the 13-inch Pro is now lighter and faster, but probably not powerful enough to justify its premium over the Air. Sure it has a retina display, But keep in mind the standard resolution of the retina, not maxed out and scaled, is less than that of the Air. And maxing out the 13 pros graphical resolution veers towards eyestrain inducing. The Macbook Airs resolution seems to be at a really balanced point between pixel density and usability.
The rest of the equation is iffy, too. The pro 13 is 0.11 pounds lighter and 0.04 inches thinner than last years, but still half a pound heavier and up to 0.6 inches thicker than the Air. Its battery life is 3 hours shorter than the Air, and it still doesnt have discrete graphics, but unlike last year, it has better integrated graphics. Haswell has different levels of integrated graphics and the Iris 5100 graphics in the 13-inch Pro are about 20 percent faster than the HD 5000 graphics in this years Air. Youre still trading the Airs lightness and battery life for a Retina display, but at least theres more of a performance boostalthough the CPUs in the 13-inch are dual-core only, which keeps them out of power-user territory. The SSDs themselves are PCIe-based like in this years Air, so theyre roughly twice as fast as before. The 13-inch starts at $1300 with 4GB RAM and a 128GB SSD, or about $400 cheaper than last years entry-level 13-inch Pro, and only a few hundred bucks over a similarly configured Air. Its probably not worth getting over the Air unless you must have a Retina display, 16GB of RAM, 1TB of SSD or the extra ports. In otherwords, if youre a pro user, you can consider it. But you should really be considering the 15-inch Pro.