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.
Refurbished 13-Inch Retina MacBook Pro Models Appear in Apple's Online Store
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The next gen retinas will be significantly cheaper, as Apple prepare to discontinue the cMBPs. My guess is that theyll bring the price of the retinas down to maybe a hundred or two more than the current cMBPs cost, then discount the cMBPs a tad before their demise.
Still cant justify these over a mba. $400 more for a bigger/heavier laptop with better processor and screen.
Compare to a Macbook Air, if you need a (2560x1440)+(2560x1440)+(1920x1200) vs. the Air only being able to add ONE 2560x1440 then it makes sense. If you need that.
Took the words out of my mouth. Even I would be hard pressed not to grab a refurb but I am waiting out for Haswell.
Technically, it can drive 2 external displays and the internal, but I'm not sure I'd want to put the HD 4000 through that kind of test.
I agree....we purchased two iMacs in 2008 when we redid our library...one was a refurb ... ended up with a larger HD than I paid for, and it's worked fine...
I wouldn't mind buying a refurbished desktop because I could get a new keyboard and mouse... Those are the places somebody else touched the most...
But unless Apple change whole new exterior parts, I'm not buying refurbished laptop or tablet...
please search for Lysol disinfecting wipes on my new refurbed MBP.
It depends. I think if it has more than a certain number of cycles they will replace it. I purchased a refurbished MacBook Air in early 2011 and it had a brand new battery.
Only if you want to actually do some PR spin for Apple and want to ignore the whole pricing on the 15" rMBP vs the 15" cMBP. Then yes, within the RDF he's right.
For everyone else, 1499$ was the price that would've made sense for the 13" rMBP (same pricing strategy as on the 15" rMBP when compared to its cMBP cousin). At 1499$, myself and a collegue would own 13" rMBPs. Now instead he went with a MBA, I went with the 15" rMBP.
I checked the UK store, and 15" rMBP is about £200 less than an equivalent non-retina, while the 13" rMBP is £200-£300 more than the equivalent non-retina. Actually, the cheapest 15" rMBP is just £100 more than 13" rMBP with same memory and SSD but dual core instead of quad core processor. 15" rMBP is absolutely worth the money. 13" rMBP isn't.
At home, I have a 13" MBP. Apart from the price vs. 15", I preferred the 13" not because it has a smaller screen size, but because it has less weight. With the 15" rMBP, that's not an argument anymore. It doesn't feel bigger (in the sense of harder to carry or transport).
Unless you get the cheapest 13" rMBP, you get a vastly superior 15" rMBP for just £100 more. There's absolutely no way I would buy a 13" rMBP today. The original 13" MBP + BYOR (bring your own RAM), or the cheaper rMBP with 16 GB RAM are by far the best buys and all the others are rather pointless.
Last edited:
Whoa. Holy crap. You've just said something that makes total sense, and I actually agree with.
...this is kinda scary.
Last edited by a moderator:
The only reason I can see for Apple doing this to the pricing is to actually discourage high volume of 13" rMBP sales. At the volumes they sell the 13" MBP vs the 15" MBP, non-Retina, they probably thought that a 1499$ would result in too high volume for their capacity to produce Retina displays.
So they priced themselves out of the market a bit, in order to decrease volume.
That's the only logical explanation. And it's not consumer friendly at all. It's quite consumer hostile. Just making the "shipping window" longer would've had the same effect (wait 3-4 weeks for a 13" rMBP or go 15" ?).
So because you thought that a $1699 13" rMBP was overpriced, you went out and bought one that is $2199?
I'm not saying a $1499 13" rMBP wouldn't be more consistent with the 15" pricing, or that Apple wouldn't sell more at that price. However, they priced it as they did, and it's up to consumers to decide for themselves what makes sense for them.
----------
And that's a very good explanation. However another perfectly logical reaction to a mismatch between supply and demand is to raise the price, which is what Apple did. Apple is a for profit business. And maybe Apple decided for the 13" rMBP that it is better to have actual product at $1699 than to have a product at $1499 that is constantly unavailable because demand outstrips supply. IOW, position it as a niche product until it is ready for mainstreaming.
They can't do that with every product. Remember the angry threads in the iMac forums because of the long wait times for the new models? So keeping the price low and just restricting supply isn't always "consumer friendly" either.
Last edited:
So because you thought that a $1699 13" rMBP was overpriced, you went out and bought one that is $2199?
Yes. Value per dollar. gnasher put it best :
The 1699$ asking price for the 13" rMBP was not giving me 1699$ worth of laptop, while a 2199$ price for the 15" rMBP was giving 2199$ worth of laptop.
It's not that I didn't have the money, it's that I don't see the value.
But I don't want a 15" rMBP. I want a 13" one. If they made an 11.6" one I'd probably get that. Believe me, I can notice the difference in weight between a 13" rMBP and 15" rMBP. Heck, I'm still getting used to how much heavier this is than my 11.6" MacBook Air. I don't need a quad core processor or dGPU for what I do.
If I'm in the market for an Audi A3, I don't care that I can get a Ford F150 with a lot more horsepower and storage space for the same price. I may not care that I can get a Volkswagen Passat for the same price.
Sure, but I won't over pay for a 13" rMBP if I can get a fairer price on a 15" model and get more value for my dollar. I don't need a quad core or dGPU, but you know what, I don't regret getting them, I decided to play a few game titles I was putting off because I didn't have the computing horse power to run them.
The F150 analogy is just ludicrous. A 15" rMBP is far from a F150 to the 13"'s A3. Car analogies never work anyhow.
But if a $1699 notebook does what you need and want it to, then it is a better absolute value than the $2199 notebook, "value per dollar" notwithstanding. I'm not saying that the 13" vs 15" comparison isn't valid. For someone who doesn't prioritize the weight and size differential, then absolutely the 15" is worth consideration and may be a better value. However, your explanation almost makes it sound like you went out and got a more powerful and more expensive notebook than you needed out of spite.
Hahaha. What an entertaining thread! I think Knight and KPOM are both right, but comparing Apples and oranges. It seems to me that KPOM is trying to explain why Apple priced them the way they did from an economic-analysis standpoint, where Knight is looking at it from a consumer standpoint.
Regardless, I think the cMBP is overpriced when compared to the rMBP. But I also can see why Apple did it (aside from wanting more money; this is obvious): they cover different spaces. The two are not equivalent. I think that Apple knows they are targeting two types of users.
I find the rMBP too limited for my taste because of the below:
-can't upgrade ram except once-at sale point (soldered!!)-deal-breaker right there.
-no optical drive, which can also be used as a secondary drive bay-expansion
-no Ethernet; less ports
-unconventional HD, I want to be able to use standard sized HDDs/SSDs
The rMBP is awesome, but I given the way I use my Macs it is way too inflexible for me. To me, it is just a more powerful MB Air, not a desktop replacement (like my beloved 17" that I will never, ever,evereverever get rid of). Now, if they release a 17" rMBP, all bets are off.
Now, pricing can be argued to death; just ask a PC evangelist. No Apple price will EVER be fair or reasonable. I'd sum it up like this: I want to pay as little as (legally) possible for my Macs, but I will use Macs at any price, at least until a PC is equivalent to a Mac, both hardware and software-wise. Damn you, Apple, for knowing your products are like crack!
Regardless, I think the cMBP is overpriced when compared to the rMBP. But I also can see why Apple did it (aside from wanting more money; this is obvious): they cover different spaces. The two are not equivalent. I think that Apple knows they are targeting two types of users.
I find the rMBP too limited for my taste because of the below:
-can't upgrade ram except once-at sale point (soldered!!)-deal-breaker right there.
-no optical drive, which can also be used as a secondary drive bay-expansion
-no Ethernet; less ports
-unconventional HD, I want to be able to use standard sized HDDs/SSDs
The rMBP is awesome, but I given the way I use my Macs it is way too inflexible for me. To me, it is just a more powerful MB Air, not a desktop replacement (like my beloved 17" that I will never, ever,evereverever get rid of). Now, if they release a 17" rMBP, all bets are off.
Now, pricing can be argued to death; just ask a PC evangelist. No Apple price will EVER be fair or reasonable. I'd sum it up like this: I want to pay as little as (legally) possible for my Macs, but I will use Macs at any price, at least until a PC is equivalent to a Mac, both hardware and software-wise. Damn you, Apple, for knowing your products are like crack!
I also compared it to a Passat. No analogy is perfect. But the point is valid. Different people value different things. Some people value processing power. Other people value size.