or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Review: Apple's late-2013 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina display
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Review: Apple's late-2013 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina display - Page 3

post #81 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by akqies View Post
How much trouble would it be to create a Safari extension that would allow you to type in names into a block list that would also remove those posters and their content from all Huddler forums?

Waste of time in my opinion. It needs to done on the server, and for that, one needs permission and access to the source code, That definitely won't be a project for me. The owners of the software know about the issue of blocked users showing up in the replies, but, they apparently don't care, although it seems like it would be a fairly pervasive problem.  I really don't want to derail the thread further with this.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #82 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durandal1707 View Post

By the way: I found the price of 4 GB of Micron D9PXV (which has the full part number MT41K256M16HA-125 per Micron's web site). It turns out to be $9.59. Here's my source.

I'd like an apology now, but of course I don't expect one from someone of your apparent intellectual caliber.

1oyvey.gif
post #83 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by daveinpublic View Post

You sound like you don't know what you're talking about either. Do u ever do research before you post all these jerk reactions/replies?

After years of shooting down the same old same old typical nonsense comments..yea maybe it sounds knee jerk...but it's actually just well-practiced. He knows what he's talking about.

People that whine about the masterpiece that is rMBP because it has soldered ram....in short....don't.
post #84 of 120
Originally Posted by Durandal1707 View Post
I’d like an apology now…

 

Only when you’ve learned what RAM is and what Apple’s doing with it. Except then you’ll know we’re not the ones to be apologizing.

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 #85 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by akqies View Post

How much trouble would it be to create a Safari extension that would allow you to type in names into a block list that would also remove those posters and their content from all Huddler forums?

I'd pay for that!
post #86 of 120

For anyone to make the statement the 4GB of RAM is enough is a foolish assertion. We all understand that Mavericks is using compression but that only goes so far. If someone is using Adobe Photoshop Lightroom the recommended amount of RAM for that software alone is 4GB.

 

The fact that the GPU uses system RAM is also a consideration. RAM is like gas in a car, your car doesn't go faster with a full tank of gas but it certainly goes slower if you run out of gas. If you make the comment that 4GB of RAM is enough you better be able to back that up with technical data. The needs of the user and the programs they are going to run dictates the system requirements.

 

The other joke is using the term "Pro" for a system that has 1280x800 resolution, 4GB of RAM and 5400rpm HDD. That was a pro system in the 1990's.

post #87 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlApple View Post
 

For anyone to make the statement the 4GB of RAM is enough is a foolish assertion. We all understand that Mavericks is using compression but that only goes so far. If someone is using Adobe Photoshop Lightroom the recommended amount of RAM for that software alone is 4GB.

 

It depends entirely on what your doing with it, although I agree the 4GB RAM model most likely ain't the best in terms of a future proof investment. Any soft of professional program except for word processing applications could be quite limited by the 4GB, more so once the GPU has taken its piece like you pointed out. However as a general web browsing and homework typing machine its more than capable.

 

Quote:

The fact that the GPU uses system RAM is also a consideration. RAM is like gas in a car, your car doesn't go faster with a full tank of gas but it certainly goes slower if you run out of gas. If you make the comment that 4GB of RAM is enough you better be able to back that up with technical data. The needs of the user and the programs they are going to run dictates the system requirements.

 

I don't understand what sort of technical data your looking for though, do you need some information on how much RAM Chrome & MS Word uses? Clearly for professionals you will want the extra RAM, but I don't think the bottom spec Macbook 13" Pro was intended for professionals. I think Apple intended this as a cheap option to a decently performing retina laptop. 

 

Quote:
The other joke is using the term "Pro" for a system that has 1280x800 resolution, 4GB of RAM and 5400rpm HDD. That was a pro system in the 1990's.

 

I assume you aren't talking about the Retina Macbook pro here, because that is the specs of the none retina model which hasn't been updated since 2011, I think the only reason they are keeping that around is so people have an option with a ROM drive.

post #88 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlApple View Post
 

For anyone to make the statement the 4GB of RAM is enough is a foolish assertion. We all understand that Mavericks is using compression but that only goes so far. If someone is using Adobe Photoshop Lightroom the recommended amount of RAM for that software alone is 4GB.

 

The fact that the GPU uses system RAM is also a consideration. RAM is like gas in a car, your car doesn't go faster with a full tank of gas but it certainly goes slower if you run out of gas. If you make the comment that 4GB of RAM is enough you better be able to back that up with technical data. The needs of the user and the programs they are going to run dictates the system requirements.

 

The other joke is using the term "Pro" for a system that has 1280x800 resolution, 4GB of RAM and 5400rpm HDD. That was a pro system in the 1990's.

The bolded part is hilarious. And it was Apple's best seller until a few months ago. It just goes to show how ignorant most PC buyers are.

 

But with profits of 8 billion per quarter, there was no excuse for Apple. Instead of doing stupid stuff like dividends, why not use the money in excess for better products?

 

I want each computer to last at least 5 years. That's what's happening worldwide in the industry. 16gb ram should be the minimum right now, especially with integrated graphics, even if the majority won't use it until this year. The same can be said about storage. 128gb is pathetic.

 

Apple could easily put 256gb ssd and 16gb ram minimum an maintain more than 25% profit margin on their macs. Everyone would win in the long term.

 

Besides, what bothers me about this forum is the posters that fiercely defend every action Apple takes. "do you know more than Steve Jobs?" "do you know more than Tim Cook?"? Of course we do, sometimes. Steve was the guy that screamed about iTunes on Windows, after all. He was also the jerk that couldn't work with anybody and had to be fired.

 

Everyone make mistakes. Ask Microsoft, Nokia, Rim, Apple itself.

 

Seriously, 4gb ram and 128 gb on a 1200€ machine? No one is forced to buy, but at least I hope that Apple and the usual retards stop the "they try to make the best product possible for as cheap as they can" crap.

 

Basically, the base rMBP is better than every Windows machine available, but Apple could make much better.

post #89 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlApple View Post

For anyone to make the statement the 4GB of RAM is enough is a foolish assertion.

It's enough for the entry model.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlApple View Post

The other joke is using the term "Pro" for a system that has 1280x800 resolution, 4GB of RAM and 5400rpm HDD. That was a pro system in the 1990's.

It depends which profession it's used in. Professional software development and web development don't require all that many resources. Same with the legal profession, journalism, writers etc. You can chop together a video on 4GB RAM too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durandal1707 
By the way: I found the price of 4 GB of Micron D9PXV (which has the full part number MT41K256M16HA-125 per Micron's web site). It turns out to be $9.59.

That's a 4Gbit chip, not 4GBytes of memory. 4GBytes needs 8x 4Gbit chips = $77, add 30% gross margins and you get $110, Apple charges $100 for the upgrade. Apple will most likely get memory cheaper (retail 4GB upgrades are just over $40) but they also have to pay for machines to fit the parts.

We'd all like Apple to offer more things at a lower price but what they do is take all the parts, factor in all the build costs and add healthy margins. Taking a hit of $50-100 when it's not necessary is not what they do (their gross profit, not even net profit on a $1299 machine is ~$390). PC manufacturers do this and it kills their margins because buyers end up going for the lowest priced models. Apple pushes people who need the higher spec up to the higher priced models and it works out very well for them.

If DDR4 memory prices allow more RAM at a lower price, they can do that or they can stick with 4GB and drop the entry MBP price down to $1199.
post #90 of 120
I'm pro Apple, and I find 4GB of ram in any offered machine insulting. So maybe it wouldn't cost then only 15$, maybe 20$? 30$? It's not a price drop if it's also a spec drop, that's called a value drop.
post #91 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by alienzed View Post

I'm pro Apple, and I find 4GB of ram in any offered machine insulting. So maybe it wouldn't cost then only 15$, maybe 20$? 30$? It's not a price drop if it's also a spec drop, that's called a value drop.

Except it is a price drop.  4gb is 1299- if you jump that up to 8gb it is 1399.  Last year 8gb was 1499.  So unless you don't consider $100 less a price drop, I don't know what to tell you...

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2012 27" iMac i7, 2010 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air, iPad Mini Retina, (2) iPhone 5S, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #92 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


It's enough for the entry model.
It depends which profession it's used in. Professional software development and web development don't require all that many resources. Same with the legal profession, journalism, writers etc. You can chop together a video on 4GB RAM too.
That's a 4Gbit chip, not 4GBytes of memory. 4GBytes needs 8x 4Gbit chips = $77, add 30% gross margins and you get $110, Apple charges $100 for the upgrade. Apple will most likely get memory cheaper (retail 4GB upgrades are just over $40) but they also have to pay for machines to fit the parts.

We'd all like Apple to offer more things at a lower price but what they do is take all the parts, factor in all the build costs and add healthy margins. Taking a hit of $50-100 when it's not necessary is not what they do (their gross profit, not even net profit on a $1299 machine is ~$390). PC manufacturers do this and it kills their margins because buyers end up going for the lowest priced models. Apple pushes people who need the higher spec up to the higher priced models and it works out very well for them.

If DDR4 memory prices allow more RAM at a lower price, they can do that or they can stick with 4GB and drop the entry MBP price down to $1199.

I guess my questions would be why drop the specs on a entry level pro model? The drop in price really isn't a drop if the hardware isn't the same. The majority have the mindset that 8GB of RAM should be standard, even if that isn't the case or the nees I'm not sure it's the right move to lowes hardware specs from the previous model. 

 

Some consumers may feel annoyed because they feel the need to upgrade one what Apple tags as a professional laptop. This would be one case where I feel Apple should stick to the old way of doing things, give and upgrade or update at the same price point. I admit it's more perception then need, users have always had an interesting mindset when it comes to RAM. 

 

Will be interesting to see how many units sell. 

post #93 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlApple View Post

If someone is using Adobe Photoshop Lightroom the recommended amount of RAM for that software alone is 4GB.

This is what I don't get about people like you. Why do you think the entry level specs are the same specs that someone that uses Adobe Photoshop? Why are you so bothered by the fact that Apple has made the MBP less expensive for entry level buyers? Are you really so shallow as to not want more people buying the MBP so you can feel more elitist?
post #94 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlApple View Post

The drop in price really isn't a drop if the hardware isn't the same.

So no Macs, except for clearance and refurbished products, have ever had a price drop because each each revision is new HW? W…T… F…?
post #95 of 120
This machine has me almost completely sold because I don't do high end graphics and just want a portable laptop with a beautiful display and good battery life. That said, can anyone comment on if the Iris graphics is powerful enough to power the retina on the higher resolutions of 1440 x 900 or 2560 x 1600, and if you notice any lag (like the 2012 retina model without a discrete gpu)? 1280 x 800 native is just not enough screen real estate for a 13in computer these days, that's what my 19in square dell monitors that are 5yrs old are running for their native resolution...
post #96 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShhImSleeping View Post

This machine has me almost completely sold because I don't do high end graphics and just want a portable laptop with a beautiful display and good battery life. That said, can anyone comment on if the Iris graphics is powerful enough to power the retina on the higher resolutions of 1440 x 900 or 2560 x 1600, and if you notice any lag (like the 2012 retina model without a discrete gpu)? 1280 x 800 native is just not enough screen real estate for a 13in computer these days, that's what my 19in square dell monitors that are 5yrs old are running for their native resolution...

I have a 15" which is nearly 1 million more pixels to push and Iris hasn't shown any issues whatsoever. I have even used gfxCardStatus to disable the Nvidia GeFroce GT 750M to only use Iris and ran apps that would dynamically kick the GPU from Iris to Nvidia without any issues.


PS: What out. People here will tell you can't be a professional if you don't need a high-end GPU. 1biggrin.gif
post #97 of 120
Quote:
 

I have a 15" which is nearly 1 million more pixels to push and Iris hasn't shown any issues whatsoever. I have even used gfxCardStatus to disable the Nvidia GeFroce GT 750M to only use Iris and ran apps that would dynamically kick the GPU from Iris to Nvidia without any issues.

PS: What out. People here will tell you can't be a professional if you don't need a high-end GPU. 1biggrin.gif

 

 

I appreciate the feedback, but doesn't the 15inchers use the Iris Pro, not the regular Iris?  If you had just the Iris graphics with discrete turned off, and it was pushing a retina 15in mbp without lag, I wouldn't even hesitate to order mine now then haha.

post #98 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShhImSleeping View Post


I appreciate the feedback, but doesn't the 15inchers use the Iris Pro, not the regular Iris?  If you had just the Iris graphics with discrete turned off, and it was pushing a retina 15in mbp without lag, I wouldn't even hesitate to order mine now then haha.

My mistake. I thought they bought used Iris Pro. Thanks for pointing that out.
post #99 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by akqies View Post

You really can't understand why a 3rd-pary vendor like Newegg selling a stick of RAM to an end user might require the same rigid testing for reliability, power usage and performance as a company like Apple, Samsung or Cisco that is putting RAM directly on a motherboard along with hundreds to thousands of dollars in other parts? Have you spent your entire life looking at shadows on a cave wall?

Can you re-read what you have written as it doesn't make sense.

Now back to what you claimed, can you show me this proof that Apple double tests their RAM?
post #100 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

Can you re-read what you have written as it doesn't make sense.

Now back to what you claimed, can you show me this proof that Apple double tests their RAM?

It makes sense. Learn to read.

Who said Apple doubles anything? This is about accepting RAM that has been passed higher standards of testing, not about doing the same test twice.
post #101 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by akqies View Post


This is what I don't get about people like you. Why do you think the entry level specs are the same specs that someone that uses Adobe Photoshop? Why are you so bothered by the fact that Apple has made the MBP less expensive for entry level buyers? Are you really so shallow as to not want more people buying the MBP so you can feel more elitist?

People like me? That's an interesting comment. My main point was the entry level dropped in specs. If the previous entry level came with 4GB of RAM that's a different story. Apple touted a decrease in price, however it also came with a decrease in RAM. My comment about Abobe had to do with others making a one size fits all comment. Also 8GB of RAM is hardly elite seeing it's less than a hundred dollar upgrade.

 

RAM is the least expensive upgrade someone can make, including APPLE. Apple should be able to give entry level buyers the same specs as the previous model at a better price and still be able to keep a very good profit margin. Some members come to the defense of Apple no matter what they do, I tend to come to the defense of the consumer getting the most for their money.

 

Another point I failed to raise in my previous post is some assume all anyone wants or needs to run is Mavericks. If the user wants to have a dual boot option into Windows then 8GB of RAM is even more important.

 

This is really easy, once they set a watermark on specs don't go backwards.

post #102 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlApple View Post

People like me? That's an interesting comment. My main point was the entry level dropped in specs. If the previous entry level came with 4GB of RAM that's a different story. Apple touted a decrease in price, however it also came with a decrease in RAM. My comment about Abobe had to do with others making a one size fits all comment. Also 8GB of RAM is hardly elite seeing it's less than a hundred dollar upgrade.

RAM is the least expensive upgrade someone can make, including APPLE. Apple should be able to give entry level buyers the same specs as the previous model at a better price and still be able to keep a very good profit margin. Some members come to the defense of Apple no matter what they do, I tend to come to the defense of the consumer getting the most for their money.

Another point I failed to raise in my previous post is some assume all anyone wants or needs to run is Mavericks. If the user wants to have a dual boot option into Windows then 8GB of RAM is even more important.

This is really easy, once they set a watermark on specs don't go backwards.

So what? Make it 8GB RAM and it's still $100 cheaper that the day before it was released with newer, better, and faster components. That means your real issue is that people you think that are beneath you will now have access to this MBP. And yet you shouldn't think that since you're the one that feels entitled to get more for less, not them. If you don't like it then don't buy it but claims that Apple should give you more and using your opinion as to what is a good enough profit margin for them is ridiculous. It's not your decision to make and yet you can't be happy for others that would have otherwise not been able to get a MBP now able to get one that fits their needs and pay less for more performance over the previous generation. You make me sick.
post #103 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlApple View Post

I guess my questions would be why drop the specs on a entry level pro model?

The entry Pro (the cMBP) always had 4GB. They are trying to ultimately replace the cMBP with the rMBP so it makes sense to use whatever options allow them to do that without killing the margins.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlApple View Post

Will be interesting to see how many units sell.

Why? Their entry cMBP model is the same as before.
post #104 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by akqies View Post


So what? Make it 8GB RAM and it's still $100 cheaper that the day before it was released with newer, better, and faster components. That means your real issue is that people you think that are beneath you will now have access to this MBP. And yet you shouldn't think that since you're the one that feels entitled to get more for less, not them. If you don't like it then don't buy it but claims that Apple should give you more and using your opinion as to what is a good enough profit margin for them is ridiculous. It's not your decision to make and yet you can't be happy for others that would have otherwise not been able to get a MBP now able to get one that fits their needs and pay less for more performance over the previous generation. You make me sick.


We can't have a debate until you get past this "beneath you" nonsense. If you enjoy paying more for less. Go for it. Have a blast.

post #105 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


The entry Pro (the cMBP) always had 4GB. They are trying to ultimately replace the cMBP with the rMBP so it makes sense to use whatever options allow them to do that without killing the margins.
Why? Their entry cMBP model is the same as before.


I get your point now. Get the rMBP close to the price of the non retina so they can drop that model. Good point didn't think of it that way.

post #106 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by akqies View Post

It makes sense. Learn to read.

ok, can you tell me what your statement has to do with your claim of Apple double testing RAM?

Quote:
Originally Posted by akqies View Post

Who said Apple doubles anything? This is about accepting RAM that has been passed higher standards of testing, not about doing the same test twice.

You did, here http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160544/review-apples-late-2013-13-inch-macbook-pro-with-retina-display/40#post_2429529
post #107 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning View Post

ok, can you tell me what your statement has to do with your claim of Apple double testing RAM?
You did, here http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160544/review-apples-late-2013-13-inch-macbook-pro-with-retina-display/40#post_2429529

You're the only one that used the word double. Do you not know what double means? It means consisting of two equal, identical, or similar parts or things. It isn't defined as better, or additional, or deeper. It's also not defined as taking components that fit within stricter thresholds, which is what everyone has been referring to.. except you. You still think that if a component has the same common name they are somehow exactly the same. Shameful.
post #108 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlApple View Post


We can't have a debate until you get past this "beneath you" nonsense. If you enjoy paying more for less. Go for it. Have a blast.

You're absolutely right there. It's impossible to debate with someone who thinks MBP buyers that are happy to have Iris and 4GB of RAM aren't worthy of owning MBPs.
post #109 of 120
Considering CPU, Gpu both use the ram 4 gb is probably 2-3(with the apple calculation 4gb other=6 gb apple) so you get ok ram but if you are getting a MacBook Pro because MacBook Air is not enough then you need 8gb(most are, but some just want the fancy screen at only $300) I would have hoped to see discrete graphics on more devices, and larger rams, SSD availible but less discrete graphics, new lower standard, and same (yet faster) SSD options.
post #110 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by vash486 View Post

what about Image Retention on LG Panels? Anybody is mentioning it?
It is a major issue and that's stopping me from buying one. Pretty bad for Apple.


The huge discussion over at Apple forums about image retention still runs strong. The reports are mixed, some machines have image retention right out of the box, others don't but who knows what will happen with time. So, if you buy such a MacBook Pro, you are still playing the lottery regarding this specific issue. What a bummer.

post #111 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

A lot of you here seem obsessed with Cash097's (throwaway) '$15' comment.

In the process, you're missing the larger point of his post: whether 128GB is sufficient anymore even for an entry level.

 

It's plenty if you don't store long term media files on your machine. A full blown setup for me takes up 87gigs including the OS.

 

That leaves roughly 40gb left over.

 

I have a developer and trader centric setup and don't need large library installed on my machine.  My setup includes MS Office, Xcode 5, Bitnami PHP stack, some trading apps, and a few utilities.

I also also keep a small iTunes install that's around 28gb in size.

 

The bulk of my media is in a 1.5TB drive connected to my router and accessible by all my computers and other devices like tablets and phones.

 

Having an additional 128gb of HD space on my machine wouldn't really add anything, for me at least.

 

So yes, 128gb is still plenty, even for "professionals".

 

I do have a few 65gb SD cards that contain VMs for old VB.net apps I still update but I would like to keep them on a mobile storage device anyway.

post #112 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlApple View Post
 

People like me? That's an interesting comment. My main point was the entry level dropped in specs. If the previous entry level came with 4GB of RAM that's a different story. Apple touted a decrease in price, however it also came with a decrease in RAM. My comment about Abobe had to do with others making a one size fits all comment. Also 8GB of RAM is hardly elite seeing it's less than a hundred dollar upgrade.

 

RAM is the least expensive upgrade someone can make, including APPLE. Apple should be able to give entry level buyers the same specs as the previous model at a better price and still be able to keep a very good profit margin. Some members come to the defense of Apple no matter what they do, I tend to come to the defense of the consumer getting the most for their money.

 

Another point I failed to raise in my previous post is some assume all anyone wants or needs to run is Mavericks. If the user wants to have a dual boot option into Windows then 8GB of RAM is even more important.

 

This is really easy, once they set a watermark on specs don't go backwards.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlApple View Post
 

People like me? That's an interesting comment. My main point was the entry level dropped in specs. If the previous entry level came with 4GB of RAM that's a different story. Apple touted a decrease in price, however it also came with a decrease in RAM. My comment about Abobe had to do with others making a one size fits all comment. Also 8GB of RAM is hardly elite seeing it's less than a hundred dollar upgrade.

 

RAM is the least expensive upgrade someone can make, including APPLE. Apple should be able to give entry level buyers the same specs as the previous model at a better price and still be able to keep a very good profit margin. Some members come to the defense of Apple no matter what they do, I tend to come to the defense of the consumer getting the most for their money.

 

Another point I failed to raise in my previous post is some assume all anyone wants or needs to run is Mavericks. If the user wants to have a dual boot option into Windows then 8GB of RAM is even more important.

 

This is really easy, once they set a watermark on specs don't go backwards.

 

Apple didn't really lower the bar in terms of the whole package.

 

Remember, they added Memory Compression (4GB = 6GB) and other tricks in resource management to improve performance and endurance.

post #113 of 120
My iTunes music is 160gb alone lol
post #114 of 120
Quote:

Originally Posted by rats View Post

So yes, 128gb is still plenty, even for "professionals".

I would say it is plenty "only" for professionals, because they commonly use external storage. For the average user though, commonly relying on internal storage, 128 GB is a joke today.

post #115 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by PB View Post
 

I would say it is plenty "only" for professionals, because they commonly use external storage. For the average user though, commonly relying on internal storage, 128 GB is a joke today.

But that goes back to the original point, it makes sense that Apple starts it's Pro line at 128gb.

 

Also, with wireless ac routers being able to do real world transfers at 16mb/s it makes total sense going forward to attach a drive to your router and have access to all your media from all your devices.  Obviously this will take a while since router upgrades take forever for most people.

post #116 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by rats View Post
 

But that goes back to the original point, it makes sense that Apple starts it's Pro line at 128gb.

True, and it is not Apple's fault entirely. We live in a "schizophrenic" (in the literal meaning) transitional period, in which cheap and slow media providing huge amount or storage room (HDD) coexist with very expensive and fast media that are thin on storage room (SSD). It seems that it will take a while before SSD's be inexpensive and large enough to phase out hard disks as a viable alternative.

post #117 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by PB View Post
 

I would say it is plenty "only" for professionals, because they commonly use external storage. For the average user though, commonly relying on internal storage, 128 GB is a joke today.

It's an entry level model for those that don't have a lot of data to store. College students, college professors and other people don't always need that much more than that.  Pros want the biggest, fastest, etc. they can get their hands on.

 

Or it's for those that know how to manage their data.  I only need more than 128GB because I have a huge audio/video collection that's growing, but I'm planning on offloading to an external RAID. If I do that, 128GB would be plenty.

post #118 of 120

Use the cloud. Problem solved.  Unless you are a video professional, you probably don't need GB of videos sitting around all the time.

post #119 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

It's an entry level model for those that don't have a lot of data to store. College students, college professors and other people don't always need that much more than that.

 

No more storage is needed if the use is really limited to that (university work/documents, courses, etc.). Is it though?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post
 

Or it's for those that know how to manage their data.  I only need more than 128GB because I have a huge audio/video collection that's growing, but I'm planning on offloading to an external RAID. If I do that, 128GB would be plenty.

 

This is where the problem comes from. Audio/video storage and processing. High definition video, produced nowadays even by digital cameras in the reach of everyone, eats GB's for breakfast. And photo/music/video is a primary target for Apple. OK, we have the iMac for that. But if you want to go mobile, then the only reasonable solution is the ordinary (non-Retina) MacBook Pro.

post #120 of 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by PB View Post
 

 

No more storage is needed if the use is really limited to that (university work/documents, courses, etc.). Is it though?

 

 

This is where the problem comes from. Audio/video storage and processing. High definition video, produced nowadays even by digital cameras in the reach of everyone, eats GB's for breakfast. And photo/music/video is a primary target for Apple. OK, we have the iMac for that. But if you want to go mobile, then the only reasonable solution is the ordinary (non-Retina) MacBook Pro.

That's why Apple offers storage options up to 1TB of SSD.  But not everyone needs that amount of storage or can afford it.  Companies have to offer products to those that want/need different levels of storage.  But I don't think there's anything wrong with offering a 128GB model.  It's just the entry level model, but it's certainly not the only model or storage option they offer.  Some people just don't have a lot of music/videos and other large amounts of data, for those that do, they'll buy another model with more storage.  Actually, I'm contemplating buying an external Thunderbolt SSD drive with either 1 or 2TB of SSD storage which will bring down my internal storage requirements to just apps and OS and very little else which will be WAY under 128GB.  Then I can connect to any future device and not have to constantly transfer all my data from one to the next.  I'm actually thinking that might be the best way to deal with data management.  It's fast, reliable and I don't have the data transfer headaches.  It's just the initial investment that's the major consideration.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Review: Apple's late-2013 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina display