Apple Posts New 'Colors' TV Ad for 13" MacBook Pro With Retina Display

"For the pro in all of us."

"For the pro in all of us."

If this were a picture of fcpx, I could arguably agree with that statement, but when they advertise consumer applications on it, as-well-as consumer parts in it, how can they, then, advertise it as a computer that would make the consumer a "pro?"

This drives me crazy.
I wish all companies everywhere would either make their "pro" products truly professional, or stop using the term.

There are too many people that don't know the difference, and lying to them by adding the word "pro" to everything in order to make a buck doesn't help matters.

Saw this while watching Modern Family and was surprised this wasn't already on the site!

blackhand1001 said:

They've obviously lost touch. I mean exactly what does making the iMac thinner accomplish.

Click to expand...

For starters, I think it looks nicer. Apple has always valued design. Plus, it is no secret that they want to eliminate the optical drive. I don't agree with John C. Dvorak often, but he's right with his column that Apple is the most fashionable tech company right now. That's probably why they attract premium prices. People buy Apple for the same reason they buy BMWs or Audis. However, a Mac, iPad, or iPhone is much more affordable.

----------

Mr. Dee said:

Introducing the new 13" MacBook Pro.

With the stunning Retina display and underpowered hardware.

For the broke pocket in all of us.

Click to expand...

It has the same internals as the regular 13" MacBook Pro. The resolution of the rMBP is about the same as the Apple Thunderbolt Display. No one complained that the old 13" Pro couldn't drive a Thunderbolt Display.

So it won't play Crysis 2. That doesn't mean it isn't a "pro" device (unless you are a professional game player).

The narrator just heightens the sense of pretentiousness in these new commercials.

KPOM said:

The top-of-the-line Air has been over $1699 for quite some time now.

Click to expand...

i7/8/256 AIR costs $1700. If you do the same configuration with 13" rMBP you'll end up paying $2200. So $500 for retina display, it's way too high to even consider it. For $500 you can buy a completely new laptop with IPS display panel .

Hakone said:

The pro in me wants a discrete GPU.

Click to expand...

Right, because you cannot edit video or drive a couple of displays with the Intel 4000? Let me guess, you are a "pro" gamer?

If you can update the CPU to an i7 quad core, that is all you really need.

Show me a laptop with the resolution of the 13" MBP let alone the 15" model made by any other company. I'm waiting.

Seriously, you can edit 2K video with ease on either the 13" or 15" model and the latter can display close to 3K resolution giving you a pretty good idea of what 4K video will look like.

For non-gaming, the CPU, memory bandwidth and I/O speed is more of a factor than discrete graphics.

@KPOM: Don't mind Mr. Dee. He thinks that he needs discreet graphics to post faster to facebook.

Been waiting for this laptop! But it's too damn pricey! If this can edit full hd videos (from dSLR) smoothly I might consider it though

The pricing of the 13" rMBP doesn't seem to fit in the big scheme of things, when u consider the price of 13" MBA, 13" cMBP, 15" cMBP and 15" rMBP...

It just makes 13" rMBP the worst value you can get right now. Either get 13" MBA, or 15" c/rMBP if you need a dedicated video card/bigger screen.

colourful...

short, but too to point..

wow. not impressed with the notebook perse but the hd4000. is the hd4000 good enough for final cut pro x and aperture at that high resolution?

They had to speed up the screen so you couldn't see the lag from the integrated graphics

haha..

probably...

This new Mac's tickling my 'funny bone' .... To bad I only bought AppleCare BEFORE the event ... ... dang ...

I've really enjoyed macs for years, now, and truly dread the thought (windows) that I might have to buy a pc workstation for "work" and a lower end Mac for "home", just so that I can keep using a Mac, while continuing to have a computer that actually meets my needs.

It's ironic that I might one day consider buying this 13" rMBP (or MBA), specifically because it is less expensive and portable, not for any "professional" reasons...that's what the pc would be for.

How many of their customers actually buy it because it has the word "pro" in it?

aristotle said:

Right, because you cannot edit video or drive a couple of displays with the Intel 4000? Let me guess, you are a "pro" gamer?

If you can update the CPU to an i7 quad core, that is all you really need.

Show me a laptop with the resolution of the 13" MBP let alone the 15" model made by any other company. I'm waiting.

Seriously, you can edit 2K video with ease on either the 13" or 15" model and the latter can display close to 3K resolution giving you a pretty good idea of what 4K video will look like.

For non-gaming, the CPU, memory bandwidth and I/O speed is more of a factor than discrete graphics.

@KPOM: Don't mind Mr. Dee. He thinks that he needs discreet graphics to post faster to facebook.

Click to expand...

Actually if you have multiple monitors, and have active applications in all of them, the HD 4000 will struggle. So yea, maybe for Starbucks loungers who post on facebook and Instagram the HD 4000 is fine, but for several people and professionals it's sub par.

strausd said:

They had to speed up the screen so you couldn't see the lag from the integrated graphics

Click to expand...

haha. or maybe fcp x is just that good that it'll work on an hd4000. who knows. apple gives me mix-feeling sometimes because just when you think you should have everything in a luxury-price and luxury-looking computer--you don't. aka 5400rpm drives. you need at least 7200rpm drives to edit in video. or even imovie. whatever. maybe hdd manufacturers needs to stop making 5400 rpm hdd's so apple won't use them. who cares.

I guess the distinction between an "entry level Mac"..... there is none anymore... considering the price now. ?

So, this would also mean there is no advantage in getting the non-Retina 15 inch Macbook Pro, apart from capacity, and optical drive.. anymore. right ?

... unless you use Multiple monitors too.

scotty321 said:

Terrible ad. It's like something Dell would run. Why doesn't Apple run the outstanding "iPad mini piano duet ad" instead? They need to advertise that product more anyways, since the high price tag is turning people off. But forget about the price... it's still a vastly superior ad.

Click to expand...

Pass the chronic...

namethisfile said:

haha. or maybe fcp x is just that good that it'll work on an hd4000. who knows. apple gives me mix-feeling sometimes because just when you think you should have everything in a luxury-price and luxury-looking computer--you don't. aka 5400rpm drives. you need at least 7200rpm drives to edit in video. or even imovie. whatever. maybe hdd manufacturers needs to stop making 5400 rpm hdd's so apple won't use them. who cares.

Click to expand...

True.. but battery life would go down with 7200 .... I thought that why Apple uses 5400 in laptops,, same with any laptop manufacture.

Exio said:

Actually if you have multiple monitors, and have active applications in all of them, the HD 4000 will struggle. So yea, maybe for Starbucks loungers who post on facebook and Instagram the HD 4000 is fine, but for several people and professionals it's sub par.

Click to expand...

Right, because you have to have multiple monitors to be productive? You should be able to make due with the builtin display and possibly an external one.

The 13" has a native resolution of 2560 by 1600 normally in hiDPI retina mode but you can use a small tool called setres to change it to 1:1 pixel mode at that resolution and you can drive two additional displays in addition at that resolution which would be overkill. You were saying?

Realistically, you would either drive the internal display and one 27" display or close the lid on the laptop and drive two external monitors but one external monitor + the builtin should be more than enough for most use cases.

Maybe the idea of a Retina display, is you wouldn't NEED multiple monitors.

aristotle said:

Right, because you have to have multiple monitors to be productive? You should be able to make due with the builtin display and possibly an external one.

The 13" has a native resolution of 2560 by 1600 normally in hiDPI retina mode but you can use a small tool called setres to change it to 1:1 pixel mode at that resolution and you can drive two additional displays in addition at that resolution which would be overkill. You were saying?

Realistically, you would either drive the internal display and one 27" display or close the lid on the laptop and drive two external monitors but one external monitor + the builtin should be more than enough for most use cases.

Click to expand...

Depends on the application as well. Good luck rendering in CAD. Trust me the HD 4000 is great for youtube and media, but it's terrible for many higher level programs that are used in workplaces.

----------

Tech198 said:

Maybe the idea of a Retina display, is you wouldn't NEED multiple monitors.

Click to expand...

No, the idea is that you can't see pixels. Apple is so caught up recently with people not being able to see pixels, or being able to see the products that hold those pixels (thinness).

levitynyc said:

1700 for a machine that couldn't run a modern game at decent settings at 30 frames per second.....

----------



I'm a proud owner of a 13" air.

Click to expand...

MacBook Pro's were never advertised as gaming machines. Intel HD 4000 is a fairly decent shared GPU.

For $1700 you can build a really good gaming PC.

Go for it.

Exio said:

No, the idea is that you can't see pixels. Apple is so caught up recently with people not being able to see pixels, or being able to see the products that hold those pixels (thinness).

Click to expand...

I should have used the

Tech198 said:

True.. but battery life would go down with 7200 .... I thought that why Apple uses 5400 in laptops,, same with any laptop manufacture.

Click to expand...

not by much. if at all. i have a 7200rpm hdd on my 2010 mbp.

apple just has a buttload of 5400 rpm hdd's or someone is giving them a buttload of 5400 rpm hdd's for nothing so apple puts them in their computers to save money.