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 Predicted to Release Ultra-Slim 12-Inch MacBook with Retina Display in Mid-2014
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
As I clearly stated, I was talking about desktop space, not about what is obvious: retina is better than non-retina
[quote myself]
So, as we can see, in terms of desktop space, now, the screen of the MBA 13" is better that the one of the rMBP 13"
I like this idea. I can't see Apple doing it though, given that they introduced the Retina models in odd-numbered sizes just a year ago. Sadly the 16-inch Macbook sounds the least likely of the three. Also, Apple will probably never build another laptop with a mechanical hard drive, so fusion drives are out of the question.
12'' Macpad with Retina Display!
It looks like Jony Ive been toying with Surface too much recently! to make it slimmer they will do the following:
-drop the USB ports
-drop the MagSafe
-offer one thunderbolt 2 port
-offer one lightening port for charging
-offer wifi an 4G options
-black clamshell design
innovation.
It looks like Jony Ive been toying with Surface too much recently! to make it slimmer they will do the following:
-drop the USB ports
-drop the MagSafe
-offer one thunderbolt 2 port
-offer one lightening port for charging
-offer wifi an 4G options
-black clamshell design
innovation.
C
champ01
Guest
Apple wants surfaces with a high scratch resistance. Black is not scratch resistant enough.
Hmm.. 2304 x 1440 would use a Retina scale of 1152x720.. and I hate the 1200x800 scale on rMBP 13 
.
I know there are other options for scaling but it is better not to split pixels.
If this rumor is true, at least they maintain the 16:10 ratio.
. I know there are other options for scaling but it is better not to split pixels.
If this rumor is true, at least they maintain the 16:10 ratio.
"Desktop space" is user selectable. Those who want to trade-off image quality for some more pixels can. That why I mentioned virtual; as indicative as this is something that is controlled.
The "retina" screens are have both more utilization flexibility and higher quality. Characterizing the MBA 13" as better on any dimension other than cheaper is "smoking something".
The mac product line will soon start to consolidate with the growth in post-PC devices. The macbook air in different sizes will be replaced by one size device, the Macbook at 12 inches. The pro machines will stay at 13 and 15 inch.
This helps Apple reduce the footprint the Macs take up in store for more iOS device space. It increases their yield and reduces production lines for laptops. It also is a more straight forward consumer proposition without multiple multiples at the same size like it is currently with three different 13" devices.
This helps Apple reduce the footprint the Macs take up in store for more iOS device space. It increases their yield and reduces production lines for laptops. It also is a more straight forward consumer proposition without multiple multiples at the same size like it is currently with three different 13" devices.
Yeah... I prefer 16:10 any day of the week.
Though it depends on the size of the screen.
I could get by with a 24" 16:9 display on a desktop. There is plenty of screen area.
However... an 11" 16:9 display feels like you're looking through a mailslot
16:9 and 11" is below my tolerance level.
I'd keep the black keys, but use the same sapphire crystal for the Touch ID sensor. It's matte, but extremely durable and comfortable. It will also resist getting shiny better than the polycarb.
Do you guys not want thinner, lighter laptops?
Making the iMac thinner is one thing but I sure do want my actual portable devices to be as thin, light, and useful as possible.
I can't see how any computer could drop such a widely used port such as USB. Can't use drop box for everything, too slow for large files or backing up to external drives.
My take it will settle down to three retina displays of 12", 15" and 18" at starting base prices of $750, $1500 and $2100.
No, disagree!
Quote from post 252:
"I greatly prefer the 13" model's 16:10 aspect ratio over anything 16:9"
I disagree. This is IMO a violation to being elegant! The 16:10 ration may have its advantages in form of pixels, but IMO has so "pallid looks" being on the edge of an almost "square" window pane, not an elegant display that excels in using the width, to left and right.
----------
Just to say it: 12" is not too small a display for me. (11.6 is not too small either.) I have written many thousand pages with such display, and not suffered a minute. I have even been satisfied with the VAIO TZ 11.1 display.
Quote from post 252:
"I greatly prefer the 13" model's 16:10 aspect ratio over anything 16:9"
I disagree. This is IMO a violation to being elegant! The 16:10 ration may have its advantages in form of pixels, but IMO has so "pallid looks" being on the edge of an almost "square" window pane, not an elegant display that excels in using the width, to left and right.
----------
Just to say it: 12" is not too small a display for me. (11.6 is not too small either.) I have written many thousand pages with such display, and not suffered a minute. I have even been satisfied with the VAIO TZ 11.1 display.
I doubt the resolution will be 2304x1440.
I think it'll be the same as the current 11” (1366x768), but doubled.
Some quick math tells me that Apple could make an 11.9” (0.3” larger than the current 11”) display at that resolution, at the same pixel density as the current, 9.7” iPad:
iPad’s display is 5.82" on it's short side. If the MBA’s display were that tall, it would be 10.35" wide, and 11.9" diagonal, and have a 2732x1536px display at the same 260ppi as the iPad.
Which means they can use the same display tech, thus (ostensibly) saving them money. Seems like the quintessential Apple move to me.
Last edited:
Prefer much more 16:9 to 16:10!
9000 wrote: "Yeah, 16:9 is annoying on a PC. I bet everyone just does it so they can say the magical marketing term "1080p". I wish my monitor was 1920x1200 instead of 1920x1080."
I just don't like the 16:10 ratio. The way I see it, it's not a good display to look at, just because of the ratio.
This must certainly be a like or dislike "thing".
9000 wrote: "Yeah, 16:9 is annoying on a PC. I bet everyone just does it so they can say the magical marketing term "1080p". I wish my monitor was 1920x1200 instead of 1920x1080."
I just don't like the 16:10 ratio. The way I see it, it's not a good display to look at, just because of the ratio.
This must certainly be a like or dislike "thing".
I might be selling my 15" macbook retina and going to something smaller and basic to get me from point a to point b, much like ex 13" Macbook Pro. After spending a lot of money on a 15" retina a year ago I am disappointed and experiencing these sporadic popping noises in my retina which occur after the fan spins down, whilst I noticed the temp gets up 90 degrees while gaming. I am taking it into a Apple Store to get it checked out. If there needs to be repairs i will sell and I will wait maybe a year before i get one. I got a 27" iMac on pre order and will be getting iPad in what eva form i decide.
As i will be only using my laptop on the fly or a backup, i like the 13" macbook retina but todays rumours of 12" sounds tempting as it might reassemble the air, however 12" may be too tiny for screen estate.
As i will be only using my laptop on the fly or a backup, i like the 13" macbook retina but todays rumours of 12" sounds tempting as it might reassemble the air, however 12" may be too tiny for screen estate.
I don't think being able to attach a keyboard to a 12.9" iPad and switching from iOS to OSX would be a mistake. Besides, iOS and OSX appear to be on a collision course anyway.
I was me who posted that... learn how to quote
I'd rather have a little more screen height... especially if I'm using the laptop for work. But yeah... it's totally a personal preference.
You're in luck, though... Apple is one of the only manufacturers who make 16:10 screens.
Almost every other laptop on the market is 16:9
And no... a 16:10 display is not almost square. It's still a widescreen... with just a little extra height:
So with 12, 13, and 15 inch macbooks, we have three classes of notebooks, Ultra Low Voltage dual core CPU in the 12, dual core CPU in the 13, and quad core with discrete graphics in the 15. They should add a 17 on top that is a derivative of the high end 15.
Sounds pretty simple to me.
Sounds pretty simple to me.