Tell me not to get an rMBP 13

Valkyre said:

Τhis logic will not change in 2 years time. You could very well be saying the exact same thing even after the next next rmbp comes out, since the next next next one will obviously be even better.

You are never tech proof.

Click to expand...

I think what they meant or what they're more concerned with was the GPU powering the retina display. You'll have the argument that yes the current GPU in the current 13-inch rMBP is underpowered (outside of web browsing and word processing) while others think it's perfectly fine for any tasks you throw at it.

The recommendation for waiting out in this case is wait for the GPU to be better, almost "catching up" to the display where the GPU is better fitted.

isephmusic said:

Can anyone tell me what my classic MacBook 15 inch will be worth next year when the new retinas come out ? It's the latest version (mid 2012) . Also 13 inch MacBooks make no sense the only people using that are those who only consume media and the only thing that fits that profile is an iPad with retina .... If u had a serious use for a computer like photo / video / music creation you would most obviously get 15 inch to compare things side by side, network remotely , game , view multiple menus ect

Click to expand...

For several years now companies have been developing these really neat devices. Basically you take a plastic enclosure that can stand on it's own, and you (pay attention this is the tricky part) insert a larger display panel inside the enclosure. The ancients called these "external monitors".

I have a 13" MBP, and use it professionally for photo editing, color correction, etc. (My wife is a professional photographer) Any real, serious professional would never EVER use a laptop display for photo editing, least of all a twisted nematic laptop display. Not unless they calibrated it each and every time. I do my work on a monthly calibrated 27" Apple Cinema Display. There are certainly uses for the 15" MBP, but the notion that the 13" isn't capable of doing work is ludacris. The 13" profile makes it portable for other situations though, and is a preferable form factor for being on the go.

I don't know what you meant by 'network remotely', but there are no additional network features on the 15" that aren't present on the 13". You've got it on gaming, but that's not why I bought my 13".

The blanket statements like that are as bad as people who don't use their computer for anything other than PC gaming not being able to wrap their head around owning a Mac at all, not realizing that it's a preferable platform for certain OTHER applications. For you, it sounds like the 15" MBP is the better option. The 13" is actually very popular among professional photographers as they often are using much more powerful desktop platforms back at the studio for post processing, but a 13" MacBook is a great machine to carry to an on location shoot, download images from CF and SD cards and put them on backup media (we always keep at least two copies of every image, usually the Mac and an external drive at the same time). It's more portable than the 15 or 17, also works well for tethered shooting.

As a desktop replacement with no external display solution, you might find yourself limited with the 13" MBP. However, in our situation it's perfect. I have a more powerful desktop setup, but lately I've been using the 2012 MBP, it's so fast I often don't feel like switching over to the desktop and just connect the displays to the MBP and do the work there. I never edit photos on the laptop display, it's just not as accurate and is unacceptable for professional, paid work.

Beyond that, it's a great laptop to take to conferences, seminars, classes, meetings, etc. Just great portability. Also great for this stuff right here, sitting in the living room and posting on MacRumors.

It's not perfect for everyone, but it's perfect for me. The portability is what's key here, while still being powerful enough to handle desktop class applications like CS6 (Photoshop and Lightroom).

But, if it were my only machine, or I did everything without external displays, you bet I'd be on the 15" model or even the 17" model. Or, if I gamed with my laptop, or was doing work that a larger display is needed but color accuracy is not a concern (like music production), then the 15" would have some applications as a mobile working platform. But in a situation where the work is never done on the laptop display (aside from categorizing, backing up, and storing photos), it's not needed.

I'm telling you not to get a 13" rMBP because to be honest it doesn't sound like you need a new computer. It really sounds like "first world computer problems" to me. If you want something portable I recommend getting an iPad for the retina experience.

jemesouviens said:

Fair enough, I too take (admittedly rather mild) offence at a marketing trope being pronounced as the considered opinion of a seasoned IT pro on an anonymous forum.

My Mrs manages to trigger the occasional spinning beach ball of death in the course of her rather mundane computing activities so guess I'm a little surprised technical aristocracy such as your good self hasn't ever encountered it and that your Mac works "every time, all the time".

Click to expand...

You should be a good man and upgrade that beach ball spinning mess you're wife is using. New macs...we've got a half dozen made since 2010 in all shapes and sizes....don't tend to trigger the 'beach ball of dean in the course of ANY mundane computing activity'. Either something is wrong or your machine is becoming dated. Not sure why YOU take mild offense as it was you attempting to discredit him....and he WAS correct!

Chill bud

Ice Dragon said:

This is true. It would be a drain on the battery life. Hopefully the refurbs come out soon.

Click to expand...

Well sure...usually we DO drain battery life when unplugged. Cool thing is, these rMBPs have truly remarkable battery 'up' time that won't fade over time.

willcapellaro said:

Thanks for the excellent breakdown -- that actually helps a lot (had done similar things but it was not methodical or objective).

So yeah that's some great stuff when you go from 13" to 15", but remember all I want is to extend my display to another monitor. I use my machine constantly but I don't know if any of these things are bankable. Not exactly sure how quadcore or GPU will help Adobe performance aside from theoreticals. Would love to have a better sense of that—Adobe/Apple should start talking again to brag about their mutual compatibility and capableness -- simply so we have some benchmarks and screenshots.

My impression is that adobe engineers are just beginning to know how to use extra cores and GPU really only helps dorky UI tweaks with hardware acceleration in Photoshop. If something made illustrator perform less terribly I'd really consider it. Talking out my butt but I wonder if FPUs need to make a comeback--simple because vector artwork is really a set of math instructions than graphics. Or so my impression is from continuing to misunderstand why illustrator fails to be sufficiently responsive for the 21st century.



[/COLOR]

Yep. Self upgraded to 8G, have original 256 SDD and swapped optical for 750GB Combo drive. If I could just upgrade so I can run two monitors I'd happily pay good money for that. Unfortunately, that is not possible... hence the dilemma (which would merely be a conundrum if I didn't have to sacrifice a direct ethernet connection, change all my power adapters, shell out a lot of cash, worry about compatibility learn new stuff).

Click to expand...

Hi Will. I'm a 15 rMBP owner and heavy Adobe user...focused a bit more on video and photography than design and layout...but I've had amazing luck with CS6. AE, PS, LR and Audition are my staples...regardless of whether or not they've been 'retina-ized)...since purchase of the laptop, I've been very happy with it's performance. Adobe engineers are now on their third suite of software with utilizing GPU to accelerate manipulation and rendering/transcoding and finalizing. Right off the bat, the suite recognizes the GPU and asks if you're interested in using it--while I'm not an ID user, we do 'play' with it a bit. Seems to work well....bit I'm in no position to give you anymore info on the program.

As far as multiple monitors, have you looked at Matrox and their offerings? The DualHead2Go maybe exactly what you're looking for and at $169, a relative bargain in your case if you're looking to hold out for the Haswell generation in 2013.

willcapellaro said:

Good point -- especially in CS6 where they puffed up each and every UI element by a few pixels. It's like the anti-Retina. You wanted more screen real estate? Well here are some McMansion palettes.
......

When I can afford the lifestyle, I think I will try to emulate Hunter S Thompson who always had to have the newest, fastest typewriter, just to keep up with him.

Click to expand...

Love the HST reference...he's one of my favorite writers of the 20th century. The menus and the tool bars in the non retina optimized apps is where you'll notice some 'blur'. But your text, photos, transitions and titles, text and I would assume the 'vector images' all look very, VERY Sharp! I've actually switched from CS 5 (skipped 5.5) to the creative cloud version of CS6--the Master Suite for $29.95/month. An absolute bargain in comparison to buying and upgrading suites over the past decade

Check out Matrox...you may indeed get exactly what you're looking for. I'm not sure the rMBP will ever include an Ethernet jack again....but some of these TB peripheral options are starting to hit the market and at a reasonable price. I think it's Belkin offering a $250 TB breakout with Ethernet, USB 3, USB 2, HDMI, etc. You don't need a CF on your desk with one of these options. I'd bet more will be presented next week at CES as well now that it's native to Sandy Bridge and Windows is starting to implement it.

It's tough to spend the money...but after owning computers for twenty five years...the rMBP is hands down my favorite, fastest, lightest and most efficient laptop I've ever had the pleasure of owning. The screen alone is of unbelievable quality...and the way it allows scaling to 1920 gives one a massive amount of real estate when necessary...and not 'too small' by any means.

I can't speak to the rMBP 13"---but at less than a pound of difference and maybe an inch in each direction....and the price parity when spec'ed evenly, it would be tough for me to justify its purchase for productivity. For an 'everyday' surfer, Facebook, iPhoto and email...everything my bride is interested in, it's a barn burner....when you get into heavy photo and video editing....both with Premier and FCPx...the nvidia card is heaven sent! I've cut my transcoding in half in comparison with my 2009 MacPro! With twin TB and USB 3 ports, external scratch discs are blazingly fast and convenient. I'm really hoping thunderbolt continues to develop. It's an amazing technology

As others have said though, you've still got a very capable machine there. If it's just the addition of another monitor you're looking for, third party options ARE available and I've had excellent luck with Matrox...at one point, I used it to set up one heck of a flight simulator system with multiple monitors....then, we had kids

Here's a link to the dual head I was talking about earlier

http://www.markertek.com/Connectors...45414432474f&gclid=CIudiIeOwbQCFQhyQgodZQYAQQ

J

el-John-o said:

For several years now companies have been developing these really neat devices. Basically you take a plastic enclosure that can stand on it's own, and you (pay attention this is the tricky part) insert a larger display panel inside the enclosure. The ancients called these "external monitors".

I have a 13" MBP, and use it professionally for photo editing, color correction, etc. (My wife is a professional photographer) Any real, serious professional would never EVER use a laptop display for photo editing, least of all a twisted nematic laptop display. Not unless they calibrated it each and every time. I do my work on a monthly calibrated 27" Apple Cinema Display. There are certainly uses for the 15" MBP, but the notion that the 13" isn't capable of doing work is ludacris. The 13" profile makes it portable for other situations though, and is a preferable form factor for being on the go.

I don't know what you meant by 'network remotely', but there are no additional network features on the 15" that aren't present on the 13". You've got it on gaming, but that's not why I bought my 13".

The blanket statements like that are as bad as people who don't use their computer for anything other than PC gaming not being able to wrap their head around owning a Mac at all, not realizing that it's a preferable platform for certain OTHER applications. For you, it sounds like the 15" MBP is the better option. The 13" is actually very popular among professional photographers as they often are using much more powerful desktop platforms back at the studio for post processing, but a 13" MacBook is a great machine to carry to an on location shoot, download images from CF and SD cards and put them on backup media (we always keep at least two copies of every image, usually the Mac and an external drive at the same time). It's more portable than the 15 or 17, also works well for tethered shooting.

As a desktop replacement with no external display solution, you might find yourself limited with the 13" MBP. However, in our situation it's perfect. I have a more powerful desktop setup, but lately I've been using the 2012 MBP, it's so fast I often don't feel like switching over to the desktop and just connect the displays to the MBP and do the work there. I never edit photos on the laptop display, it's just not as accurate and is unacceptable for professional, paid work.

Beyond that, it's a great laptop to take to conferences, seminars, classes, meetings, etc. Just great portability. Also great for this stuff right here, sitting in the living room and posting on MacRumors.

It's not perfect for everyone, but it's perfect for me. The portability is what's key here, while still being powerful enough to handle desktop class applications like CS6 (Photoshop and Lightroom).

But, if it were my only machine, or I did everything without external displays, you bet I'd be on the 15" model or even the 17" model. Or, if I gamed with my laptop, or was doing work that a larger display is needed but color accuracy is not a concern (like music production), then the 15" would have some applications as a mobile working platform. But in a situation where the work is never done on the laptop display (aside from categorizing, backing up, and storing photos), it's not needed.

Click to expand...

an ipad 4 is much better at all the things you stated for. if you are using your 13 inch to connect to external monitors then you need the power of the i7 15 inch. it will help you render files faster. my friend uses an ipad 4 on the go with verizon LTE and his meetings go much smoother out in the field with no wifi or internet. like you said most of you pros have a powerful desktop at home. why not go with a powerful 15 inch that you can actually work on ! ( im not just talking about photographers man im talking about video creation and more specifically in my case music production )

then if you do need to be out to transfer files between co workers the ipad does that just fine especially with how cloud storage is now a days. 10 hours of battery life, compact, has bluetooth keyboards that act as a protective shell its great. ill never understand the 11 and 13 inch markets. the computer is too weak to replace my desktop and not portable enough to be my on the go device. i got the 15 inch because i would not mind photoshopping logo and ads ( which dont require rediculous accurate color output ) and bounce down audio on a powerful machine while on a train ride... i borrowed someones 13 inch once and it was a pain in the ass ! if you get 8gigs in it and an ssd like most of the 13 inch users do anyway then your at the pricetag of almost an retina 15 inch lmao !

lwilliams said:

After re-reading your original post......

I am an IT manager, I work with Microsoft machines all day. I use Mac for home, travel, and hobby. I use Mac because it works every time, all the time.

I use my Mac for video editing mainly. I was using a MacBook Air. The only issue I found with it was the SSD was not large enough and I kept having to off load data to work on files....big hassle.

I had a similar delimma as you. I was trying to choose between a fully loaded MBA and the rMBP. My first concern was staying with the 13" size. I carried 17" and 15" machines for years and do not want to go back to anything that large.

I had everyone tell me: get the MBP 15, more for your money, Retina not worth exta cost, etc. Well, I can tell you the Retina display is worth the dollars!

Considering what you use yours for, go for the Retina display. Then decide if you wan the size and weight of the 15 or the portability of the 13. Go for the largest SSD you can afford just for breathing room.

As a computer "pro", I can tell you the Retina is worth the dollars.

Now, this is just my opinion. It is not right for everyone. But, if you are doing a lot of Photoshop, you will really appreciate the difference.

Click to expand...

A little off topic, just curious as an IT Manager what are your thoughts about adopting Windows 8 in your shop?

And yes I have to make a decision between my MBA and rMBP that I am typing now. Love the MBA for its size and portability but the rMBP screen is worth staring at all day...

isephmusic said:

an ipad 4 is much better at all the things you stated for. if you are using your 13 inch to connect to external monitors then you need the power of the i7 15 inch. it will help you render files faster. my friend uses an ipad 4 on the go with verizon LTE and his meetings go much smoother out in the field with no wifi or internet. like you said most of you pros have a powerful desktop at home. why not go with a powerful 15 inch that you can actually work on ! ( im not just talking about photographers man im talking about video creation and more specifically in my case music production )

then if you do need to be out to transfer files between co workers the ipad does that just fine especially with how cloud storage is now a days. 10 hours of battery life, compact, has bluetooth keyboards that act as a protective shell its great. ill never understand the 11 and 13 inch markets. the computer is too weak to replace my desktop and not portable enough to be my on the go device. i got the 15 inch because i would not mind photoshopping logo and ads ( which dont require rediculous accurate color output ) and bounce down audio on a powerful machine while on a train ride... i borrowed someones 13 inch once and it was a pain in the ass ! if you get 8gigs in it and an ssd like most of the 13 inch users do anyway then your at the pricetag of almost an retina 15 inch lmao !

Click to expand...

For video editing, the i7 is a must, that's for sure. But I don't do any video editing, and thus have no need.

The iPad is NOT 'better' at ANY of those tasks. It's simply 'capable' of SOME of those tasks in a less expensive and more portable form. Actually it can't do ANYTHING I described in my previous post. The iPad cannot do work with photoshop CS6, do more complicated desktop publishing, or work nearly as quickly as a 13" MBP. I know you're not talking about just photographers, but your blanket statement was that you don't understand how ANYONE would want a 13" MBP, well I'm tellin ya! It's more portable, and $500 cheaper. Nothing WRONG with the 15" model, but I prefer the form factor and am more than capable of handling the tasks I need to do on the go. It cannot quickly take photos off of a CF or SD card and back them up onto external drives, (it sort of can import photos from SD cards or CF through the camera, but even the biggest iPad is only 64GB, and has no way to back up to external storage. I could fill a 64GB iPad in one shoot) It cannot develop things into a lightroom catalog for easy workflow when you are back at the studio or office to start doing the post processing work, and it cannot do tethered shooting.

Also, it's only that expensive if you go through Apple, if you do the upgrades yourself it's much cheaper. For less than the price of a non retina 15" model, I have a 13" MBP with two 256GB SSDs in RAID 0, and 16GB of RAM. (You can even get more RAM than Apple will even install!)

There are times where I'd like a 15", that's for sure. But the portability is really nice, and saving $500 that I then went and spent on 2 SSD's and 16 gigs of RAM gave me better performance for the work that I actually do. A 5 year old windows laptop can handle basic office tasks, there's no need to boost performance there.

Like I said, I'm not knocking the 15" models, and users like yourself probably need them. But a blanket statement that the 11"-13" market has no bearing is kind of silly. 11.6" is too small for me, but not for others. 13" is just right, and 15" is a bit unwieldy. You're obviously a bit different. Ironically, I can't stand using anything smaller than my 27" ACD when working on the photos, and I really kind of wish Apple still made the 30" displays! But color accuracy is important with portrait and commercial photography, so using a laptop display, whether a 17" MacBook or an 11.6" air, is a no go anyway, so that's moot there.

very informative post , thank you !

curious, why do you use a apple display cinema and not one of the crazy korean IPS displays i herd they have the most accurate representation.

isephmusic said:

very informative post , thank you !

curious, why do you use a apple display cinema and not one of the crazy korean IPS displays i herd they have the most accurate representation.

Click to expand...

They aren't the most accurate. They are pretty good, but certainly not the most accurate. They are just crazy cheap and much better than a cheap Twisted Nematic display. They do have some issues with backlight consistency and the like. For other situations, it can be a perfect alternative. But, unfortunately (and I do mean unfortunately, because it gets expensive!) for what I do, consistent and accurate color is a must. When you are building website elements you are building something that will be viewed on various displays and may vary a little anyway, no big deal. When you are working with music, the end user doesn't see anything! Even with video, 'eyeballing it' is often okay because the end user isn't likely going to view the content on an accurate display anyway. BUT, when you start doing large prints of high resolution color photographs, especially of things like people, the difference between a cheap display and a good, calibrated display actually become obvious. Some people think photographers need to use gray cards, use calibrated displays, etc., is kind of pedantic, but when that print comes back from the lab and grandmas face on that expensive 11x14 print is just a hare red, it becomes really obvious, and the client is going to notice that something just 'isn't right'. That's the key to calibration there, you want what is on your screen to be EXACTLY what comes out of the printer.

I'd like to try one, but the ACD is a tried and true, easy to calibrate, beautiful display.

Also, I'll admit it, it's a gorgeous display! Just a good looking piece of equipment on my desk.

From the sounds of this thread we just didn't create any content before 2010 I mean cripes you "need" a dGPU and a quad i7 to do some work in Ps and Ai? Gotta have a quad i7 to make some music?

I have/had a hack an 8 core MP and an 09 17". In the Ps speed test posted in the MP forum my hack is the fastest of my computers and beats the retnas by about 3 seconds it took 9.7 seconds to complete the test. My '09 17" takes 38 seconds to complete the test, so my hack is roughly 4 times faster than my MBP. But what does that 4 times mean really? It means absolutely nothing in reality it just means that my hack is fast. In real usage applying layers and filters etc. and the like you cannot tell the difference even in the most extreme a 4.7Ghz OC i7 w/32 gigs compared to a 2.8 Ghz C2D with 8.

If I were in your shoes OP I do a whole lotta nothing you existing computer isn't exactly old. You need a dongle to add a second display or a dongle to add ethernet your choice.

GermanyChris said:

From the sounds of this thread we just didn't create any content before 2010 I mean cripes you "need" a dGPU and a quad i7 to do some work in Ps and Ai? Gotta have a quad i7 to make some music?

Click to expand...

Exactly. I keep on telling people the same... it's just funny how they forget this ( or ignore it ) and keep on whining for nothing. All those tools didn't radically change since and although a few are a bit more optimized ( or in the contrary, eat up a tad bit more resources ), overall, it's almost the same thing.

People just like to blow things out of proportion in the hope that their opinion is more heard than of others.

krravi said:

A little off topic, just curious as an IT Manager what are your thoughts about adopting Windows 8 in your shop?

And yes I have to make a decision between my MBA and rMBP that I am typing now. Love the MBA for its size and portability but the rMBP screen is worth staring at all day...

Click to expand...

I have tried Win8 since the alpa version. Tried the betas and also tried the current RTM. I despise it. It is the hardest to use version of Windows ever. The Metro interface is impossible. It is obvious that Microsoft intended this for tablet/touchscreen use. And for that use, it would probably be OK. But I don't expect any Enterprise type of adopting. I manage about 200 PCs and it will never be installed on those. I still run XP on some and Win7 on most. They will stay as they are...and if they have to be replaced, I will "downgrade" them to Win 7.

I had a 2009 13" MBP and LOVED it (perfect laptop size). Absolutely love the 13" SIZE.

I just couldn't justify no dedicated graphics and dual over quad core for the price difference. I live with the extra size and am OK with it.

EDIT: NOT knocking the 13" w retina and you do NOT need dedicated graphics/quad core but for the price difference, it's like getting a V8 over a 4cyl.

MikesGravity said:

I had a 2009 13" MBP and LOVED it (perfect laptop size). Absolutely love the 13" SIZE.

I just couldn't justify no dedicated graphics and dual over quad core for the price difference. I live with the extra size and am OK with it.

EDIT: NOT knocking the 13" w retina and you do NOT need dedicated graphics/quad core but for the price difference, it's like getting a V8 over a 4cyl.

Click to expand...

Its one of those things that its good to have and not need it, than to need and not have it. In that regards I might be considering a 15" switch haha.

To put it simply, lot of gaming warrants the 15". Others who just want to run regular applications the Intel HD 4000 should be just fine.

As someone posted earlier, a few years back all we had was a dual core CPU with a weak GPU and still go things done.