or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Purported 13" MacBook Pro specs show USB 3.0, Ivy Bridge, no Retina display
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Purported 13" MacBook Pro specs show USB 3.0, Ivy Bridge, no Retina display - Page 4

post #121 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgsarch View Post

Wait a second, that resolution looks "wrong". Wasn't it being suggested that retina mbp would need to be 2880x1800?

Looks right to me. That's a 16:10 aspect ratio and 196 PPI. I think what you're assuming is that it there needs to be exactly double the resolution like with the iPhone and iPad so that one pixel can be represented by 4 pixels, but that law doesn't carry over to Mac OS X in the same way because it's a windowed OS. The structure and design is completely different because the primary input method is completely different. Mac OS has always fluctuated the PPI of the display (within reason) based on the size and tech.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #122 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post

 

Personally, I'd be interested in affordable MacBook with aluminium unibody and decent IPS screen, even in 1280x. In fact, I'd rather have 1280 IPS than 1980 TFT on 13" unit, for the same price.

 

Only thing stopping me from buying a current model 13" MBP is the screen res. After comparing the MBP and Air screens side by side, the higher res of the Air is clearly a big plus. 1440 x 900 is about right as the base res for a 13.3" screen.

 

I would be very happy if they went to a 1440 x 900 IPS screen for the 13" MBP. That would be a sweet little unit.

 

Unfortunately it would be serious competition for the 13" Air, so I can't see Apple doing it.

post #123 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Ah, so no mention of Turbo Boost and mention of the RAM for the integrated GPU. Thanks!

No problem. I just double checked my roommates and he bought his about two weeks ago. It looks exactly the same as mine so there's not been a silent update to the sticker.

 

I just recently sold my early 2011 i7 but I can't remember if that sticker mentioned TurboBoost. It might have because at the time I *think* the i5's didn't have TurboBoost or at least non-Apple i5's did not. When I bought this MBP I googled around to make sure it had it because I didn't want to upgrade to the i7 if I didn't feel I had to.

post #124 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


Looks right to me. That's a 16:10 aspect ratio and 196 PPI. I think what you're assuming is that it there needs to be exactly double the resolution like with the iPhone and iPad so that one pixel can be represented by 4 pixels, but that law doesn't carry over to Mac OS X in the same way because it's a windowed OS. The structure and design is completely different because the primary input method is completely different. Mac OS has always fluctuated the PPI of the display (within reason) based on the size and tech.


Further, this alleged second model has exactly 4x the pixel count as the first one which, if anything, adds to the credibility of both (much like iPad 2 and new iPad).

post #125 of 132
Yes really, did you ever do any kind of video editing
post #126 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crunch View Post

 

 

In your lame comment, you mean to imply that FW800 are speedier than USB 2 drives in any truly meaningful way? Hardly.

No, I don't. It is, however.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vandil View Post

Firewire port: for people with PowerMac G4/G5 era equipment and hardware from Apple and third parties like LaCie.

 

No one makes Firewire devices any more.  They should replace the Firewire 800 jack with an additional USB port and allow third party companies to make a thunderbolt-connected hub with Firewire ports (heck, even throw in a Firewire 400 port in the hub for the real technical dinosaur equipment).

 

Come on, Apple, move on to USB 3.0.

To this and the quote before: there's mor eto FW than drives. Have you any idea about the amount of (professional) video and audio hardware that is out there that connects to Macs through FireWire? None of those users will upgrade their machines if there are no FireWire ports, or at least reasonable options to connect FireWire devices to Thunderbolt. Thunderbolt holds huge promise in this field, but so far, it is slow to gain traction. So FireWire is here to stay for another year or so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

What about this one? Thoughts?

 

macbook-pro-2012-9to5mac-slim.jpg

Delicious. Now make me a 17" model, Apple!

 

.tsooJ

post #127 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by gyorpb View Post
Delicious. Now make me a 17" model, Apple!

 

Maybe the rumors say this one is $3,000 because there isn't a 17" anymore.

 

If so, Apple, that's an idiotic decision.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #128 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

What about this one? Thoughts?

 

macbook-pro-2012-9to5mac-slim.jpg

 

 

Mhh well Ethernet for real ? i mean have u ever take a look on your macbook how less space there is for ethernet, and now its smaller an has ethernet ? ... well i cant believe this

post #129 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by detmud View Post
Mhh well Ethernet for real ? i mean have u ever take a look on your macbook how less space there is for ethernet, and now its smaller an has ethernet ? ... well i cant believe this

 

You're claiming that a smaller computer can't have Ethernet. 


Yes, I've looked at the modern MacBook family, and there's a fair bit of space that can be shaved off while retaining Ethernet.

 

Have you looked at them?

 

features_ports_17inch20110224.jpg#gallery-ports-17inch

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #130 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

You're claiming that a smaller computer can't have Ethernet. 


Yes, I've looked at the modern MacBook family, and there's a fair bit of space that can be shaved off while retaining Ethernet.

 

Have you looked at them?

 

 

I wonder how much thinner they could go while maintaining structural integrity there. The current aluminum shells are a fairly thin skin. Anyway I hope they don't do anything that results in even higher fan speeds. 

post #131 of 132

wow still low rez and the macbook pro is "still rocking' the pager" (superdrive).

post #132 of 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by detmud View Post

 

 

Mhh well Ethernet for real ? i mean have u ever take a look on your macbook how less space there is for ethernet, and now its smaller an has ethernet ? ... well i cant believe this


Ethernet is a must for a professional laptop. Still too many professional environments where WiFi is not an option due to security concerns.

 

Expect to see Apple push for a new (smaller) Ethernet port standard sooner than seeing them drop the port altogether.

 

.tsooJ

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Purported 13" MacBook Pro specs show USB 3.0, Ivy Bridge, no Retina display