No quad core or discrete GPU? :/ I could have forgiven it if the price was lower but if you're going to spend that much you might as well go the whole hog and get the 15". Still, I guess some people like the 13" form factor.
I bet this makes a great deal less noise than the Airs too. My late 2010 13" Air makes way too much noise at load. It sounds like a jet engine.
Agreed, there is a quad core Vaio S 13", and there is a quad core IVB processor in the same TDP this uses, so it's very underwhelming. The specs would be ok if it was 1400 or something, but nope.
Size, weight, price. That's why I didn't go with the 15". Also, since the resolution is decreased, hopefully, the lag shouldn't be as severe on the 13".
I wonder if 17" just isn't a good enough seller for Apple to maintain. Either that or they'll bring it back when they can finally do their iMacs. However, I wouldn't expect a 21.5" Retina Display if they can't also do the 27" as Retina at or around the same time... which I think is a couple years off.
IBM had the T221 monitor out way back in 2001 (IIRC). It has 3840x2400 (That's 4 x the so called "HD" 1920x1200 resolution for the mathematically challenged) at 22.2 inches diagonal, 16x10 aspect @ 200dpi. Its panel only refreshes at 48Hz, but it's very, very usable for static documents, text and CAD.
I have three of them. One connected to a Mac Mini, one connected to a Power Mac and one as a second monitor for my iMac 27". They were totally unbelievable until the new(ish) iPad came out earlier this year. Once you get used to Retina resolutions, it's really noticeable when you go back to sub-retina levels... It's laughable seeing a 27" 1920x1080 display after using one.
The colour rendering and smoothness is top notch and it's literally print resolution.
So, if they had that level of tech 10 years back, it should be possible today if they put their mind to it. The only problem is that desktop Macs account for less than 4% of Apple's total revenue, so I can't see them being very high on the agenda to be honest.
I suspect that is why Apple was the sole customer asking for eDRAM for the Haswell GPU, so that the integrated GPUs aren't so laggy on Retina resolutions.
Can someone please try to "pitch" me on why someone would choose the rMBP over the 13" air? especially if you add 256gb SSD and 8gb ram and the 2.0ghz COU to the air you are at the same $1699 and the air turbos to 3.2ghz not the 3.1ghz the rMBP 13" does and you have twices as much storage. yes you get more video out, and the retina display but with the way OSX (and windows) scales the retina displays i just dont see the advantage or point of this machine.
You already answered your question; why you'd choose the rMBP is because of the retina display (primarily) and the other differences you mentioned. If that's not interesting to you, by all means don't desire it. :)
I don't see a reason, not with these price differences. The 15" rMBP and the 13" MBA make lots of sense. Apple's laptops in the middle don't make as much sense.
And thus you see the reason, the "desire". There you have it. The fanboyisms are so intense and the primping and excuses on the failures are so numerous, just resign yourself to your conclusion, and remain aware that you just don't have the snotty idiocy to quack out the dough just so you can prance around your new toy and display it to all your jealous latte sucking snottie "pals". Besides, you'd probably have to buy it a personal security blankie, and a 50 dollar polishing cloth, then have a feng shui pedestal mount arena room posh enough to idle your social gratification concerns while keeping your estrogen levels peaking.
I am curious if there is going to be a full review of the MacBook Pro Retina 13". If so, any chance that the SSD performance can be compared to alternatives like the one currently offered by OWC (Aura Pro) for the 13" MacBook Pro Retina? Thanks.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
24 Comments
Back to Article
andykins - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link
No quad core or discrete GPU? :/ I could have forgiven it if the price was lower but if you're going to spend that much you might as well go the whole hog and get the 15". Still, I guess some people like the 13" form factor.I bet this makes a great deal less noise than the Airs too. My late 2010 13" Air makes way too much noise at load. It sounds like a jet engine.
tipoo - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link
Agreed, there is a quad core Vaio S 13", and there is a quad core IVB processor in the same TDP this uses, so it's very underwhelming. The specs would be ok if it was 1400 or something, but nope.coder543 - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link
once you leave out the display -- you're comparing against the $1200 MBP. Check your price ranges, good sir.dagamer34 - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link
Size, weight, price. That's why I didn't go with the 15". Also, since the resolution is decreased, hopefully, the lag shouldn't be as severe on the 13".tmacboy - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link
13'' has always been my favorite too for the same reasons. I will jump on this 13'' retina bandwagon when they start putting a quad-core into it.lmcd - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link
No discrete GPU = more lagsolipsism - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link
He's talking about the iGPU on the 15" pushing the display. That's where there can be some lag on the 15".madmilk - Thursday, October 25, 2012 - link
Most of the lag is from the CPU getting stuck on window rendering, not the GPU.sheh - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link
If 17" is expected, finally we'll be within reach to >200dpi >20" desktop monitors.450 DPI phones
300 DPI tablets
250 DPI notebooks
100 DPI desktop
solipsism - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link
I wonder if 17" just isn't a good enough seller for Apple to maintain. Either that or they'll bring it back when they can finally do their iMacs. However, I wouldn't expect a 21.5" Retina Display if they can't also do the 27" as Retina at or around the same time... which I think is a couple years off.GraXXoR - Sunday, November 11, 2012 - link
IBM had the T221 monitor out way back in 2001 (IIRC). It has 3840x2400 (That's 4 x the so called "HD" 1920x1200 resolution for the mathematically challenged) at 22.2 inches diagonal, 16x10 aspect @ 200dpi. Its panel only refreshes at 48Hz, but it's very, very usable for static documents, text and CAD.I have three of them. One connected to a Mac Mini, one connected to a Power Mac and one as a second monitor for my iMac 27". They were totally unbelievable until the new(ish) iPad came out earlier this year. Once you get used to Retina resolutions, it's really noticeable when you go back to sub-retina levels... It's laughable seeing a 27" 1920x1080 display after using one.
The colour rendering and smoothness is top notch and it's literally print resolution.
So, if they had that level of tech 10 years back, it should be possible today if they put their mind to it. The only problem is that desktop Macs account for less than 4% of Apple's total revenue, so I can't see them being very high on the agenda to be honest.
coder543 - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link
No... no 17" is expected.CharonPDX - Wednesday, October 24, 2012 - link
We've had >200 dpi for over a decade.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_T220/T221_LCD_mon...
They were just bulky, slow refresh rate, and insanely expensive.
dyc4ha - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link
Perhaps this is just an experiment for the form factor in anticipation of Haswell which should bring improved GPU performancetipoo - Wednesday, October 24, 2012 - link
I suspect that is why Apple was the sole customer asking for eDRAM for the Haswell GPU, so that the integrated GPUs aren't so laggy on Retina resolutions.Filiprino - Thursday, October 25, 2012 - link
What a costly experiment. Such a high resolution display with an integrated GPU from Intel means asking for problems.kchase731 - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link
Can someone please try to "pitch" me on why someone would choose the rMBP over the 13" air? especially if you add 256gb SSD and 8gb ram and the 2.0ghz COU to the air you are at the same $1699 and the air turbos to 3.2ghz not the 3.1ghz the rMBP 13" does and you have twices as much storage. yes you get more video out, and the retina display but with the way OSX (and windows) scales the retina displays i just dont see the advantage or point of this machine.FaaR - Wednesday, October 24, 2012 - link
You already answered your question; why you'd choose the rMBP is because of the retina display (primarily) and the other differences you mentioned. If that's not interesting to you, by all means don't desire it. :)KoolAidMan1 - Sunday, October 28, 2012 - link
I don't see a reason, not with these price differences. The 15" rMBP and the 13" MBA make lots of sense. Apple's laptops in the middle don't make as much sense.CeriseCogburn - Tuesday, October 30, 2012 - link
Why you're being selfish, think of APPL's stock pricing and it's venerated control of the top market spot !CeriseCogburn - Tuesday, October 30, 2012 - link
And thus you see the reason, the "desire".There you have it.
The fanboyisms are so intense and the primping and excuses on the failures are so numerous, just resign yourself to your conclusion, and remain aware that you just don't have the snotty idiocy to quack out the dough just so you can prance around your new toy and display it to all your jealous latte sucking snottie "pals".
Besides, you'd probably have to buy it a personal security blankie, and a 50 dollar polishing cloth, then have a feng shui pedestal mount arena room posh enough to idle your social gratification concerns while keeping your estrogen levels peaking.
steven75 - Friday, November 2, 2012 - link
Don't you have a ROM to flash?erple2 - Monday, November 12, 2012 - link
Being an anti-Apple fanboy myself, that comment had me gurgling milk through my nose.iamnothere - Monday, November 5, 2012 - link
I am curious if there is going to be a full review of the MacBook Pro Retina 13". If so, any chance that the SSD performance can be compared to alternatives like the one currently offered by OWC (Aura Pro) for the 13" MacBook Pro Retina? Thanks.