15" cMBP vs 15" rMBP

[KPOM]

I thinks the rMBP would be a nice choose for me.. but.. with the rMBP I am a bit concerned about lags and IR. Should I be? Or are these problems all fixed with the latest rMBP models and ML. Or...If I choose for the rMBP, will it be better to wait for the next update this summer? I'm not in a hurry at this moment. Maybe a bit impatient...

cMBP or rMBP... that's the question..

edit: Some typo..

I wouldn't be that concerned about lag. I don't notice in on my 13" rMBP and I came from an 11.6" Core i7 Air.

That is not to say there is no lag at all. However, you are unlikely to notice any coming from a 2007 MBP. People tend to notice it most if they came from 2011 or 2012 15" MBPs, which were silky smooth. The rMBP has 4 times the pixels to push, and it has taken Apple a few updates to Safari and the graphics drivers to work out some issues, but it appears to be software rather than hardware, and the software is being sorted out. After all, we have had screens of this level of resolution for a long time, just not in a 13" or 15" notebook.

As for image retention, some people have it and others don't. It seems to be an issue for earlier LG screens. I don't notice in on mine, but I've had mine only about a month. I'd say get one and if it develops an issue have Apple look at it.

After owning a rMBP I can't see myself going back to a non-Retina screen.

 

[kensic]

just bought a 12 cMBP for1186$ after tax (open box item from bestbuy)

i love it. also changed out to an SSD immediately.

great price, great laptop, can't complaint

 

[nickftw8686]

I had a late or mid, whatever it was called 13 inch macbook pro and now I have a 15 inch Retina MacBook Pro and I am blown away by it. Its bigger but the weight is really nice, the screen is amazing my first retina device, I love that its so thin and has the redesigned body with more areas for it to breath and new fans. The device just feels great. Now that is not to say that I did not like the regular MacBook Pro but I am very impressed by this new machine and do not regret my purchase. I also got a great open box deal at best buy so that helped lol.

I think both computers will suit anyones needs, if one is going for screen res and a bit more portable then get a RMBP, if your just going to dock it or not carry it around a ton then maybe a regular one is better for you. Also if your not looking for the most blazing performance then a high end laptop is probably overkill that being any macbook pro not just the RMBP lol.

 

[circa7]

just bought a 12 cMBP for1186$ after tax (open box item from bestbuy)

i love it. also changed out to an SSD immediately.

great price, great laptop, can't complaint

What re the specs?

 

[Slayergramp]

The rMBP runs at 1440x900 at its default setting, only it looks 10x sharper than the cMBP, so I'm not sure where your observation on that is coming from. The way that OS X handles scaling makes the screen look VERY sharp at any resolution setting. In Windows, it isn't as pretty, but also not bad. I personally use 2880x1800 but with 150% DPI scaling and it's wonderful. Also, the screen shows hardly any reflections on the rMBP (Apple claims 75% less compared to the cMBP glossy screen).

The only arguments for a cMBP are price and upgradability. A 1TB SSD in the near future for a reasonable price is probably not going to happen unless you consider $500+ reasonable.

I personally picked up a rMBP 15" last week and it's by far the best laptop (or computer) I've ever owned, and I had a 2011 15" before. The cMBP is in no ways bad or outdated, but if you have the money, I'd suggest the rMBP. By the time I feel like I need to upgrade anything, I'll be buying a new laptop anyway. Anyone that thinks a computer with 8/16GB of RAM will be outdated in the next few years is fooling themselves except those in specific lines of work that would demand more than that, but for 85% of people, even 8GB is overkill for day-to-day needs. If you can't see the difference between the screens of the cMBP vs. the rMBP, then I guess the cMBP is a better choice because you'd be saving some money. I personally can tell a HUGE difference between the two and the extra real estate (running scaled to 1920x1200) is very beneficial for work purposes. YMMV.

I actually just learned about this feature. Didn't know you could scale it when I wrote that post, and I believe the retina macbook I looked at in the store was bumped at the max scale which disturbed me. 1-2 years isn't so much the "near" future in my books, and I do believe in 2 years at the most we'll have 1TB solid state drives, and they'll definitely be no more than $500 which I find totally reasonable, given that Apple's 768SSD is almost double that (on a cMBP at least). Either way, the resolution is nice, but not necessary. I feel like the resolution is some kind of disease, because according to other posts, once people get used to retina, it strains their eyes looking at non-retina computers, and I work on a couple computers a day, plus I have my computer connected to a larger display about 60% of the time.

There are so many wrongs in your posts I can't even start. I have a classic next to a retina both running 1440*900 nonHiDPI and retina looks better. @1680*1050 native looks better, but if you put retina into 1680*1050 HiDPI mode it looks better than native 1680*1050.

If you don't even know what Firewire800 is then i believe you can't care for TB ports. For people who want to expand their laptop (as opposed to upgrade it to a bigger drive for more movies...), 2 TB ports + discrete video out offers so much more options to one TB port without discrete video out...

Ethernet works with an adapter, when and if you need one. It's the same story as with displays.

USB is a consumer port, this is supposed to be top-of-the-line pro machine. Two thunderbolts offer better performance than 4 USB 3.0 ports.

Glare? Retina doesn't have dual glasses. The amount of glare is the same as on anti-glare display, although its diffused on the matte display.

If you use it as a glorified Windows DVD player however I can see why retina frustrates you. I couldn't care less about windows...

It's a fact of opinion. I'm glad you like thunderbolt. I'm glad you have 2 of them to suit your needs. I don't need them. And if I do, I have 1, which is more than enough. Your post seems to be attacking me, especially in the last line you wrote, and I don't really like that. You can make whatever assumptions you want, but I don't care about having more pixels than a TV. It's nice I'm sure, but I'm happy with what I have. 1680x1050 is enough to make words legible.
Antiglare makes a big difference. This "75%" less glare nonsense is a sales motive, and it might be true, but it's still not up to par with full antiglare. They certainly do not look the same. Antiglare is just a plus to the cMBP, not a seller. And as I said earlier, I would surely rather not go everywhere I go with several adapters and connecters.
Why the mention of a glorified DVD player? Is one not meant to watch movies on his laptop? Is it frowned upon nowadays? No. It's not. I use windows for gaming only. Games take up quite a bit of space. No, I don't game all the time, but working in the gaming industry, it's a bit of a must.

 

[Ploki]

I actually just learned about this feature. Didn't know you could scale it when I wrote that post, and I believe the retina macbook I looked at in the store was bumped at the max scale which disturbed me. 1-2 years isn't so much the "near" future in my books, and I do believe in 2 years at the most we'll have 1TB solid state drives, and they'll definitely be no more than $500 which I find totally reasonable, given that Apple's 768SSD is almost double that (on a cMBP at least). Either way, the resolution is nice, but not necessary. I feel like the resolution is some kind of disease, because according to other posts, once people get used to retina, it strains their eyes looking at non-retina computers, and I work on a couple computers a day, plus I have my computer connected to a larger display about 60% of the time.



It's a fact of opinion. I'm glad you like thunderbolt. I'm glad you have 2 of them to suit your needs. I don't need them. And if I do, I have 1, which is more than enough. Your post seems to be attacking me, especially in the last line you wrote, and I don't really like that. You can make whatever assumptions you want, but I don't care about having more pixels than a TV. It's nice I'm sure, but I'm happy with what I have. 1680x1050 is enough to make words legible.
Antiglare makes a big difference. This "75%" less glare nonsense is a sales motive, and it might be true, but it's still not up to par with full antiglare. They certainly do not look the same. Antiglare is just a plus to the cMBP, not a seller. And as I said earlier, I would surely rather not go everywhere I go with several adapters and connecters.
Why the mention of a glorified DVD player? Is one not meant to watch movies on his laptop? Is it frowned upon nowadays? No. It's not. I use windows for gaming only. Games take up quite a bit of space. No, I don't game all the time, but working in the gaming industry, it's a bit of a must.

Actually my cousin has a 1680*1050 antiglare so I compared it with it. 75% less glare is not nonsense. The only difference is now that antiglare diffuses the light to some extent, which is sometimes a hit and sometimes a miss.

You CAN run windows off an external TB SSD drive... On the rMBP. On the cMBP its usually already taken by the display.

Most of the times on the old MBP i used VGA and DVI port. Some people even use S-video. It's sure easier not to have all those adapters in the bag. Perhaps throw on FW400 4pin, 6pin and FW800 so you don't need FW800>FW400 adapters (if you forget FW400>FW800 cable is like forgetting a MiniDP>DVI adapter...)

Your post came across wrong, that's why the assumption because some things were plain wrong, not opinion.

 

[Slayergramp]

Actually my cousin has a 1680*1050 antiglare so I compared it with it. 75% less glare is not nonsense. The only difference is now that antiglare diffuses the light to some extent, which is sometimes a hit and sometimes a miss.

You CAN run windows off an external TB SSD drive... On the rMBP. On the cMBP its usually already taken by the display.

Most of the times on the old MBP i used VGA and DVI port. Some people even use S-video. It's sure easier not to have all those adapters in the bag. Perhaps throw on FW400 4pin, 6pin and FW800 so you don't need FW800>FW400 adapters (if you forget FW400>FW800 cable is like forgetting a MiniDP>DVI adapter...)

Your post came across wrong, that's why the assumption because some things were plain wrong, not opinion.

Clearly you missed what I said. I use my laptop as a laptop. I don't like attachments. I like Antiglare. I THINK it's better. It's opinion. I like the optical drive, and don't use thunderbolt. More opinion towards cMBP. I also like future upgradability, so that possible one day, I'll have 2 1TB SSD in my cMBP. Will you? No. You might not want/care about that. Good. It's your opinion. And I respect it just as much as I respect mine. Good day.

 

[Ploki]

Clearly you missed what I said. I use my laptop as a laptop. I don't like attachments. I like Antiglare. I THINK it's better. It's opinion. I like the optical drive, and don't use thunderbolt. More opinion towards cMBP. I also like future upgradability, so that possible one day, I'll have 2 1TB SSD in my cMBP. Will you? No. You might not want/care about that. Good. It's your opinion. And I respect it just as much as I respect mine. Good day.

Geez, sorry.

I do admit I needed to go through some restructuring of my disk space, and second drive bay is the only feud I have with this laptop. Still, while restructuring I did find lots of stuff that i really don't need on a laptop at all cost.