Giving up on Retina for MBA?

[Toltepeceno]

A macbook pro is basically he same as a mba just with a retina screen.
I am not sure what you want.

Uh, might want to check the spec's again, it's not even close. The highest macbook air i5 processor is 1.4GHz Dual-Core Intel Core i5. The lowest 13" retina macbook pro i5 processor is 2.6GHz dual-core Intel Core i5.

The air i7 processor is 1.7GHz Dual-Core Intel Core i7 and the 13" retina macbook pro is 3.0GHz Dual-core Intel Core i7.

The 15" retina macbook pro's are quad cores.

It's not basically the same thing, it's not remotely the same thing.

 

[Meister]

LOL! Yeah, all Apple laptops are the same! Seriously, you know your stuff.
What do I want? I want to have the choice of an MBA with a high-resolution screen. It's amazing that you haven't figured this out by now.

Yes. I know my stuff. With a high resolution screen come different hardware needs and higher power consumption. Comes a larger battery, comes a thicker, heavier macbook. You want to square the circle.

----------

Uh, might want to check the spec's again, it's not even close. The highest macbook air i5 processor is 1.4GHz Dual-Core Intel Core i5. The lowest 13" retina macbook pro i5 processor is 2.6GHz dual-core Intel Core i5.

The air i7 processor is 1.7GHz Dual-Core Intel Core i7 and the 13" retina macbook pro is 3.0GHz Dual-core Intel Core i7.

The 15" retina macbook pro's are quad cores.

It's not basically the same thing, it's not remotely the same thing.

I was only taking about the 13" rmbp. You are reducing it down to one component, the cpu. In real life performance the rmbp and mba are very similar.

 

[Serban]

next year for sure until summer WWDC we will have both 12" retina macbook air and the retina 4k 21.5" imac, and i think apple since that point can remove the "retina" from their name

so i would wait for the MBA from next year..

 

[OneMike]

Its pretty crappy by todays standards thats clear to see. I want a retina MBA as well

I just picked up a 13 air at best buy a couple hours ago. Depends on your needs I guess. As a second computer I'll be very happy with it. Couldn't use it as a main

 

[johngwheeler]

Uh, might want to check the spec's again, it's not even close. The highest macbook air i5 processor is 1.4GHz Dual-Core Intel Core i5. The lowest 13" retina macbook pro i5 processor is 2.6GHz dual-core Intel Core i5.

The air i7 processor is 1.7GHz Dual-Core Intel Core i7 and the 13" retina macbook pro is 3.0GHz Dual-core Intel Core i7.

The 15" retina macbook pro's are quad cores.

It's not basically the same thing, it's not remotely the same thing.

Actually, this isn't quite true: From Geekbench (http://browser.primatelabs.com/mac-benchmarks) single core / multi-core

rMBP 13 (Mid 2014) - Intel Core i5-4308U 2800 MHz: 3275 / 6931

rMBP 13 (Mid 2014) - Intel Core i5-4278U 2600 MHz : 3098 / 6629

MBA (Mid 2013) Intel Core i7-4650U 1700 MHz: 3157 / 6192

So the MBA has comparable single-core performance to the rMBP (better than the mid-level rMBP) and about 8-10% less multi-core.

This is basically un-noticeable for most use cases. Sure the rMBP display is nicer, but the MBA is more portable and has significantly better battery life. Performance isn't really compromised.

There is a common misconception that the MBA (at least in it's i7 version) is far less powerful than the rMBP 13. There is plenty of evidence (not just Geekbench) that this just isn't true.

The next step up is the rMBP 15, which IS a lot faster (but bigger, heavier, and more expensive....)

 

[BMox81]

Are the screens on a MBA that bad?

I was all set on getting one on Friday but all this talk about inferior "it's not Retina" screens has me wondering whether it's worth it....

 

[sleepyking]

Are the screens on a MBA that bad?

I was all set on getting one on Friday but all this talk about inferior "it's not Retina" screens has me wondering whether it's worth it....

I also had this hesitation but I picked up my first MBA earlier and it looks great.
I have not been spoiled with a retina laptop so I figured it'll be worth it should I decide to upgrade next year

 

[BMox81]

I also had this hesitation but I picked up my first MBA earlier and it looks great.
I have not been spoiled with a retina laptop so I figured it'll be worth it should I decide to upgrade next year

I've been using my Mum's rMBP for a while now so you could say that I've been spoiled, but then I've also been using my 7 year old Vista laptop for various bits and pieces so it's not as if I'm a snob when it comes to a screen display.....

 

[theSeb]

Bill Gates never actually said that.

And anyone as smart as him should consider themselves very lucky and blessed.

 

[jmoore5196]

I have an 11" MBA (i7/8/512) and travel with it. I tried to consolidate my two MacBooks (I had a QC 15" from 2011) and bought a '13 13" (i7/16/512) to replace both.

What no one mentions with respect to the retina display is the processor hit. I run a lot of CS6 apps and the screen lag and audio latency drove me nuts.

I finally sold the 13" rMBP, kept my 11" MBA and bought a new QC 15" rMBP. I still notice the "retina lag" with the 15", but the QC i7 makes it manageable.

If you're doing any sort of demanding work, you have to choose between a mediocre screen and a laggy user experience. I guess I'll put up with the disappointing screen rather than trade off processor power. YMMV, of course ... I just wanted to point out that the gorgeous screen involves something of a tradeoff if you're doing anything that's processor-intensive.

 

[John marts]

Im not very technical with computers but I can't see them ever making a retina MBA, atleast for awhile. If they were to make a retina MBA, then id assume they would have to significantly bump the processor to be able to handle the retina display. At that point the specs would be so close to the retina MBP that it would make having a MBP in the lineup pointless. Other than there being a 15' and 17' option, who would seriously choose a MBP when you could have an air which is much thinner and nearly identical specs at that point? The difference in models wouldn't be enough to justify it. I look at the air as a gateway into the macbook line, something light, fairly affordable, and fast enough for your average user. Theres no need for a retina MBA.

 

[Toltepeceno]

Let me get this straight. You are comparing the i7 in the macbook air to the 15 in the macbook pro. Are you kidding???? I compared i5 to i5 and i7 to i7. This has to be the most ridiculous post I have seen.

You just proved the most powerful macbook air processor, the i7, is STILL less powerful than the entry level macbook pro 13" processor. You made my point completely. That doesn't even take into consideration the rest of the 13" line and the 15" quad core line. That's like saying the imac is basically a mac pro with a screen because of the highest model imac scores matching up, even a little higher, than the base mac pro.

You said "A macbook pro is basically he same as a mba just with a retina screen". This is ridiculous . This comment insinuates the air line is basically the same as the pro line which is laughable. It does not mean the most powerful air i7 is only moderately less powerful than the lowest pro 15. That would negate the whole less powerful air line and the more powerful pro line.

Amazing. Not in any world, fantasy or otherwise is this accurate "A macbook pro is basically he same as a mba just with a retina screen" just because one model out of each lineup is close.

The next step up is the rMBP 15, which IS a lot faster (but bigger, heavier, and more expensive....)

Irrelevant, you said macbook pro and did not designate which ones. The fact is that ALL models of macbook pro's (retina, which you mentioned) are more powerful than ALL models of the air line. Period. That alone makes your statement completely false. They are NOT remotely air's with a retina screen.

Actually, this isn't quite true: From Geekbench (http://browser.primatelabs.com/mac-benchmarks) single core / multi-core

rMBP 13 (Mid 2014) - Intel Core i5-4308U 2800 MHz: 3275 / 6931

rMBP 13 (Mid 2014) - Intel Core i5-4278U 2600 MHz : 3098 / 6629

MBA (Mid 2013) Intel Core i7-4650U 1700 MHz: 3157 / 6192

So the MBA has comparable single-core performance to the rMBP (better than the mid-level rMBP) and about 8-10% less multi-core.

This is basically un-noticeable for most use cases. Sure the rMBP display is nicer, but the MBA is more portable and has significantly better battery life. Performance isn't really compromised.

There is a common misconception that the MBA (at least in it's i7 version) is far less powerful than the rMBP 13. There is plenty of evidence (not just Geekbench) that this just isn't true.

The next step up is the rMBP 15, which IS a lot faster (but bigger, heavier, and more expensive....)

 

[jmoore5196]

Im not very technical with computers but I can't see them ever making a retina MBA, atleast for awhile. Theres no need for a retina MBA.

There's a rather substantial thread on "Warming Up for the Redesigned MBA" on which I've made this same point several times ... to no avail.

Apple's not stupid. They won't crater a successful product line just to engineer an improvement that costs both processor power and battery life.

Still, a lot of folks seem fixated on a retina MBA. I frankly don't understand the fascination, but I'm now inclined to let them dream on and not waste my time arguing the point.

 

[carlgo]

Just visited the Apple Store and looked at all the new stuff. The MBA screen just does not compare at all any more. Retina is so obviously better. Sure is a nice device though. The updated one will be dynamite for sure.

The retinal iMac is super. I would never buy anything but that quality of screen. All else seems simply old at this point. It is not a subtle difference.

 

[nksk]

Apple's not stupid. They won't crater a successful product line just to engineer an improvement that costs both processor power and battery life.

Still, a lot of folks seem fixated on a retina MBA. I frankly don't understand the fascination, but I'm now inclined to let them dream on and not waste my time arguing the point.

Fixated? If anyone is "fixated" it's the people who obsess so much about battery life that going from 12 hours to 10 would be a disaster.

Not to mention that Apple just compromised the iPad Air 2's battery just to shave off 1,4 mm!

And how many times does it need to be repeated that every single other Apple product now has a Retina display? Why is battery life not the overriding concern for anything else? If something is going to crater the Macbook Air, it's the fact that it's rapidly falling behind in relative quality, and at an accelerating pace.

 

[Republius]

Fixated? If anyone is "fixated" it's the people who obsess so much about battery life that going from 12 hours to 10 would be a disaster.

Not to mention that Apple just compromised the iPad Air 2's battery just to shave off 1,4 mm!

And how many times does it need to be repeated that every single other Apple product now has a Retina display? Why is battery life not the overriding concern for anything else? If something is going to crater the Macbook Air, it's the fact that it's rapidly falling behind in relative quality, and at an accelerating pace.

Good point.

Everyone has their own needs. But I am with you that retina screen capability is more important than battery life, though my guess is that a bigger concern for Apple is not denigrating MBA processing power in utilizing a low-wattage chip for fanless design that will have its capabilities taxed in driving the retina screen. Sacrificing computing power for a retina screen would be problematic for me.

And that seems to be the rub as Apple waits for a microprocessor that can operate without a fan in order to slim the MacBook Air case, but also needs to be powerful enough to drive a retina screen without reducing the processing power customers have come to expect from the MBA.

 

[jmoore5196]

Fixated? If anyone is "fixated" it's the people who obsess so much about battery life that going from 12 hours to 10 would be a disaster.

If battery life were my primary concern, I wouldn't have an 11" MBA ... I'd have a 13" instead.

My point is that, with the MBA at least, it seems pretty evident to me that you cannot have both all-day battery life and CPU "umph" combined with a Retina display. My experience with the 13" rMBP bitterly proved that point. That was an expensive lesson.

If I could have a Retina display on my 11" MBA and still have six hours of battery life and the same processor kick without the disconcerting lagging, I'd buy one tomorrow. Sadly, I don't think we're quite there yet ... there are too many tradeoffs to be made.

Incidentally, I'd hasten to point out that I turned to my 11" MBA when the processor lag was too much to bear with the 13" rMBP. The 11" handles CC and CS6 apps without a hiccup. I wish the 13" Retina MBP had! For me, the display quality isn't something I'm prepared to emphasize over essential computing power.

 

[sleepyking]

I've been using my Mum's rMBP for a while now so you could say that I've been spoiled, but then I've also been using my 7 year old Vista laptop for various bits and pieces so it's not as if I'm a snob when it comes to a screen display.....

Then I think you will not have a problem with it.
I thought I would but it looks good enough to me. Especially from your vista I think you'll appreciate the upgrade

 

[John marts]

If battery life were my primary concern, I wouldn't have an 11" MBA ... I'd have a 13" instead.

My point is that, with the MBA at least, it seems pretty evident to me that you cannot have both all-day battery life and CPU "umph" combined with a Retina display. My experience with the 13" rMBP bitterly proved that point. That was an expensive lesson.

If I could have a Retina display on my 11" MBA and still have six hours of battery life and the same processor kick without the disconcerting lagging, I'd buy one tomorrow. Sadly, I don't think we're quite there yet ... there are too many tradeoffs to be made.

Incidentally, I'd hasten to point out that I turned to my 11" MBA when the processor lag was too much to bear with the 13" rMBP. The 11" handles CC and CS6 apps without a hiccup. I wish the 13" Retina MBP had! For me, the display quality isn't something I'm prepared to emphasize over essential computing power.

Exactly. I don't understand how people aren't getting this.

 

[johngwheeler]

We're talking about rMBP 13 vs MBA

Let me get this straight. You are comparing the i7 in the macbook air to the 15 in the macbook pro. Are you kidding???? I compared i5 to i5 and i7 to i7. This has to be the most ridiculous post I have seen.

Obviously I'm not comparing a quad-core rMBP 15 to an MBA. The OP and I are comparing the MBA to the rMBP 13!

You just proved the most powerful macbook air processor, the i7, is STILL less powerful than the entry level macbook pro 13" processor. You made my point completely. That doesn't even take into consideration the rest of the 13" line and the 15" quad core line. That's like saying the imac is basically a mac pro with a screen because of the highest model imac scores matching up, even a little higher, than the base mac pro.

Take it easy, Dude. The comparison is that the better MBA option (the i7) is COMPARABLE to the better 2.8GHz rMBP 13 (excluding the rMBP i7 CTO option). I would say that <10% CPU difference is comparable. Many people wouldn't even notice this except for long-running tasks.

You said "A macbook pro is basically he same as a mba just with a retina screen". This is ridiculous . This comment insinuates the air line is basically the same as the pro line which is laughable. It does not mean the most powerful air i7 is only moderately less powerful than the lowest pro 15. That would negate the whole less powerful air line and the more powerful pro line.

The OP stated this, and there are obviously differences in product positioning. My point is that the PERFORMANCE of the MBA (i7) and rMBP 13 (mid and high-level, not CTO) are quite similar. Others have mentioned that although the MBA screen is of lesser quality, the retina screen in the rMBP 13 can appear laggy. I'll accept that the rMBP has Iris 5100 graphics vs HD5000 in the MBA, which no doubt helps the retina screen.

Amazing. Not in any world, fantasy or otherwise is this accurate "A macbook pro is basically he same as a mba just with a retina screen" just because one model out of each lineup is close.

I don't know why you are so indignant about this. I'm not insulting your personal choice. The rMBP 13 is generally a better computer for the following reasons:
1) It is SLIGHTLY faster than the MBA
2) It has a much better screen (albeit native retina resolution is only 1280x800 - I know it can be changed)
3) It can have 16GB RAM - quite an advantage in my book
4) It has more ports (can run 3 external screens easily, or use Ethernet/Firewire Thunderbolt adapters plus external screens)

It's also more expensive, heavier and has a shorter battery life.

My argument is not about it's other features, just the basic performance of the CPU.

Check out:

http://www.macworld.com/article/204...13-holds-its-own-against-the-macbook-pro.html

Irrelevant, you said macbook pro and did not designate which ones. The fact is that ALL models of macbook pro's (retina, which you mentioned) are more powerful than ALL models of the air line. Period. That alone makes your statement completely false. They are NOT remotely air's with a retina screen.

Whatever, dude. I'd agree that the MBA and rMBP 13 are different, and that the rMBP 13 is a slightly more powerful computer in raw CPU (by about 10% at the top end).

The choice of rMBP 13 and MBA should NOT be made on CPU alone. It's the other features that should drive the decision.

I was weighing this up myself a year ago when I was travelling all of the time: I had to decide whether to get a really lightweight computer that I could use to work remotely (without power) for a whole day, or a slightly more powerful and expensive one that probably wouldn't get through a day's work without power. I chose the Air, but recognise it's limitations - I really wish I had 16GB RAM and another TB port.

If I get a rMBP, it will be an rMBP 15 which is clearly going to be an advantage in processing power. The rMBP 13 just isn't enough of an improvement to justify the expense.

My view is that the current rMBP and MBA lines will merge at some point with the rMBP becoming more "Air-like" in size and battery life (may with Skylake). The MBA may become a smaller low power option powered by Broadwell Core M or even ARM.

I would definitely get a lighter rMBP with 10+ hour battery life and a native 1440x900 retina screen (i.e. same resolutions as the rMBP 15).

 

[Toltepeceno]

Obviously I'm not comparing a quad-core rMBP 15 to an MBA. The OP and I are comparing the MBA to the rMBP 13!

Again, that is not what you said at all. Reread and comprehend it.

The ONLY air and pro models that are even close is the highest air and lowest pro. Period.

The choice of rMBP 13 and MBA should NOT be made on CPU alone. It's the other features that should drive the decision.

Again irrelevant, you said the pro is basically an air with retina. Stop trying to change the story as you have this whole post. That is hilarious.

It is SLIGHTLY faster than the MBA

Christ only the bottom, slowest pro model is slightly faster than the air fastest model. The rest get even faster.

The way you talk with all of the "Dude's" I'm guessing you just got home from school. Adios, you are ignored.

 

[johngwheeler]

Again, that is not what you said at all. Reread and comprehend it.

No, I did not say this. You are confusing me (johngwheeler) with the poster who originally said that (Meister) - Please reread the thread and comprehend

The ONLY air and pro models that are even close is the highest air and lowest pro. Period.

Define your definition of "even close" for me? Going by the Geekbench and other benchmarks that I gave, the i7 MBA is quite close to both the mid and high-level rMBP 13. i.e. 2.8 GHz rMBP is 3.7% faster in single-core and 11.9% faster in multi-core. That's quite close, isn't it?

Again irrelevant, you said the pro is basically an air with retina. Stop trying to change the story as you have this whole post. That is hilarious.

Not me, ask user "Meister". The machines are different, although their performance is "similar" (or at least my definition of similar - yours may differ).

Christ only the bottom, slowest pro model is slightly faster than the air fastest model. The rest get even faster.

Bear in mind I am comparing the BTO MBA to the stock rMBP 13s. i.e 1.7GHz i7 to the stock 2.6GHz & 2.8GHz i5. So maybe this appears unfair and is the source of your frustration. Obviously the difference between the base MBA and base rMBP 13 is greater: Geekbench single core 2709 vs 3098, multi-core 5295 vs 6629.

So the base rMBP 13 is at most 25% faster than the base MBA. I would call that significant. Are you happier now?

The way you talk with all of the "Dude's" I'm guessing you just got home from school. Adios, you are ignored.

You seem to be taking this to heart - calmate tio! (and I wish I could go back to my school days . The use of "Dude" is friendly and informally meant. You are more likely to impress people if you learn the art of polite debate....

 

[heliora]

If battery life were my primary concern, I wouldn't have an 11" MBA ... I'd have a 13" instead.

My point is that, with the MBA at least, it seems pretty evident to me that you cannot have both all-day battery life and CPU "umph" combined with a Retina display. My experience with the 13" rMBP bitterly proved that point. That was an expensive lesson.

If I could have a Retina display on my 11" MBA and still have six hours of battery life and the same processor kick without the disconcerting lagging, I'd buy one tomorrow. Sadly, I don't think we're quite there yet ... there are too many tradeoffs to be made.

Incidentally, I'd hasten to point out that I turned to my 11" MBA when the processor lag was too much to bear with the 13" rMBP. The 11" handles CC and CS6 apps without a hiccup. I wish the 13" Retina MBP had! For me, the display quality isn't something I'm prepared to emphasize over essential computing power.

i have a similar experience to yours, using a rMBP 13-inch late 2013 model here, and under any heavy usage the whole UI lags, Mission Control gets quite choppy, and Yosemite makes it worse

however if you switch to low resolution using programs like Display Menu, then it becomes much better, but that essentially renders the rMBP a more powerful MBA lol, which could be what some people need, with the advantage that you can have higher low-res (if that makes sense) like 1680×1050 for bigger real estate compared to the MBA, screen looks sharper but not retina quality.

which is what i'm doing now to get acceptable performance for moderate to heavy usage. doing something light i can switch back to retina resolution to get the sharp screen again.

but this pisses me off, so i'm actually thinking of swapping my rMBP for an MBA until the future where MBP is powerful enough to drive a retina display.

 

[johngwheeler]

I stand corrected...

It seems I was wrong about my MBA and rMBP price comparison.

The top-end i7 MBA with 8GB / 256GB SSD costs $1449, and the slightly more powerful base 2.6GHz rMBP 13 (default 8GB with 256GB SSD) is $1499.

When I bought my MBA the rMBPs were more expensive and IIRC only came with 4GB in the base model, so were about $400 more I think.

Given the benefit of the retina screen and extra ports, I would say the rMBP is better deal, provided:

1) You don't need to extra few hours of battery live afforded by the MBA
2) You don't mind the slight extra weight and thicker case profile of the rMBP
3) You are happy with the retina screen performance (native resolution of 1280x800 & possible (not confirmed) lag).

If I were buying again, I might well prefer a base rMBP 13 to an i7 MBA. The problem is that I would be tempted to upgrade the RAM to 16GB, and at that point, the base rMBP 15 with its quad-core i7 and larger screen starts to look attractive....and so goes the never-ending cycle of justification for more expensive hardware!

 

[Cheffy Dave]

Im not very technical with computers but I can't see them ever making a retina MBA, atleast for awhile. If they were to make a retina MBA, then id assume they would have to significantly bump the processor to be able to handle the retina display. At that point the specs would be so close to the retina MBP that it would make having a MBP in the lineup pointless. Other than there being a 15' and 17' option, who would seriously choose a MBP when you could have an air which is much thinner and nearly identical specs at that point? The difference in models wouldn't be enough to justify it. I look at the air as a gateway into the macbook line, something light, fairly affordable, and fast enough for your average user. Theres no need for a retina MBA.

Well no need for a retina MBA for YOU maybe, but for me, its a must! Such generalizations are based on your perceptions of the Air as you see it
I have been Retina ruined since the iPad 3, and I along with others, WON'T buy any MBA's now without RETINA screen, and I will say, the only reason it hasn't happened, is Apple is waiting for BROADWELL, or better SKYLAKE.
My favorite AIR is the 11", having bought and upgraded 80 over the years for friends, an 11" with Retina would be awesome for movies