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 Updates Retina MacBook Pro with New Processors, Drops Pricing on 13-Inch Models and High-End MacBook Air
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
While you might be correct that the cMBP 13" is going away, I don't think it makes a lot of sense at the moment. Apple said that the cMBP 13" was their best selling laptop (prior to the Retinas). Because it has a relatively large and inexpensive hard drive, I can't see the Airs or rMBPs replacing it soon. Ineveitbaly, traditional hard drives will all but go away in laptops, but I think the price is just to high to EOL the cMBP 13" in favor of laptops with SSDs and Retina Displays. Once the 11" and 13" Airs include at least a 512 GB SSD at the current prices, I think that is when the cMBP 13" will be gone. (At least that is what I am hoping! lol)
----------
I agree!
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Would you pay < $200 vs. the new price of whichever version you are considering if it was a used laptop at least 4-8 months old? People will pay up pretty well for Apple used but at rMBP new pricing, I wonder if they'll pay up that close to "new."
Also note that you'll be competing with refurb pricing in the Apple store when a new model rolls out. Refurbs can be about 15% off new price and they come with a full Apple warranty, etc. So the guy in the market for a used rMBP will consider your price against an Apple refurb price if he knows about the refurb store.
My guess, NO. $200 will not be enough of a discount. But then again, what was that old P.T. Barnum saying about a sucker?
Cool beans, the new Macbook Air I priced out is now under $2k, where before it was over.
...not that I plan on buying one, as I've got at least two years left of life out of my 2010 iMac.
...not that I plan on buying one, as I've got at least two years left of life out of my 2010 iMac.
They dropped in price because they probably sold badly, Wish they dropped the 15" retinas but they seem to be doing well in sales so that won't be happening
I imagine Apple will honor its typical 2 week return policy in order to qualify for these new discounts.
Personally, I wouldn't send it back over the processor bump either... BUT... give Apple a call. You might get them to give you $100 discount or app store credit or free Apple Care or something. That's worth a try (I think).
Why doesn't say "Macbook Pro" on the bottom of the rMBP's screen like the non-retina one? Also what does "c"MBP stand for? Thanks.
cMBP ... classic MacBook Pro...
There's ALWAYS something better.
Me... I'm glad I got the older non-retina model. When it's maxed out (SSD replacing the optical drive etc) it'll last longer than the current retina models.
A bit longer.
Coz it does 16GB RAM, massive storage (using the spinning platter HD) and SSD (using an optical drive conversion kit).
The current retinas can't upgrade.... at all. You need to pay upfront or else get something inferior.
Me... I'm glad I got the older non-retina model. When it's maxed out (SSD replacing the optical drive etc) it'll last longer than the current retina models.
A bit longer.
Coz it does 16GB RAM, massive storage (using the spinning platter HD) and SSD (using an optical drive conversion kit).
The current retinas can't upgrade.... at all. You need to pay upfront or else get something inferior.
I once looked at buying a cheap used Mac Mini on eBay. Prices were absolutely ridiculous. I mean if an old model sells for more than a refurbished new model with full warranty at the Apple Store, that's ridiculous. But that's what happens.
Not if they're set on running windows 8. ....lol pity the fool.
You can always buy a Windows 8 license separetely and run it on the Mac. The Aspire S7 looks like an overpriced beast, and even more now that Apple dropped the price of the 13-inch retina MacBook Pro.
No, Apple refuses to be associated with Intel's marketing so even a MBA isn't considered an ultrabook, even if it's the computer that defined that category of laptops.
The 13" rMBP couldn't be called an ultrabook anyway since it uses a 35W CPU rather than a 17W one. Same goes with the 15" rMBP since it has a 45W CPU and discrete GPU.
Basically, even though Intel originally wanted Ultrabooks to be a high end line of computers with which you don't sacrifice performance for portability, computers that are actually powerful are excluded from the category while there are tons of so-called ultrabooks with ULV Core i3s, mechanical hard drives with a bit of flash cache, bad battery life and a bad TN 1366x768 panel.
The race to the bottom continues even in an attempt to prevent it and it seems like Intel doesn't care. They chose to make touch displays mandatory for the ultrabook certification starting this year (at haswell's launch) and still don't make a good display or all-SSD mandatory and still don't accept CPUs over 17W even if you meet size/weight/battery life requirements.
With ULV processors becoming the new standard and flash cache being so cheap, I wonder if Ultrabook will keep meaning anything at all in the future.
You can count on it NOT being addressed. Apple has a history of never addressing screen issues. You'll have to continue to play the screen lottery and hope for a Samsung screen.
Seems to be someone who has often posted very well thought-out opinions on many subjects. He's also someone who I hundred percent agree with on this point. I think he doesn't mind if you "don't care for his tone", just as I wouldn't.
And since the Retina 13" costs in the USA exactly the same as a classic 13" MBP with the same amount of RAM and the same SSD drive, I'd say your opinion is not perfectly valid, but perfectly wrong.
I heard the story (don't know if it's true) that there is a mandated maximum time to wake up from sleep, and since the computer will write RAM to the SSD drive and read it back on wake up to save power, this maximum time to wake up limits how much RAM can go into an Ultrabook. Which would be rather ridiculous if true.
The 17W vs. 35W is the _maximum_ power consumption. You get less _maximum_ power consumption by having a lower maximum speed. Doesn't mean that the 17W processor uses less power when both run at the same speed.
Last edited:
You are probably right... or Apple will bump up the SSD on the 13" MBA to fill the gap.
I would think so unless Intel decided on some super-secret launch of a new processor. The different speed offerings (2.4, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8) are still in line with what's currently out there for 3rd gen i7 mobile processors.
Waiting (hopefully) for Anand, etc. to confirm, though
By the geometrical specifications it isn't. It is 1 mm too thick. The 15" is thin enough though.