2012 macbook pro retina vs not retina

georgelangridge

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Aug 8, 2012
9
0
England
Alright, so I just got my new 2012 (non retina) 15" Macbook Pro and I want to hear what you guys think about the differences between the retina and not retina versions.


Lets start a debate here, which do you prefer and why?

:apple:
2012 15" Macbook Pro, i7, 8GB RAM, 750GB HDD @ 7200RPM, Anti-Glare
 

clyde2801

macrumors 601
Alright, so I just got my new 2012 (non retina) 15" Macbook Pro and I want to hear what you guys think about the differences between the retina and not retina versions.


Lets start a debate here, which do you prefer and why?

:apple:
2012 15" Macbook Pro, i7, 8GB RAM, 750GB HDD @ 7200RPM, Anti-Glare
OH MY GOD, this entire subforum has been a debate for the last couple of months!
 

nontroppo

macrumors 6502
Mar 11, 2009
430
21
My previous MBP was a 2010 corei5 - upgraded with an SSD+fast 750GB 7200rpm HD — a nice workhorse laptop. My new rMBP is so so much better — the screen is something that just transforms everything[1]. My photography editing, writing in Scrivener, reading PDFs. The internal flash is substantially faster than my aftermarket SSD. And the weight and significant heat difference really are noticeable. I have few worries of the downsides (no chance to expand my internal storage being my main one); thunderbolt means for e.g. video editing works just as well on external as internal.

----
[1] sorry this sounds like Apple marketing; I'm incredibly grumpy at Apple for letting OS X run down, and prefer the tweak-ability of non-Apple phones/tablets, but the new display is the best hardware advance for me in years!
 
Last edited:

dmorgan

macrumors member
Mar 24, 2009
84
0
I ordered a non retina Macbook Pro that should be arriving tomorrow!

I chose this one, because the hard drive in the retina one was too small by default. The high end model with the bigger drive is out of my price range. The other reason was because I don't want to be a guinea pig for this new retina product... The classic MBP is pretty solid.
 

hvfsl

macrumors 68000
Jul 9, 2001
1,795
100
London, UK
I ordered a non retina Macbook Pro that should be arriving tomorrow!

I chose this one, because the hard drive in the retina one was too small by default. The high end model with the bigger drive is out of my price range. The other reason was because I don't want to be a guinea pig for this new retina product... The classic MBP is pretty solid.
Same for me. Got the Classic MBR with 750GB HD and only have 80GB left on that, so the Retina would have been too small for me. Have ordered an SSD to put in the optical bay for some more space, so will be installing that next week.

The rMBP is very nice, but the lack of HD space (at a sensible price) and it looks to me like it probably got released a generation too early (not sure the G650M is really up to displaying stuff at that res) made me go with the classic one in the end.
 

ixodes

macrumors 601
Jan 11, 2012
4,430
2
Pacific Coast, USA
Alright, so I just got my new 2012 (non retina) 15" Macbook Pro and I want to hear what you guys think about the differences between the retina and not retina versions.


Lets start a debate here, which do you prefer and why?

:apple:
2012 15" Macbook Pro, i7, 8GB RAM, 750GB HDD @ 7200RPM, Anti-Glare
Having had both, I find them just different enough to resist the urge to compare.

I'd much rather focus on the positive characteristics of each, and use the one that suits me best.

It's the same set of considerations I use when choosing any new Apple computer.

I do believe that if more people would take the time to actually write a list of pros and cons, along with one for their needs, they would end up with the very best computer for their personal or business requirements. There's something about putting it in writing that helps one sort out priorities and identify the functionality they need.

All to often, especially in the land of Apple, people choose based on style, or the most current, popular machine. This as opposed to truly focusing on what they want it to do, what they need it to do, and choosing accordingly.
 

Snesley Wipes

macrumors regular
Jun 29, 2009
119
5
Alright, so I just got my new 2012 (non retina) 15" Macbook Pro and I want to hear what you guys think about the differences between the retina and not retina versions.


Lets start a debate here, which do you prefer and why?

:apple:
2012 15" Macbook Pro, i7, 8GB RAM, 750GB HDD @ 7200RPM, Anti-Glare
Have you not read the 76 other posts on this same topic???
 

AZREOSpecialist

macrumors 68020
Mar 15, 2009
2,115
925
Alright, so I just got my new 2012 (non retina) 15" Macbook Pro and I want to hear what you guys think about the differences between the retina and not retina versions.


Lets start a debate here, which do you prefer and why?

:apple:
2012 15" Macbook Pro, i7, 8GB RAM, 750GB HDD @ 7200RPM, Anti-Glare
What is the point of this?
 

mjn298

macrumors regular
Oct 25, 2011
201
0
Palisades, Washington, DC
retina is the way to go i think but i needed native firewire since i use some stuff that is explicitly incompatible (i don't get why) w/ thunderbolt to firewire

i also like the unibody build and the extra pane of glass on the display because my laptop gets taken on stage/moved around a whole lot

really wish we could get the pci slot back
 

Aodhan

macrumors regular
Jun 16, 2012
148
0
I really wanted the new Retina, badly. When I saw it that morning I whipped out the credit card and made my order. I had been waiting about two years for the new MacBook Pro to come out.

It's thinner, it's sleeker, flash drive, amazing resolution, advanced cooling system. It's the new hotness, I didn't want to have to buy the old model. But then iFixit did its teardown, and I saw that it was completely locked up inside. And then I read Anandtech's detailed explanation of how the Retina scales the resolutions, and I thought about that poor 650M with 1GB of memory doing all that work driving all those pixels, and I started to think...

So I decided to get the non-Retina MacBook Pro. This will last me three years, and then my next computer will be a more mature Retina.
 

kpdillon

macrumors member
Jul 26, 2011
54
0
So I decided to get the non-Retina MacBook Pro. This will last me three years, and then my next computer will be a more mature Retina.
As long as your happy that is all that matters! Enjoy your choice. I am enjoying mine! I just received my rMBP and all I can say is WOW.
 

mjoshi123

macrumors 6502
Apr 14, 2010
441
3
Alright, so I just got my new 2012 (non retina) 15" Macbook Pro and I want to hear what you guys think about the differences between the retina and not retina versions.


Lets start a debate here, which do you prefer and why?

:apple:
2012 15" Macbook Pro, i7, 8GB RAM, 750GB HDD @ 7200RPM, Anti-Glare
I looked at rMBP but will go for regular MBP to replace my 2010 MBP and will later upgrade to SSD+16GB RAM. For my CS6 + LR4 work there is nothing that rMBP brings to table that could not be done with more solid and proven MBP attached to DELL 23" IPS panel.
 

Textureboy

macrumors 6502
Jul 25, 2012
322
40
Only difference is the screen and the physical re design. If you want the rMBP specs then upgrade it from the non retina. Will cost more than rMBP. Therefore it's a better deal to get the rMBP.
 

clyde2801

macrumors 601
Only difference is the screen and the physical re design. If you want the rMBP specs then upgrade it from the non retina. Will cost more than rMBP. Therefore it's a better deal to get the rMBP.
That's assuming you're getting the upgrades from Apple:

2.3 rMBP $2200 plus 16 gigs ram $200 plus 512 gb SSD $500 = $2899.

2.3 cMBP $1799 plus 16 gigs 3d party ram $100 plus M4 Crucial 512gb SSD $400 = $2299