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.
So get a rMBP and install VMware Fusion. We're using rMBP's in the office with Windows 7 with no problem.
So what is the problem with focusing on the fact that they where overpriced at introduction? He said nothing wrong and is just highlighting the facts. Beyond that, in Apples case, they do it to moderate demand until production catches up. The only real problem here is that people make excuses for Apple or complain loudly, instead of just grasping what is going on and acting intelligently. It just isn't smart to be an early adopter of new technology if you aren't willing to pay the cost.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
Please. An initial (very high) premium happens with every introduction of a new technology. Every company does it. You either ignored it or have selective amnesia. For example, take a look at the 4TB HDDs against the price of typical 3TB hard drives, the cost per GB is considerably higher. You'd pay at least twice as much for 33% more storage. Tech companies need to do this, to recoup the development cost, and they aren't giving their best away at bargain prices, that's a quick way to die in the tech world.
Apple was doing pretty darn well, the limited supply of iMacs was chiefly holding down their numbers.
The 13" would make a great deal of sense if it had discrete GPUs, I'm not in a rush to buy I hope by 2014 with Broadwell out the graphics improvements would negate the need for a discrete GPU.
Yeah, I saw that on Ars. Their reporting of the pricing and parts changes was clearer, because they weren't trying to work in a shout out to their advertising partners.
You didn't comment at all on the Asus. It's not comparable either?
EDIT: Gotcha now Soli. The PPI works out to around 170 I think, whereas it needs to get to about 215ppi for a laptop to be "retina-grade".
My bad.
By definition 1920x1080 is "retina-grade" display IF you sit at the recommended viewing distance for HDTVs. For a 13" diagonal screen 16:9 screen that means no closer than 1.69 feet in order to meet the 60 pixels per degree standard for "retina" displays.
The reason that HDTVs are looking at 4K is because 1080 replicates the view from the FURTHEST seat in the theater and most folks (for theater anyway) prefer to sit closer and with ever larger screens available it's no longer as awkward to do so for HDTVs.
For the 13" MBPr you can be as near as 15" (vs 20" for the Acer) before someone with 20/20 vision can resolve a single pixel.
PPI by itself is a useless spec. Viewing distance must also be considered before something can be considered "retina".
Sitting naturally from my 15" 2010 MBP my eyes are around 23" from the surface of the screen. For a 13" screen I'd probably want to be a little closer. 15" means I'm leaning forward with my arms at a more awkward angle relative to the keyboard.
Try running XCode on a 2008 MBP with just 2GB of RAM. I'm rather shocked at just how hungry an IDE can be these days for RAM. However the bigger issue with modern software is having enough cores to keep all the threads running interactively. At some point you have to upgrade anyways, with 8GB of RAM I see other parts of the machine becoming an issue before RAM does.
That being said I would not object to more RAM, it is just that looking two to four years into the future it is hard to say what will be a shortcoming on today's machines. Considering my issue with HD space I'm willing to bet that the SSD capacity will be a bigger issue in that time frame. SSD capacity at a reasonable cost is what has kept me away from an update to my MBP. I will have to look over the new pricing carefully.
Sadly does anybody think that this might be an indication of a long wait for Haswell based Mac Books? If this was just a flash update I wouldn't bother to ask but the processor bumps make me think we have another six months ahead of us.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL
Try running Xcode, Illustrator and Safari at the same time. It's fine at the moment with 8GB but that RAM is non-upgradeable. A machine with 8GB will almost certainly struggle in two years time.
So what is the problem with focusing on the fact that they where overpriced at introduction? He said nothing wrong and is just highlighting the facts. Beyond that, in Apples case, they do it to moderate demand until production catches up. The only real problem here is that people make excuses for Apple or complain loudly, instead of just grasping what is going on and acting intelligently. It just isn't smart to be an early adopter of new technology if you aren't willing to pay the cost.
Yes. It's a smart strategy for Apple but it does mean to be an early adopter you over pay. That's always to case for an early adopter so arguing that this isn't happening is silly.
The 13" MBPr was simply not that great a value and the lack of a discrete GPU makes it not as "Pro" as it should be in comparison to the MBA.
I'd gladly pay $1,999 for a 13" MBPr 2.9 Ghz dual core i7 with a GT640M. That puts it below the base 15" MBPr in performance and not far below in terms of price for a slightly smaller form factor that's nice for mobility. As is it's a compromised machine for too many pros.
What about the simple fact that electronics prices decline over time?
Um, my statement can't be possible without a drop in electronics prices. I'm being more specific than simply saying they are getting a better deal with the tech but saying they are getting newer tech that is doubling the capacity of NAND for about the same price as it was previously. It's also likely how we got the 128GB iPad. This wasn't possible in large quantities last year.
Of course they can do better but the point is that spending more for a machine that suits my needs less simply won't make sense. It was less than a week ago I talked my brother out of buying a 13" RMBP now. I told him to wait for a revision so they could update the iGPU and perhaps they may finally be able to offer these displays in the MBAs. His usage is completely different from mine hence the suggestion was warranted, but in no way does that mean the current 13" RMBP is useless, overpriced, poorly designed or anything else. Like all PCs there are use cases that can make one better or worse for a user but it's never a blanket statement.
My point was that most people don't know about (or look at) specs when deciding what to buy these days. From that perspective, the Air and the 13" Pro are close enough that I could see people having a more difficult time choosing which one meets their needs. Again, most people on here would consider themselves "nerds" and are probably looking closer at the specs of these machines.
As I said, the area that concerns me the most looking at Apple's current hardware is the GPU. This isn't because I want to do anything really graphics intensive, but because I've had issues in the past with hardware not lasting as long as it should or not performing well. I only wish they would choose higher performance parts to begin with.
Somebody correct me if I am wrong, but it looks like they have cut SSD prices across the board. For all MBPs and MBAs.
The BTO options look the same:
256 = $200
512 = $500
768 = $900
While this looks like <$1/GB at some points, they take the 128GB out first so it's really:
128 = $200
384 = $500
640 = $900
Retail prices are about $0.7-0.9/GB, Apple is around $1.30-1.50/GB. They're better than they have been with other components but it would be nice to see them hit under $1/GB or at least deduct $100 for the 128GB drive they keep. Maybe even give the buyer the lower drive they take out in a small USB 3 enclosure to use as a pen drive. If it had a bootable partition with the OS installer on it, even better.
I expected them to do this price shift when Haswell arrived. I wonder what will happen when it does arrive. I doubt they can eliminate the rest of the older lineup because the gap is still too much.
[...] I've been using iGPUs since i switched from my 12" PB back in 2005(?) and I've never once thought to myself "Gee, I wish TextEdit would render my text faster."
Yay for you. You don't *DO* anything other than punch text on your machine. You sound like a guy standing at a race track arguing that there's no need for anything more than a 98 horsepower 4-banger for carrying groceries. True, but completely irrelevant to those whose needs are CONSIDERABLY more demanding.
My point was that most people don't know about (or look at) specs when deciding what to buy these days. From that perspective, the Air and the 13" Pro are close enough that I could see people having a more difficult time choosing which one meets their needs. Again, most people on here would consider themselves "nerds" and are probably looking closer at the specs of these machines.
As I said, the area that concerns me the most looking at Apple's current hardware is the GPU. This isn't because I want to do anything really graphics intensive, but because I've had issues in the past with hardware not lasting as long as it should or not performing well. I only wish they would choose higher performance parts to begin with.
In no way do I disagree with your desires. I have no problem with Apple offering a dGPU for the 13" MBP and I can see how you might not like the 11" MBP and the 13" RMBP both using the same iGPU but I've used the 13" RMBP and it's in no way a bad machine, and if the only other option is a dGPU that 1) results in removing some of the battery size to make it fit, 2) adding more heatsinks, a bigger fan, etc. for better cooling, and 3) additional power consumption for the fan, the GPU, etc. I'm going to say that a dGPU isn't the best choice for that machine.
I understand that WebKit is being updated to make scrolling better and they are clearly pushing the envelope in many ways but I've bee hearing the stories of woe about iGPUs since they first appeared. i can't say I ever had any complaint about my 2010 13" MBP's Nvidia 320M, except that it didn't like to playback YouTube videos in 1080p or 4K in Flash… not that that was ever an issue on a 1280x768 display.
Yay for you. You don't *DO* anything other than punch text on your machine. You sound like a guy standing at a race track arguing that there's no need for anything more than a 98 horsepower 4-banger for carrying groceries. True, but completely irrelevant to those whose needs are CONSIDERABLY more demanding.
I sound like someone that buys what they need when they need it instead of complaining that they've been wronged or that such-and-such is doing wrong because they aren't catering exactly to their personal needs.
Comments
So get a rMBP and install VMware Fusion. We're using rMBP's in the office with Windows 7 with no problem.
So what is the problem with focusing on the fact that they where overpriced at introduction? He said nothing wrong and is just highlighting the facts. Beyond that, in Apples case, they do it to moderate demand until production catches up. The only real problem here is that people make excuses for Apple or complain loudly, instead of just grasping what is going on and acting intelligently. It just isn't smart to be an early adopter of new technology if you aren't willing to pay the cost.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
Please. An initial (very high) premium happens with every introduction of a new technology. Every company does it. You either ignored it or have selective amnesia. For example, take a look at the 4TB HDDs against the price of typical 3TB hard drives, the cost per GB is considerably higher. You'd pay at least twice as much for 33% more storage. Tech companies need to do this, to recoup the development cost, and they aren't giving their best away at bargain prices, that's a quick way to die in the tech world.
Apple was doing pretty darn well, the limited supply of iMacs was chiefly holding down their numbers.
If that's the case then I don't see any other conclusion than the are now using a smaller node process to double the NAND density.
But why the 64GB MBA still holding on? I assume that will be gone when they get updated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
How is it not "retina-grade"? 1920x1080 IPS display. List price on the Acer according to Amazon is $1399.
http://www.amazon.com/Acer-S7-391-6810-13-3-Inch-Touchscreen-Ultrabook/dp/B009H2CL1S
You didn't comment at all on the Asus. It's not comparable either?
EDIT: Gotcha now Soli. The PPI works out to around 170 I think, whereas it needs to get to about 215ppi for a laptop to be "retina-grade".
My bad.
By definition 1920x1080 is "retina-grade" display IF you sit at the recommended viewing distance for HDTVs. For a 13" diagonal screen 16:9 screen that means no closer than 1.69 feet in order to meet the 60 pixels per degree standard for "retina" displays.
The reason that HDTVs are looking at 4K is because 1080 replicates the view from the FURTHEST seat in the theater and most folks (for theater anyway) prefer to sit closer and with ever larger screens available it's no longer as awkward to do so for HDTVs.
For the 13" MBPr you can be as near as 15" (vs 20" for the Acer) before someone with 20/20 vision can resolve a single pixel.
PPI by itself is a useless spec. Viewing distance must also be considered before something can be considered "retina".
Sitting naturally from my 15" 2010 MBP my eyes are around 23" from the surface of the screen. For a 13" screen I'd probably want to be a little closer. 15" means I'm leaning forward with my arms at a more awkward angle relative to the keyboard.
That's the ONLY conclusion?
What about the simple fact that electronics prices decline over time?
Figures.
This was coming... The end of cMBP.
rMBP to the same price points.
Try running XCode on a 2008 MBP with just 2GB of RAM. I'm rather shocked at just how hungry an IDE can be these days for RAM. However the bigger issue with modern software is having enough cores to keep all the threads running interactively. At some point you have to upgrade anyways, with 8GB of RAM I see other parts of the machine becoming an issue before RAM does.
That being said I would not object to more RAM, it is just that looking two to four years into the future it is hard to say what will be a shortcoming on today's machines. Considering my issue with HD space I'm willing to bet that the SSD capacity will be a bigger issue in that time frame. SSD capacity at a reasonable cost is what has kept me away from an update to my MBP. I will have to look over the new pricing carefully.
Sadly does anybody think that this might be an indication of a long wait for Haswell based Mac Books? If this was just a flash update I wouldn't bother to ask but the processor bumps make me think we have another six months ahead of us.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL
Try running Xcode, Illustrator and Safari at the same time. It's fine at the moment with 8GB but that RAM is non-upgradeable. A machine with 8GB will almost certainly struggle in two years time.
He must've loved that advise with todays news! (Or is it today's news?)
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
So what is the problem with focusing on the fact that they where overpriced at introduction? He said nothing wrong and is just highlighting the facts. Beyond that, in Apples case, they do it to moderate demand until production catches up. The only real problem here is that people make excuses for Apple or complain loudly, instead of just grasping what is going on and acting intelligently. It just isn't smart to be an early adopter of new technology if you aren't willing to pay the cost.
Yes. It's a smart strategy for Apple but it does mean to be an early adopter you over pay. That's always to case for an early adopter so arguing that this isn't happening is silly.
The 13" MBPr was simply not that great a value and the lack of a discrete GPU makes it not as "Pro" as it should be in comparison to the MBA.
I'd gladly pay $1,999 for a 13" MBPr 2.9 Ghz dual core i7 with a GT640M. That puts it below the base 15" MBPr in performance and not far below in terms of price for a slightly smaller form factor that's nice for mobility. As is it's a compromised machine for too many pros.
Um, my statement can't be possible without a drop in electronics prices. I'm being more specific than simply saying they are getting a better deal with the tech but saying they are getting newer tech that is doubling the capacity of NAND for about the same price as it was previously. It's also likely how we got the 128GB iPad. This wasn't possible in large quantities last year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Of course they can do better but the point is that spending more for a machine that suits my needs less simply won't make sense. It was less than a week ago I talked my brother out of buying a 13" RMBP now. I told him to wait for a revision so they could update the iGPU and perhaps they may finally be able to offer these displays in the MBAs. His usage is completely different from mine hence the suggestion was warranted, but in no way does that mean the current 13" RMBP is useless, overpriced, poorly designed or anything else. Like all PCs there are use cases that can make one better or worse for a user but it's never a blanket statement.
My point was that most people don't know about (or look at) specs when deciding what to buy these days. From that perspective, the Air and the 13" Pro are close enough that I could see people having a more difficult time choosing which one meets their needs. Again, most people on here would consider themselves "nerds" and are probably looking closer at the specs of these machines.
As I said, the area that concerns me the most looking at Apple's current hardware is the GPU. This isn't because I want to do anything really graphics intensive, but because I've had issues in the past with hardware not lasting as long as it should or not performing well. I only wish they would choose higher performance parts to begin with.
The BTO options look the same:
256 = $200
512 = $500
768 = $900
While this looks like <$1/GB at some points, they take the 128GB out first so it's really:
128 = $200
384 = $500
640 = $900
Retail prices are about $0.7-0.9/GB, Apple is around $1.30-1.50/GB. They're better than they have been with other components but it would be nice to see them hit under $1/GB or at least deduct $100 for the 128GB drive they keep. Maybe even give the buyer the lower drive they take out in a small USB 3 enclosure to use as a pen drive. If it had a bootable partition with the OS installer on it, even better.
I expected them to do this price shift when Haswell arrived. I wonder what will happen when it does arrive. I doubt they can eliminate the rest of the older lineup because the gap is still too much.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
[...] I've been using iGPUs since i switched from my 12" PB back in 2005(?) and I've never once thought to myself "Gee, I wish TextEdit would render my text faster."
Yay for you. You don't *DO* anything other than punch text on your machine. You sound like a guy standing at a race track arguing that there's no need for anything more than a 98 horsepower 4-banger for carrying groceries. True, but completely irrelevant to those whose needs are CONSIDERABLY more demanding.
Source: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6744/apple-cuts-pricing-on-macbook-pro-with-retina-display-and-ssd-upgrades
In no way do I disagree with your desires. I have no problem with Apple offering a dGPU for the 13" MBP and I can see how you might not like the 11" MBP and the 13" RMBP both using the same iGPU but I've used the 13" RMBP and it's in no way a bad machine, and if the only other option is a dGPU that 1) results in removing some of the battery size to make it fit, 2) adding more heatsinks, a bigger fan, etc. for better cooling, and 3) additional power consumption for the fan, the GPU, etc. I'm going to say that a dGPU isn't the best choice for that machine.
I understand that WebKit is being updated to make scrolling better and they are clearly pushing the envelope in many ways but I've bee hearing the stories of woe about iGPUs since they first appeared. i can't say I ever had any complaint about my 2010 13" MBP's Nvidia 320M, except that it didn't like to playback YouTube videos in 1080p or 4K in Flash… not that that was ever an issue on a 1280x768 display.
I sound like someone that buys what they need when they need it instead of complaining that they've been wronged or that such-and-such is doing wrong because they aren't catering exactly to their personal needs.