Hi res vs. retina - Please help me decide!

[ocool]

Hi!!

Been reading this forum for a long time, first time posting. I know a lot of people have asked similar questions but I like to get opinions based on what I will be using the laptop for. It will be for:

- music and photo storage
- personal photo and video editing (photoshop etc)
- web browsing
- viewing photos
- games
- watching movies (rarely)


It will be a secondary comp. I have a PC desktop where all the downloads, iphone & ipad back up, etc 😀

Im torn between 15in 2.6GHz hi-res and retina 2.3GHz. the price is the same between the two. Hi-res is only a wee higher coz of the Hi res option.

Does 2.6 makes a lot of difference compared to 2.3?? But then it has a flash drive that is fast. Is flash drive a SSD drive?? Will 256gb be enough for me?? If i take Hi Res, which one should i opt for antiglare or glossy( i read so many threads about this and the debate just doesnt end) sadly in my country here, we dont have a apple store and the biggest re-seller here doest have the hi-res MBPs, only online booking. So i cant compare between both other than getting info from the net and from you guys 😉 Do help me out!! Thanks in advance.

p.s apologize for my english as its my second language.

 

[Sambo110]

Does 2.6 makes a lot of difference compared to 2.3??

Not for what you are doing, the difference is negligible

But then it has a flash drive that is fast. Is flash drive a SSD drive?

Yes

Will 256gb be enough for me??

We don't know, that's up to you to decide.

If i take Hi Res, which one should i opt for antiglare or glossy

Again, that's up to you to decide.

 

[fryrice]

I myself was on the same boat as you. I went for the regular 15in 2.6ghz anti glare hi res. It really didn't matter since they were the same price plus it was a longer wait for the retina one. Since this is my first time using a mac I though it would be nice for myself that I can at least later put in my own ssd or expand the ram when I need it. Also another thing is the anti glare of the screen is pretty nice but u do want at least hi res screen for the non retina model.

What I do mostly on my mac is web, movies, music, some photo editing, and running vmware for my work to test codes.

 

[LEARN2MAKE]

Just my two cents, the main reason to get a hi-res over retina is if you want more hard drive space or an optical drive. The SSD/flash hard drive will more than make up for the slightly slower processor. If 256 GB is enough for what you will use the laptop for and you don't care to not have an optical drive, DEFINITELY get the Retina.

 

[M5RahuL]

I cancelled my order for the retina base model with 16GB RAM upgrade in favor of the cMBP with HR + AG [ Anti Glare ].

I see the Retina MBP not as *practical* for my purposes because I need an Ethernet port [ I know we can get an adapter but that's besides the point .. ] and an optical drive.

I also prefer to be able to upgrade the RAM to whatever capacity ; HDD to SSD and what capacity ; keep or remove the Optical drive for a second HDD down the road instead of getting locked down with what I need [ or I think I need ] today.

To me, after much deliberation, it appears that Apple has taken another walled garden approach with the retina MBPs.

Anyway, those are my reasons...

As for the difference between the 2.3 and 2.6, that's trivial and you probably won't see any difference!

Depending on your games and music library, 256GB may not be enough. I opted for the 500 GB [ slowwww... I know ] HDD but have plans to replace it with a 512 - 750 GB SSD later when they stop costing you a nut!

Either way, if you do opt for the cMBP [ classic MBP not the Retina ] I highly recommend the High Resolution with Anti Glare [ Matte ] screen... Glossy sucks!!!

Goodluck!

 

[PaulAtkinson]

Retina

If you are visually inclined, get the Retina. I use my new RetinaMBP for web browsing and Aperture (mostly), and I can't imagine parting with this screen.

I was torn between the exact same machines you present. It's impossible to see an example of the Hi-Res option at any Apple store or Best Buy, making this decision really a leap of faith. I bought the Retina when visiting a Best Buy just to (once again) compare the computers, and they had one last base model in stock. I bought it, not even sure I would open it, after reading all the complaints about the machine on this forum.

I actually don't like the high-resolution (1680x1050) emulated display on the Retina for web-browsing: text is simply too small for my 47-year-old eyes (for any extended period of reading -- I love the NYT). The 1440x900 emulated resolution (Best for Retina) is my favorite; and it is crisper and easier on the eyes than any computer screen I have ever used. When I use Aperture, I switch to the 1680x1050 mode, and still get a razor sharp experience.

Win-win.

 

[jrouse]

I started a thread with the same topic and was in a similar situation last week. I bought the 2.6 cMBP because I told myself I wanted to have the ability to customize it later. I also was using it for similar needs to yours. I ended up exchanging on Friday for the rMBP and couldn't be happier.

The cMBP is a great machine, but as an iPad/iPhone owner, the regular screen, even the hi res, didn't look as good as the retina and it made me crazy. The retina display is truly worth it. Every bit of text is crystal clear and it feels quite slim for a 15" laptop. Regarding the difference between 2.3 and 2.6 - I guarantee you won't be able to tell. The SSD makes it feel faster anyways. And 256gb is plenty, use a small external if you need more. And for the optical drive, I just picked up the external superdrive which works fine when I rarely need to use a CD. If you decide you need more than 8gb of ram go for it and order the 16gb for an extra $200, but remember 8gb is quite a bit.

The rMBP is just a better deal IMO. For the same price you get an amazing display, faster SSD storage, same amount of ram, HDMI port, and a thinner computer. There is really no disadvantage besides the 0.3 difference in processors and lack of an optical drive.

 

[doh123]

for those that want to be able to "upgrade" their Macs so buy the older version... you need to either get used to the fact you won't be able to upgrade them, or you need to switch away from Macs to something else. It won't be but a couple years from now and Apple will not be selling machines that are upgradable very much if any at all. All Macs will be made with the same mind set as iPads, Macbook Airs, and the Retina MBP... you buy as is and thats how it is forever.

 

[Eallan]

For what it's worth, i went from a 2010 MBP with matte hi-res to the top model rMBP.

Not a chance in hell I could ever go back to that old display. This display is so much more pleasant and fantastic. The rest of the machine is equally better than previous models.

 

[sofianito]

All Macs will be made with the same mind set as iPads, Macbook Airs, and the Retina MBP... you buy as is and thats how it is forever.

That's scaring and sounds as a nightmare... The technology moves so fast that no one would want a computer that can not have its parts upgraded in 3 years...

 

[01mggt]

One note, don't pick between anti-glare and glossy until you have tried them both in person. I prefer Glossy any day of the week. But then again I don't work in places where glare is a terrible factor. Then again with Retina you get gret colors and such like from a glossy but with way less glare possibility. And don't over estimate being able to upgrade. The most upgrading you will really ever do is maxing the ram and upgrading hard drive.

----------

That's scaring and sounds as a nightmare... The technology moves so fast that no one would want a computer that can not have its parts upgraded in 3 years...

For laptops in general this isn't a big deal. almost any laptop these days will only allow for hdd and ram upgrades.

 

[Trey M]

For laptops in general this isn't a big deal. almost any laptop these days will only allow for hdd and ram upgrades.

I agree, I think customization is an over rated feature. Now, macs generally are probably a little less user friendly than other laptops, but those are for reasons beyond just being a walled garden. If you really want a laptop to last you 4-5 years, then you should just buy the highest RAM option and a big enough HDD or SSD to last. It may be more expensive initially, but a Mac will likely last longer than many other laptops. IMO it all evens out.

 

[kdoug]

Hi!!

Been reading this forum for a long time, first time posting. I know a lot of people have asked similar questions but I like to get opinions based on what I will be using the laptop for. It will be for:

- music and photo storage
- personal photo and video editing (photoshop etc)
- web browsing
- viewing photos
- games
- watching movies (rarely)


It will be a secondary comp. I have a PC desktop where all the downloads, iphone & ipad back up, etc 😀

Im torn between 15in 2.6GHz hi-res and retina 2.3GHz. the price is the same between the two. Hi-res is only a wee higher coz of the Hi res option.

Does 2.6 makes a lot of difference compared to 2.3?? But then it has a flash drive that is fast. Is flash drive a SSD drive?? Will 256gb be enough for me?? If i take Hi Res, which one should i opt for antiglare or glossy( i read so many threads about this and the debate just doesnt end) sadly in my country here, we dont have a apple store and the biggest re-seller here doest have the hi-res MBPs, only online booking. So i cant compare between both other than getting info from the net and from you guys 😉 Do help me out!! Thanks in advance.

p.s apologize for my english as its my second language.

I returned my cMBP Hi-Res antiglare after a week. I ordered the retina 2.3, 256gb, 16gb model (still waiting). I have a 128gb Samsung 830 attached to a 3.0 USB enclosure for iTunes and iPhoto. I have plenty of room for everything else. To me, the screen and the chassis are much better than the classic.

 

[DrJohnZoidberg]

Im torn between 15in 2.6GHz hi-res and retina 2.3GHz. the price is the same between the two. Hi-res is only a wee higher coz of the Hi res option.

Speaking as an ardent HiRes-cMBP advocate, the Retina MBP is the MBP for you.

For your listed usage, you would benefit more from the SSD and Retina screen of the rMBP than any of the advantages of the cMBP.

Is flash drive a SSD drive??

Yes. Apple are marketing it with a different name in the hope that people will think it is some kind of superior technology; it isn't.

 

[doh123]

Yes. Apple are marketing it with a different name in the hope that people will think it is some kind of superior technology; it isn't.

I think its more because they do not use standard SSD drives, but their own modules... while SSDs also use flash, its not a standard SSD.

But it may just be because Flash Memory is better for marketing all around, even if SSD didn't exist. It sounds better and is more descriptive to someone than what the heck is a SSD, or what does solid state mean... Flash, well people hear about that all the time really when you add in different types of CF, SD, SSD, USB drives, etc... which are all flash. Why confuse people with many different names.

 

[Slivortal]

The difference between 2.3 and 2.6 GHz is trivial, even for powerful applications. It's more of a slight boost for people who need to 512 GB SSD. 2.3->2.6 is not worth nearly $600. What you may notice though is a RAM upgrade, especially if you do all those things at once (which is more worth it at $200).

 

[sofianito]

I agree, I think customization is an over rated feature. Now, macs generally are probably a little less user friendly than other laptops, but those are for reasons beyond just being a walled garden. If you really want a laptop to last you 4-5 years, then you should just buy the highest RAM option and a big enough HDD or SSD to last. It may be more expensive initially, but a Mac will likely last longer than many other laptops. IMO it all evens out.

In the hypothetical case that Apple does allow you to contract a 4-5 years Applecare, the initial investment is quite high. Right now, the maxed rMBP (2.7Ghz, 16GB, 758GB) costs $3,749.00. In Europe the same mobo costs 3,848.99 € ($4,715.63 with the actual € to $ conversion rate). The hypothetical 5 years Applecare would cost $581.66 (5 * $349 / 3). So the total (Mobo + Applecare) would be $4,330.66 in the US and $5,143.21 in Europe. Not to mention that most of the people cannot afford to pay it cash in a single shot, so they would pay interests going through Apple financing... This is clearly insane...

Also, as technology moves fast, in 3 years a new or several one(s) will appear and Apple would try to push them setting again insane price tags for those mobos and expecting predictable loyal customers to buy them... The loop never ends...

 

[Trey M]

In the hypothetical case that Apple does allow you to contract a 4-5 years Applecare, the initial investment is quite high. Right now, the maxed rMBP (2.7Ghz, 16GB, 758GB) costs $3,749.00. In Europe the same mobo costs 3,848.99 € ($4,715.63 with the actual € to $ conversion rate). The hypothetical 5 years Applecare would cost $581.66 (5 * $349 / 3). So the total (Mobo + Applecare) would be $4,330.66 in the US and $5,143.21 in Europe. Not to mention that most of the people cannot afford to pay it cash in a single shot, so they would pay interests going through Apple financing... This is clearly insane...

Also, as technology moves fast, in 3 years a new or several one(s) will appear and Apple would try to push them setting again insane price tags for those mobos and expecting predictable loyal customers to buy them... The loop never ends...

Why are you using the term mobo? Doesn't that stand for motherboard?

Also, I didn't factor Applecare into the price. That's completely situational and some people require it and some people never will buy it. And every year there will be a better model...I don't understand your last paragraph.

 

[flipnap]

Sofianto, why are quoting the absolute highest build possible and talking like its the standard price to deal with. probably 5 percent of people would buy that config. The average price people are paying for these machines is around 2500 dollars, and with a lot of windows laptops going for the same or more money (ive seen windows machines in the 4 grand range), this is just how much these things cost.

Why are you going on like this is "insane" or a ripoff. Its no different than a million dollar house or a 90 thousand dollar car.

 

[Slivortal]

I personally think that if you're looking to get a 15", the MBPRs are a much better option, as they are actually cheaper than their non-retina counterparts when they are upgraded to SSDs and the same RAM capacities - and you get the retina screen on the MBPRs to boot.

 

[InlawBiker]

As a secondary computer I would get an Air. As a primary computer I would get the Retina MBP over the Classic any day.

 

[sofianito]

Why are you using the term mobo? Doesn't that stand for motherboard?

Also, I didn't factor Applecare into the price. That's completely situational and some people require it and some people never will buy it. And every year there will be a better model...I don't understand your last paragraph.

Sorry, by mobo I meant laptop instead of motherboard.

In my last paragraph, I tried to explain that it is not worth to spend that much money for something that lasts very shortly and does not provide a so revolutionary added value.

 

[sofianito]

In my case I would get a cMBP with antiglare hires. I am pissed of because Apple claims that the rMBP is so revolutionary, but has set its price same as the cMBP...

 

[Guitarboy315]

I had the same problem a couple of weeks ago. For me, it was the overall money for what I wanted. To get the RMBP that would be ideal for me, it would be close to $3,000 which is a lot of money. So I went with the $2,100 regular MacBook Pro model and upgraded the screen to hi-res (which does give additional screen real estate without making anything too small) and upgraded the the HD to the 750GB at 7200 RPM. I am very happy with my new Mac and to be honest, I don't think the technology has caught up to be able to power the retina screen...

 

[sofianito]

I had the same problem a couple of weeks ago. For me, it was the overall money for what I wanted. To get the RMBP that would be ideal for me, it would be close to $3,000 which is a lot of money. So I went with the $2,100 regular MacBook Pro model and upgraded the screen to hi-res (which does give additional screen real estate without making anything too small) and upgraded the the HD to the 750GB at 7200 RPM. I am very happy with my new Mac and to be honest, I don't think the technology has caught up to be able to power the retina screen...

I am planning to get the same configuration 🙂.
Later on, when my economy allows me, I'll get the Samsung 830 128 or 256gb for boot and applications and an optibay for the 750gb where it'llhold the user home, VMs, logs,...