Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Which is more likely to get a retina display in 2012? MBA or MBP

which one will get a retina display?

  • Macbook air!

    Votes: 26 25.0%

  • Macbook Pro!

    Votes: 31 29.8%

  • Niether :P

    Votes: 31 29.8%

  • Both!!!!

    Votes: 16 15.4%
  • Total voters
    104
yanksrock100

yanksrock100

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Oct 30, 2010
673
245
San Diego
Which do you think will get a retina display in 2012?

The MacBook pro, or the MacBook air?

My assumption that the MBA will later this year (maybe right after ML) because it has 11inch, and 13 inch, which is probably easier to manufacture than a 13, 15, and 17.

Like some of you said, if the MBA doesn't get a retina display, I hope it will at least get a resolution bump like the Asus.

Whats your opinions?

Do you think retina display Macs are coming in 2012?
 
Last edited:
O

Oli3000

macrumors regular
Apr 20, 2009
172
0
Before I read the articles on the Asus Zenbook, I was convinced it would be the pro first. However, I cannot see Apple letting a competitor get the upper hand on them. So if that is true the air has to!

Having said that, the rumoured zen book spec was not 'full retina', so perhaps we will just see an increase in the air and 'full retina' in the pros?
 
N

nexsta

macrumors 6502
Jul 21, 2007
301
0
If any of this macbook will get a retina display, you can forget to play any graphic intense game on it in full resolution. The battery life would also be bad. I can live with the resoultion we have now on the airs and want a better battery and graphic perfomance in the future.
 
Last edited:
KittyKatta

KittyKatta

macrumors 65816
Feb 24, 2011
1,058
1,212
SoCal
Sorry if this is a dumb question but is a retina MacBook realistic? From what I've read then the new iPad screen is a technological feat but it's only 9.7" and required making it thicker and doubling the battery capacity in order to maintain the same battery life. I'm not sure if the public would accept that tradeoff on a product who's main selling point is how thin it is and who's biggest drawback is its battery life.

I have a retina display iPad and the screen is so amazing that I'm selling my 11" Air in hopes that next gen a retina display Macbook will be less strenuous on my eyes but I just don't know if it would actually happen on the MacBook? If larger screens are an issue then I dont think Apple would allow an 11" retina but leave the the 13, 15, and 17 as "normal" displays.
 
NutsNGum

NutsNGum

macrumors 68030
Jul 30, 2010
2,856
367
Glasgow, Scotland
nexsta said:
If any of this macbook will get a retina display, you can forget to play any graphic intense game on it in full resolution. The battery life would also be bad. I can live with the resoultion we have now on the airs and want a better battery and graphic perfomance in the future.
Click to expand...

You could pretty much say the same now.
 
H

Hawkeye16

macrumors regular
Sep 16, 2009
208
39
Iowa
I agree with the few posters above. I would not want to see it in the Air because it would adversely affect the battery life, which is one of the biggest selling points. It is not a gaming machine so there is really no point in having it either.

I would say MBP first, but probably not anytime soon.
 
thekev

thekev

macrumors 604
Aug 5, 2010
7,005
3,343
jessica. said:
I think the MBP sees it before the MB Airs.
Click to expand...

I'm of the opposite opinion here unless panel density (as in thickness) with the air makes it too difficult. The Air currently only requires up to a 13" panel, and it's obviously been a big focus for them. I've read the rumors about thinner macbook pros. None were from reliable sources, and there really isn't a guarantee until we see something shipping. Anyway if they keep the current sizes, I'd expect an Air retina could come out first. I know Samsung has shown some high resolution panels, but there aren't any currently shipping products, and the laptops tend to use a lot more in the way of generic parts than the ipad.
 
GoCubsGo

GoCubsGo

macrumors Nehalem
Feb 19, 2005
35,741
153
thekev said:
I'm of the opposite opinion here unless panel density (as in thickness) with the air makes it too difficult. The Air currently only requires up to a 13" panel, and it's obviously been a big focus for them. I've read the rumors about thinner macbook pros. None were from reliable sources, and there really isn't a guarantee until we see something shipping. Anyway if they keep the current sizes, I'd expect an Air retina could come out first. I know Samsung has shown some high resolution panels, but there aren't any currently shipping products, and the laptops tend to use a lot more in the way of generic parts than the ipad.
Click to expand...

I meant because I don't think you can maintain the thickness (or thinness) of the Air with the current tech behind retina today.
 
Moonjumper

Moonjumper

macrumors 68030
Jun 20, 2009
2,740
2,908
Lincoln, UK
KittyKatta said:
Sorry if this is a dumb question but is a retina MacBook realistic? From what I've read then the new iPad screen is a technological feat but it's only 9.7" and required making it thicker and doubling the battery capacity in order to maintain the same battery life. I'm not sure if the public would accept that tradeoff on a product who's main selling point is how thin it is and who's biggest drawback is its battery life.

I have a retina display iPad and the screen is so amazing that I'm selling my 11" Air in hopes that next gen a retina display Macbook will be less strenuous on my eyes but I just don't know if it would actually happen on the MacBook? If larger screens are an issue then I dont think Apple would allow an 11" retina but leave the the 13, 15, and 17 as "normal" displays.
Click to expand...

Some of that battery increase was to be able to cope with LTE band chips that are not yet very efficient.
 
Benbikeman

Benbikeman

macrumors 6502a
May 17, 2011
616
1
London, England
kwijbo said:
What's 'full retina'?
Click to expand...
There is no technical definition of a 'retina' screen, it's just a marketing term used to describe a screen in which a typical person can't resolve individual pixels at a typical viewing distance.

To be honest, the existing MBP 17 and hi-res 15 already meet this definition for most people.

If you want to adopt a tougher definition, and say 'indistinguishable from print at any reasonable distance' (including closer than normal viewing distance), then you're looking at 240DPI for the average person and 300DPI for those with more acute vision. I don't see that coming anytime soon.
 
K

kwijbo

macrumors regular
Jan 28, 2012
249
131
Assimilated said:
There is no technical definition of a 'retina' screen, it's just a marketing term used to describe a screen in which a typical person can't resolve individual pixels at a typical viewing distance.

To be honest, the existing MBP 17 and hi-res 15 already meet this definition for most people.

If you want to adopt a tougher definition, and say 'indistinguishable from print at any reasonable distance' (including closer than normal viewing distance), then you're looking at 240DPI for the average person and 300DPI for those with more acute vision. I don't see that coming anytime soon.
Click to expand...

I was being facetious with my question because of the full vs non full distinction being made ;).

But, there is a technical definition (according to Wikipedia) - 57 arcseconds per pixel. It takes pixel density and viewing distance into account. Based on that number the rumored 11" Zenbook with 1080p screen will be above the threshold for "retina".

Just for comparison, a 65" 1080p tv at a viewing distance of 10 feet also qualifies as "retina" :)
 
D

drjsway

macrumors 6502a
Jan 8, 2009
936
2
nexsta said:
If any of this macbook will get a retina display, you can forget to play any graphic intense game on it in full resolution. The battery life would also be bad. I can live with the resoultion we have now on the airs and want a better battery and graphic perfomance in the future.
Click to expand...

Retina negates the need to play at native resolution. If you can't see pixels, 1:1 pixel mapping is unnoticeable.
 
yanksrock100

yanksrock100

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Oct 30, 2010
673
245
San Diego
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; CPU iPhone OS 5_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9B176 Safari/7534.48.3)

Moonjumper said:
KittyKatta said:
Sorry if this is a dumb question but is a retina MacBook realistic? From what I've read then the new iPad screen is a technological feat but it's only 9.7" and required making it thicker and doubling the battery capacity in order to maintain the same battery life. I'm not sure if the public would accept that tradeoff on a product who's main selling point is how thin it is and who's biggest drawback is its battery life.

I have a retina display iPad and the screen is so amazing that I'm selling my 11" Air in hopes that next gen a retina display Macbook will be less strenuous on my eyes but I just don't know if it would actually happen on the MacBook? If larger screens are an issue then I dont think Apple would allow an 11" retina but leave the the 13, 15, and 17 as "normal" displays.
Click to expand...

Some of that battery increase was to be able to cope with LTE band chips that are not yet very efficient.
Click to expand...

I think you are correct
 
KittyKatta

KittyKatta

macrumors 65816
Feb 24, 2011
1,058
1,212
SoCal
Moonjumper said:
Some of that battery increase was to be able to cope with LTE band chips that are not yet very efficient.
Click to expand...
On The new iPad its 10hr WiFi vs 9hr LTE.

Thats only an hour difference so while LTE does use some battery, it seems the biggest culprit on requiring more battery is the retina display.
 
Oppressed

Oppressed

macrumors 65816
Aug 15, 2010
1,265
10
To answer the poll, neither. But at the same time the MBP line will be axed this year and there will only be the "MacBook" line which will be 11", 13", and 15" "air like" machines. Ivy bridge and all that jazz too. Purely speculation based on a collection of rumors though.
 
yanksrock100

yanksrock100

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Oct 30, 2010
673
245
San Diego
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; CPU iPhone OS 5_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9B176 Safari/7534.48.3)

I could actually see apple doing that. I just hope there is a resolution bump, if not retina.
 
B

blipmusic

macrumors 6502
Feb 4, 2011
250
23
Regardless of what would fall within Apple's definition of "retina" (i.e. x arcseconds), does anyone dare to estimate the cost of the 1920x1080 panels in the new Zenbooks?

That is, will the small ASUS laptops fitted with one of those come in at $1500? $2000? (TBA?)
 
Moonjumper

Moonjumper

macrumors 68030
Jun 20, 2009
2,740
2,908
Lincoln, UK
Apparently IGZO screens are potentially easier to make in higher pixel densities. If Sharp (or someone else) gets that working on mass production lines soon, then I suspect that will be the technology Apple use.

The iPad rumours pointed towards the device getting thicker because IGZO wasn't useable in time. The possible thinness of IGZO points the finger more towards the Air being able to use it, but I still think the top end Pro machines will still get the top end screens first.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom