|
Honestly, to be most accurate to everyone's real world usage their battery life testing should be binging netflix/youtube and/or going to wikipedia and opening random links in new tabs for each tab open, all while downloading torrents and maybe a worm or two. Also a shitposting markov bot
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 11:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 16:11 |
|
|
FCKGW posted:Some of CRs tests had claimed at 19+ hour battery which isn't even possible. Their testing was fundamentally broken and they should have sorted their poo poo out before posting a clickbait "apple loses recommendation for first time ever!" article.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 12:02
|
|
|
jawbroken posted:
jawbroken posted:Sure, of course, did anyone say otherwise? It should be investigated and fixed. I said that because people are posting like it's a hardware issue with the battery design, which is probably not the case. Whatever else, I think we can all agree that my posts were accurate and “Strong Sauce” was/is wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 12:38
|
|
|
Choadmaster posted:Wiping an SSD is complicated because you never know for sure what the firmware is doing (in particular, reserving areas for garbage collection). You can google for how to "wipe" an SSD and you'll get a dozen different recommendations, including 'it's unnecessary'. *shrug* Is it just me or is FileVault on any modern Mac with an SSD almost transparently fast?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 13:03
|
|
|
Three-Phase posted:Is it just me or is FileVault on any modern Mac with an SSD almost transparently fast? It’s not just you. Starting in 2010, processors got dedicated instructions for cryptography.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 13:13
|
|
|
BobHoward posted:It is definitely CR's job to not deliberately break Safari by turning on the developer menu to disable a feature that is something they should be testing because ordinary people do not deliberately break Safari. loving hilarious that you think disabling caching is "deliberately breaking Safari". You couldn't be more disingenuous if we were playing for prizes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 14:03
|
|
|
Pivo posted:loving hilarious that you think disabling caching is "deliberately breaking Safari". You couldn't be more disingenuous if we were playing for prizes. Disabling caching for a benchmark isn't a small change. Think of the increase in network traffic. Wireless data uses battery lift.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 14:19
|
|
|
Bob Morales posted:Disabling caching for a benchmark isn't a small change. Think of the increase in network traffic. Wireless data uses battery lift. The only thing that matters is that it was equally disabled on all the tests across different machines. You need to think of the result of the test as a unit-less number, not in terms of hours. Think of it like a score. What did they get, 18 or 19 hours on the high end with the fixed test? No one actually gets 18 or 19 hours. By leaving it enabled, it introduces a variable (the aggressiveness of the browser's cache) that is otherwise easily controlled for. Saying "we did what we usually do, and the scores are crazy" was perfectly valid.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 15:04
|
|
|
tuyop posted:Is there a way to be notified when a, say, 2015 15" mpb drops on the refurb store? I'm in Canada. What was the largest ssd and best video card offered on those? My googling is totally failing me and I need a second laptop and my 13" air was kind of frustrating for doing some of the stuff I need to do. Anyone? I mean it sounds like I should disable browser caching and refresh the page for 15 hours straight and post about it or something.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 15:10
|
|
|
tuyop posted:Anyone? I mean it sounds like I should disable browser caching and refresh the page for 15 hours straight and post about it or something. Google man https://refurb-tracker.com/
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 15:24
|
|
|
Guys it can be both. consumer reports can have a lovely test that doesn't represent the real world AND there can be a bad bug in safari that no one will ever hit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 18:19
|
|
|
Three-Phase posted:Is it just me or is FileVault on any modern Mac with an SSD almost transparently fast? We've done testing at work and at most it's 4% difference in performance which you're not going to notice.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 19:30
|
|
|
Strong Sauce posted:Consumer Reports is a Non-Profit Organization that releases a print magazine as well as having an online presence. It also sent Apple the results to help them diagnose the problem. They have deadlines to meet and who knows if Apple would bother responding if they had "waited for comment." Apple certainly didn't respond to anyone else's problems about battery life until this CR article gained traction. So if one puts the "blame" on them for doing their job.... congrats? Er, CR is a paid subscription magazine/website. It's a non-profit but it's not free.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 20:13
|
|
|
Pivo posted:Google man Ugh, I don't know how I didn't find that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 20:53
|
|
|
Speaking of refurbs: 2016 MBPs should be showing up in the next 2 weeks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 20:58
|
|
|
I actually ran into the same bug CR/Apple were talking about, and its not the same as "oh it must be using more resources because it has to contact the server all the time blah blah blah". I was running a local development server, testing some features in safari with Develop -> Disable Caches enabled. I finished my testing but let Safari stay open in the background while I went and did other things. The fans started spinning up and I saw the access log from my local development web server. It appears Safari was stuck in an infinite loop trying to load the touch icons for every page I had open. Needless to say this destroyed my battery life/performance. Turning off the "Disable Caches" option immediately fixed it.  So yes this was a legit bug, and not something that should happen even with the Disable Caches option enabled. It was good that CR and Apple worked together to resolve it, and good of CR to re-do the testing. IMO the testing methodology could be better, but if I didn't have much time/money to do battery testing I'd probably do something similar. It's also weird that they changed the user agent to iPhone to try and collect the shortcut icons for desktop safari but the UA string has been hosed forever so who cares. Granite Octopus fucked around with this message at 22:23 on Jan 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 22:20
|
|
|
Pivo posted:loving hilarious that you think disabling caching is "deliberately breaking Safari". You couldn't be more disingenuous if we were playing for prizes. Lol pivo. Never stop pivoing. Absolutely nothing that I said was disingenuous. I meant every word. If you completely disable caching on a browser, you are in fact breaking it because nobody designs web browsers without caching, and users don't use them that way either. Would you accept the results of a performance or power test of a CPU which disabled CPU caches? gently caress no you wouldn't. Why are you so determined to defend CR when they deliberately disabled a core Safari subsystem with major potential to impact battery life while conducting battery life testing? Like, holy poo poo man. Please note: "deliberate" does not mean I think that someone twirled their mustache while plotting how to harm Apple. It means that someone at CR intentionally did a very dumb thing which implies that they don't know how to test this kind of stuff. It has the flavor of a naive junior level employee with a bunch of wrong ideas, not malice. It's okay to have people like that, everyone has to learn somehow. The reason CR has lost a ton of credibility here is that apparently there was little or no oversight, so they've been publishing thoroughly bogus results for a long time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 23:09
|
|
|
FCKGW posted:Er, CR is a paid subscription magazine/website. It's a non-profit but it's not free. Yes. I meant the revenue they generate from any third-party advertisers, not subscriptions since their users wouldn't influence their reviews.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 23:22
|
|
|
BobHoward posted:Lol pivo. Never stop pivoing. they are testing the battery, not the browser so... to get consistent testing they have to see how much a page refresh affects the drainage on the battery. they are not testing how efficient the browser is, but how in a theoretical benchmark how many webpages you could view with the given battery. disabling the cache is perfectly fine as long as the test is done across all their tests. none of these results are bogus. which again confounds me that a bug that apple introduced themselves is somehow indicative of how CR did their testing. Seems no one was opposed to how they tested until Apple decided to introduce a bug into their own browser.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 23:29
|
|
|
If the only thing they wanted to test was the battery, they’d open the machine up and connect directly to the terminals. But that’s not really what they want to test.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 00:05
|
|
|
I unwittingly started the de‐rail with this post, so let me just say: Bugs are bad. Apple deserves blame, but blame for a minor issue because very few people would have encountered that bug, and when they did it wasn’t the worst thing ever (e.g. data loss or security vulnerability). Consumer Reports doesn’t deserve blame per se. At most, their testing practices deserve a raised eyebrow and an ”I’ll look elsewhere for laptop battery life tests in the future because such of a test is not the most reflective of my own personal usage.” Strong Sauce posted:Phil Schiller says Apple is working with Consumer Reports in wake of MacBook Pro battery issues Oh hey it turns out that the issue CR’s was having is completely unrelated to what YouTubers and Redditors were reporting.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 00:20
|
|
|
Can I get the personal attention of Apple every time I come across some bug in MacOS or iOS because holllly poo poo I'm gonna need a lot of engineers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 00:27
|
|
|
Pryor on Fire posted:Can I get the personal attention of Apple every time I come across some bug in MacOS or iOS because holllly poo poo I'm gonna need a lot of engineers. Bugreport.apple.com
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 03:16
|
|
|
MrBond posted:Bugreport.apple.com They don't actually reply to those right? I mean you fill in an email address but that has to be just for show. Reported a really weird bug I have with Calendar a while back, I guess I'll see.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 12:09
|
|
|
That touchbar looks really cool. Shame about the rest of the MBP.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 19:18
|
|
|
I Am Crake posted:They don't actually reply to those right? I mean you fill in an email address but that has to be just for show. I've had them respond to some of mine. Eventually. Sometimes very eventually (by which I mean years). When they get around to fixing a bug, usually everyone who reported it gets a semi automated email asking them to test whether the issue was fixed in a new OS release (or beta build, if you're using developer or public beta releases). That email is usually the first thing I ever get as a response to a bug I've filed. You might also see the bug get fixed, and never get a response. Or you might never see it get fixed at all. Or you might get asked immediately for clarifications, or to try something different, and after a brief flurry of exchanges with some intern it goes back into Schrödinger's Apple bug box where you cannot observe whether any attention is being paid to it. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 19:52
|
|
|
I'm hoping to have more to add to this thread soon vs. just asking for purchase advice - but I was hoping to get one last educated opinion on the following: After cooling on the $2000 2.5ghz 512GB w/ AMD GFX 2015 MBP posting I found on Craigslist, I started looking for something with Apple Care on eBay. Last night I found a 'Manufacturer Refurbished' listing with the exact same specs and managed to snag it for less than 1600, I haven't sent payment quite yet, though. The condition looks perfect but the description other than the condition was lacking - I inquired about whether or not "Manufacturer Refurbished" was an accurate description for the posting and they said "Absolutely! It's basically new. It was used for 5 months and then refurbished by Apple", this weirded me out and tipped me off that they proooooobably don't know what a refurb actually is. They didn't include the Battery Cycles or Serial in the original listing when I won it, but I was hoping it was an actual refurb. They got back to me about this and the cycle count is at 113. They also clarified that when they said 'refurbished' they seem to be referring to having had the RAM just replaced by Apple. However, they sent me the serial and it's apparently not even covered by the original 1-year warranty - which makes me question their "used it for 5 months and then had it 'refurbished' (repaired). Did it just sit for 6 months doing nothing? I know that isn't good for the battery either.  They also now hilariously are asking for 20 more dollars when I send payment because they had to ruin their shipping box in order to get me battery cycles, or some asinine poo poo like that (after they posted the wrong description). Seeing that this morning made me laugh and honestly almost made me cancel the purchase outright. But hey, this seems like it could still be a good deal, even if they're an idiot? Oh, also - this is the first thing they've sold on eBay it looks like - they have like 5 points of buying feedback that they've earned over 7 years or something. I'm not really sure how much that matters but it definitely explains the posting. SO: similar situation to the Craigslist posting I asked about a few pages back, I guess: nice machine, no warranty. This time it's over 400 dollars cheaper, though. Would you guys still feel good about it, if you were in my position? The price seems RIGHT but I'm worried that I'm missing all these warning signs due to new-machine-tunnel-vision. Is there a price where buying sans-warranty becomes acceptable?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 21:56
|
|
|
It's probably fine, but I'm leery on buying such an expensive used machine sight unseen, for those reasons you posted. And I'm sure the "used 5 months and then refurbished" line is bullshit. You also can't replace the RAM on that machine, it's the whole motherboard or nothing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 22:01
|
|
|
Nah, sounds sketch, you've got more than enough reason to cancel your bid and say whatever that it's not as described. Maybe they got some issue fixed with Apple but naaaah with Apple and people who trade Apple products, 'refurb' means something quite specific and 'used but had issues that were fixed' is something else entirely. All laptops have a 1 year warranty though so I don't know about "doesn't even have a 1 year warranty" but the serial would be tied to purchase date, so maybe it was purchased >1yr ago but it was 'used' for <12mo by the seller. Regardless, sounds sketchy. I mean, you could roll the dice, but I wouldn't. Battery isn't bad tho, 113 cycles is fine, if it's over a year old it's been kept plugged in most of the time. And lithium batteries sitting around for a while doesn't hurt them much either. It's better if they're only about half charged while sitting around, but it's not the end of the world, on the time scale these devices are used for. Just watch out for a crazy cycle count.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 22:05
|
|
|
Don't do it!!!Quantum of Phallus posted:Don't do it!!! Quantum of Phallus fucked around with this message at 02:06 on Jan 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 22:18
|
|
|
Amphetama posted:I'm hoping to have more to add to this thread soon vs. just asking for purchase advice - but I was hoping to get one last educated opinion on the following: To be completely honest, the only 'preowned' Mac I'd consider buying is an official Apple refurb. This sounds like you'll get burned in some way, and that's not worth it at all- especially if you have to pay to get something fixed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 22:19
|
|
|
Most egregious is the fact that the seller doesn't know how to take a screenshot! Sever.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 02:03
|
|
|
I cant make this poo poo up Also, if you're into stereotypes  He sent me this right after I last posted, too: "The refurbish was through apple. The issue was not hardware, it was a software reboot and HD recovery that led to them replacing all the RAM. " The screenshot above is his response to me thoughtfully explaining in a message why his post didn't match the description, and that half of what he is saying wasn't making any sense (and requesting cancellation). Thanks for the assistance guys - the search continues. Sounds like I should either buy new or stick to apple refurbs (refurb tracker whoo).
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 04:28
|
|
|
This leaves me more confused than any of those other confusing sentences:some ebay idiot posted:I RAM is not soldered to the board, it's a loving input. I really want to know what he *thinks* he's saying.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 04:32
|
|
|
flosofl posted:This leaves me more confused than any of those other confusing sentences: i think he was trying to tell him that he was in fact selling him an 2012 MBP with replaceable RAM
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 04:41
|
|
|
It's worth mentioning as well that I didn't ever use the word "actually" in my last message to him either. "I work in tech so small...." What? It's re-posted as "Seller refurbished" now. 
Amphetama fucked around with this message at 04:47 on Jan 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 04:44
|
|
|
For Mac minis, is there any particular arrangement that I should install an SSD and a HDD, whether for heat or anything else? It's a 2011 so I won't be doing a Fusion drive.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 05:03
|
|
|
I work in tech so small it's just me in my underwear inputting I RAM into the markbooks
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 07:34
|
|
|
p-p-p-p-powerbook
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 13:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 16:11 |
|
|
I bought a keyboard on eBay a few weeks ago, from Hong Kong Wasn't in stock. So it took over a week to get my payment refunded and order canceled. I left them negative feedback for listing poo poo they didn't have in stock and wasting my time.  Then they tried sending me another keyboard that wasn't the right one. Checked their feedback (which I should have done before buying) and it looks like a couple other people experienced the same thing
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 13:49
|
|