Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Oct 25, 2012, 05:22 AM   #101
liquidx
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
A very warm welcome to image retention Kingdom for the 13 inch macbook pro retina Users

https://discussions.apple.com/thread...art=0&tstart=0
liquidx is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2012, 05:23 AM   #102
RobertMartens
macrumors 6502a
 
RobertMartens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRumors View Post
The new machine is aimed at "the pro in all of us."

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?
RobertMartens is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2012, 05:45 AM   #103
Iconoclysm
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: May 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moshe1010 View Post
I have no idea how Apple is not ashamed to call it PRO.
Because PRO does not mean "Gaming" in any way, shape, or form.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by goobot View Post
Still confused how a 1700$ "Pro" computer is dual core mean while a 300$ Mp3 player is as well.
Because "dual core" alone means just about nothing.
Iconoclysm is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2012, 05:54 AM   #104
arvacker
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
[QUOTE=appleguy123;16129768]For the pro in all of us.

Unless you need a dedicated GPU, or quad core.

I wanted this computer so bad, but it looks like I'll be waiting for the (hopefully) vastly improved second generation.[COLOR="#808080"]

I wanted this one too, but I'm hoping they'll give it a nice update alongside the 15" rMBP in April/May, I want to use a computer 3years before retiring it, but damn, my 15" mid 2010 is starting to show it's age...
arvacker is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2012, 05:57 AM   #105
rmwebs
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by KPOM View Post
The top-of-the-line Air has been over $1699 for quite some time now.
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.
rmwebs is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2012, 05:57 AM   #106
everything-i
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: London, UK
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.
everything-i is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2012, 05:59 AM   #107
vikpt
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yinmay View Post
Honestly, I don't see the point of the RMBP13 when you have the thinner and lighter Air or Quad core and 650M RMBP15.

Nor do I see the point of a thinner iMac, I mean... how light and thin does it need to be? It's not like people carry it around. I would have been much happier if they had managed to fit desktop-grade GPUs.

Or am I missing something?
there's windows
vikpt is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2012, 05:59 AM   #108
rmwebs
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by KPOM View Post
How so? It has the same processor as the classic 13" Pro. The 13" has never had a discrete GPU, nor has it ever had a quad-core processor. The display is nice. I agree it is a bit pricey, but it is in line with the Air when you consider the full voltage processor and higher resolution IPS display.
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.
rmwebs is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2012, 06:01 AM   #109
vikpt
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by illegalprelude View Post
I think the issue here seems to be that many are equating pro with meaning a film director. There are a lot of other "pro" users out there who access things like video and photos (like a social media consultant) who don't need a dedicated chip.

Now should a $1,700 laptop come with a dedicated card is a different question but to assume those who own a 13-inch MBP are somehow not pro users or that a "pro" user can't get by with a 13 MBP is a bit silly.
Agree!
vikpt is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2012, 06:03 AM   #110
rmwebs
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by vikpt View Post
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
It'll edit them, but smoothly may not happen.
rmwebs is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2012, 06:07 AM   #111
mkoesel
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by aristotle View Post
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.
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.
mkoesel is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2012, 06:11 AM   #112
rmwebs
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by aristotle View Post
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.
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'.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tech198 View Post
Maybe the idea of a Retina display, is you wouldn't NEED multiple monitors.
Um...no. You clearly aren't a 'pro' user if thats what you think.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDAVE View Post
MacBook Pro's were never advertised as gaming machines. Intel HD 4000 is a fairly decent shared GPU.
Has any Mac ever been advertised as a gaming machine?
rmwebs is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2012, 06:11 AM   #113
downpour
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
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.
downpour is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2012, 06:13 AM   #114
rmwebs
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by namethisfile View Post
ok. i thought your were speculating that they sped up the video but the actual video is actually sped up as illustrated more clearly by the zippy hands. but, if you don't look at the hands, and just the screen of the notebook, which is what most people will notice more, the hd4000 is smoothly operating and navigating between pro video/graphic heavy apps like it's ms word.
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.
rmwebs is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2012, 06:16 AM   #115
mkoesel
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by shurcooL View Post
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.
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.
mkoesel is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2012, 06:23 AM   #116
bushido
macrumors 603
 
bushido's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Espaņa y Germany
bit of a pointless device to get specs wise unless u want a small laptop. for 100 more u can get the 15 and if u can afford the 13 then 100 more probably means nothin to u anyway
bushido is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2012, 06:23 AM   #117
mkoesel
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anuba View Post
Yeah, the 13" unibody used to be called MacBook and was just a deluxe version of the plastic ones, they changed the name to MacBook Pro for uniformity more than anything else. If you're a creative pro working on that cramped little thing, congrats for having customers who are willing to pay for the extra hours you spend toggling tool panels and scrolling.
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.
mkoesel is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2012, 06:27 AM   #118
j_maddison
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Nelson, Wales
Send a message via AIM to j_maddison Send a message via MSN to j_maddison Send a message via Yahoo to j_maddison Send a message via Skype™ to j_maddison
Quote:
Originally Posted by KPOM View Post
It could be that Apple sees the Retina Display as something that makes it "Pro." The 13" rMBP is about 20% heavier than the 13" Air. My guess is that it will be at least 2 years before the Air gets a Retina Display. It requires too big a battery for an "Air" for now.
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.
__________________
13" MacBook Pro 2.8 i7, 16Gig Ram, 256Gig SSD, iPad Mini 16Gig, iPhone 5S 32Gig
j_maddison is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2012, 06:49 AM   #119
Liquinn
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
What can this do that my 13" cMBP can't?
__________________
2011 Mini | 13" (cMBP) + 15" (rMBP 2013) | Powermac G5 | 27" TBD | iPhone 3GS (16GB) | iPad 1 and iPad 4 | iPod touch 4G (64GB) | Apple Wireless Keyboard + Magic Mouse x2 | Magic Trackpad |
Liquinn is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2012, 06:52 AM   #120
Lesser Evets
macrumors 68030
 
Lesser Evets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
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.
__________________
2x1.86 BSEL Pro 1,1; 5770; 16GB RAM
Lesser Evets is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2012, 06:57 AM   #121
Mackan
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Base model should have had retina display, 8 GB RAM, 256 GB SSD, Quad-Core CPU and dedicated GPU. All for $1500. Then... it would been 'Pro'.

As it is now, it's just a failure that smells greed.
Mackan is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2012, 07:05 AM   #122
tdream
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
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.
__________________
rMacbook Pro 2.6 Galaxy Note 12.2 Moto G iPad 3
tdream is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2012, 07:23 AM   #123
AR999
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Think its bad value at $1699?

It costs the equivalent of $2335 in the UK.

WOW
AR999 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2012, 07:30 AM   #124
Sacird
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Northern, VA
Quote:
Originally Posted by AR999 View Post
Think its bad value at $1699?

It costs the equivalent of $2335 in the UK.

WOW
WOW is right. Ouch. It's really thin though.
Sacird is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2012, 07:31 AM   #125
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
 
KnightWRX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Quebec, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmwebs View Post
Realistically the 13" line is actually the MacBook - Apple simply slapped 'pro' on the MacBook line to boost sales and stick the price up.
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.
__________________
"What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others."
-- Pericles
KnightWRX is offline   1 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: Apple refurbed 15 inch macbook pro with retina display jwp333 Buying Tips and Advice 1 Jun 5, 2013 02:47 PM
Apple Introduces 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina Display MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 201 Oct 28, 2012 07:43 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:46 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC