Would you pay EXTRA for Retina? (Both Money and Battery Life)

Discussion in 'MacBook Air' started by KittyKatta, Mar 23, 2012.

  1. KittyKatta, Mar 23, 2012
    Last edited: Mar 24, 2012

    macrumors 6502

    KittyKatta

    #1
    One thing I don't understand is that Higher Resolution displays have been an option on MacBook Pros for years but most people still opt for the Standard display. But with this whole "Retina" bandwagon then a majority of people now demand retina screens as a requirement for upgrading.

    So what Im wondering is this:
    For $200 more then would you pay EXTRA for Retina Display or would you stick with the current resolution and save money?

    To me, I'm not sure because I've still to figure out if the whole Retina hype is simply a sign of Apple Marketing being successful. I bought 2 new iPads and love the Retina Display but in real world usage then if someone stuck with their old iPad 2 they wouldn't really miss out on anything. So the same may be true with the already great MBA screens.

    Edit:
    Would you pay for Retina at the cost of Battery Life?
    It seems that the retina display on the ipad is the main reason they had to fit in a larger capacity battery. So if they are going to use the same battery magic on the MacBook then it would be possible we'd have a choice between something like a 8hr Standard Resolution MacBook vs a 3hr Retina MacBook. If so, many mobile users may prefer extra battery and view Retina to be more a novelty.
     
  2. macrumors 6502a

    yanksrock100

    #2
    I would CONSIDER paying extra for retina...BUT apple wouldnt do that, they would use retina as a selling point to get people to buy it.

    I mean if the Airs get retina, thats where alot of their adverts would go, so they wouldnt have it as a configuration upgrade.
     
  3. macrumors 68020

    Cheffy Dave

    #3
    Oh Yeah!

    After 4 days with my new iPad, I would in a heartbeat, just give me a 15" MBA with a retina display!
     
  4. macrumors 6502a

    BreakGuy

    #4
    'Retina' is just a marketing term used by Apple to dupe people into buying what they think is some state of the art new technology, when it's not. Clever marketing or false advertising? Either way, Apple made their millions from it.
     
  5. macrumors 6502

    #5
    Wow, what an original thought.... :rolleyes:

    Retina is something everyone here understands to mean very high resolution/dpi. It's a convenient phrase to get an idea across.
     
  6. macrumors 68020

    LostSoul80

    #6
    Exactly. And seen the success of that term, I can't but think Apple will use it again.
     
  7. macrumors 68000

    #7
    I don't think so, with a desktop or even a laptop, you don't really put your face right into it like you would with a phone or a tablet. Your usually a little less than arms length away.
     
  8. macrumors 6502a

    Jobsian

    #8
    Yes and to be honest, I'd pay extra for quite a few upgrades that I want to see.
     
  9. macrumors G5

    Macman45

    #9
    Having had my new iPad for a week now, yes I probably would, but I'd rather Apple stuck to the practice they used for the newbie....As posted, use it as a selling point and not an excuse to charge more.
     
  10. macrumors 65816

    #10
    I would, but they didn't increase the cost of the iPhone or iPad when they introduced Retina displays, so probably won't again.
     
  11. macrumors 68000

    #11
    it could be a BTO option at first add $300 for Hi-dpi display. ;)
     
  12. macrumors demi-god

    Gav2k

    #12
    Wirelessly posted (iPhone 4s)

    They can't sell it as an upgrade. Without it it's an iPad 2
     
  13. macrumors 6502

    #13
    The high resolution offered by MBP is not equivalent to retina, the quality offered by those high res screen does not make a big different compare to what retina can.
     
  14. macrumors 6502

    KittyKatta

    #14
    But is it unreasonable to assume a Retina MacBook would cause a hit in battery life? Despite all this "post-PC" talk then many people still rely on MacBooks as portable workstations. It just seems that with MacBooks then there is a distinct line between the types of users and so "retina displays" may be considered more of a novelty than necessity, especially if it affects a travelers battery life.
     
  15. macrumors G5

    gnasher729

    #15
    I have compared an iPad 2 with a new iPad. It doesn't matter what Apple calls it. The quality of the display on the iPad 2 wasn' bad at all, but the display on the new iPad is just incredible. So when you ask the leading question "clever marketing or false advertising?" the answer is: Neither. Just an incredibly good display.


    There is some loss. The iPad battery was increased from 25Wh to 42Wh to give the same 10 hours battery life, so we can calculate that the display uses about 1.7 Watt more than before. Battery life of the MBA is less than the iPad, so Apple would have to increase the battery by about 10 Wh to get the same battery life.
     
  16. macrumors 6502

    KittyKatta

    #16
    It is an incredibly good display. but making the general public believe they "need" it and life without it is somehow crippling is marketing in action. And as someone who's pretty good at justifying purchases I don't actually "need", then if given a choice I'm just not sure if Retina would beat out Battery for me. :D
     
  17. macrumors 65816

    #17
    The display is the major interaction with a computer. The quality of the screen makes a big difference to the quality of that interaction.

    I have always spent more that most on monitors as a proportion of computer costs. A retina display would be a major upgrade for me. For others, less so.
     
  18. macrumors demi-god

    alphaod

    #18
    Yes I would pay extra for a higher resolution display. I'd probably run it at native resolution, rather than at "retina" mode. As with battery life, I don't really think it'll be affected much; the computer would certainly require more video memory.
     
  19. linuxcooldude, Mar 26, 2012
    Last edited: Mar 26, 2012

    macrumors 68000

    #19
    The iPad aside, there is a lot of things people don't "need" but they buy them anyway. I'm not going to blame a commercial for peoples lack of will power for impulse buying. If the majority of people are really that gullible, psychiatry would be at an all time high.

    If it were just a term, they could of used it for the first iPad. You are getting an improved display getting 4X the pixel density then the previous version. Thats not false advertising to me. Don't like the Retina concept? iPad 2 is still for sale.
     
  20. macrumors 6502

    KittyKatta

    #20
    Maybe with Touchscreen, but is the display really considered "the major interaction" when it is a one-way output device? A high quality monitor improves the experience but for most people a retina display is more a luxury than a necessity. Just look at the comments on the iPad board (and im guilty too) where everyone brags about the amazing screen but very few people are actually doing something they couldn't do before.
     
  21. macrumors 65816

    #21
    If you use a computer for 8+ hours a day (i.e. full time job), the display is very important.

    If you use a computer rarely, here and there, then no, it might not be important. Though that is for the end user to decide and not you.

    I feel the same way about my office chair that I sit in for 8+ hours. Comfort is worth a lot in that situation. But my desk chair at home which I rarely use... cheap and not worth buying anything higher end.
     
  22. macrumors 6502a

    #22
    I would certainly pay in extra money, but I would not give up on battery life. At the end of the day, the MBA is a mobility-focused deviced, and battery life is crucial in this regard.
     
  23. macrumors 68040

    Jaro65

    #23
    As reported, Apple took the margin hit with the new iPad. The retina display did increase the cost, but not the price.
     
  24. macrumors 65816

    #24
    Looking at the screen is something you are doing most of the time when using a computer.

    When I got my iPhone 4, the retina screen helped reduce eyestrain a lot over my iPhone 3G because the text was so much clearer. I haven't got an new iPad yet, but from having a go on one, I expect the same results, meaning I will likely use iBooks a lot more than I currently do on my iPad 1. The text on my iMac is noticeably worse than my iPhone 4, so I would benefit.

    As an app developer I see many benefits beyond being able to display an iPad screen at the full resolution. It will make a big difference in Illustrator and Photoshop.
     
  25. macrumors 6502a

    #25
    Wirelessly posted

    A Retina MBA is my holy grail and it is my hope that one will be released this summer at the latest.
     

Share This Page