omgitscro
macrumors 6502a
Well, the 15" rMBP has 1920x1080 as one of its settings...? Or I'm missing something here...
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
17" MBP Owners...huddle up!
- Thread starter Hillskill
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well, the 15" rMBP has 1920x1080 as one of its settings...? Or I'm missing something here...
Jumped from 17"
I recently jumped from a 2011 17" MBP. For me, I always enjoyed the resolution of it's display and the screen real estate. However, my back is flat out terrible and the concept of shedding about 2lb and not sacrificing power was too appealing. I now use the base model MBPr and I'm loving it.
I recently jumped from a 2011 17" MBP. For me, I always enjoyed the resolution of it's display and the screen real estate. However, my back is flat out terrible and the concept of shedding about 2lb and not sacrificing power was too appealing. I now use the base model MBPr and I'm loving it.
Well, usually when one does not use the 'native' resolution of the display you get 'blurry' pixels....
omgitscro
macrumors 6502a
Except that the rMBP renders a 3840x2400 image and downscales it to the 2880x1800 Retina display if you choose the "most desktop space" option (which corresponds to a resolution of 1920x1200). There is no blurriness.
Ah i didn't realize that...... Might be worth to take another look at the 15 rMBP then....
Macman45
macrumors G5
I have an 9 month old top end 17" with 8GB, it's a powerhouse and I won't be selling it either. When the time comes for me to upgrade (not for a year yet) I'm hoping that Apple will have some sort of 17" version available...The rMBP, as advanced a piece of tech. as it is, just isn't enough real-estate for me. Being forced onto the Windows platform would really bug me.
I thought so as well...... That's why i upgraded to 16GB (costs only 100) and an SSD drive.
My MacBook Pro (just bought a year ago) is seriously fast......
I think they will eventually do a 17" MBPr too. I think the current technology just makes it a little to pricey right now, but once price comes down a 17" MBPr would be too cool and I think there is still demand and the higher margins they get on the 17" will make it worth there while. But who know when this will all come to pass.
I'm not so sure. There are two factors at work here. The first is that Apple's screen vendors LG and Samsung seem to be scrambling to get adequate yields on the 15.4" display. Producing a panel with 5184000 pixels at 220 pixels per inch with zero dead pixels is pretty much on the bleeding edge today. A 17" retina-class display would probably be something like 3120 X 1950 (216 ppi). That's 6084000 pixels with zero dead pixels. Getting effective yield at those specs isn't going to happen real soon.
Then there's the issue of demand. The demand for 17" laptops is small to begin with. With a large percentage of 17" buyers thinking a 15.4" retina works for them, that doesn't leave much market left. If Apple released a 17" retina, I'd buy one. But I'm not holding my breath.
GoreVidal
macrumors 6502a
Sticking with my 17" after owning a retina for a couple weeks.
-17" has superior storage capacity (512GB SSD+1TB HDD in Optical Bay)
-I prefer physical screen size over pixel density in this case
-speakers are far superior to the retina
-no need for additional dongles for Gigabit and Firewire 800
-Can use USB 3.0 expresscards to compensate for now USB 3.0
-Size and weight for me are non-issues and I carry it EVERYWHERE with me every day, the extra lbs in my pack doesn't register, even after carrying a rMBP for 2 weeks instead.
I for one hope they bring back the 17", just for the sheer size of it. It truly is a mobile editing studio.
-17" has superior storage capacity (512GB SSD+1TB HDD in Optical Bay)
-I prefer physical screen size over pixel density in this case
-speakers are far superior to the retina
-no need for additional dongles for Gigabit and Firewire 800
-Can use USB 3.0 expresscards to compensate for now USB 3.0
-Size and weight for me are non-issues and I carry it EVERYWHERE with me every day, the extra lbs in my pack doesn't register, even after carrying a rMBP for 2 weeks instead.
I for one hope they bring back the 17", just for the sheer size of it. It truly is a mobile editing studio.
JesterJJZ
macrumors 68030
Only thing keeping me away is no AG screen and only one internal drive. Weight's never been a problem. I'm a filmmaker and my 17" is one of the lighter things in my kit when traveling. I also hate that there's only one USB port on each side. Give me at least two on the left with the rest. The right one is only good for a mouse.
My ideal 17" Retina would have:
Two drive bays
Two Thunderbolt
Three USB 3.0
One FW800
One ethernet
Optional AG Screen
Don't care about HDMI or SD slot. Also ok without the Express slot at this point.
My ideal 17" Retina would have:
Two drive bays
Two Thunderbolt
Three USB 3.0
One FW800
One ethernet
Optional AG Screen
Don't care about HDMI or SD slot. Also ok without the Express slot at this point.
OK, I get you guys who root for the rMBP, I really do, but those are my thoughts:
1) By Apple's own definition, the 17" MBP is the only Mac before rMBP that can be called "retina" (meaning individual pixels indistinguishable at normal working distance). I will find the link to Apple's own math if you won't believe me. Therefore, the perceivable difference in resolution should be minimal. Remember: This is by Apple's own math.
2) 17" is and has always been about screen estate. The old question "15 vs 17 MBP - What to get" is the same, regardless of resolution.
3) The weight of the 17" is not bothering me one bit. Annoying comment coming up: If the weight difference between this and the rMBP really bothers you, you might want to hit the gym. Annoying, yes, I'm serious though.
4) 17" + SSD (especially if you've got a SATA III MBP (2011)), and you will have a hard time feeling any difference between
It really comes down to this:
rMBP:
+Lighter
+Better performance (albeit very minimal in daily use)
+Thunderbolt (might be a deal breaker for some, others already have it)
+Better vents and presumably temps
+Newer tech (let's face it, a big plus)
17" MBP:
+Screen estate
+Better battery life
+No lag (next generation will solve this, undoubtedly)
+1080p can be displayed properly (big plus)
+Games will run smoother (2010-2011-models) (even with newer graphics in rMBP - That amazing res takes a LOT)
+Better speakers
+Better keyboard (more tactile - subjective)
+Easily repaired and upgraded (replacing battery in rMBP? OUCH!)
+You will save a lot of dough keeping your trusty 17" (!!) MBP
To me, this is a no-brainer. Apple always tempts me, but this time it wasn't a hard decision at all to stick with my old'n'beautiful Mac. But that's just my opinion 😉
1) By Apple's own definition, the 17" MBP is the only Mac before rMBP that can be called "retina" (meaning individual pixels indistinguishable at normal working distance). I will find the link to Apple's own math if you won't believe me. Therefore, the perceivable difference in resolution should be minimal. Remember: This is by Apple's own math.
2) 17" is and has always been about screen estate. The old question "15 vs 17 MBP - What to get" is the same, regardless of resolution.
3) The weight of the 17" is not bothering me one bit. Annoying comment coming up: If the weight difference between this and the rMBP really bothers you, you might want to hit the gym. Annoying, yes, I'm serious though.
4) 17" + SSD (especially if you've got a SATA III MBP (2011)), and you will have a hard time feeling any difference between
It really comes down to this:
rMBP:
+Lighter
+Better performance (albeit very minimal in daily use)
+Thunderbolt (might be a deal breaker for some, others already have it)
+Better vents and presumably temps
+Newer tech (let's face it, a big plus)
17" MBP:
+Screen estate
+Better battery life
+No lag (next generation will solve this, undoubtedly)
+1080p can be displayed properly (big plus)
+Games will run smoother (2010-2011-models) (even with newer graphics in rMBP - That amazing res takes a LOT)
+Better speakers
+Better keyboard (more tactile - subjective)
+Easily repaired and upgraded (replacing battery in rMBP? OUCH!)
+You will save a lot of dough keeping your trusty 17" (!!) MBP
To me, this is a no-brainer. Apple always tempts me, but this time it wasn't a hard decision at all to stick with my old'n'beautiful Mac. But that's just my opinion 😉
Math aside, I see a very big difference between my 17" MBP and the retina. The retina is a significantly better experience for me.
Again, I have both (had, now, actually) and the 15" retina has more usable "real estate" for me than the 17". I discussed why I packed up my 17" and switched to the retina in another post here.
I humped 17" MBPs around for three years. Weight was not a driving factor for me... until I actually swapped the 17 for the MBPr. It really is a huge difference. My shoulder no longer gets fatigued schlepping my briefcase around airports.
Not in my experience. The MBPr is better for me in this regard.
Honestly, this "lag" thing has taken on a life of it's own, much like the JFK conspiracy theories. I don't experience any lag and it seems that most MBPr owners on this forum don't either. Granted, some do and it would be good to get to the bottom of it.
I'll grant you this one. The speakers on the 17" are awesome. The MBPr is much better than any other 15" but still not as good as the 17.
Yeah... very subjective. I like the MBPr better.
The reality for most people is that they're not going to replace their own battery. It then becomes just a matter of cost. Apple quotes $129 to replace a 17" battery and $199 for the MBPr. So yes, the 17" is ahead by $70, but I hardly consider that an "OUCH!".
It's hard to argue with this one. Except I generally sell my computers every year at a net cost of about $500. Since the MBPr is less expensive than a similarly equipped MBP, the MBPr actually comes out ahead for me.
I'm glad you're happy. I went the other way and I'm happy too. Ain't life grand?
Last edited:
Honestly, the retina IS anti-glare without the need for the diffusion layer. I get must less reflection in the MBPr than I did on my ant-glare 17" displays, with the added benefit of not losing sharpness with the matte coating.
Considering I have a USB3 3 drive plugged in to the right port at the moment, I think I'm going to have to disagree with you. The fact that there IS a port on the right for a mouse seems like a great thing for the mouse users in the crowd.
Considering the MBPr supports both 1 GigE and FW800 through Thunderbolt, is this actually a concern? Yes, you're limited to a single FW800 connection if you're using wired Ethernet. On the other hand, you can support two FW800 connections or multi-homed wired GigE connections on the MBPr. Your "ideal" MBP doesn't have that kind of flexibility.
Again, the retina IS anti-glare. It just doesn't have a matte diffusion coating.
Yeah, me too. I have two Express cards for SATA and CF that I schlepped around in my bag for years and rarely used.
JesterJJZ
macrumors 68030
Antiglare is not a coating. I don't want a plate of glass between me and the panel.
I don't want to carry external drives if I don't have to.
I don't want to waste TB ports on FW or Eternet, daisychaining is annoying.
I have devices that need two USB ports, I need two USB ports on a side so I don't need to bring long cables with me.
Need 3 USB ports, Two for my devices, one for mouse.
GoreVidal
macrumors 6502a
No it's not.
I can have 2xFW800 ports on my 17" as well since it has Thunderbolt. I don't see the point of having a lighter laptop if I have to carry additional dongles and an extra hard drive to compensate for what I have in my 17".
No it's not.
JesterJJZ
macrumors 68030
InuNacho
macrumors 68010
Actually we can go 4 if you get a 2 port FW expresscard. Bring on the drives and or camcorders!
devman
macrumors 65816
calderone
Cancelled
Yes, it is a coating. I guess that is fine between you and the panel, gotta love that screen door effect.
I appreciate you referring to the AnandTech review as your source. This is from the same review:
"The King of All Notebook Displays
For years Apple has been shipping some of the best displays in consumer notebooks, but the MacBook Pro’s Retina Display is in a league of its own. While I never liked the phrase “painted on” in reference to the iPad and iPhone Retina Displays, that’s the best way I can describe the effect the MacBook Pro’s Retina Display has on me. Text really does look painted on."
and
"Fewer Reflections, Hugely Improved Contrast
In the standard (glossy) MacBook Pro, Apple had a standard LCD arrangement with two sheets of glass plus a third piece of cover glass that gave it the seamless edge-to-edge glass appearance. The MacBook Air and the high-res/matte display on the other hand did not have any cover glass and instead hid the LCD panel behind a bezel. The MacBook Pro with Retina Display uses a similar LCD construction to the MacBook Air/matte-MBP, without a cover glass."
"By integrating the bezel into the outermost glass in the LCD stack you get the same effect as a cover glass but without the added reflections it introduces..."
"It’s the combination of these two elements, the removal of the cover glass and the insanely high pixel density that makes everything from text to UI elements just look painted on the new Retina Display. And the effect is gorgeous. I’ve never seen a prettier panel and it’s actually ruined me for pretty much all other displays, notebook and desktop."
And from the same review you pulled your image from:
The point being, the retina display significantly reduces reflections without resorting to the diffusion coating of a matte display. While it doesn't eliminate reflections entirely, the retina display reduces them to the point of being a non-issue in every environment in which I use the thing including my home office with all of it's west and south facing glass and afternoon glare from the sun on the ocean as well as brightly lit client conference rooms.
Last edited: