As long as they keep the price low. They added retina displays to the iPhone 4 without raising the price, and they should do that with the MBPs. Unless they're going to start marketing the Air as the entry level computer and return the Pro to its, well, Pro status.
Displays pick up a lot of engineering problems as you scale up in size, although I think notebooks have benefited from some of the problem solving driven by the market for smartphones. If you look at desktop displays, those have been incredibly stagnant relative to their smaller counterparts. Panel generations last several years with the rest of the advancement coming from research on ways to better implement them. These include improved measurement and panel blocking for backlight uniformity, lessened perceivable dithering, faster stabilization after the display is powered on, better internal compensation for drift, internal display lookup tables, and way more that I don't feel like listing or describing. The 27" panels used in the imacs and other 27" displays have been officially available since 2009 or 2010.
More apps sold in the mac app store = more $$$$ for apple. Sad but true.
So far it hasn't provided a significant percentage of their revenue. It's possible that they see this as a strategic point of growth internally, but they don't currently highlight how much they make off it.
Yep. I see them adding high-res displays to the Pro line, then slimming them down over the years to replace the Air models entirely.
They already have a "high-res" option, although it should have been the standard option at this point. They're already quite slim. While I agree they might try something like this, how would they address a staggered range of price points as they do now? Their options around the $1000 mark must carry an incredible amount of the volume. Look at their growth in idevices where the upfront cost isn't always so high.
If they consolidate the Macbook Pro lines which pricing structure will they maintain? The Retina or Classic?
A $1199 Retina Macbook Pro base model would revitalise Apple's market share and do their image the world of good.
It would provide further growth assuming enough users identify it as a desirable feature. You can find 1080 display on 13" notebooks, so in absolute resolution, they're ahead but not to a crazy degree. Typically on Windows 1920x1080 is as high as it goes in 16:9, so you find that on 15" models as well where the gap becomes a bit wider. I just wouldn't assume that the retina marketing will work forever. It is just marketing where they chose a specific way of explaining it that adhered to their marketing. There are many things that affect the sense of realism of content displayed on a page beyond if you specifically perceive pixels.
If the roadmap is accurate, I hope Apple leaves the soldered ram and proprietary SSD to the MBA line where portability is paramount, and gives the MBP line (retina or not) user upgradeable parts.
But going by what they did to the new iMac, I wouldn't hold my breath...
Well the soldered ram has already infiltrated the rMBPs. The 21.5" imac no longer has user serviceable ram, although it remains on the 27". I only see it as a huge problem if the configuration is limited to the amount absolutely required for their hypothetical average user in most situations. It wouldn't fit my usage patterns. It's possible for it to work even at current rMBP prices where it's $200 to go from 8 to 16GB. What matters is that the total cost of the machine as you require it aligns well enough with your budget against whatever time frame you would need to retain it at that price point. I tend to interpret it that way, as there are many base components you pay for either way.
If a working machine was sold without ram or a hard drive, many people on here would opt for such a solution as they intend to do their own upgrades. Barebones systems do exist as a niche market. It's just Apple sells working systems. When they arrive, they are bootable out of the box. Ram and a working drive are both necessary to test such a machine prior to shipping, and you do pay for those base components within the price. CTO upgrades tend to have a higher markup, but part of what people find so distasteful is the way their markup is packaged to the end user.
I'd like to ask everyone what they think the chances are of new MBPs having fusion drives (hybridized solid-state drives and HDDs) as one way of addressing the high price of large capacity storage on their flagship laptop.
Plus: lowers $/Gb for storage, contains most of the performance increases of SSDs
Minus: reintroduces a part apple have EOL'd, could be seen (illogically) as a step back.
Personally, the inability to replace the battery after a couple of years into what will be a ~4 year life cycle is a deal breaker.
So far you can still get battery service. It's expensive and others have suggested that they replace a number of parts to perform it. If that is true, I wonder how long it will exist. Replacing part of the case with an attached battery is not something they'd want to do on every machine. The fusion drives appear to be larger than what could be accommodated in the current rMBPs, although I haven't looked at the latest HDD technology or anything sub 2.5" form factor.
Let's see $2200 for a computer. Sell it in two years for $1000
Cost of ownership $50 a month or about $2 per work day. Ouch!
Do you earn anything from the use of your computer?
Your math is tainted if you expect that to work with a reasonable level of confidence. You didn't budget for Applecare, so if something fails in the second year of ownership, the proposed salvage/residual value will be affected. It also ignores the sometimes non linear nature of update cycles, assumes the person is both buying and selling at an ideal time, and assumes a lack of any major changes over that period. Major changes can make a new macbook air look a lot more appealing than that used macbook pro. Depending on the other expenses of that person, a 2 year repurchasing cycle may or may not be feasible. Personally I think if you're stretching really far with disposable products, you should reconsider how much you're willing to budget each cycle.