A 13" rMBP with i7 and 256GB is the same price as a 15" rMBP

[pgiguere1]

13" MacBook Pro with Retina display
2560x1600 13.3" display
Dual-core i7
8GB RAM
256GB flash
Intel HD 4000
0.75" thick
$2199

15" MacBook Pro with Retina display
2880x1800 15.4" display
Quad-core i7
8GB RAM
256GB flash
GT650M + Intel HD 4000
0.71" thick
$2199

Something seems wrong here...


EDIT: Even worse, if you're a student, the 13" will actually be $100 more expensive since it only gets a $100 student discount as opposed to $200 off with the 15"

 

[Jinzen]

The 13" Retina Pro will be good next year with significantly more power efficient Haswell and much faster integrated graphics.

This year, it's outdated and overpriced like hell.

 

[mohsy90]

Damn, thats such a disappointing comparison. 13" is way overpriced. I'm hoping sales numbers are awful

 

[DVD9]

DOA

Mr. Kuo say: "Priced aggressively under $1,300".

Mr. Kuo was wrong about what the price is, but Mr. Kuo was spot on as to what the price should be.

Also, enjoy that 128GB Toshiba SSD with the Sandforce controller which will choke on Filevault2 like the base Air.

Yeah, there's a lot wrong with this. Only an authentic idiot would buy it.

 

[bax2003]

2560x1600 with HD4000 only and no Quad core, not only option for quad, and reason is obvious, Apple did not wont to endanger sales of 15" with discreet graphics.

 

[pgiguere1]

The 13" Retina Pro will be good next year with significantly more power efficient Haswell and much faster integrated graphics.

This year, it's outdated and overpriced like hell.

Sure it'll be better next year, but so will the 15".

What I'm saying is that nothing justifies the huge gap in specs between the 13" and 15" rMBP when configured at the same price.

Unless they drop the 13"'s price significantly next year without changing the 15"'s, it's still gonna be the same situation with the 15" offering a lot better specs for the price.

 

[Jinzen]

Sure it'll be better next year, but so will the 15".

What I'm saying is that nothing justifies the huge gap in specs between the 13" and 15" rMBP when configured at the same price.

Unless they drop the 13"'s price significantly next year without changing the 15"'s, it's still gonna be the same situation with the 15" offering a lot better specs for the price.

Well, no. With Haswell, everything changes because the technology matures and there is an opportunity to offer ULV quad core + much faster integrated graphics on the 13" Pro.

Of course, the 15" will have a speed advantage, but it's about size and portability as well, which is why the MacBook Air currently tops out at $2000 with much weaker specs, and why a Retina MacBook Pro at $2000 is much weaker than a similarly priced Desktop.

 

[DVD9]

Well, no. With Haswell, everything changes because the technology matures and there is an opportunity to offer ULV quad core + much faster integrated graphics on the 13" Pro.

Of course, the 15" will have a speed advantage, but it's about size and portability as well, which is why the MacBook Air currently tops out at $2000 with much weaker specs, and why a Retina MacBook Pro at $2000 is much weaker than a similarly priced Desktop.

Look dude, if 4.4 pounds represents a size and weight problem for you then you must be a 75 pound anorexic woman on the edge of death.

This 13" MacBook is a huge RIPOFF.

 

[pgiguere1]

Well, no. With Haswell, everything changes because the technology matures and there is an opportunity to offer ULV quad core + much faster integrated graphics on the 13" Pro.

Of course, the 15" will have a speed advantage, but it's about size and portability as well, which is why the MacBook Air currently tops out at $2000 with much weaker specs, and why a Retina MacBook Pro at $2000 is much weaker than a similarly priced Desktop.

Portability is cool for the user but it doesn't cost Apple more to "miniaturize" the 13" rMBP compared to the 15".

A 11" MBA has a better portability/performance ratio than a 13" MBA without being more expensive since none of its components is more expensive to make, as opposed to your laptop vs desktop analogy.

Apple has a much higher profit margin on the 13" rMBP than on the 15" rMBP, no doubt about that.

 

[mohsy90]

Look dude, if 4.4 pounds represents a size and weight problem for you then you must be a 75 pound anorexic woman on the edge of death.

This 13" MacBook is a huge RIPOFF.

15" rMBP, even at 4.4 pounds is a problem for many when it comes to portability. After owning 13" MBP for 5+ years and then switching to the 15" rMBP, its a big difference, I returned it solely based on portability.

 

[Rizzm]

It all comes down to how much you value the portability of 13" vs. 15".

IMO you'd have to be crazy to value that extra pound lost + size difference over quad core, extra screen real estate, and dedicated GPU.

Not to mention when comparing the 13" rMBP against the 13" MBA. Then the decision is easier IMO. The retina screen alone is hardly worth the upgrade there either.

 

[mohsy90]

It all comes down to how much you value the portability of 13" vs. 15".

IMO you'd have to be crazy to value that extra pound lost + size difference over quad core, extra screen real estate, and dedicated GPU.

Not to mention when comparing the 13" rMBP against the 13" MBA. Then the decision is easier IMO. The retina screen alone is hardly worth the upgrade there either.

Yup, and thats why I went with the air.

 

[Rizzm]

Yup, and thats why I went with the air.

I absolutely love your sig. Is that original?

 

[MaxPower72]

Damn, thats such a disappointing comparison. 13" is way overpriced. I'm hoping sales numbers are awful

me too

 

[namethisfile]

i thought this was another meh event for apple, too.

made a similar thread in which i speculate a theory as to the meh-ness of apple, excluding of course, the way their products look and operate. and oh, feel!

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1473666/

 

[mohsy90]

I absolutely love your sig. Is that original?

thanks, not mine though. Took it from another forum. I find it hilarious that I reread it sometimes just to waste my time and laugh at myself

 

[namethisfile]

2560x1600 with HD4000 only and no Quad core, not only option for quad, and reason is obvious, Apple did not wont to endanger sales of 15" with discreet graphics.

could be the reason. but, it's the same company. if people buy the 15 or the 13, they're both apple products. so, cannibalization doesn't really matter, i think, in the big picture.

i have a theory though that i posted on a similar thread here:

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1473666/

 

[vpro]

Order the maxed out like I did!

Do what I did, I maxed out my order, this is so fun to be able to just play with it in my home for 14 days and then toss the toy back at them. Woo hoo for cash !!!

 

[okrelayer]

I currently have a 4 year old unibody 15inch MacBook Pro. I was hoping to upgrade to the 13inch retna.. but after watching the keynote, with my student discount the retna 15 with quad core, more screen real-estate,discrete graphics just seems like so much of a better deal for 100 more. I do like the portable idea, but I would have trouble buying something that feels like its so much less.

 

[Orlandoech]

13" MacBook Pro with Retina display
2560x1600 13.3" display
Dual-core i7
8GB RAM
256GB flash
Intel HD 4000
0.75" thick
$2199

15" MacBook Pro with Retina display
2880x1800 15.4" display
Quad-core i7
8GB RAM
256GB flash
GT650M + Intel HD 4000
0.71" thick
$2199

Something seems wrong here...


EDIT: Even worse, if you're a student, the 13" will actually be $100 more expensive since it only gets a $100 student discount as opposed to $200 off with the 15"

God that is depressing. Wow. Only the base 13" model is decently priced.

 

[twietee]

thanks, not mine though. Took it from another forum. I find it hilarious that I reread it sometimes just to waste my time and laugh at myself

lol, before your post, I just read it twice in a row and thought the same

 

[rmwebs]

God that is depressing. Wow. Only the base 13" model is decently priced.

IMO even the base model isnt competitively priced compared to the base 15" - at least as a UK student (See comparison attachment). There's a £280 difference, and you get dedicated graphics, double the ssd and an i7 quad core.

Really disappointed in how...CRAP the 13" is. I ended up ordering the base 15" rMBP to replace a 2011 11" MBA and a 09 Mac Pro!

 

[jacg]

It only has 8 GB RAM max. No 16 GB option.

Aperture has only become usable on my quad core i7 MBP since I installed 16 GB. And that machine is only driving a HiRes display.

 

[yusukeaoki]

Very disappointed for all this release.
Except for the iMac.

 

[pgiguere1]

God that is depressing. Wow. Only the base 13" model is decently priced.

I don't know, you're still paying a $400 premium over the 128GB/8GB 13" MBA mostly for the display. I expected more something like a $200 premium ($1499).