Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

13-Inch Retina MacBook Pro Coming in October?

Yeah. Don't care. Need a 17". I'm too old to be squinting at a 15" or 13" laptop. Heck, I'd even be happy with a 19" laptop. A laptop for me is a desktop replacement. I'm not trecking through the outback with it; I'm going from house to motel to house within 12hrs. I can deal with the extra weight.

Am I the only person that feels this way? If the previous 17" was too expensive for most people, how will they justify the retina MB Pros?
 
2560x1600!! Thats all I am hoping for on a 13"
If i Get it, I am ready to sell my 15" XPS 15, my PSP, my iPad just to buy it! :)
 
Nicest thing about this thread - there's no one insisting it will have Ethernet, Firewire or an optical drive.
 
Here is how to calculate a price for a new 13" retina macbook pro !

Think about a price You consider reasonable, then give an example of a cost that You think is high, add both and divide by two...

Take that number and add 400$ to it to get a final price :eek:
 
technopimp said:
Yes, but the problem with the Retina display is you still only get an effective 1280x800 resolution, except for some apps that MAY take advantage of the full resolution in full screen.

1280x800 is WAY too low for a 13" laptop. My 11" Air has higher resolution. I know Retina "looks nice", but, c'mon...
Click to expand...

But you can choose the effective resolution in the settings, the 15 inch goes up to 1920 x 1200, I expect the 13 inch to go up to 1680 x 1050.


For those worried about the iGPU not being powerful enough, it is. The 15 inch is running on the HD4000 most of the time. The HD3000 in the old 13 inch pro could power two thunderbolt displays for a total of ~7 Million pixels. A 13 inch retina display would have ~4 Million pixels. Obviously you wouldnt be gaming at native resolution, you'd drop it down, but the 13 inch has always been bad for gaming, you don't buy a 13 inch pro to game on.

Also people need to stop getting hung up about the word "pro." It doesn't mean anything apart from what Apple wants it to mean.
 
Last edited:
CarlHeanerd said:
This would be nice, but seems premature. What low-heat / energy-efficient candidate is there for a GPU that wouldn't buckle under high resolution displays? I can't imagine the Intel 4000 doing the job without strain when under higher loads, especially when rendering, using OpenCL, or gaming; hardly "pro" performance. The issue is going to be further compounded if they intend on making it just as thin as the 15" model. It just seems impractical right now.
Click to expand...

This is why I'm surprised there is even a Retina Macbook this year. And why I think its limited to one model.
 
Skika said:
OMG 3 choices for a 13 inch laptop, that is really confusing, poor customers :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Once pricing of ssds and displays come down the macbook pro as we know it will be killed off

----------
NewbieCanada said:
Nicest thing about this thread - there's no one insisting it will have Ethernet, Firewire or an optical drive.
Click to expand...

Prob because its 2012. Cd's??? Havent used one in years! Ethernet? Everyone has wifi now. Firewire? Never caught on.
 
I ordered a new 13" MacBook Air, scheduled to arrive today. Regardless of when this hypothetical 13" Retina will be released, I am buying it day zero. I want the discrete GPU. I want the larger drive space. I want the awesome display (iPad3 has spoiled me). But I want it all in the size and weight of the 13".
 
jbkalla said:
Yeah. Don't care. Need a 17". I'm too old to be squinting at a 15" or 13" laptop.
Click to expand...

That makes no sense. The 17" has a higher resolution and therefore smaller text. If there is any MBP that makes even a healthy 15 y.o. squint it's the 17". The lower res 13" OTOH has bigger text than either the 15 or 17".

Also have you actually laid eyes on the RMBP? I'm a 40-something and I didn't even need my glasses to read every bit of text at arms length on the RMBP @ the Apple Store. Text was sharper than a Samurai sword. Don't knock it till you try it.
 
screensaver400 said:
Yeah, the only problem is that the next step up is 1440x900, and that's already used by the 15" Retina MacBook Pro.
Click to expand...
Well, the 11" Air has a 1366x768 screen, so I guess they could double that resolution, but my money would be on a doubled 1280x800. Plus, someone else in this thread said that the Intel 4000 graphics max out at 2560x1600, so 1366x768 doubled might not be an option if they're looking to stick with that chipset. I definitely agree that I don't see them going all out on a 13" 1440x900 doubled screen, for several reasons.

FWIW, I really like my 13" Air (last year's model), and since I probably won't be due for an upgrade this year anyway, I'll be interested to see if they can squeeze a 13" Retina display into the even lighter/thinner Air casing by next year.
 
Perhaps this is why they've held off on upgrading the 13" display to 1440*900 like the air. Would make the retina upgrade seem less significant. There's a great chance a retina MBP 13" will end up their biggest selling computer if it has a more accessible price. I think £1400 is likely.
 
Looking forward to this if it's true. I actually prefer the 13" size to the 15" and 17". To me it's the perfect size for the daily commute, and doesn't require a large bag to carry. I'd rather have the desktop be my professional work station, and only use my MacBook Pro for audio/photo/video editing in a pinch... instead of having it being my all in one professional/recreational machine.
 
I've probably posted this 12 times already, but I am one of those definitely waiting out for a 13in rMBP!

BUT, I'm cautious. The only reason I never got an MBP before was because 1) its screen resolution was 1280x800 and 2) it didn't have a dedicated GPU.

And this rumor indicates 2560x1600, which is nice, but that's still only a 1280x800 workspace. Now granted, you can apparently adjust the resolution, which would be sweet for those of us looking for a larger workspace, but so far I've read about lag and such in doing so (perhaps the kinks will be worked out though).

Secondly, if it still comes with HD4000 graphics (which, don't get me wrong, are certainly excellent for what they are), it won't be much better than an MBA, especially having to push 2560x1600 pixels.

So in essence, give me a 13in rMBP with dedicated GPU or I'll just be holding out for next year's refreshes (and really, I'm in no rush, so it's okay!).
 
Hi,

I'm guessing €1.7K and 1.7kg weight for an 8GB/256GB config. Same dimensions as the MBA/MBP, but 18mm thick all over.

I would consider this machine over the 11" MBA I'm considering ordering once a few paychecks come in. There are a few reasons:

  • The screen is IPS. Better colours, better viewing angles, better everything. Retina is nice, but an overall much improved screen is worth the money even more. 2560x1600 will do nicely, thank you. I'm not usually moving about tens of windows on a small screen like this.
  • Higher spec. I would get the 256GB base model but upgrade to 16GB. With that config and the higher spec'ed processor, I'd expect to get 5 years instead of 3 years out of the machine, at least. Which is worth a few €100 more.
  • Better expandability with (hopefully) an SD card slot (practical to have it built-in) and 2 TB ports.

The downside is, of course, lots and lots of extra weight. Probably 70% over the 11". Also, the size would be the equivalent of 2 13" MBAs side-to-side (one's taper pointing up, the other down). I already dislike the size of the 13" MBA, so this could be an issue. It comes down to what I want to use it for: the 11" is great for fun and occasional work, the 13" MBPR would be great for work and occasional fun.


Peter.
 
I'm guessing it'll be around 1500ish starting price.

Isn't the 13" MBP the best selling MacBook? I believe it is.
 
nick_elt said:
Firewire? Never caught on.
Click to expand...

FireWire did take off, you was just never in an industry whatever used it. I did Media for several years at college all the video cameras and tape decks where Firewire 400/800. Unlike USB Firewire can support physical control of the camera and or other devices in terms of playing, fast forwarding, rewinding etc. It was also faster than the more widely use USB 2.0, and all of my hard drives are FW 800 as opposed to USB because its just too freakin slow to use as an external when you have like 6,000 images in your Aperture Libary LOL
 
Nickpocalypse said:
At US$1,200, I feel like this'll be the MacBook Pro to buy. I wonder if it'll have the same graphics card as the 15"?
Click to expand...

where did this number come from? Doesn't seem realistic... given the existing 13" pro starts at $1200. My guess is closer to $1600.
 
Makes no sense. What's the point of a 13" Pro with no optical drive? It would have 0 benefit over the Air.

Just give the 13" Air a hi-res/retina BTO option.

The 15" Retina is amazing because it retains the quad core and discrete GPU while being the smallest/thinnest laptop you can get at that screen size. Unless they can fit a quad core processor and a discrete GPU in the 13" Pro, the Air with Retina display makes more sense.
 
jbkalla said:
Yeah. Don't care. Need a 17". I'm too old to be squinting at a 15" or 13" laptop. Heck, I'd even be happy with a 19" laptop. A laptop for me is a desktop replacement. I'm not trecking through the outback with it; I'm going from house to motel to house within 12hrs. I can deal with the extra weight.

Am I the only person that feels this way? If the previous 17" was too expensive for most people, how will they justify the retina MB Pros?
Click to expand...

You aren't the only one. Though I have to admit I love my macbook air these days, I miss the screen size (NOT RESOLUTION) of the 17". But try to explain that around here. It seems to be a generation gap.

----------
Yinmay said:
Makes no sense. What's the point of a 13" Pro with no optical drive? It would have 0 benefit over the Air.

Just give the 13" Air a hi-res/retina BTO option.

The 15" Retina is amazing because it retains the quad core and discrete GPU while being the smallest/thinnest laptop you can get at that screen size. Unless they can fit a quad core processor and a discrete GPU in the 13" Pro, the Air with Retina display makes more sense.
Click to expand...

You answered your own question. A 13 inch RMP would have a more powerful processor than the Air, and need larger batteries than an Air, all to drive that retina display you like. It comes with an engineering cost (not to mention a dollar cost)
 
roland.g said:
What is really amazing is that my unibody 2008 13" MacBook is 4.5 lbs. The current 13" MBPs are 4.5 lbs. The current 15" MBPs are 5.6 lbs. And they shaved off 1.14 lbs to get the 15" MBPr down to 4.46, less than a 13" MBP. Not sure they can get that much off a 13" MBPr, we're talking 3.36 lbs. But probably in the 3.75 to 3.95 range.
Click to expand...

arghh why haven't you american people switched to the metric system already?
it's the 21th century folks ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back