I've been wondering if there are differences like that in the different levels of MB processors. I guess we'll have to wait to see exactly which part numbers Apple is using.
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.
Apple Confirms Retina MacBook Build-to-Order Pricing for 1.3 GHz Processor
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I've been wondering if there are differences like that in the different levels of MB processors. I guess we'll have to wait to see exactly which part numbers Apple is using.
Thats cool, I doubt she had the model Im speaking of. Was probably a low end cheap model.
Uh, no. According to that link, that Asus is 12.8" long by 8.9" wide, which is even larger than the 13" Macbook Pro retina. The new Macbook is 11" long by 7.75" wide, which is considerably smaller, not to mention over 30% lighter.
I think people are underestimating just how small and light this new Macbook is. I mean, it only weighs a few ounces more than my iPad 3 with the magnetic cover on it, which is pretty awesome.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Again, iPad Air has a retina screen in it. Would putting a retina screen in an MB Air or something between this MB and the MB Air hunger for more battery than the Air or this MB? Probably. But the battery in the iPad Air is much slimmer than this MB or the Air's battery and it seems to be able to run 4X as many pixels for 10+ hours with little problem. Perhaps a hungrier Intel chip will need twice as much battery as that iPad Air? Maybe more?
I simply don't agree with the assumption that retina would require so much more battery that they couldn't have made a "thinnest & lightest" between the Air and this MB with more horsepower than this MB. I don't know that for sure but you don't know that for sure either so we can just accept that either of us can be wrong or right on this particular topic.
We both can see a retina screen in this new MB so all this extra battery you are implying would have to be needed by the circuit board (not a retina screen) with horsepower better than they put in this new MB. So again, how about a "thinnest & lightest" laptop a little bigger than this MB but thinner than the Air, otherwise leveraging everything else in this MB that improves upon the power sipping of the Air. Had they not revealed this MB, the hypothetical one I just described could still be spun as the "thinnest & lightest" Apple laptop ever and either priced up in Pro levels with better specs or priced down in Air territory for these specs.
However, I'm not Apple so that's just wishful thinking. I don't see this MB as a good choice for me (rMBP would be my choice at this price) but I'm glad it will be the ideal laptop for others. I hope those who buy it enjoy it very much.
Last edited:
I opted for a bit less portability and a lot more power and storage when I got my 2014 rMBP, and am glad I did. It was between that and the MacBook Air for my blog (primarily), and it was crazy what slightly more weight and bulk got me. Of course, this wouldn't work for everyone.
My 2013 maxed mba will run circles around this. I had it for less, so useless is a relative term.
Probably not what you linked to, but it was one of their premium ultrabooks - about 18 months ago.
Upload photos and videos of kids or family to share, two things you can't do with the MacBook without an adapter which is ridiculous. Not to mention the whole crowd of people who buy laptops for work. The vast majority of people who buy laptops do a lot more than just surf the web and stream Youtube lol.
oldies but goodies
to all of you who are dissing people interested in the new rMB as pretentious, nouveau-riche, hipsters, ignoramuses -
I have been using Macs since they first came out, and know all the disadvantages of this machine. But at 65 years old the difference between a retina and non-retina screen is very significant for my eyes, so that rules out MBA; I travel frequently and the rMBP is nearly twice as heavy and, yes, that does make a difference.
I only upgrade when I need to but my 2007 MBP is dying and probably won't last until Skylake processors come out. I'd love more power in this MacBook but since when I travel I mostly email, write, web surf I have to trade off the ability to do more graphics on the go for the convenience and swallow the (yes, too high) price.
As a retiree I live on a fixed income and wish the rMB were $900...but if wishes were horses....
(and yes, I've tried using the most recent iPad instead and returned it due to limitations of iOS - inability to switch between apps, have multiple docs open easily is a killer for me).
I do most of my graphics work on my desktop maxed-out late 2009 iMac (2.8 GHz i7, 16 GB). (amateur photography, video, mostly Aperture-soon-Lightroom/Photoshop, some Final Cut). That and the rMB will probably have to serve as a compromise.
Please stop insulting folks like us....
to all of you who are dissing people interested in the new rMB as pretentious, nouveau-riche, hipsters, ignoramuses -
I have been using Macs since they first came out, and know all the disadvantages of this machine. But at 65 years old the difference between a retina and non-retina screen is very significant for my eyes, so that rules out MBA; I travel frequently and the rMBP is nearly twice as heavy and, yes, that does make a difference.
I only upgrade when I need to but my 2007 MBP is dying and probably won't last until Skylake processors come out. I'd love more power in this MacBook but since when I travel I mostly email, write, web surf I have to trade off the ability to do more graphics on the go for the convenience and swallow the (yes, too high) price.
As a retiree I live on a fixed income and wish the rMB were $900...but if wishes were horses....
(and yes, I've tried using the most recent iPad instead and returned it due to limitations of iOS - inability to switch between apps, have multiple docs open easily is a killer for me).
I do most of my graphics work on my desktop maxed-out late 2009 iMac (2.8 GHz i7, 16 GB). (amateur photography, video, mostly Aperture-soon-Lightroom/Photoshop, some Final Cut). That and the rMB will probably have to serve as a compromise.
Please stop insulting folks like us....
Wow.... you really think the guys that helped make Apple into the single largest company in the world deserve to be axed?
If all you do is email, write and web surf and you are that concerned with weight, why not just get an iPad? Thinner, lighter and much less expensive, even with a keyboard.
Whether or not something is overpriced is relative to other similar products. So for him to point out that it is comparable in price to the only other products that use the same processors is a valid thing to do. Makes more sense for him to compare it to a similarly targeted product that it does for you to compare it to a completely different machine, using completely different processor, that is targeted to a completely different audience. *sigh*
----------
Yea... just change the processor, the controller, the memory, the battery, the screen... basically everything... and then you have the same thing. LOL.
I think you missed this part: "(and yes, I've tried using the most recent iPad instead and returned it due to limitations of iOS - inability to switch between apps, have multiple docs open easily is a killer for me)"
Ah I did miss it. I love when people do that. All I do is light web browsing and email, oh but I also need to have 472 tabs open, 58 apps running I could switch lighting quick in between and 265 documents going at the same time
Light web browsing is what I do. ONE PAGE AT A TIME. I rarely open a new window or tab when browsing, like very rarely. I don't do documents or apps and I do one email at a time in Gmail. Thats light use people.
"under-powered" is such a relative term. it's absolutely meaningless without knowing what someone's needs are. you buy the machine that meets your needs. and as much as so many people here like to deny it, processing power is most definitely NOT the only factor that people take into account when choosing a computer. you buy the one that best meets your needs.
It's too bad Apple doesn't seem to offer a 16 GB memory upgrade option. Most power users such as programmers would be far better served by double the RAM instead of a measly 0.2 GHz clock upgrade.
It's a much smaller screen, though, and the ARM chips do use up a lot less power. Core M is Intel's attempt to match the power usage of ARM processors. Actually, the quad-core Atom in the new Surface 3 is another such attempt, but that runs even slower than the Core M chips people are deriding as "the same as a 2011 MacBook Air." First of all, that's not the case (the graphics are much better), and second of all, the CPU in a 2015 MacBook Air isn't all that much faster than a 2011 MacBook Air. Intel has been focusing mostly on power consumption rather than CPU performance in recent years.
----------
Given how quick the SSD is, I'm not sure that's really true anymore. This isn't a machine for power users, even with 16GB AND the clock upgrade (which also boost the maximum speed from 2.6GHz to 2.9GHz). Neither the extra RAM nor the extra CPU are likely to have a noticeable impact.
Ah I did miss it. I love when people do that. All I do is light web browsing and email, oh but I also need to have 472 tabs open, 58 apps running I could switch lighting quick in between and 265 documents going at the same time
For me, it's just a matter of needing OSX. We have an iPad, but it rarely leaves the house, because my business requires OSX. I've tried using logmein on the iPad for my work, but it's too tedious and isn't a good fit. So, I lug around my Macbook Pro everywhere. I tried an 11" MBA, but the screen didn't accommodate my databases and whatnot. The new Macbook slots in nicely, and it'll still be powerful enough to run my various databases and work programs.
Sounds like you'll both love the 1.75lb Surface Pro 3 with an i7 released May 2014.
----------
BTW, I'm in need of an upgrade and super disappointed with this.
If they just put a decent screen in an air I'd be happy. I mean, lets face it, the screen on a MBA is horribly, horribly, embarrassingly bad and has been for years. I have a 15" 2012 rMBP with not enough storage, and I'm travelling more now, so wanted a smaller laptop.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
OK so how about the second option? Take the very same retina screen in this new MB and that battery necessary to power it. Put that in a slightly thicker and slightly heavier case that is still thinner & lighter than the MB Air so that Apple could still spin "thinnest & lightest" at the big reveal. We just created room for more battery and added space for more CPU board if needed. Build every other power-sipping innovation in this MB into this hypothetical one (so SSD, keyboard "butterfly mechanism", etc). Basically, this might be thought of as screen half of this MB and bottom half of the Air, except the bottom half would be modernized and be shaped to have the volume of the new MB, plus a little more to create the added space for battery/guts.
The point pitched was the implication that a retina screen would require much more battery. So per that suggestion just offered, the added battery perceived necessary would be for the better CPU board than what was used in the MB because we already have enough battery in this MB "as is" to fully power that retina screen and the CPU board "as is". I can't see that being hugely more battery when we have other laptops powering less power-efficient CPU boards and fans that are not that much thicker than this MB (see the keyboard portion of the Air for example or a product like the Surface Pro).
I feel like we're getting into "dead horse" territory. What's built is built and launching soon. Some people will love it and other's won't buy it. If it's the future, wallets will open en masse and Apple will have another huge hit. If it's not so well received, maybe it will own a third niche in the laptop line for a long time or eventually evolve to replace the Air or the Pro line (at this price, who knows?). If I was betting, I'd bet on a (masses) miss... but almost entirely because of the pricing:
-Someone who wants a thin Apple laptop can get the Air instead for so much less than this MB.
-Someone who wants a lot of power and "retina" can get the rMBP for less than this.
-Someone who needs "thinnest & lightest" with truly light computing needs can get an iPad or iPad + Keyboard for so much less than this.
So all that leaves is someone who wants retina and "thinnest & lightest" laptop that can run OS X and doesn't care about relative pricing or pricing vs. power. Are there some of these kinds of people? Sure. Is there multitudes of these people? We'll see soon enough.
Last edited:
The mid 2011 1.7Ghz MBA scored a 4287 multi on GB3 while the 2015 1.6Ghz MBA scores a 5725. Thats a huge difference...
No, the Macbook is 2 pounds (with multiple engineering feats to make that so) and it has a 9+ hour battery - a significant difference.
If it is that much to you, jump to Windows 10 and the Zenbook. It's fanless. It's lighter. If it's not for you, wait until the next generation or don't bother.