Purported 13" Retina MacBook Pro benchmarks appear, launch rumored before Oct.

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 51
    hmmhmm Posts: 3,405member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post



    At $1599-1699, it has a good chance of killing the 13" Air. I think next year, they will drop the prices on the retina models and kill off the 13" Air, old 13" and 15" Pro together. I'd like to see them drop the 11" Air too. I think it's a compromise too far. Instead, just ship a 13" MBP with a non-retina TN display and IGP for $999 with the same chassis as the Pro and 128GB SSD. While the taper design does give the sense of thinness, I much prefer the Retina MBP design.


    Hey for once I agree with you. The 11" seemed too small for most things, but they needed a $999 option. I realize that some people like it. The tapered design was gimmicky. I dislike it no matter who uses it. I thought lenovo had the right idea with theirs in that it was thinner and flat. The rMBP is similar. I still dislike the complicated issue of getting a new battery and the proprietary/expensive drive. I can live with the ram thing. As far as price is concerned, it remains to be seen what kind of hardware will accompany such a machine. Intel has been experimenting with 35W quad core cpus , and Haswell should further beef up the integrated graphics.


     


    http://ark.intel.com/products/64901


     


    compared to Apple's current upper 13" option


     


    http://ark.intel.com/products/64893/


     


    It's slightly more expensive, but I think this is the first time Intel has produced a 35W quad mobile cpu.

  • Reply 42 of 51
    winterwinter Posts: 1,238member
    I had an HP mini 210 netbook and while the 11" MacBook Air mops the floor with it, I feel 11" is too small a screen for a notebook. 13" should be the minimum and you have to wonder if at some point, the 13" Air will become the entry level model at $999, followed by the 13" retina, and 15" retina.
  • Reply 43 of 51
    negafoxnegafox Posts: 480member


    I do not understand Apple's use of the marketing term "Retina" nowadays.  Didn't Steve Jobs originally say that 300 PPI or higher is the magic number? Now Apple is calling devices with a 220 PPI Retina quality as well which there are many Android and Windows devices that would fall under that definition in that case.

  • Reply 44 of 51
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    negafox wrote: »
    I do not understand Apple's use of the marketing term "Retina" nowadays.  Didn't Steve Jobs originally say that 300 PPI or higher is the magic number? Now Apple is calling devices with a 220 PPI Retina quality as well which there are many Android and Windows devices that would fall under that definition in that case.

    How many fucking times does this need to be discussed? Common sense should tell you that one's ability to discern pixel size is based on the distance you are from the display. It's been made very clear, from the start, that with the average distance one holds a phone from one's face means that about 300 PPI is needed for the Retina display effect for someone with 20/20 vision. Since we tend to use tablets and PC display at a farther distance the pixels don't have to be as dense.
  • Reply 45 of 51
    dhagan4755dhagan4755 Posts: 2,152member
    hmm wrote: »
    I still dislike the complicated issue of getting a new battery and the proprietary/expensive drive. I can live with the ram
    I find it funny to read the complaints about the MacBook Pro with retina display not having any user serviceable parts when there's barely any fuss that the iPad the iPhone doesn't have any user serviceable parts either. But I'm right there with you. It kind of bothers me that there aren't any user serviceable parts in the new MacBook Pro with retina display. However I think Steve Jobs said at the worldwide developers conference back in 2011 when he introduced iCloud, that the computer was being demoted to a device. So I guess the MacBook Pro with retina display is just a device like the iPad & the iPhone.

    As far as this rumor regarding the MacBook Pro 13 inch with retina display, it's probably going to come out sometime this fall. There is no question in my mind that it exists and it's coming. It's probably going to be a huge seller. Like off the charts.

    The way I see it...probably within the next 12 to 18 months Apple phases out the classic MacBook Pro. Apple will keep the two lines: a MacBook Air & a MacBook Pro. There will be no mergers of the lines contrary to all of the people here that wish it to be true. The MacBook air will always be about having a thin & light portable but will always use low-voltage Intel processors; the MacBook Pro on the other hand, will always be about power & braun.
  • Reply 46 of 51
    hmmhmm Posts: 3,405member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by DHagan4755 View Post





     However I think Steve Jobs said at the worldwide developers conference back in 2011 when he introduced iCloud, that the computer was being demoted to a device. So I guess the MacBook Pro with retina display is just a device like the iPad & the iPhone.

     


    I never heard him say that, but I don't watch those things every time. Usually with Apple events I'll watch part of the keynotes, but it depends on the topics. The idevices are a less awkward issue. It's generally easier to be without an ipad than without your primary computer. With the iphone, the subsidy model makes the upfront payment cheap every other year, and you shouldn't be able to kneecap  battery life in the first year assuming it's not defective. Overall I have no interest in purchasing this one. If they turn out to be indestructible, perhaps I'll pick up one of the future generation versions. First generation product + intel tick cycle is kind of unappealing to me.

  • Reply 47 of 51
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    hmm wrote: »
    I never heard him say that, but I don't watch those things every time. Usually with Apple events I'll watch part of the keynotes, but it depends on the topics. The idevices are a less awkward issue. It's generally easier to be without an ipad than without your primary computer. With the iphone, the subsidy model makes the upfront payment cheap every other year, and you shouldn't be able to kneecap  battery life in the first year assuming it's not defective. Overall I have no interest in purchasing this one. If they turn out to be indestructible, perhaps I'll pick up one of the future generation versions. First generation product + intel tick cycle is kind of unappealing to me.

    He made some sort of comment about "PCs" no longer being your digital hub and that "PCs" were to become just another device.
  • Reply 48 of 51
    dhagan4755dhagan4755 Posts: 2,152member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hmm View Post


    I never heard him say that



     


     


    He says it right here...


     


    image:


     


     


    I think the computer transitioning to a device fits for the new MacBook Pro with Retina display.

  • Reply 49 of 51

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by thataveragejoe View Post


    I stopped reading at Digitimes.





    With good reason! ;)

  • Reply 50 of 51


    There's probably a fair number of buyers who purposely buy the 15" MBP's because of the dedicated gpu. If a retina 13" MBP comes with a dedicated gpu (because it may need it)...then there may be a lot less reasons (at least for a segment of 15" MBP buyers) to buy 15" MBP's.



    On the other hand...maybe there's some sort of "slick" integrated graphics hardware out there that can handle it...or some sort of "slick" software that will allow a 13" MBP to run a retina display.



    I'm not really sure...but how does "horsepower" of the graphics hardware in the iPad 3/new iPad (which is driving a 9.7" retina display)...compare to the integrated graphics of a 13" MBP. Anyone know?

  • Reply 51 of 51
    foljsfoljs Posts: 382member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Negafox View Post


    I do not understand Apple's use of the marketing term "Retina" nowadays.  Didn't Steve Jobs originally say that 300 PPI or higher is the magic number? 



     


    No, he didn't, even in the first ever Keynote that included the term, he mentioned *specifically* that it's not just 300 PPI but has to do with viewing distance.


     


    He said: "well it turns out, there is a magic number, around 300 PPI, where when you hold something 10" away from your face"... (emphasis mine). Around 1:55 mark: 

Sign In or Register to comment.