Is Apple’s new “Pro = Beefy” design language a mistake?

[Edgecrusherr]

I currently use a Mac Studio, MacBook Pro 16" Intel, and a MacBook Pro 16" M1 Pro. I have an older Mac Pro too, that I'm phasing out for the Mac Studio.

I'm ok with the bulkiness. I need the most performance, most battery life, most ports, as good of a keyboard as we can get, and the best screen possible. Apple obsessed over thinness for too long, to the point that it was a literal detriment. Maybe the rumored 15" Air will be perfect for those who want something better than a 13" Air, but were happy with thin/light designs of the previous generation, but I'm a "pro" and need the most Apple can stuff in a computer.

I had to hold onto my 17" MacBook Pro for 10 years, because I didn't like that Apple had done with the follow 2 generations of computers (The original Retinas, and the USB-C models). They didn't win me over until the 16" MacBook Pro was released, and still that thing was flawed thermally, because it was too thin for the chipset it has. Had the Intel 16" been the same design as the M1 Pro models, it would perform differently.

The same goes for the Mac Pro. The 2013 Mac Pro was really just a Mac mini Pro. They should have started that out as the Mac Studio name, as it would have been a better fit. I kept my 2010 Mac Pro all the way up to the begging of 2023 (which is insane for a "pro" level machine), because I was waiting for the tower Pro to return, then when it did, I was waiting for the 2nd generation to release so I could get the 2019 Pro at a reduced price....then they announced their own chips, so then I was waiting for the Apple Silicon Mac Pro, then by 2023, I had to just give in and get a Ma Studio. As much as I love the performance of the Studio, but having several drives connect via Thunderbolt and USB to make up for the 5 drives I used to have internally in the Mac Pro (4x hard drives, plus an NVMe SSD on a PCIe card), is almost maddening. So many cables, so much to take apart if I need to rearrange things. I'd take a bulky tower ver this any day.

Anyway, I say let people choose what's best for them, but bulky for Pro and thin for consumer seems to be the best, given the physics of how tech works.

 

[A.R.E.A.M.]

clearly yall have been mac users for quite a while. i have a 17 inch dell G7. it weighs about as much as 2.5 mac pro 16 inchers! lol bulky?? cant pick up with one hand? wow for me the 16 incher is anything BUT bulky. this thread is cray cray.

 

[dmccloud]

Just tried it out and I stand corrected. Picking up with one hand is a no-go. But holding is more comfortable with the new chassis. With the old I was always afraid it would fall down.

I have average-sized hands, and I can easily pick up the 14" MBP with one hand. I just put my fingertips under the hinge side and pick it up that way without even the slightest slip.

 

[pete1]

It's definitely not too thin. It's the internal hardware that draws too much power. Put that Intel i9 in the current M1 Max chassis and your experience wouldn't be any different.

My understanding is that the ultra-thin chassis means there is an inadequate thermal envelope to cool these power hungry chips when under load, and they have to aggressively throttle as a result. YouTube channels such as MKBHD and others have covered these issues and I assume that's why Apple has moved to a beefier case starting with the M1 MBPs.

Why do you think putting the i7/i9 internals into a case with better airflow wouldn't help?

 

[dmccloud]

My understanding is that the ultra-thin chassis means there is an inadequate thermal envelope to cool these power hungry chips when under load, and they have to aggressively throttle as a result. YouTube channels such as MKBHD and others have covered these issues and I assume that's why Apple has moved to a beefier case starting with the M1 MBPs.

Why do you think putting the i7/i9 internals into a case with better airflow wouldn't help?

The heat generated by even a mobile variant of the i7 and i9 used in the MBPs of old would require an even beefier cooling solution than what Apple Silicon requires. That would require a larger overall solution, either in terms of surface area covered of thickness of the cooling system itself. Neither option would really work well with even the current M1/M2 chassis. The other option if you wanted to keep the current cooling system would be to downclock and/or undervolt the i7/i9 in order to reduce the heat generated by the processors.

 

[leman]

My understanding is that the ultra-thin chassis means there is an inadequate thermal envelope to cool these power hungry chips when under load, and they have to aggressively throttle as a result. YouTube channels such as MKBHD and others have covered these issues and I assume that's why Apple has moved to a beefier case starting with the M1 MBPs.

Why do you think putting the i7/i9 internals into a case with better airflow wouldn't help?

I can easily write a two page essay on this, but I will try to keep it brief

The "ultra-thin" 2016 chassis can dissipate around 45 watts for the CPU (which according to Intel documentation is sufficient to run their high-end mobile CPUs without throttling) and around 70 watts of combined CPU+GPU. Due to extreme increase in power consumption of Intel CPUs and stagnating performance Appel has increased this limit to 60 watts in the 2019 16" chassis. These are values established by respectable third-party reviewers which you can find online (e.g. in the notebookcheck reviews archives). Also, I am not aware of a single 15" MacBook Pro that would throttle under load (using Intel's definition of throttling which is running below the advertised base frequency on a demanding workloads that involves all cores).

As I see it, the main issue with the latest crop of Intel CPUs is the extreme power consumption for burst workloads. Just loading a website or an excel file will burst the CPU to 5Ghz on one or two cores, pushing the power consumption to 60+ watts. I've seen my 2019 i9 push over 100 watts for brief period of time. The thermal system needs to compensate this and fans kick in. This is the source of the complains "my laptop runs hot and loud all the time". And it's not exclusive to Macs, PC laptops have the same issues.

You are absolutely right that a more powerful cooling system would help to alleviate this, but what exactly does "more powerful" mean? If you want the ability to casually absorb 60 or more watts, you are really looking for a coolignsystem designed for enthusiast desktop CPUs. There are some laptops on the market that are designed to dissipate up to 200 watts or even more on the CPU socket. Mind, performance-class desktop CPU was defined at 60 or 90 watts just a few years ago. These laptops are large, heavy, and very very loud. Hardly the future of technology to be looking to.

The cooling system of the current 16" MBP is not far off the previous Macs. It is kind of difficult to estimate, since the maximal observed power consumption observed on M1 Max is close to 80 watts (CPU + GPU). It is possible that the system still has some headroom, although Apple likes to design their cooling to be "tight". At any rate, I very much doubt that this small increase in cooling capacity will bring substantial improvements for Intel CPUs — you'd be still running hot and loud pretty much at any time.

Compare this to Apple Silicon, where the CPU maxes out at 40-45 watts (that's the absolute limit, not the "negotiated" equilibrium like with x86 chips), and won't break 6 watt power consumption for single-core burst tasks. It's just a different world. The new Macs run cool and silent because the hardware uses less than 1/5 of power on average, not because of the improved cooling system. Of course, if you fully load the system, it will run hot — that's the same for Apple Silicon and Intel.

 

[heretiq]

This exactly. My 2019 Macbook Pro 16" is way too thin and it's been a disappointing experience from day one. It constantly overheats and throttles, and the lack of clearance between keyboard and screen means that any tiny grit on the top case damages the screen or at least makes it dirty when I close the lid of the machine. At least I don't have the keyboard issues, thank God.

Despite the title and question posed by this thread, the 16” M1 Max MacBook Pro is the best laptop I’ve ever owned. However the larger dimensions of the 16” M1 Max MacBook Pro did not resolve the keyboard clearance issue. I just spent $19 on the Apple Polishing Cloth to protect against screen damage from regular cleaning to remove keyboard imprint. And, no my hands are dry so this is not due to excess skin oil. The super low keyboard clearance seems to be an element of the MacBook Pro design language that is unchanged from the previous Intel 16” MacBook Pro design — so the extra thickness is there for other reasons.

 

[pete1]

Despite the title and question posed by this thread, the 16” M1 Max MacBook Pro is the best laptop I’ve ever owned. However the larger dimensions of the 16” M1 Max MacBook Pro did not resolve the keyboard clearance issue. I just spent $19 on the Apple Polishing Cloth to protect against screen damage from regular cleaning to remove keyboard imprint. And, no my hands are dry so this is not due to excess skin oil. The super low keyboard clearance seems to be an element of the MacBook Pro design language that is unchanged from the previous Intel 16” MacBook Pro design — so the extra thickness is there for other reasons.

On my 2019 16” MBP, closing the screen without cleaning the top case/keyboard carefully results in pieces of grit getting embedded in the glass of the LCD that I can’t remove later. The brightness and clarity of the screen is such that this doesn’t excessively bother me although it is something I think that shouldn’t happen.

 

[pete1]

I just spent $19 on the Apple Polishing Cloth to protect against screen damage from regular cleaning to remove keyboard imprint

LOL. Maybe it’s by design then, since they can sell more cloths.

 

[heretiq]

LOL. Maybe it’s by design then, since they can sell more cloths.

Ha! That would make the Apple cleaning cloth super late to the game as I recall dealing with that issue prior to the advent of the vilified Intel 16” MacBook Pro!

 

[russell_314]

I just spent $19 on the Apple Polishing Cloth to protect against screen damage from regular cleaning to remove keyboard imprint.

I hate to tell you but it’s not going to do any more or less damage than a standard microfiber cloth. If you are constantly rubbing on the screen with anything, it’s going to wear it. That’s just physics.

What you really should be concerned with is any kind of debris in the cloth. That’s the same with a fancy $19 Apple cloth or one you get at Walmart for $2. If there’s debris it can scratch the screen.

 

[pshufd]

My reaction to the weight and size of the 16" M1 MBP really surprised me. I didn't think I'd even notice it. It's only about half a pound heavier and slightly thicker than my 2018 15", but the extra weight and size just nudges it over a tipping point where it starts to feel awkward to handle. I feel like I'm living dangerously if I handle it with one hand whereas I wouldn't hesitate to one hand my 2018.

I do one-hand my MBP 16 as the rigidity of the case certainly seems sturdy enough to handle it.

I used to have a 2008 MBP 17 which was almost 7 pounds and 50% thicker and larger in width and length. The 2021 MacBook Pro swims in my backpack (custom for the MBP 17 back then). So it depends on where you are coming from. I would like something thinner and lighter but there were no other options at the time and it was a replacement for my 2015 MacBook Pro.

I'd love something like the LG Gram 17 in a MacBook Air. I do not need the CPU or GPU of a MacBook Pro but I do need 32 GB of RAM and I'd prefer a 16 or 17 inch display. On problem is that I've gotten used to the screen and speakers of the MBP 16 and I think that I'd miss those.

 

[pshufd]

Good points @Mr. Dee. I really appreciate your history and first hand experience with the Mac laptops. To this day, I have fond memories of my bulky 6.6 pound 2011 17” MacBook Pro and found it hard to “downgrade” to the 15” Pro when the 17” was discontinued, but I eventually adjusted and learned to appreciate the more “streamlined” 15” models including the 2019 15” Intel with TouchBar.

For me, the higher resolution outweighed the loss in screen real estate. You could get the same resolutions, only a bit smaller. You could even get far higher resolutions with a third-party resolution switcher.

 

[pshufd]

I find the whole thing silly. I swear every YouTube review I’ve seen on a Mac bases the performance how well how well it renders video to create YouTube videos. Is everyone buying a Mac for making videos to review a Macs?

I’m not saying there aren’t people buying Macs to make YouTube videos, but I can’t believe the majority are sold for that purpose.

I do have a YouTube channel though I was doing HD videos on my older systems. Apple Silicon allowed me to transition to 4k. You don't really even need a MacBook Pro to do simple stuff as I know someone that used to run a moderately high-volume channel with a base M1 mini. The typical person probably doesn't have a YouTube channel but it is there if you ever want to do it.

Video was not my primary reason for getting Apple Silicon but it does make it really easy.

 

[russell_314]

I do have a YouTube channel though I was doing HD videos on my older systems. Apple Silicon allowed me to transition to 4k. You don't really even need a MacBook Pro to do simple stuff as I know someone that used to run a moderately high-volume channel with a base M1 mini. The typical person probably doesn't have a YouTube channel but it is there if you ever want to do it.

Video was not my primary reason for getting Apple Silicon but it does make it really easy.

I agree it's great and it does help but I think the benchmark thing has gone crazy. Even videos will talk about how the Air is maybe a minute slower at rendering a video... I'm thinking unless you're MKBHD with 15 mil subs and you have a whole crew waiting to go home then maybe waiting an extra minute a problem. For most people that's a chance to get a cup of coffee.

 

[pshufd]

I agree it's great and it does help but I think the benchmark thing has gone crazy. Even videos will talk about how the Air is maybe a minute slower at rendering a video... I'm thinking unless you're MKBHD with 15 mil subs and you have a whole crew waiting to go home then maybe waiting an extra minute a problem. For most people that's a chance to get a cup of coffee.

You don't even have to do that as rendering your video will use up about 30% of the compute resources. You can still do other stuff on the system while it's rendering. You just let it run and when it's done, you upload it and that's also going to take a while. But you just do something else.

 

[dmccloud]

You don't even have to do that as rendering your video will use up about 30% of the compute resources. You can still do other stuff on the system while it's rendering. You just let it run and when it's done, you upload it and that's also going to take a while. But you just do something else.

I think this is what people don't talk about enough with these systems. On many Intel/AMD systems video rendering can make the entire system useless because of how the CPU and RAM resources are utilized in the process. On Apple Silicon, you can often work on other things while the rendering is running in the background without issue. This means increased productivity and less downtime.