Not a huge fan of the glossy displays myself. I've still got an old matte Cinema Display for my Mac Pro and I love it. My current MacBook Pro has a glossy display, but to be honest it has really become a bit of a non-issue. It is easy to adjust indoors and even outdoors I can usually find a position where it is manageable. That said, I'm looking forward to the, what was it, 70% glare reduction they mentioned in the keynote? That'll be a great bonus.
I work with colors too as a graphics/web designer. I work with colors a lot. The display has not interfered with my colors.
The glare can be an issue, but again most people are less picky than they realize. If you're doing print design work, you're going to have proofs or press checks either way. For web design it should just be close enough. There's no possible way that an old one is still dead on given how fast those things drifted, but close enough is close enough. The closer you want to get, the more elaborate the setup can become
Wayyyyy too expensive! I can get a fully loaded iMac for cheaper. If they want to take over all the markets, they need to have an evenly distributed number of products in the cheaper as well as expensive areas. Students love MacBooks, but they can't afford $2K on a laptop.
At these prices I should probably be thankful they don't have a 17" model. Yikes.
I don't get it; iPad gets retina display and more memory but the price doesn't change. SSD prices are plummeting and the new MacBook explodes in price. Maybe Apple is anticipating low volume. Maybe they don't care to make that much of an impact on the market beyond twitters.
Until apps are upgraded to take advantage of the new display this is just a very, very expensive toy.
just seems to me in all my uses i never find myself needing a library of music or all my movies on a laptop when i leave the house? and to pull out a usb 3 external hd that fits in my hand doesn't seem a big deal to me. guess im just living in the future or something =D
or getting ready to live in the cloud? Laptops are probably even more presumed to be networked than pads. High storage volumes are going to be SO "first decade" rather soon I suspect.
TBH: The high end non retina 15in macbook pro is the same price as the entry retina with nearly same specs besides the old 5400 hd. so the pricing isn't that bad and for those who say "256 SSD is so small omg i want my 5400 awesomeness." get over it buy an external and move on. for 2199 price tag this thing is nice. it has alot new features not just the retina display. the new cooling system is amazing and the build of the laptop itself was enough for me to purchase. so TY apple for not sticking to the norm and changing everything again with little to any price hike!
A better solution than buying an external hard drive (pretty silly to have a laptop that requires one), would be to take the space where an optical bay used to be and install a convential HDD. I would far prefer this to a thinner design. A 256GB or 500GB SSD, and a 1 TB HDD. Perfect. Apple's single-minded focus on size results in missed opportunities like this.
The RAM situation in these MacBooks is a joke, too. Soldered RAM? WTF? For a "Pro" laptop, 32GB RAM should be an option. I'd also like to see the CPU installed in a proper socket so it can be upgraded, but it's at least understandable that Apple solder it on the logic board. Not so for the RAM.
Additionally, for a "Pro" laptop, Apple should have at least one model, such as the 17 incher, that has an SSD boot drive and two hot swapable bays with external access for two HDDs. There's plenty of space as long as they don't go making it too thin. These are the sorts of killer features Apple needs to go along with the killer Retina display. The goal with a laptop should be to need as few external peripherals as possible, otherwise carrying your system anywhere takes a freakin' suitcase or the like.
The new MacBook Pro is clearly a brilliant replacement for both the current 15" and 17" models. Incredibly powerful, who needs a big heavyweight redundant desk-bound tower? Just plug the new 15" into an Apple display and you have the perfect desktop system as well as the perfect laptop.
That said, keeping the existing 13" and 15" models seems very schizophrenic. Don't Apple believe in their new 15" machine? And where was the new 13" MacBook Pro? Maybe the new 13" Air is good enough? But if it is, couldn't it have had the retina treatment too?
And if you have a 13" model and 15" model,, why not have a single enclosure design? And if you couldn't fit all that hardware in slim Air 15" unibody, why not offer a 13" new design too?
I'm not saying that I'm unimpressed, but the new models seems to lack the clear vision and focus that accompanied the first unibody MBPs. I am a little bit worried by this - it's very un-Steve. But maybe the wisdom of the various decisions behind the latest product technology choices will become obvious as i see these machines in the flesh.
I am interested to see expert opinion on these new machines.
Here's a clue: Apple's $2199 MacBook is gimped on memory and drive space. Once you put in a larger SSD and max the RAM, it's at $3000 or even more.
8 GBs of RAM is not gimped. That's more than enough for the vast range of computer uses people will need this thing for. 16 GBs is $200 more (actually relatively reasonable) for those who will need more (or who anticipate needing more). Not a huge fan of soldering them in (if that's the case), but an intelligent purchase should handle that well enough. 256 GBs of storage isn't super delightful but it will work for many people depending on their requirements, though that's something I imagine more people will want to upgrade. In any case, it is not worth insulting someone over, and it also doesn't excuse someone from saying that a $2200 laptop is a $3000 laptop (also noting that the 512 GB option is $2800).
That said, keeping the existing 13" and 15" models seems very schizophrenic. Don't Apple believe in their new 15" machine? And where was the new 13" MacBook Pro? Maybe the new 13" Air is good enough? But if it is, couldn't it have had the retina treatment too?
It seemed a little unusual to me too, but as I think of it it does make more sense. I have a feeling these machines are highly dedicated to providing certain specifications like battery life with that retina display and the extra space saved by cutting out the likes of an optical drive and even a mechanical hard drive played a key role in that (these laptops are packed). Some professionals are going to want the option of a huge mechanical hard drive or might not want to invest in features like a retina display, might just want to save money (the cost has more to do with just the Retina display), or will (I'm certain) have any other number of reasons for preferring a laptop which doesn't make one of the highly specialized changes found in this particular model. The cheaper MacBooks will be appropriate for them.
I imagine Apple will cut out the 'old' MacBooks and there will just be one line of MacBook Pros along these lines when all the technologies and costs converge properly. And it isn't like professional users, studios, and companies will have much trouble traversing the specifics of the MacBook lineup Apple is currently offering.
At these prices I should probably be thankful they don't have a 17" model. Yikes.
I don't get it; iPad gets retina display and more memory but the price doesn't change. SSD prices are plummeting and the new MacBook explodes in price. Maybe Apple is anticipating low volume. Maybe they don't care to make that much of an impact on the market beyond twitters.
Until apps are upgraded to take advantage of the new display this is just a very, very expensive toy.
There is certainly lower volume with all Macs combined (not just one type of Mac notebook) than the iPad but there are also other dynamics at work. Consider the previous iPad. If they released it with the same resolution this year it would be well below the other tablets coming to market which could hurt it's attempt at dominating the unit market share of the tablet market. Same goes for raising the price.
I don't think Macs are in that flux state like the still nascent modern tablet market. But you also need to consider other costs with the new MBPs. It's a new design, not just a new CPU and chipset (that supports USB 3.0). How much does that cost? What about the 2nd TB port? Is that just daisy-chained off the 1st one or can you theoretically get 2x10GB off each port?
What about other HW changes? Does that new display and glass process with the milled lid cost more or less than the old MBP? And why assume that iPad display change doesn't have higher costs in the 13" and 15" sizes? The area and pixel count are both significantly increased.
You wouldn't say that if you knew what Apple was paying for that RAM. I'd wager far less than $50.
The Apple premium for SSD is even more outrageous.
So $200 for an additional 8GB of RAM is outrageous only because Apple's wholesale component costs (not including design, production, warranties, etc.) are less than what they charge? FFS!
8 GBs of RAM is not gimped. That's more than enough for the vast range of computer uses people will need this thing for. 16 GBs is $200 more (actually relatively reasonable) for those who will need more (or who anticipate needing more). Not a huge fan of soldering them in (if that's the case), but an intelligent purchase should handle that well enough. 256 GBs of storage isn't super delightful but it will work for many people depending on their requirements, though that's something I imagine more people will want to upgrade. In any case, it is not worth insulting someone over, and it also doesn't excuse someone from saying that a $2200 laptop is a $3000 laptop (also noting that the 512 GB option is $2800).
8GB is gimped. And for a Pro system entry level should be at 16GB. W're talking about a Pro system and I can punch that memory till its maxed in 5 minutes.
8GB is gimped. And for a Pro system entry level should be at 16GB. W're talking about a Pro system and I can punch that memory till its maxed in 5 minutes.
Gimped for you, gimped for video editors, underpowered for me, but plenty for a wide range of professionals. An upgrade is available. 16 GBs is more than enough for the vast majority of professionals out there.
Skimming through the thread, it seems that many users don't have the slightest fu[king clue about implications of display resolutions or how Apple is dealing with the ultra-high resolution Retina displays. Apple would be wise to put up an explanation on their website, and not a marketing gobblygook statement, I mean a real, honest white paper discussion of ultra-high resolutions and what they mean for end users. Otherwise every Windows user you meet is going to be snarking at Apple's tiny font sizes, LOL.
I agree that the new age of rez and retina needs MUCH more 'splaining to we non-engineers. This takes me back to 15 years ago poring over the meanings and implications of dpi vs ppi, vector vs. raster, RGB vs CMYK vs. LAB and other such conundrums I'd never encountered. And Apple - and Apple-centric sites - would be well served to help us tease this all out. As in when is a pixel more than a pixel? Is a doubled 1440x900 display truly able to display 1080p content using most or all of the screen - and if so will that require interpolation or a mode change of some sort.... .....and well, I know I'm confused....
But apparently from your comment, you're also one of the "many users" who "don't have the slightest fu[king clue about implications of display resolutions or how Apple is dealing with the ultra-high resolution Retina displays" - as the type, will not, of course be tiny - on software optimized for the new age at least.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tailpipe
That said, keeping the existing 13" and 15" models seems very schizophrenic. Don't Apple believe in their new 15" machine? And where was the new 13" MacBook Pro? Maybe the new 13" Air is good enough? But if it is, couldn't it have had the retina treatment too?
I was mildly surprised to see Apple adding so many SKU's with different compromises myself. But thinking about it, and Apple's history, it comes down - at least partially - to price points and legacy freaks, guy. $1199 to $2199 with nothing between is a hefty price gap - and ultra-slimness is not on everyone's req list. And finally, apparently quite a few people still like to make shiny silver coasters. Tho' honestly I was expecting something like the new Pro - along with a 15" MBA and a bumped 13" MBA rather than what we got.
I know we won't see the model by model sales breakdown - but we will see that reflected in next year's line up. I'll be interested.....
More like, "BA HA HA HA HA HA No Ethernet?! Failure!"
Of course this thing is going to be $3,000 BASE price… Just watch.
According to AnandTech: "The base configurations comes with 8 GB of DRAM, a 256 GB NAND SSD, and a 2.3 GHz quad-core chip. That variant costs $2199 USD, a cost Apple promises is due to all its custom components like "asymmetrical fans" and other ultrathin oddiities."
If that is correct, it is good price for very sweet unit.
Ethernet would be nice, though - I've been in a number of hotels (couple of Hiltons included) in Australia, Europe and US... with only wired Internet in rooms. This can be sorted with cheap USB-to-Ethernet adapter, though, so not a major.
I don't really think this will scare other manufacturers, though. They are more anxious what Apple is doing in more masinstream segments - Airs and lower end MBPs. Not so many people need that resolution on 15.4" laptop, and even among them who would like to have it - not too many will be willing to pay the price. I am hoping, though, that moves like this will inspire PC makers to start improving screen quality on their units. My wife has recently purchased basic Sony VAIO SB, and it is great portable for great price - but I'd gladly put some extra money to have that unit with IPS screen of a bit more decent resolution (that 1366*768).
According to AnandTech: "The base configurations comes with 8 GB of DRAM, a 256 GB NAND SSD, and a 2.3 GHz quad-core chip. That variant costs $2199 USD, a cost Apple promises is due to all its custom components like "asymmetrical fans" and other ultrathin oddiities."
If that is correct, it is good price for very sweet unit.
Ethernet would be nice, though - I've been in a number of hotels (couple of Hiltons included) in Australia, Europe and US... with only wired Internet in rooms. This can be sorted with cheap USB-to-Ethernet adapter, though, so not a major.
Exactly; I was quite surprised.
And even the Thunderbolt to Ethernet adapter is cheap.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xian Zhu Xuande
Not a huge fan of the glossy displays myself. I've still got an old matte Cinema Display for my Mac Pro and I love it. My current MacBook Pro has a glossy display, but to be honest it has really become a bit of a non-issue. It is easy to adjust indoors and even outdoors I can usually find a position where it is manageable. That said, I'm looking forward to the, what was it, 70% glare reduction they mentioned in the keynote? That'll be a great bonus.
I work with colors too as a graphics/web designer. I work with colors a lot. The display has not interfered with my colors.
The glare can be an issue, but again most people are less picky than they realize. If you're doing print design work, you're going to have proofs or press checks either way. For web design it should just be close enough. There's no possible way that an old one is still dead on given how fast those things drifted, but close enough is close enough. The closer you want to get, the more elaborate the setup can become
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
How many of them have 500MB/s read/write?
Genuine question; I don't follow SSDs because they're still nowhere near the capacities I need.
Newegg sells a PCI-E SSd that has 1600MB/s read/write, and it's expensive enough to be an Apple product.
The sub $100 SSDs are usually 250-300MB/s
At these prices I should probably be thankful they don't have a 17" model. Yikes.
I don't get it; iPad gets retina display and more memory but the price doesn't change. SSD prices are plummeting and the new MacBook explodes in price. Maybe Apple is anticipating low volume. Maybe they don't care to make that much of an impact on the market beyond twitters.
Until apps are upgraded to take advantage of the new display this is just a very, very expensive toy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hypez
just seems to me in all my uses i never find myself needing a library of music or all my movies on a laptop when i leave the house? and to pull out a usb 3 external hd that fits in my hand doesn't seem a big deal to me. guess im just living in the future or something =D
or getting ready to live in the cloud? Laptops are probably even more presumed to be networked than pads. High storage volumes are going to be SO "first decade" rather soon I suspect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hypez
TBH: The high end non retina 15in macbook pro is the same price as the entry retina with nearly same specs besides the old 5400 hd. so the pricing isn't that bad and for those who say "256 SSD is so small omg i want my 5400 awesomeness." get over it buy an external and move on. for 2199 price tag this thing is nice. it has alot new features not just the retina display. the new cooling system is amazing and the build of the laptop itself was enough for me to purchase. so TY apple for not sticking to the norm and changing everything again with little to any price hike!
A better solution than buying an external hard drive (pretty silly to have a laptop that requires one), would be to take the space where an optical bay used to be and install a convential HDD. I would far prefer this to a thinner design. A 256GB or 500GB SSD, and a 1 TB HDD. Perfect. Apple's single-minded focus on size results in missed opportunities like this.
The RAM situation in these MacBooks is a joke, too. Soldered RAM? WTF? For a "Pro" laptop, 32GB RAM should be an option. I'd also like to see the CPU installed in a proper socket so it can be upgraded, but it's at least understandable that Apple solder it on the logic board. Not so for the RAM.
Additionally, for a "Pro" laptop, Apple should have at least one model, such as the 17 incher, that has an SSD boot drive and two hot swapable bays with external access for two HDDs. There's plenty of space as long as they don't go making it too thin. These are the sorts of killer features Apple needs to go along with the killer Retina display. The goal with a laptop should be to need as few external peripherals as possible, otherwise carrying your system anywhere takes a freakin' suitcase or the like.
The new MacBook Pro is clearly a brilliant replacement for both the current 15" and 17" models. Incredibly powerful, who needs a big heavyweight redundant desk-bound tower? Just plug the new 15" into an Apple display and you have the perfect desktop system as well as the perfect laptop.
That said, keeping the existing 13" and 15" models seems very schizophrenic. Don't Apple believe in their new 15" machine? And where was the new 13" MacBook Pro? Maybe the new 13" Air is good enough? But if it is, couldn't it have had the retina treatment too?
And if you have a 13" model and 15" model,, why not have a single enclosure design? And if you couldn't fit all that hardware in slim Air 15" unibody, why not offer a 13" new design too?
I'm not saying that I'm unimpressed, but the new models seems to lack the clear vision and focus that accompanied the first unibody MBPs. I am a little bit worried by this - it's very un-Steve. But maybe the wisdom of the various decisions behind the latest product technology choices will become obvious as i see these machines in the flesh.
I am interested to see expert opinion on these new machines.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Junkyard Dawg
Moderators here aren't too bright, are they?
Here's a clue: Apple's $2199 MacBook is gimped on memory and drive space. Once you put in a larger SSD and max the RAM, it's at $3000 or even more.
8 GBs of RAM is not gimped. That's more than enough for the vast range of computer uses people will need this thing for. 16 GBs is $200 more (actually relatively reasonable) for those who will need more (or who anticipate needing more). Not a huge fan of soldering them in (if that's the case), but an intelligent purchase should handle that well enough. 256 GBs of storage isn't super delightful but it will work for many people depending on their requirements, though that's something I imagine more people will want to upgrade. In any case, it is not worth insulting someone over, and it also doesn't excuse someone from saying that a $2200 laptop is a $3000 laptop (also noting that the 512 GB option is $2800).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Junkyard Dawg
Moderators here aren't too bright, are they?
Here's a clue: Apple's $2199 MacBook is gimped on memory and drive space. Once you put in a larger SSD and max the RAM, it's at $3000 or even more.
So explain to me why Apple has "$2,199" on their website. They obviously got something wrong. Or you did. Whichever makes more sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timbit
Wayyyyy too expensive! I can get a fully loaded iMac for cheaper.
They're not even in the same product category. How can you compare them?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tailpipe
That said, keeping the existing 13" and 15" models seems very schizophrenic. Don't Apple believe in their new 15" machine? And where was the new 13" MacBook Pro? Maybe the new 13" Air is good enough? But if it is, couldn't it have had the retina treatment too?
It seemed a little unusual to me too, but as I think of it it does make more sense. I have a feeling these machines are highly dedicated to providing certain specifications like battery life with that retina display and the extra space saved by cutting out the likes of an optical drive and even a mechanical hard drive played a key role in that (these laptops are packed). Some professionals are going to want the option of a huge mechanical hard drive or might not want to invest in features like a retina display, might just want to save money (the cost has more to do with just the Retina display), or will (I'm certain) have any other number of reasons for preferring a laptop which doesn't make one of the highly specialized changes found in this particular model. The cheaper MacBooks will be appropriate for them.
I imagine Apple will cut out the 'old' MacBooks and there will just be one line of MacBook Pros along these lines when all the technologies and costs converge properly. And it isn't like professional users, studios, and companies will have much trouble traversing the specifics of the MacBook lineup Apple is currently offering.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xian Zhu Xuande
8 GBs of RAM is not gimped.
You wouldn't say that if you knew what Apple was paying for that RAM. I'd wager far less than $50.
The Apple premium for SSD is even more outrageous.
There is certainly lower volume with all Macs combined (not just one type of Mac notebook) than the iPad but there are also other dynamics at work. Consider the previous iPad. If they released it with the same resolution this year it would be well below the other tablets coming to market which could hurt it's attempt at dominating the unit market share of the tablet market. Same goes for raising the price.
I don't think Macs are in that flux state like the still nascent modern tablet market. But you also need to consider other costs with the new MBPs. It's a new design, not just a new CPU and chipset (that supports USB 3.0). How much does that cost? What about the 2nd TB port? Is that just daisy-chained off the 1st one or can you theoretically get 2x10GB off each port?
What about other HW changes? Does that new display and glass process with the milled lid cost more or less than the old MBP? And why assume that iPad display change doesn't have higher costs in the 13" and 15" sizes? The area and pixel count are both significantly increased.
So $200 for an additional 8GB of RAM is outrageous only because Apple's wholesale component costs (not including design, production, warranties, etc.) are less than what they charge? FFS!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xian Zhu Xuande
8 GBs of RAM is not gimped. That's more than enough for the vast range of computer uses people will need this thing for. 16 GBs is $200 more (actually relatively reasonable) for those who will need more (or who anticipate needing more). Not a huge fan of soldering them in (if that's the case), but an intelligent purchase should handle that well enough. 256 GBs of storage isn't super delightful but it will work for many people depending on their requirements, though that's something I imagine more people will want to upgrade. In any case, it is not worth insulting someone over, and it also doesn't excuse someone from saying that a $2200 laptop is a $3000 laptop (also noting that the 512 GB option is $2800).
8GB is gimped. And for a Pro system entry level should be at 16GB. W're talking about a Pro system and I can punch that memory till its maxed in 5 minutes.
Overpriced Crap and where the F*u*c*k is the iMac
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer
8GB is gimped. And for a Pro system entry level should be at 16GB. W're talking about a Pro system and I can punch that memory till its maxed in 5 minutes.
Gimped for you, gimped for video editors, underpowered for me, but plenty for a wide range of professionals. An upgrade is available. 16 GBs is more than enough for the vast majority of professionals out there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Junkyard Dawg
Skimming through the thread, it seems that many users don't have the slightest fu[king clue about implications of display resolutions or how Apple is dealing with the ultra-high resolution Retina displays. Apple would be wise to put up an explanation on their website, and not a marketing gobblygook statement, I mean a real, honest white paper discussion of ultra-high resolutions and what they mean for end users. Otherwise every Windows user you meet is going to be snarking at Apple's tiny font sizes, LOL.
I agree that the new age of rez and retina needs MUCH more 'splaining to we non-engineers. This takes me back to 15 years ago poring over the meanings and implications of dpi vs ppi, vector vs. raster, RGB vs CMYK vs. LAB and other such conundrums I'd never encountered. And Apple - and Apple-centric sites - would be well served to help us tease this all out. As in when is a pixel more than a pixel? Is a doubled 1440x900 display truly able to display 1080p content using most or all of the screen - and if so will that require interpolation or a mode change of some sort.... .....and well, I know I'm confused....
But apparently from your comment, you're also one of the "many users" who "don't have the slightest fu[king clue about implications of display resolutions or how Apple is dealing with the ultra-high resolution Retina displays" - as the type, will not, of course be tiny - on software optimized for the new age at least.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tailpipe
That said, keeping the existing 13" and 15" models seems very schizophrenic. Don't Apple believe in their new 15" machine? And where was the new 13" MacBook Pro? Maybe the new 13" Air is good enough? But if it is, couldn't it have had the retina treatment too?
I was mildly surprised to see Apple adding so many SKU's with different compromises myself. But thinking about it, and Apple's history, it comes down - at least partially - to price points and legacy freaks, guy. $1199 to $2199 with nothing between is a hefty price gap - and ultra-slimness is not on everyone's req list. And finally, apparently quite a few people still like to make shiny silver coasters. Tho' honestly I was expecting something like the new Pro - along with a 15" MBA and a bumped 13" MBA rather than what we got.
I know we won't see the model by model sales breakdown - but we will see that reflected in next year's line up. I'll be interested.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
More like, "BA HA HA HA HA HA No Ethernet?! Failure!"
Of course this thing is going to be $3,000 BASE price… Just watch.
According to AnandTech: "The base configurations comes with 8 GB of DRAM, a 256 GB NAND SSD, and a 2.3 GHz quad-core chip. That variant costs $2199 USD, a cost Apple promises is due to all its custom components like "asymmetrical fans" and other ultrathin oddiities."
If that is correct, it is good price for very sweet unit.
Ethernet would be nice, though - I've been in a number of hotels (couple of Hiltons included) in Australia, Europe and US... with only wired Internet in rooms. This can be sorted with cheap USB-to-Ethernet adapter, though, so not a major.
I don't really think this will scare other manufacturers, though. They are more anxious what Apple is doing in more masinstream segments - Airs and lower end MBPs. Not so many people need that resolution on 15.4" laptop, and even among them who would like to have it - not too many will be willing to pay the price. I am hoping, though, that moves like this will inspire PC makers to start improving screen quality on their units. My wife has recently purchased basic Sony VAIO SB, and it is great portable for great price - but I'd gladly put some extra money to have that unit with IPS screen of a bit more decent resolution (that 1366*768).
Apple closed at 571.17 a drop of 9.15 on a major product launch day......... hmmmn
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133
According to AnandTech: "The base configurations comes with 8 GB of DRAM, a 256 GB NAND SSD, and a 2.3 GHz quad-core chip. That variant costs $2199 USD, a cost Apple promises is due to all its custom components like "asymmetrical fans" and other ultrathin oddiities."
If that is correct, it is good price for very sweet unit.
Ethernet would be nice, though - I've been in a number of hotels (couple of Hiltons included) in Australia, Europe and US... with only wired Internet in rooms. This can be sorted with cheap USB-to-Ethernet adapter, though, so not a major.
Exactly; I was quite surprised.
And even the Thunderbolt to Ethernet adapter is cheap.