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.
Early Benchmarks Put Retina MacBook CPU Performance in Range of 2011 MacBook Air
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Your argument of "Every single laptop has ports, therefore 99% of people use them" is incorrect and based off a false presumption.
The reason laptops have ports and are designed that way is because the part cost for these ports is almost non existent now. These laptop designers are driven by sales. As a result, there is very little cost downside to adding a port where removal of a port may exclude some portion of your potential sales market.
Hence why laptops have ports.
This is also why computers had Floppy Drives for many years after they were even useful. Because it was basically free.
Apple on the other hand, while still sales motivated, has a corporate culture and reputation for bucking these trends. EVEN WHEN ITS CONTRAVERSIAL. And it is because hey... People can't seem to get over the one port.
The future will go one of two ways. In 5 years, ports will feel antiquated or we will find that we can never really get rid of them. With advancements in Wireless communication and Cloud services, my bet is on the former.
Wait two or three years. It could happen. There is a long series of connectivity and input interfaces that we thought were indispensable and most of them are history. Ironically, the audio jack just might be the longest-lived connector on a computer today.
It should be noted that it's 2011 CPU performance IN A BENCH TEST. Benchmark tests are designed in such a way as to see how hard you can push the CPU. Real world apllication is different. The Core M and the 2011 i7 work differently in how they handle short burst computing.
You're assuming it will get a second port. My bet is it never will.
I agree about everything you said but then why not get the 11" MacBook Air? Isn't it too big of a compromise just because of the Retina display? Everything else is better on the MBA and the size difference is really negligible.
I don't know where you got your 99%. It's probably more like 1%. I have two kids in their 20s, my wife is a teacher and I get out a lot in a very connected, young city. It actually gave me a little shock when I was thinking about your assertion, but the truth is that I almost never see anything other than a charging cord and headphones connected to a computer. That would actually confirm the way that Apple configured the rMB, which I personally am not enthusiastic about.
perhaps your market research dosent cover every usage scenario of most users. your research does however show that people like their laptops to be powered on and that people are willing to spare others from their music taste.
however if apple actually thought that only 1% of users needed a usb port they wouldnt have only 1 machine represent that.
personally i would rather have a port than need one
Size difference and Retina display is actually a really big difference. It's negligible FOR YOU.
I just gave my take on this in another post replying to MAFlynn. TLDR: the display.
But aren't the people who say they don't need or want ports also the same people touting it comes with 256GB SSD? I mean, if you don't need ports in 2015, you must not need hard drive space either right? Everything is in the cloud right? How about if this computer only had 16GB SSD?
I'm willing to bet that Apple's market research is light years ahead of your, or Dexterbell's, or mine. You nay-sayers may be right, who knows? If you are, Apple learns and takes another direction. If not...get ready for Apple's brave new world.
The year seems to be 2008 all over again. Because these reactions looks exactly like the outrage over the original MacBook Air.
What kind of joke is this? It's underpowered and overpriced and because I am completely unable to imagine anyone else having different priorities than me I cannot comprehend how this product could be desirable at all.
I know what you're saying, but there is a whole family of computers based more or less on exactly that premise. Wouldn't suit me for a second, but it's out there.
Don't get me wrong. I'm a wires and fixed storage guy. My workhorse machine has almost 14TB of fixed storage and more ports of various kinds than I could count, including by the way an RS232 board which I actually still use. (!!!) But I am not kidding myself about being even remotely representative of the market.
My personal estimate is that it will take between 15% - 20% of the iPad users who will go for the light thin macbook (now that it is almost as light as mine) -- or around 10 million units per year..... in addition to a portion of the macbook air users..... along with some new users..... and will account for more than 50% of the mac unit sales by the end of the first year.
Here's the thing, benchmarks like geek bench are perfect for putting a fan less 5 watt cpu in its best light. The reason is that it only stresses the cpu for seconds and not minutes. I'd like to see the lengthier benchmarks that stress the cpu for minutes as then you'll see the cpu and gpu throttling.
Making a choice in what to do with my money. Just like you. Spec whores live in their own world not inhabited by everyone. In a time where a new Samsung S6 Edge 128GB PHONE costs $1000 to $1150 this is seems to be a steal, for the target audience.
Last edited:
I think this is s fair question so I will address it.
First, your 16GB comment is just ridiculous. There needs to be a reasonable minimum and that isn't it. 256GB? That's pretty good. An argument can be made for 128 as well.
The reason is actually pretty simple. File space for most consumers is used by some combination of three things. Photos, Music, and to a lesser extent video.
iCloud and iTunes match both solve the Photos and Music problem. But more importantly, owning actual music files instead of streaming is quickly becoming more antiquated (though not extinct).
Video is even easier. There are a myriad of video streaming services. There's little reason to store it locally anymore.
The answer is that cloud services now store and stream the files that take up the most disk space for most consumers.
If use DaisyDisk on my iMac, 89% of my disk space is used by the three things I mentioned above. All of those things are on the cloud now anyway so I don't really need them there.
Are there other file types that are big and take up a lot of space? Sure. Are they used by the vast majority of consumers? Nope. If you have other file types, then don't buy a MB. The pro is the model for you.
All I read here the last few pages is blah blah blah about CPU.
Guess what, I bet the majority of Macbook users dont even know where CPU stands for.
Get it?
Guess what, I bet the majority of Macbook users dont even know where CPU stands for.
Get it?
thinking apple is infallible in their decision making is extreme complacency imo.
i wouldnt consider myself a nay-sayer per se. i certainly dont agree with your 1% view but concede that regular users are moving towards using less and less ports but as i said i would rather have one than need one.
it does though have further implications such as owning media vs renting, storing your backup yourself (on a nas) or entrusting some behemoth of a corporation etc. obviously apple is a player in these markets (although perhaps not competitive on the gb/$ side)
I have a lovely Intel Atom netbook thats really pretty. I'll sell it to you for $2k. I mean, if CPU doesn't matter to you, you won't care right?
Just as some think one port on a computer is just ridiculous too. If you do everything cloud based and don't need ports, you shouldn't need hard drive space either, its all stored in the cloud.
No, but the benchmark is within striking distance of what the actual benchmark will be..... so it doesn't really matter what date it was posted on.
Figured it would come in at around 2300 - 2400 single core; and 4300 - 4500 multicore.