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 Pricing to Start at Roughly $1699

Ideally it would offer

2.5Ghz Dual Core just like the 1199 model.
256 GB of SSD storage
8GB of RAM
650m dGPU

That's feasible because we've got an additional $500 to work with.
 
technopimp said:
Except you can't USE that resolution. You can use a "pretty" version of 1280x800 (which is laughable for a 13" screen) or some awkward scaled monstrosity. This is the reason I haven't jumped on a 15" Retina yet and still am using an 11" Air. I have roughly the same resolution as the current 13 but in an 11" screen. I know Retina is pretty, but really that's all it's buying you.
Click to expand...

You get options for scaled resolutions (up to 1920x1200) on the 15" rMBP. They may not be quite as sharp as the pixel-doubled standard retina resolution, but they are still sharper than most displays.

I expect something similar on the 13" rMBP.
 
For that price please tell me it will atleast have a real GPU in addition to the Intel junk.
 
That is a bit high for the kind of value it would provide for me. I'm not always on the go, so that $500 extra would be better spent on a nice IPS external monitor for me. If it has 4GB on ram for that price...
 
Rogifan said:
Yeah that's the reason a corporation is in business, to subsidize its customers. :rolleyes: You must come from the Obama school of thought.
Click to expand...

On November 6th 2012, he will be your President for the next 4 years, so get use to it.

I believe when you have enough cash to bail out the US government at one, you can at least drop the prices on some of your stuff, its not like its gonna let them go broke anytime soon. Unless the Steve Jobs ideas have ran out so they need to make as much as they can off what they currently have.
 
US$ 1,999 for the higher-end model? It's expensive, considering that for US$ 200 more you could buy the low-end 15" rMBP that will come with a quad-core processor and a dedicated video card, features which the 13" rMBP will probably not have.

Also, while the US$ 1,699 price point is only US$ 200 more than the higher-end MBA, for (what I expect) a better configuration, Apple is just missing the point here.

No other laptop has display with a 2560x1600 resolution and Apple could charge as much as it wants for it. But it's not the point.

The point is that nobody is exactly rushing to buy laptops these days. The PC market is slowing down, and both Intel and Microsoft saw declining revenues. Sales have shrunk. Even the sales of Macs were lower in Q3 2012 than they were in Q3 2011 (yes, the release of 15" rMBP didn't help here).

To remedy this, Apple could offer the rMBP at prices more similar to the cMBP. That would have helped Apple eat into Windows market share. Instead, Apple is making these products much more expensive, reducing its consumer basis.
 
ECUpirate44 said:
Not sure how many students are going to fork up an extra $500 for the retina model..
Click to expand...

When you look at the initial "$400 premium" for the 15" Retina vs the non-Retina, it's not really a "$400 premium" when you factor in the differences. First, with educational discount, the 15" Retina carry as $300 premium (education gets $200 off the retina, but only $100 off non-Retina). For that $300 premium over non-Retina, you gain the Retina screen (obviously), an extra 4GB of RAM (8gb vs 4gb), additional 512mb of Video RAM (1GB vs 512mb), and a 256gb solid state drive (vs 500gb super slow 5400rpm spindle drive). To me, those features combined are easily worth $300.

I assume once the 13" MBPr is released, we'll see a similar situation, since the smaller form factor of the retina will require the same "perks" of SSD vs spindle drive, more standard RAM (since you can't upgrade it down the road), and retina screen, offsetting the "price premium". Point being, it's more than just forking over $400 for a fancy new screen.

Personally, if the 13" MBPr doesn't include a dedicated graphics card, then I still think the 13" Air with 256gb SSD would be a better option but that's my personal opinion.
 
sweetbrat said:
Where did it say no SSD? Not sure where you got that information from..
Click to expand...

As he clearly looked at the specifications in the image (for the old model) and decided to offer us his thoughts and make himself look like a fool, at the same time :)

Apple said from day one that the larger retina displays are costly as yields are low. NO other laptop manufacturer has incorporated retina-type displays so how on earth could someone say Apple are in the "dark ages".

Problem is, people expect Apple to deliver retina across every device (even though it's clear to most sane users that Apple are struggling to source enough retina displays), across the iMacs *and* keep the current prices.

There's absolutely no way Apple can source enough displays and create a powerful enough computer to control a 27" retina display, without lag.
 
SpiderDude said:
Unless you are 13 years old, I can't honestly believe you are serious.
Can that water blowing PC also put out a 7-8 hour battery life?

You make such a good point on your first line (on the price dropping issue), just to lost all the reason on the second paragraph.. I mean, come on, still comparing... We know Apple charges a Premium, a ridiculous one on this particular case if true, IMO, but still, post like yours sound like troll fishery... : /

Also, prices can be TO sane people too, as long as they have enough money. :p
Click to expand...

Not trying to be a troll at all. I'm just not going to buy something with so so parts inside. The retina is amazing I'll give it that. But nothing else blows my mind.
 
blackhand1001 said:
PC's have had high res screen option for a while. The sony z series has offered a 1920x1080 screen for more than 4 years now. You could buy 1920x1200 in many 14 and 15 inch laptops for a very long time now as well. Atleast 8-9 years.
Click to expand...

Correct, but I actually meant 2560x1440 or whatever resolution these retina notebooks have. I am hoping Samsung copies with their own notebook line.
 
resolution (retina) only matters if you can run the content well
skimping on the gpu is a mistake

I'd rather have low res with high performance than high res with low performance.

The 15 rmbp struggles with its discrete card so we can only imagine how the 13 will do with the intel 4000 (bad).
 
drew0020 said:
The current 13" MacBook Pros are vastly overpriced so I don't think it's fair to say XXX above seems reasonable. The base 13" MacBook Pro should be closer to $999 than $1199 with that awful resolution, integrated graphics, and a slow 5400 rpm hard drive.
Click to expand...

Well, I bought one for home use with my own money. And I'm very careful with my own money. I have to, because I don't have rich parents, but the children think they have rich parents :eek: If I buy a computer, I have to _enjoy_ using it. And I get that with the MBP. No point buying something for half the price if I'm annoyed for using a piece of **** for a computer for the next few years.

So no, the MBP is _not_ overpriced at all.

PS. My MacBook is now 6 1/2 years old and still running just fine. Used every day for 6 1/2 years. So if you don't take purchase price, but cost per year, this was a really, really cheap little computer.


moxxey said:
Apple said from day one that the larger retina displays are costly as yields are low.
Click to expand...

Where did you read this? I've never heard Apple saying anything like this. And it contradicts the 15" RBMP pricing, which is cheaper than a 15" MBP with identical specs.


technopimp said:
Except you can't USE that resolution. You can use a "pretty" version of 1280x800 (which is laughable for a 13" screen) or some awkward scaled monstrosity.
Click to expand...

What you call an "awkward scaled monstrosity" actually works very well.
 
Tiger8 said:
Really? You checked every PC out there and you don't buy them because they don't look good? There are thousands, literally thousands, of models and looks out there, and none of them look good?

I would understand sticking to Mac for the OS, reliability, etc... but for aesthetic reasons?
Click to expand...

The ones that do look good are just clones of Apple's original designs.

Lot's of people, me included, don't like buying knock offs.

Oh, wait ... the new 20th Anniversary Lenovo X1C is out now, it's sexy. BUT, read the reviews in the Owners Thread on notebookreview and it's an instant non-option.

Apple gets my vote in form and function and I'll pay a premium for it ... in the long run it's cheaper and more pleasing to use.
 
Woah at the price. I'll wait a couple of years until the price drops to at least $1,399. That would have been a better price for it.

For $1,699, you may as well get a non-retina 15" Pro.
 
Woah nelly. It better have:
  • Quad-core CPU
  • Discrete GPU
  • 8GB RAM standard
  • 256GB SSD standard

... I'd buy it in a heartbeat! With education discount of course :D

//I honestly do not expect it to have a quad-core or discrete GPU :(
 
nuckinfutz said:
Ideally it would offer

2.5Ghz Dual Core just like the 1199 model.
256 GB of SSD storage
8GB of RAM
650m dGPU

That's feasible because we've got an additional $500 to work with.
Click to expand...

2.5Ghz Dual Core - $225
256GB SSD - $150
8GB RAM - $75

how much is 650m dGPU? - we are paying too much for the retina display (if it is $1699)
 
Angus9541 said:
Why would you spend that much on a dual core without dedicated graphics card, could this machine edit high def video smoothly? If not then whats the point?
Click to expand...

I dunno, maybe we aren't all wanting to edit HD video on a 13" notebook perhaps?
 
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