A very warm welcome to image retention Kingdom for the 13 inch macbook pro retina Users 
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/4034848?start=0&tstart=0
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/4034848?start=0&tstart=0
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Posts New 'Colors' TV Ad for 13" MacBook Pro With Retina Display
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I hate this 'Pro' word. It as absolutely no meaning and it is a waste of time repeating it again and again.
FileMaker became FileMaker Pro
Final Cut became Final Cut Pro
MacBook is Mac Book Pro
Mac ias Mac Pro
What for?
Because PRO does not mean "Gaming" in any way, shape, or form.
----------
Because "dual core" alone means just about nothing.
So? The BOTTOM of the line Air can run most modern games. There's certainly ZERO graphic advantage by going with the rMBP, which is a crap machine.
After the initial wow factor of the way these things look I have to admit to being pretty disappointed by the 13" rMBP and the new iMac for that matter. This obsession with making everything wafer thin is really going too far and we are stating to end up with crippled devices because of it. In the 13" MBP they could have removed the optical drive made it a bit thinner and included a dedicate GPU but no it has to be made ultra thin which essentially makes it useless to anyone doing anything even slightly graphics intensive, we already have the Air for this. The iMac has been made thinner and lighter for what reason exactly. Again they could have removed the optical drive made it slightly thinner and used the extra space to include a proper desktop grade GPU instead of the laptop chip it has. In my opinion this is a pointless update of the iMac, it doesn't bring any benefit and doesn't even look that good from the side having an odd bulge in the back which is why they only showed a 3/4 view in the presentation. I just can't see where Apple are going with all of this, its irrational. I hope the mac pro isn't just as bizarre a set of design decisions when that appears next year.
Realistically the 13" line is actually the MacBook - Apple simply slapped 'pro' on the MacBook line to boost sales and stick the price up.
When you compare the specs to the older Mac Books you see that they still follow the same trends when it comes to performance.
Been waiting for this laptop! But it's too damn pricey!
It'll edit them, but smoothly may not happen.
Right, because you cannot edit video or drive a couple of displays with the Intel 4000?
If you can update the CPU to an i7 quad core, that is all you really need.
But that's just it - you can't. Well unless you move up to the 15" which also mandatorily includes the integrated graphics that you just said you don't need.
No discrete graphics in the 13"? Fine, ok. No Q-core processor nor 16 GB RAM options? Ridiculous. An 11" air up-spec'd is just as capable, is 40% lighter, and lacks only the retina display. But, if you don't need the dedicated GPU as you say, then you all but certainly don't need the 200+ DPI screen either.
Most "Pro" users will be using at least 2 screens, it does increase productivity in a HUGE way. Obviously if you work out in the field you'll not have that luxury most of the time.
The Intel HD 4000 can drive 2 screens + the built in one, at least it can on the Air. However it's pushing a much large amount of pixels on the rMBP, and the 15" model has to switch to its dedicated gpu to do multiple displays. If the 15", a higher powered model has to switch to the GPU, I cant imagine performance on the 4000 will be good if you try to run the retina display plus another screen.
At a guess, I'd say if you try to run 2 screens from it, the retina display will switch off automatically. I could be wrong, but we wont know until someone tries hooking it up to two displays!
For what it's worth, I have a 2011 11" MacBook Air (base spec), which is only capable of powering 1 external display (Intel HD 3000). I dont use it much at all, but a few times I've had it hooked up to a display and tried out a few games on it (Civ 5, Portal 2, GTA IV, Mafia 2, Tropico 4, F1 2011) all of which worked fine.
People underrate the Air big time because people still have this stupid mentality of 'oh its only 1.7Ghz - thats slow'.
----------
Um...no. You clearly aren't a 'pro' user if thats what you think.
----------
Has any Mac ever been advertised as a gaming machine?
Doesn't Final Cut Pro require dedicated graphics to run? I'm pretty sure that was the reason it wouldn't work on an old Macbook of mine.
Also, if you're trying to run 3D graphics applications like Modo etc, you're going to want a dedicated card. I think even Photoshop makes use of OpenGL acceleration.
These are what I would call 'professional' applications. Perhaps Apple is talking about 'professional' bloggers or Facebook users.
Hopefully Apple will read some of the comments being posted on these Macbook articles, because the lack of decent graphics in these laptops is the no. 1 topic of conversation on all the sites I've been on.
If they've got any sense, they will add dedicated graphics to next years model.
Also, if you're trying to run 3D graphics applications like Modo etc, you're going to want a dedicated card. I think even Photoshop makes use of OpenGL acceleration.
These are what I would call 'professional' applications. Perhaps Apple is talking about 'professional' bloggers or Facebook users
.Hopefully Apple will read some of the comments being posted on these Macbook articles, because the lack of decent graphics in these laptops is the no. 1 topic of conversation on all the sites I've been on.
If they've got any sense, they will add dedicated graphics to next years model.
You do realise that its a computer generated shot dont you? The footage you see on the screen was probably never even on a Macbook Pro. It's pre-rendered content. There's no way in hell Apple would roll out an advert showing actual footage, complete with wrong keys being pressed and lagging of any kind.
Yes. And the death punch is that you can spec even the 11" Air to match the highest spec 13" Air. If you need portability go with the Air 11, if you need power, go with the Pro 15. If you are utterly confused about what you genuinely need, flounder about and choose one of those 13 inchers.
I did LOL.
That being said, if you are doing work like that without external monitors, even the 15" (or, really, a 17" too) is still holding you back.
An Air running two TB displays (lid closed to take as much burden off the graphics hardware as possible) is probably going to make you more productive than any similarly powered laptop with no external monitors, regardless or their built in screen size and resolution.
I think there's a strong chance the Air will get a retina display next year, it will all depend if Apple starts to roll out iGZO displays. If they do, I'd expect to see this technology in the 13" & 15" Pro's. There should be a significant boost in battery life for the two pro models when this happens.
They'll also update the iPad to iGZO next year too, and make it thinner.
Wonder when they will call it the iMac Pro.
They should start to take Pro from the MacPro line, the way its design is a compilation of the old interfaces.
They should start to take Pro from the MacPro line, the way its design is a compilation of the old interfaces.
It is as a previous poster said the worst value macbook, even in comparison to more expensive macbooks. The 13 rMBP represents the worst price/performance ratio.
BTW this macbook is not flying off the shelves. You can get it right now anywhere in the world.
BTW this macbook is not flying off the shelves. You can get it right now anywhere in the world.
That's not what happened. Apple introduced the Unibody MacBooks in 2008. These lacked Firewire. Steve Jobs said Firewire was unneeded for consumers and that if people wanted Firewire, they just had to get a Pro model.
People whined. June 2009 came, Apple caved. They put Firewire back on the Unibody MacBook. But. Since Steve had said Firewire was for Pros, they renamed the 13" to MacBook Pro.
It's all about Steve saving face about his Firewire comments. That's why the 13" is now a MacBook Pro.