Apple updates processors and drops prices of MacBook Pro with Retina Display [u]

Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware edited January 2014
Apple said Wednesday that it's making the MacBook Pro with Retina display faster and more affordable with updated processors and lower starting prices, starting at $1,499 rather than $1,699.

$1,499 MacBook Pro


The 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina display now starts at $1,499 for a model equipped with 128GB of flash, while $1,699 will buy a new 2.6 GHz processor and 256GB of flash. The 15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina display now also features a faster 2.4 GHz quad-core processor, while the top-of-the-line 15-inch notebook comes with a new 2.7 GHz quad-core processor and 16GB of memory.

Apple also announced today that the 13-inch MacBook Air with 256GB of flash has a lower price of $1,399.

AppleInsider will be working to update its Price Guides as retailers and resellers adjust pricing throughout the day on the back of Apple's announcement. Once resellers update their pricing, AppleInsider will notify readers.

For those in the market for a new MacBook, MacMall offers AppleInsider readers the absolutely lowest prices around on most MacBooks when you click through the links in our Price Guides and apply promo code APPINSDRMWB37994 on the retailer's product pages. At the same time, B&H Photo offers AppleInsider readers unbeatable prices on Macs that are bundled with 3 years of AppleCare extended warranty plans.

Update: B&H Photo has dropped its pricing as reflected below and in our Mac Price Guide. A list of B&H Price Drops on BTO MacBook Pro with Retina display configurations is available here.

Update 2: Both Amazon and MacMall have adjusted their prices as well.

Macs with 3-Years of AppleCare

«1345678

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 149
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member


    Hmm...must not have been selling as well as they hoped?

  • Reply 2 of 149
    mobiusmobius Posts: 376member


    This is good news. But how pissed would you be if you'd just bought one.

  • Reply 3 of 149
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    mobius wrote: »
    This is good news. But how pissed would you be if you'd just bought one.

    You have 2 weeks to return yours and Apple has no restocking fee.
  • Reply 4 of 149

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


    Hmm...must not have been selling as well as they hoped?



     


    This is not a new trend. MacBook Air started off more expensive than it is today, when SSD drives were not as cheap.


     


    Having said that, I do believe the marvels of Retina Display on a laptop are totally under-appreciated. I wish it was available on more Windows laptops, as I need to work on both Windows and Mac OS.

  • Reply 5 of 149
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    I'd like to see if the SSDs are different. If they are using the smaller node NAND that could account for a good part of the cost reduction. We knew something was going to happen this year but I assumed they would most likely double the capacity at the same price point as 64GB for a MBA isn't very much. I guess $999 is not something they want to deviate from and the 64GB MBA is selling well enough to make that a good starting point.

    stelligent wrote: »
    This is not a new trend. MacBook Air started off more expensive than it is today, when SSD drives were not as cheap.

    And that SFF CULV processor was made to suit only Apple's need for an experimental new notebook class. It was also the first Mac with a milled aluminum chassis and a display laminated to the glass. I think it may have also been the first to use the more sophisticated 1000 cycle battery tech.
  • Reply 6 of 149
    This price is getting closer to the Surface Pro. Those why bought the Surface Pro and not a MBP, well, they didn't buy the MBP.
  • Reply 7 of 149
    AAPL will further drop as this news show Apple MacBook Pro demand is weaker than expected .
  • Reply 8 of 149


    Frankly, they were overpriced to begin with.  This is just a step to returning them to normal Apple pricing.


     


    The price premiums they put in when they first released retina were pretty high.

  • Reply 9 of 149
    How about providing a 16 GM RAM option for the 13" rMBP?
  • Reply 10 of 149
    Wow I did not see this coming. 3 months I've had mine for...

    Bit gutting but that's life I guess.
  • Reply 11 of 149
    herbapouherbapou Posts: 2,208member


    the 13" was way overprice for something with no GPU.  Its an improvement at $1500, it fits the MacBook Air with retina needs.  But I still think you need a GPU to drive that resolution, so its not a PC for either gaming or serious video/photo editing.


     


    IF you want an Air style laptop with retina I suggest you wait for the ones with then new Intel Haswell CPU with HD5000 integrated GPU. We should get those this summer.

  • Reply 12 of 149
    AAPL will further drop as this news show Apple MacBook Pro demand is weaker than expected .

    How you figure?
  • Reply 13 of 149
    So, no change to 15" retina prices?
  • Reply 14 of 149
    solipsismx wrote: »

    And that SFF CULV processor was made to suit only Apple's need for an experimental new notebook class. It was also the first Mac with a milled aluminum chassis and a display laminated to the glass. I think it may have also been the first to use the more sophisticated 1000 cycle battery tech.

    I believe also the first with the RAM soldered to the MB.
  • Reply 15 of 149
    saareksaarek Posts: 1,054member


    Would explain AppleInsiders "Fire Sale", not really a fire sale at all just shifting old stock before the new release. 

  • Reply 16 of 149
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    scott6666 wrote: »
    Frankly, they were overpriced to begin with.  This is just a step to returning them to normal Apple pricing.

    The price premiums they put in when they first released retina were pretty high.

    Over priced how? I can't seem to find any other 13" notebook with 200+ PPI IPS display to compare it with. Or do you mean that it's more than you were willing to pay?
  • Reply 17 of 149
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    philboogie wrote: »
    I believe also the first with the RAM soldered to the MB.

    Oh yeah. And the SSD card which was exactly new as we saw some very cheap and slow versions in netbooks, of all things, but Apple's had different electrical signaling on that mSATA board. I have no proof but it sounds like they had to get others to build them to their design.
  • Reply 18 of 149


    I love it: 


     


    When Apple products are "too expensive" people rage at the price and make fun of us that buy them. 


     


    When Apple lowers the price due to part savings, manufacturing processes, etc. then it's because Apple market share was suffering and they need to sell more. 

  • Reply 19 of 149
    vorsosvorsos Posts: 302member


    Suddenly Newton View Post

    So, no change to 15" retina prices?


     


    Correct. Ars states it more clearly:


     




    The 15" Retina MacBook Pro sees a slight increase in its processor speeds as well, though no price drop. The base model now comes with a quad-core 2.4GHz Core i7, up from 2.3GHz. The top-end model now comes with a 2.7GHz quad-core processor, up from 2.6GHz. It also comes standard with 16GB of RAM. Prices are the same at $2,199 and $2,799 respectively, but you do get a little more for your money.



  • Reply 20 of 149
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    techfox wrote: »
    Wow I did not see this coming. 3 months I've had mine for...

    Bit gutting but that's life I guess.

    Is $200 worth not waiting for 3 months?

    herbapou wrote: »
    the 13" was way overprice for something with no GPU.  Its an improvement at $1500, it fits the MacBook Air with retina needs.  But I still think you need a GPU to drive that resolution, so its not a PC for either gaming or serious video/photo editing.

    IF you want an Air style laptop with retina I suggest you wait for the ones with then new Intel CPU with HD5000 integrated GPU. We should get those this summer.

    1) You repeat that it has no GPU in a clear reference to an iGPU but then conclude by suggesting people wait for the next iGPU. If the 4000 doesn't suit you why will you be satisfied with the 5000? What about it will make a world of difference after you've stated. "I still think you need a GPU to drive that resolution, so its not a PC for either gaming or serious video/photo editing."

    2) As someone who has been using 13" MBPs, 13" MBs, and 12" PBs for a very long time I can say I've never cared about the GPU performance so long as it drives the display for my needs. I am not a gamer nor a video or photo editor. If I was I certainly wouldn't want a 13" notebook as my primary PC. Note the 12" PB had a dGPU but there is no way I'd trade that for the iGPUs that came in the Intel machines.
Sign In or Register to comment.