Which Apple MacBook is best for you? MacBook, MacBook Air or MacBook Pro?
Decided you want an Apple laptop, but you’re not sure which one is the right one for you? You’ve come to the right place. With seven MacBook models available before you even consider configuration options, it’s not an easy decision, or a simple one.
This feature rounds up all the MacBooks models offered through Apple, from the 12-inch MacBook to the new 15-inch MacBook Pro, to help you work out what each model offers, how much they cost, how they can be configured and what their pros and cons are.
Read on to find out which Apple MacBook is the one for you.
Quick summary
The MacBook is the smallest, lightest and most portable MacBook available, but it is also the most restrictive in terms of ports and power.
The MacBook Air is the cheapest MacBook available overall, and the lightest option for those after a little more power, larger screen and the convenience of ports. Its screen isn’t as impressive as any of the other options but it does offer the longest battery life.
The MacBook Pro (2015) 13-inch is the cheapest way to get your hands on the more powerful Pro range of MacBooks, and it offers ports, along with a Retina display. It’s larger and heavier than the new Pro models though so less portable than the likes of the Air.
The MacBook Pro (2016) 13-inch without Touch Bar is lighter and smaller than the older 13-inch Pro model, while offering more storage as standard and a brighter display. It doesn’t offer the Touch Bar or Touch ID, and although it has two Thunderbolt 3 ports instead of a single USB Type-C port like the MacBook, it is still restrictive in the port department.
The MacBook Pro (2016) 13-inch with Touch Bar is the model for those who want the power, the new lighter design, Touch Bar and Touch ID functionality, as well as more Thunderbolt 3 ports. It comes at a cost though, with a starting price of £300 more than the model without the Touch Bar.
The MacBook Pro (2015) 15-inch is the cheapest way to get your hands on an even larger Pro model, with all the ports still intact and a Retina display. As with the older 13-inch model though, it is larger and heavier than the new Pro models, storage configuration tops out at 1TB and its screen isn’t as bright as the new Pros.
The MacBook Pro (2016) with Touch Bar is the king of the MacBooks with the best power and largest storage options, biggest screen, new design and the Touch Bar and Touch ID features. It is also the most expensive however and this probably isn’t the MacBook you’ll want if you’re constantly on the move.
Apple
Apple MacBook
- Dimensions: 280.5 x 196.5 x 35-131mm, 920g
- Display: 12-inches, 2304 x 1440 (226ppi), 300nits brightness
- Connections: One USB Type-C port, 3.5mm headphone jack
- Battery: 10 hours
- Price: From £1249 to £1684
The MacBook is the smallest, lightest and most portable of the MacBook family, but it has the smallest display and it’s not as powerful as the MacBook Air or any of the MacBook Pro models.
The base model features a 1.1GHz Intel Core m3 processor and 256GB of storage, while the highest spec available offers a 1.3GHz Intel Core m7 processor and 512GB of storage. All configurations have Intel HD Graphics 515 and 8GB of RAM.
The MacBook only has one USB Type-C port, which supports charging, USB 3.1, Native DisplayPort 1.2 video output, VGA output and HDMI video output. This means it isn’t the most convenient MacBook for those that need to connect lots of devices, whether that’s a camera, or an adapter to allow for the transfer of images from an SD card.
It comes in Rose Gold, Space Grey, Gold and Silver colour options, all of which have a 480p FaceTime camera.
- Apple MacBook (2016) review: Is port-free still the future?
Apple
Apple MacBook Air
- Dimensions: 325 x 227 x 30-170mm, 1.35kg
- Display: 13.3-inches, 1400 x 900 (125ppi)
- Connections: Two USB 3 ports, Thunderbolt 2 port, MagSafe power port, SDXC card slot, 3.5mm headphone jack
- Battery: 12 hours
- Price: From £949 to £1409
The MacBook Air is the oldest of the MacBook family and although it is no longer the slimmest, it is the lightest MacBook available for those after power and a larger display. It is also the cheapest MacBook and the only one to start under the £1000 mark.
The base model has a 1.6GHz Intel Core i5 processor and 128GB of storage, while the top-spec available has a 2.2GHz Intel Core i7 chip and 512GB of storage. All model configurations feature Intel HD Graphics 6000 and 8GB of RAM.
The MacBook Air is a lot more flexible than the MacBook when it comes to ports, meaning you’ll not only be able to pop in an SD card to transfer images, but you’ll be able to charge your MacBook Air while doing so, or connecting to another device. For some, one port on the MacBook will be enough, for others it will be a pain, which is where the Air steps in.
The MacBook Air comes in Silver and it features a 720p FaceTime camera, meaning video calls will be crisper than on the MacBook.
- Apple MacBook Air 13-inch (2013) review
Apple
Apple MacBook Pro (2015)
- Dimensions: 314 x 219 x 180mm, 1.58kg
- Display: 13.3-inches, 2560 x 1600 (226ppi), 300nits brightness
- Connections: Two USB 3 ports, two Thunderbolt 2 ports, MagSafe 2 power port, HDMI port, SDXC card slot 3.5mm headphone jack
- Battery: 10 hours
- Price: From £1249 to £2419
The MacBook Pro family now consists of five options and last year’s 13-inch MacBook Pro is the cheapest in the Pro portfolio. It is heavier and larger than the MacBook, MacBook Air, and the two newer 13-inch MacBook Pros, but it retains those connections, which may come in useful for some.
The base model has a 2.7GHz Intel Core i5 processor, 128GB of storage and 8GB of RAM. The top-specced model available has a 3.1GHz Intel Core i7 processor, 1TB of storage and 16GB of RAM. All configurations feature Intel Iris Graphics 6000.
Like the MacBook Air, the MacBook Pro (2015) features more flexibility than the MacBook when it comes to ports, as we mentioned. It adds a HDMI port, along with an extra Thunderbolt 2 port to its features in comparison to the MacBook Air.
The MacBook Pro (2015) comes in Silver and it has a 720p FaceTime camera, like the MacBook Air.
- Apple MacBook Pro 13-inch with Retina display (early 2015) review: May the Force be with you
- Apple MacBook Pro (2016) vs MacBook Pro (2015): What’s the difference?
Apple
Apple MacBook Pro (2016) – Without Touch Bar and Touch ID
- Dimensions: 304.1 x 212.4 x 149mm, 1.37kg
- Display: 13.3-inches, 2560 x 1600 (226ppi), 500nits brightness
- Connections: Two Thunderbolt 3 ports, 3.5mm headphone jack
- Battery: 10 hours
- Price: From £1449 to £2439
This year’s 13-inch MacBook Pro without the Touch Bar is the model for those who want the power, aren’t fussed about the lack of ports and don’t want the Touch Bar and Touch ID, or perhaps don’t have the budget for them.
The base model has a 2.0GHz Intel Core i5 processor, 256GB of storage and 8GB of RAM. The top-of-the-range model has a 2.4GHz Intel Core i7 processor, 16GB of RAM and 1TB of storage. All configurations have Intel Iris Graphics 540.
Like the MacBook, this 13-inch MacBook Pro lacks in the port department, though it does have two Thunderbolt 3 ports over one USB Type-C port, meaning you’ll at least be able to charge it, while connecting to another device.
The MacBook Pro (2016) without Touch Bar and Touch ID is available in Silver or Space Gray, comes with a 720p FaceTime camera like last year’s MacBook Pro and Air and has two microphones.
- Apple MacBook Pro (2016) preview: Air apparent
- Apple MacBook Pro (2016) vs Apple MacBook Air: What’s the difference?
Apple
Apple MacBook Pro (2016) – With Touch Bar and Touch ID
- Dimensions: 304.1 x 212.4 x 149mm, 1.37kg
- Display: 13.3-inches, 2560 x 1600 (226ppi), 500nits brightness
- Connections: Four Thunderbolt 3 ports, 3.5mm headphone jack
- Battery: 10 hours
- Price: From £1749 to £2759
This year’s 13-inch MacBook Pro with the Touch Bar is for those who want the power and the latest features, but still in a compact and easily portable device.
The base model has a 2.9GHz Intel Core i5 processor, 256GB of storage and 8GB of RAM. The top-specced model has a 3.1GHz Intel Core i5 processor, 16GB of RAM and 1TB of storage. All configurations have Intel Iris Graphics 550.
Like the MacBook and MacBook Pro without Touch Bar, this 13-inch MacBook Pro says bye-bye to the ports again. It does however offer more than the previous two models, with four Thunderbolt 3 ports. You’ll still need adapters to transfer images from an SD card for example, but the extra ports will allow you to do more simultaneously than you could do with the MacBook especially, but also the MacBook Pro without Touch Bar.
The MacBook Pro (2016) with Touch Bar and Touch ID is available in Silver or Space Gray, comes with a 720p FaceTime camera and has three microphones.
- Apple MacBook Pro (2016) with Touch Bar: Thinner, brighter, faster, and very touchy feely
Apple
Apple MacBook Pro (2015)
- Dimensions: 358.9 x 247.1 x 180mm, 2.04kg
- Display: 15.4-inches, 2880 x 1800 (220ppi), 300nits brightness
- Connections: Two USB 3 ports, two Thunderbolt 2 ports, MagSafe 2 power port, HDMI port, SDXC card slot 3.5mm headphone jack
- Battery: 9 hours
- Price: From £1899 to £2709
Last year’s 15-inch MacBook Pro the cheaper option for those who want the power, larger screen and the ports, but aren’t necessarily as fussed about the latest and greatest features.
The base model has a 2.2GHz Intel Core i7 processor and 256GB of storage and 8GB of RAM. The top-specced model available has a 2.8GHz Intel Core i7 processor and 1TB of storage. All configurations feature 16GB of RAM and Intel Iris Pro Graphics.
Like the MacBook Pro (2015) 13-inch, the MacBook Pro (2015) 15-inch features more flexibility than the MacBook and new MacBook Pros when it comes to ports, as we mentioned. It adds a HDMI port, along with an extra Thunderbolt 2 port to its features in comparison to the MacBook Air.
The MacBook Pro (2015) comes in Silver, has a 720p FaceTime camera, like the MacBook Air and offers two microphones.
- Apple MacBook Pro (2016) vs MacBook Pro (2015): What’s the difference?
Apple
Apple MacBook Pro (2016) – With Touch Bar and Touch ID
- Dimensions: 349.3 x 240.7 x 155mm, 1.83kg
- Display: 15.4-inches, 2880 x 1800 (220ppi), 500nits brightness
- Connections: Four Thunderbolt 3 ports, 3.5mm headphone jack
- Battery: 10 hours
- Price: From £2349 to £4049
The new 15-inch MacBook Pro with Touch Bar and Touch ID is MacBook for those after the power, the large screen and the latest and greatest features Apple has to offer. You’ll need the budget with this one though.
The base model has a 2.6GHz Intel Core i7 processor, 256GB of storage and Radeon Pro 450 graphics. The top-specced model available has a 2.9GHz Intel Core i7 processor, 2TB of storage and Radeon Pro 460 graphics. All configurations feature 16GB of RAM.
As with the 13-inch MacBook Pro (2016), you’ll need to make sure you allow for buying any adapters you might need because the ports are limited to just Thunderbolt 3, though you at least get a few extra compared to the MacBook’s singular USB Type-C port and the two Thunderbolt 3 ports on the new MacBook Pro without Touch Bar.
The MacBook Pro (2016) comes in Silver and Space Grey, has three microphones, and it has a 720p FaceTime camera, like all the other MacBooks, except the 12-inch MacBook.
- Apple MacBook Pro (2016) with Touch Bar: Thinner, brighter, faster, and very touchy feely
- Here’s how much the new MacBook Pro will cost you in new adapters and cables
Nintendo Switch: Is this the NX console we’d hoped for?
Nintendo has announced that it will hold a dedicated presentation event for its next games console on 13 January next year, ahead of a March release. But we already know what to expect.
That’s because the gaming giant already revealed the Nintendo Switch in a teaser trailer in mid October and, from what we’ve seen so far, we’re in for some exciting times.
The trailer shows a device that can adapt and change like a Transformer from a home console to a handheld gaming portable with add-ons and clips. It also shows a games console that can even be played by two-players when out and about.
But does it show a console that can mix it with the PlayStation 4 or Xbox One? And how about the PS4 Pro or next year’s Project Scorpio?
We take a look at what we know so far about the Nintendo Switch, based on what we’ve seen and the nuggets of information gleaned so far in order to give our initial impressions. We don’t have all the specifications or information at our disposal yet, nor have we played with the console ourselves, but considering we’ve bought and coveted every Nintendo games console since the NES, we’d like to share our gut feelings.
- Nintendo Switch: Release date, specs and everything you need to know
- Nintendo NX is called… Nintendo Switch: New console revealed in stunning trailer
- Nintendo Switch games: The games revealed so far and what we’d like to see
Nintendo Switch concept
The idea behind the Nintendo Switch is interesting if not unique. The Japanese gaming giant would have us believe it’s a totally original concept, but the idea of gaming on tablet-style device while travelling, to then hook it up to a television when at home is not new: the Nvidia Shield tablet (reviewed here) can effectively do the same.
The device that’s already available links with a very reasonable, low latency game controller and you can hook it up to a TV using a HDMI lead. Plus, thanks to its Tegra K1 processor, it is capable of console-like graphics.
We suspect and hope the Switch is considerably more powerful however, and the idea of clipping controls either side of the display will make for a more effective gaming device; kind-of like a Wii U GamePad with muscles.
The proper TV dock is a more elegant solution too – you don’t have to fiddle with cables. And we think the docking station will have its own tech inside, with many rumours suggesting that the Switch is capable of 4K video output for Netflix and the like.
Most importantly, the Switch looks like something we’d happily play with at home or outside. Whether we’d fancy gaming with friends using a tiny half of a Joy-Con controller is an altogether different kettle of fish, but it’s something we’ll only really find out when the console is available to test.
Nintendo
Nintendo Switch design
If there was anything disappointing about the console shown in the teaser trailer it’s that it looks like a dog. Literally. The Joy-Con controller, when connected to a home gaming device, looks strangely like a floppy-eared mutt. And the dark grey elements of the rest of the hardware make it look dull and uninspiring.
Yes, Nintendo consoles of yesteryear wore grey plastic exteriors like a badge of honour, but we’ve moved on since then. You wouldn’t settle for a shiny new Apple device in grey would you? What’s that, Space Grey you say?
Seriously though. While a normal home games console can afford to look practical rather than pretty, Nintendo wants you to carry the Switch around with you yet has seemingly taken a British autumn as its design inspiration. Cold and grey.
Hopefully – and likely – the games will be colourful enough to compensate.
Nintendo Switch touchscreen display
One part of the tech that has us a little baffled for now relates to its built-in screen. Although Nintendo is yet to confirm it, the current train of thought is that it has a touchscreen display (with a screen size of 6.2-inches being touted).
That’s great and makes sense given the DS family of handhelds and the Wii U GamePad have all been touch-enabled in the past, but what happens when the device is docked? If games rely on the touchscreen to operate, how will they work when the Switch is docked?
Some have suggested that at least one of the two Joy-Con controllers could double as pointer device in order to play touchscreen games on a TV, but having experience of that kind of solution on Android TVs before, it’s hardly ideal. We think developers will need to build different control methods into their games, only using touch as an extended feature rather than necessity.
Nintendo Switch Joy-Con controllers
The detachable Joy-Con controllers will undoubtedly improve gaming on the hoof, when clipped to the sides of the screen, but we’re less enamoured by the home gamepad solution proposed by Nintendo. They clip around a central pad for home control, but when constructed it just looks unweildy and chunky to hold comfortably.
Again, we’ll reserve judgement for when we fully go hands-on, but from the trailer, the Xbox One controller it is not.
Nintendo
Nintendo Switch games
Like all Nintendo consoles, the Wii U included, the Switch will undoubtedly have some of the best first-party games known to man.
Rumour suggested that an all-new Mario game will launch with the machine next year, and a platformer starring the rotund plumber is shown in the teaser. We thought it looked like Super Mario 3D World ourselves, maybe an enhanced version, but there wasn’t enough footage to know for sure.
A Mario Kart also features, but that definitely looks like the Wii U game already available.
One thing’s for sure, the list of supporting developers and publishers vastly outweighs the Wii U equivalent. Electronic Arts, for example, pulled out of supporting the Wii U early doors but is keen to stress it will be releasing Switch titles.
Hopefully, all of the third-party companies listed by Nintendo mean that the console will be on a par with the PS4 and Xbox One in number of games released. That in itself can make this machine more successful than the last.
Nintendo Switch price
Although we have some reservations, we’re optimistic that the Nintendo Switch will be a valid and valued competitor in the games market going forward. There are certainly enough Ninty fans out there to drive sales if the end product is attractive enough.
The one element that can have the biggest sway though is price. If Nintendo manages to price its new machine cleverly, it’ll have a good chance against its rivals.
Unfortunately, initial indications are that the Switch could be priced higher than many would hope. A senior executive at the company previously stated that Nintendo would not make a loss on the machine, pricing it realistically for the amount of tech you get. And if you watch the teaser trailer again, the absence of children is notable. Indeed, everyone in the video looks like they could afford a more lifestyle product.
Conclusion
Naturally, we’re taking a stab in the dark with much of the above. Our impressions are entirely based on a device we’ve only seen in a three-minute commercial after all. But we are enthusiastic to find out more.
And considering that we are also big fans of the Wii U, regardless of its failings, Nintendo doesn’t have much to do to convince us that the Switch will be something we shall happily accept into our living rooms.
Outlook now displays coworkers’ availability on your phone
Sunrise is officially dead, but Microsoft just added a new feature to the Outlook iOS calendar that might help you forget it. In a trick borrowed from the desktop app, the iOS version of Outlook has a new scheduling assistant that makes it fairly easy to book a meeting. All you need to do is create an event and add coworkers in the “people” field, then choose the date picker.
From there, you can see times in white, yellow or red, indicating spaces where everyone is available (or not). Then, you can tap the time picker and drag it around until it turns green, giving you a slot that works for everyone. From there, you can fill in the rest of the information and save the event, which will automatically notify the other parties.
Many of Outlook’s calendar features come directly from Sunrise, so at least Microsoft is using the IP it paid for. Redmond integrated Sunrise’s “events” and “interesting calendars” feature last month, and added the time and date picker shortly afterwards. The scheduling assistant from Outlook desktop is icing on the cake, but whether it convinces diehard Sunrise fans to switch remains to be seen. The new feature is only on iOS, but is coming to Android and Windows 10 Mobile “shortly.”
Source: Microsoft
‘Battlefield 1’ reminded me that before war was a game, it was hell
The Battlefield games aren’t exactly known for having the best single-player modes. In fact, players ignore the series’ solo experiences so routinely that this was actually a reason we didn’t see a campaign mode in Star Wars: Battlefront last year. “Very few people actually play the single-player on these kinds of games,” EA’s Peter Moore said at the time. “That’s what the data points to.” So, naturally, when I picked up a copy of Battlefield 1 earlier this week, I planned to skip directly to online multiplayer — but the game didn’t let me. First, it had to teach me a history lesson. “Battlefield 1 is based upon events that unfolded over one hundred years ago,” the game told me immediately after booting up. “What follows is front line combat. You are not expected to survive.”
Normally, a game that automatically shoves me into its single-player campaign would have me scrambling for the skip button — but that lead-in text lingered in my mind. Why had the game bothered to tell me I wouldn’t survive? The Western Front appeared onscreen, along with a directive to defend my position against waves of German soldiers. I fought valiantly but, like the disclaimer said, I was doomed to fail.
As my fictional soldier fell to the ground, I expected the game to cut to the Battlefield 1 logo. Instead, the camera zoomed out to reveal an epitaph for the character I had just failed. A somber voiceover touched on the futility of war as my view settled behind the eyes of another soldier. Soon, he fell too. Then another, and another, each expiring under their own floating epitaph showing the character’s birth year and time of death. The narrative’s emotionally manipulative hook was obvious, but still effective. This wasn’t a game — it was a war. I left the experience feeling like a soldier myself. One who might not make it home.
This isn’t what I was expecting. Most first-person shooters border on power fantasies — walking the player through a series of overblown, high-adrenaline sequences designed to make them feel like action heros. Battlefield 1 shatters that illusion by putting the player through a carousel of death, complete with narration. “We came from all over the world, so many of us thinking this war would be our right of passage. Our great adventure,” the voiceover coldly explains. “Instead of adventure, we found fear.”
This helps players empathize with the soldiers in a way other war games often don’t and gently reminds them that this is more than a game — it’s history. Battlefield 1’s intro isn’t just hinting that its campaign is story driven; it’s asking you to respect the memory of the soldiers of the war it’s based on. “Behind every gunsight is a human being,” says the voice, driving the point home. That’s not a sentiment I’m used to hearing in my war simulators.
By contrast, Call of Duty, Medal of Honor and previous Battlefield titles are games first, offering great action experiences and more than enough danger to keep players on edge. That’s perfectly fine — and exactly what these games are supposed to be — but as a result, they almost never break free of the typical tropes. Namely, the player is the hero and the good guys always win. Real war isn’t like that, and neither is Battlefield 1’s prologue. Despite being scripted and even a bit preachy, it’s poignant too. That’s enough to get me to do something I’ve never done before: Play the campaign mode of a Battlefield game.
Unfortunately, the harsh realism of the game’s introduction doesn’t quite carry over to the rest of the game’s single-player experience. The five “war story” vignettes that make up Battlefield 1’s campaign mode take players to five different fronts of the Great War, following five soldiers through their respective adventures. Each story is unique and uses a distinct narrative to draw you in — but they all also fall back on the same heroism tropes used in other war games. It’s easy to forget the bleak prologue when you’re running across the bow of a German airship in a last-ditch effort to single-handedly take out the rest of the Zeppelin fleet.
Even so, Battlefield 1’s single-player stories are still worth playing. Clever writing goes a long way toward softening some of these war hero cliches. One story has you questioning if the over-the-top adventure you’re playing is reality or the exaggerations of a braggart. Another is framed as the somber reflections of a soldier struggling to cope with being his team’s only survivor. These stories didn’t hit me as hard as the game’s opening sequence, but they’re still strong, character-driven narratives deserving of your time. In fact, they’re good enough that they made me go back and see if I was missing anything in Battlefield 4’s single-player mode. I wasn’t, but I’m glad Dice tricked me into trying Battlefield 1’s campaign. Next time they release a game, maybe I won’t forsake the solo experience in favor of mulitplayer.
‘I Expect You To Die’ will come to PlayStation VR this year
Schell Games has announced that its forthcoming title I Expect You To Die will arrive on PlayStation VR in time for the holidays. Previously the game was announced for the Oculus Rift, and was designed to work with that platform’s touch controls. I Expect You To Die is a locked room mystery, wth a spy trying to escape capture by solving a series of puzzles and avoiding death-defying traps. The company hasn’t issued a specific launch date for PlayStation support, but given that the game launches for PCs on December 6th, it’s not hard to assume it’ll be around there.
Uber and Lyft aren’t immune to racial discrimination by drivers
For a while, ridesharing has been seen as a possible solution to the racial discrimination you sometimes see with taxis. If drivers can’t always see or hear you first, they’re less likely to reject your request, right? Unfortunately, the industry isn’t entirely color-blind. A newly published study reveals that there’s still some bias in the ridesharing world. Uber drivers in Boston were over twice as likely to cancel rides on people with black-sounding names, for example, while black men waiting for rides in Seattle faced tangibly longer wait times for both Lyft and Uber.
The nature of the services makes it difficult to quantify more passive forms of racism. Uber doesn’t show drivers your photo when you request a ride, but Lyft does — a bigoted Lyft driver could simply ignore your request instead of cancelling. The data shows signs of sexism, too. Women occasionally faced overly long rides with drivers who were either flirting or assumed that female passengers wouldn’t notice rip-off routes.
Both Lyft and Uber tell Bloomberg that they don’t tolerate discrimination, and contend that their services ultimately reduce racism. They’re right to a degree: ridesharing reduces the chances of drivers avoiding whole neighborhoods, and it’s much easier to punish drivers who frequently cancel on customers. Also, the semi-entrepreneurial nature of most ridesharing (you’re using a personal car and setting your own hours) means that nearby drivers are more likely to live in the area and feel at home picking up locals.
Much like Airbnb, though, these companies are facing a difficult balancing act between fighting discrimination and maintaining convenience. If you withheld all names and photos from ridesharing services, it’d be harder for drivers to know who they’re picking up. Likewise, harsher penalties for drivers who cancel would be tricky. You don’t always know whether a cancellation is fueled by racism or more innocuous reasons. There are steps that the companies can take without affecting innocents, though, such as reviewing driver behavior. And the ridesharing outfits aren’t necessarily opposed to the study — Uber even says the data is “helpful” in showing how it can improve. You might just see some policy changes that lead to a more egalitarian experience.
Source: Bloomberg
Apple Watch Series 1 and 2 Owners Noticing ‘Great’ Battery Improvements in watchOS 3.1
One week ago, Apple released watchOS 3.1 to the public, bringing various bug fixes and performances improvements to the first version update of watchOS 3. Over the past few days a hidden advantage of 3.1 has been discovered, with users on the MacRumors forums and Reddit mentioning that they have vastly improved battery life on their Apple Watch Series 1 and Series 2 following the new update.
In a thread that started last Wednesday, forum member tromboneaholic posted a topic about the “great battery life” found on their Series 1 Apple Watch after updating to 3.1. Sixteen hours after charging the device, it still had 75 percent battery, even “with everything turned on like location services and background app refresh.” Series 1 and Series 2 Apple Watch owners note the same beefed up battery life in 3.1, with one forum member saying that they “can now comfortably skip charging every other night” if they wanted.
I read reports that beta users were getting great battery life under 3.1. I wasn’t prepared for how big the improvement would be. I have a Series 1, and I had 75% battery left after 16 hours yesterday. After charging it over night, I have 97% battery after 6 hours. This is with everything turned on like location services and background app refresh. So far I haven’t had any strange reboots like I had under 3.0. I would say this is an amazing update for the watch.
My field test with watchOS 3.1 on my AW S2: took it off the charger Friday at 5:00 am and it lasted until Sunday 7:00 pm. Great! I think I’ll go for a charge every other night and see how that works. For once a great software update, Apple!
Some users have even managed to get a Series 2 Apple Watch on 3.1 to last all weekend. Most Apple Watch owners have known in the past that Apple’s recommended 18 hour battery life could get them through at least one day without a charge, but now it appears watchOS 3.1 has improved that to a point where users can easily get to the two day mark, as long as there aren’t many intensive tasks running on the wearable. Understandably, some apps — like Apple’s stock Workout app — increase battery loss when running in the background, which offsets the statistic for users working out heavily throughout the day.
Some owners of the original Apple Watch, known online as “Series 0,” appear to not have gotten the same battery boost, however. One forum member said their Series 0 “has actually gotten a little worse” on 3.1, with the end-of-day battery percentage down by 10 percent on average. Another user worried about their iPhone 7 potentially being the culprit behind major battery drainage issues, but 3.1 doesn’t seem to have helped their case. That forum member mentioned their battery “drops like a stone” after each workout, so it’s most likely a specific hardware issue and not a widespread bug.
My series 0 has actually gotten a little worse. I even unpaired/repaired. In WatchOS 2 I generally finished my day with roughly 25-35% left, with a 1-hour workout. Now i’m down to 10-15% with a 25-45 minute workout.
Sadly my 3.0 and 3.1 experience with original watch is very different. Have unpaired, repaired, reset, restarted but still battery drops life a stone after a workout has run. Have removed all but the one face, background refresh off, handoff off. Genius Bar went through diagnostics and reported all ok. Have a worry that it could be my iPhone 7 causing the problem as the few days with 3.0 on old iPhone 6 I didn’t notice the drain.
Still, the battery improvements for the newer Apple Watches appear to be one of the more notable changes to watchOS for most users. As one Redditor shared yesterday, on a 42mm Series 2 Apple Watch they managed to keep a battery of around 82 percent after 11 hours of standby and 1 hour of usage. That percentage was with prominent haptics, max brightness, and background app refresh all turned on, as well. Since posting, many have shared similar experiences.
Check out the full watchOS 3.1 battery improvement thread over in the MacRumors forums to see more stories related to the update.
Related Roundups: Apple Watch Series 2, watchOS 3
Buyer’s Guide: Apple Watch (Buy Now)
Discuss this article in our forums
New 13-Inch MacBook Pro Sans Touch Bar is Marginally Faster But More Efficient Than Last Year’s Base Model
Benchmarks for Apple’s new 13-inch MacBook Pro without the Touch Bar are beginning to collect on Geekbench, providing a closer look at the notebook’s performance improvements and energy efficiency.
The entry-level model, powered by a Skylake-based 2.0GHz dual-core Intel Core i5 processor, currently has an average multi-core score of 6,970, indicating the notebook is only up to 7% faster than the early 2015 base model 13-inch MacBook Pro. Last year’s comparable model, equipped with a Broadwell-based 2.7GHz dual-core Intel Core i5 processor, currently has an average multi-core score of 6,497.
The late 2016 model is also slightly faster than last year’s mid-range 13-inch MacBook Pro, while slightly outperformed by the higher-end model.
The notebooks are each calibrated against a baseline score of 4,000, which is the score of Intel’s high-end Core i7-6600U processor.
While the performance improvements are negligible, the new 13-inch MacBook Pro sans Touch Bar’s 15-watt chip is more energy efficient than the 28-watt chip in last year’s entry-level model. The lower power consumption gives the 2016 base model comparable battery life to last year’s model despite having a smaller 54.5-watt-hour battery versus the 74.9-watt-hour battery in last year’s comparable.
Given that the non-Touch Bar model’s 6360U chip would typically be appropriate for the MacBook Air, the new 13-inch MacBook Pro with Touch Bar should be a more accurate comparable to last year’s base 13-inch model. However, it is also $500 more expensive. Benchmarks for that model should be available next month when Apple begins shipping the Touch Bar notebooks to customers.
Related Roundup: MacBook Pro
Tags: Geekbench, benchmarks
Buyer’s Guide: Retina MacBook Pro (Buy Now)
Discuss this article in our forums
Apple Releases iOS 10.1.1 to Address Bugs Related to Missing Health Data
Apple today released iOS 10.1.1, the third official update to the iOS 10 operating system, one week after releasing iOS 10.1 with Portrait Mode and just over six weeks after providing the new iOS 10 operating system to the public.
Today’s update fixes bugs including an issue where Health data could not be viewed for some users. iOS 10.1.1 can be downloaded as a free over-the-air update on all iPhone, iPad, and iPod touch models compatible with iOS 10.
iOS 10 is a major update that includes features like a redesigned Lock screen experience, a revamped Messages app with a full App Store, a Siri SDK for developers, new looks and features for Maps and Apple Music, and tons more. Make sure to check out our iOS 10 roundup for details.
Related Roundup: iOS 10
Tag: iOS 10.1.1
Discuss this article in our forums
Sony A6500 preview: Compact, powerful and now with touch
Sony has made a quickstep through some of its Alpha models, with the A6500 following the A6300 that was announced at the beginning of 2016.
This new E-mount model offers much the same design of the A6300 and A6000 that came before and in many cases adopts much of the specification too, but in many cases makes a number of tweaks to boost the performance.
We got our hands on a prototype of the new model at Sony’s UK launch. Sadly, as this wasn’t a final device, we weren’t able to keep or share any of the photos we took with it.
Sony A6500 preview: Design
These E-mount models offer a compact APS-C interchangeable lens design, with a familiar look. Put the A6000, A6300 and the A6500 side-by-side and there’s very little difference.
Pocket-lint
Over the past few years of this camera’s life, Sony hasn’t changed a huge amount. However, when we reviewed the A6000 in 2014, we instantly liked the compact nature and the high build quality in this camera that evolved out of the NEX line.
For the A6500, there’s little difference in size or weight from the former models, although Sony was keen to point out that there as a little more grip, so your fingers have a little more purchase, for better control. It’s a small detail, but should aid those who find this smaller body a bit difficult to manage, especially with a weighty lens on the front.
The A6500 retains that magnesium body, and water and dust resistant, pitched very much as a camera for those serious about their photography.
Sony A6500 preview: Getting touchy
One of the big omissions from the A6300 was touch. With a cracking new AF system, covering some 425 points, 84 per cent of the imaging area, there was no easy way of manually selecting the precise point of focus.
Pocket-lint
Sony is being rather choosy with which models gets touch, as the new Sony RX100 V, its champion high-end compact, still doesn’t offer this handy feature which is something of a surprise given how useful it is on these compact models.
- Sony Cyber-shot RX100 V preview: Adding quality, speed and accuracy
With the same focusing system in the A6500 as the A6300, a hybrid AF system using phase and contrast detection that works at incredible speed, Sony has now added a touch panel to the 3-inch display on the rear.
As before, this is a display that you can move into a wide range of positions to give you composition options, but adding touch means you can do a whole lot more. Not only do you get direct interaction with menu options, but you get those tap focusing options too.
There’s some clever stuff going on here, as you can use the viewfinder, half press the button and see where the camera focuses, and then use your thumb on the screen to move that focal point where you want it.
It might sound fiddly, but it’s a natural movement as you’re already gripping the camera and that thumb falls into just about the right position to swipe across the screen and move the AF point.
Pocket-lint
Those who are left-handed (or use your left eye) will know that your nose can trigger touchscreen devices when using the viewfinder because the camera is next to your face, your nose often against the back of the camera. Sure, you can, with practice, move the focal point with the tip of your nose – we tried it and it works – although we’re not confident that’s a long-term solution.
What you can do, however, is reduce the area of the touchscreen used for focus select. You can opt for half or a quarter of the screen and again, this is easy enough to find with a thumb and move focal point when using the viewfinder, while avoiding any nasal activation.
There are some other advantages too: touch can be used in playback, giving you instant zoom, so you can get into the details easily.
The viewfinder on the A6500 is the same OLED viewfinder we’ve seen before, which is bright, crisp and sharp, giving you loads of information. Some might prefer the natural look that you get from an optical viewfinder, but Sony is making it very difficult to not like the A6500 viewfinder.
Pocket-lint
Sony A6500 preview: Faster in capture
Not only does the A6500 offer fast focusing, but it also adopts one of the skills of the RX100 V and that’s the front-end LSI that been transported from the A99.
What this does is put more power up front, meaning that the A6500 can shoot faster and capture continuously, offering up to 269 shots in RAW, without slowing down.
That’s something that might appeal to those wanting to capture fast action, and rattling off 11 frames a second, it won’t take you long to fill a card. Of course, capturing is one thing, writing to the card is another and as we didn’t have final sample models of the camera, it’s difficult to judge exactly how this might work out in real life.
We also can’t judge how the performance is lifted by the new hardware. The sensor is the same 24.2-megapixel APS-C sensor as the A6300, paired with the Bionz X engine, and Sony is promising better performance at higher ISOs, thanks to having more power available.
First Impressions
This family of Sony cameras was a little slow to update from the A6000, now quicksteps through to a new model. There’s a lot on offer in the A6300 and the A6500 takes things up a step, but at the same time, you’re being asked to pay £1500 for it, a lift of about £300.
There’s lot on offer in the A6500. The have the in-body 5-axis stabilisation, meaning that you can use your E, A or any other lenses you have via adapters and still benefit from that stabilisation.
Touch means this is more fully-featured model than those it sits alongside, and should still offer those high quality images. We’re yet to see what the final performance of this camera will be, but first impressions are good.
We can’t wait to give it a thorough workout in a full review as soon as we can.
AIVAnet 