I think I know why Apple didn't make Retina Display MBAs

[theSeb]

Is that strictly speaking true? I read else-where that it would be perfectly adequate but don't have the technical expertise to work it out myself

Perfectly adequate is a very subjective statement.

I assume that Apple are waiting for the improved IGB in Haswell to put retina screens across the rest of the range. Don't forget that Intel's HD 4000 runs quite a bit slower on the ULV CPUs in the MBA than on the full voltage CPUs so you may have read about improvements to the HD4000, but they don't really apply when talking about the ULV CPUs.

As far as Ivy Bridge goes, HD 4000 can offer relatively competitive performance, but it looks like it needs 10-15W just for the iGPU to get there. On a 45W TDP part, that’s no problem, but with ULV it looks like Ivy Bridge ends up in an area where it can’t quite deliver maximum CPU and iGPU performance at the same time. This generally means iGPU clocks will be closer to 1000MHz than 1150MHz, but it also means that the CPU portion of the chip will be closer to the rated clock speed rather than the maximum Turbo Boost speed. One final item to keep in mind is just how much performance we’re getting out of a chip that uses a maximum of 17W. ULV IVB isn’t going to offer gaming performance comparable to an entry level graphics solution, but then even the low-end discrete mobile GPUs often use 25W or more. Cut the wattage in half, and as you’d expect the performance suffers.

So how much faster can we get with ULV chips, particularly with regards to gaming? Intel has a new GPU architecture with Ivy Bridge that represents a significant update from the HD 3000 iGPU, but they’re still trailing AMD and NVIDIA in the graphics market. Their next architecture, Haswell, looks to put even more emphasis on the iGPU, so at least on higher TDP chips we could very well see as much as triple the performance of HD 4000 (if rumors are to be believed). How will that fit into ULV? Even if ULV Haswell graphics are only half as fast as full voltage chips, they should still be a decent step up from the current full voltage HD 4000 performance, which seems pretty good. Too bad we’ll have to wait another year or so to see it!

As the for battery, check out iFixit for the tear down of the new RMBP. The new battery is massive compared to the old shape MBP. It's 95 Wh vs last year's 77.5 Wh.

The iPad also had to increase in size for the new battery and they added quad core graphics to make it all work smoothly.

 

[Unison]

I'm no expert, but there are probably several different right answers in this thread... technological limitations seem to fit naturally / nicely with their approach to incremental product improvement. They effectively profit from niche and larger target markets similtaneously, and roll niche products into mainstream products as time goes by. With dictation introduced to OS X this year, I fully expect to see Siri in the next major release in 2013.

 

[KittyKatta]

IMO, Apple is trying to protect iPad for being cannibalized to the portable Macbook, especially MBA.
Many people ask over and over "Should I get an iPad or MBA ?" Well I must admit, the most overwhelming upgrade of the new iPad is the display. Who cares about A5X and extra RAM? iPad 2 still good enough for most apps, contents ... And ironically yet still bad enough for real computer apps. But main selling point is Retina Display, and so did Apple repeat the history with 15" Retina MBP.

If Apple indeed implement RD to 13" MBP and all new MBA lines, it would kill the iPad charm. I mean why would you get an iPad while MBA share the same crispness? It's equally portable, fun to use, and MBA has keyboard included
Maybe it's LTE chip? Well 3G/4G USB modem is not that expensive, and you can always tether your phone for that purpose.

I hate theories like this because they're based on nothing but excuse making that favors Apple. It's like how everyone claimed the MBA can't hold a 720p camera or the iPad isn't powerful enough to handle Siri. And if a real world theory can't be created then they rely on this "Apple doesn't want one product to cannibalize another" as if their customer base is against buying more than one Apple product. People simply make up an illogical excuse and then the following year when we get our USB3 or backlit keyboards then all this debating looks stupid because the real reason for almost every missing feature is "Apple didn't want to yet".

Almost every Apple product is amazing, but not one of them is "perfect" because of those one or two missing features that they'll bring in a year later. That's how Apple ensures we keep wanting the next model.

 

[iWantThat]

Just thinking and calculating...

A MacBook Air 11" Retina display will signify a resolution of 2260 X 1200 against the current 1366 X 768. The question is : will we notice the difference in a 11" screen with a 95in eyes distance from it ?

What? No one sits 8 feet away from their 11" MBA. Like previous posters have said, a retina display will come to the MBA in due time, just not now due to battery constraints.

 

[Monkeyat]

What? No one sits 8 feet away from their 11" MBA. Like previous posters have said, a retina display will come to the MBA in due time, just not now due to battery constraints.

Sorry, I'm from a metric system country

I've meant to say 15in distance !

 

[Andras5soul]

No..

Apple decided to exclude MBA and MBP13 from the Retina upgrade for multiple reasons.

1. Those product lines are doing incredibly well, in no need for a Retina upgrade to keep selling. 15 Inch sales were in decline and needed saving (somewhat).
2. By not including the Retina display in smaller models, the profit margin on these laptops increased, proving more valuable to the company.
3. The 15 inch retina displays were a huge investment for Apple, and were too expensive to be included in smaller models with smaller price tags and smaller profit margins. They were included in the 15 incher because the price tag is high enough to justify an increase in initial costs.
3.5. As Retina Display production prices decrease, they can be included in lower priced items.
4. Currently, the Retina-Battery trade off is too high in MBA's. The MBP15 was able to keep 7-hours because moving parts were removed and larger/better batteries fill the space... The MBA battery capacity, as of now, is maxed out.
5. Apple is looking to phase out optical drives, but they can't just take something out without adding something in. Apple wants you to believe Retina Display > Optical Drive.
6. Graphics/Processing power isn't there yet in the MBA's (due to space, mostly battery constraints), so a Retina Display couldn't even be powered properly by the machine.

 

[glen e]

No..

Apple decided to exclude MBA and MBP13 from the Retina upgrade for multiple reasons.

1. Those product lines are doing incredibly well, in no need for a Retina upgrade to keep selling. 15 Inch sales were in decline and needed saving (somewhat).
2. By not including the Retina display in smaller models, the profit margin on these laptops increased, proving more valuable to the company.
3. The 15 inch retina displays were a huge investment for Apple, and were too expensive to be included in smaller models with smaller price tags and smaller profit margins. They were included in the 15 incher because the price tag is high enough to justify an increase in initial costs.
3.5. As Retina Display production prices decrease, they can be included in lower priced items.
4. Currently, the Retina-Battery trade off is too high in MBA's. The MBP15 was able to keep 7-hours because moving parts were removed and larger/better batteries fill the space... The MBA battery capacity, as of now, is maxed out.
5. Apple is looking to phase out optical drives, but they can't just take something out without adding something in. Apple wants you to believe Retina Display > Optical Drive.

Wow! A post devoid of conspiricy and negativity, packed with knowledge and common sense.....please no more of these, it's not seen here too often....LOL

 

[Confuzzzed]

As the for battery, check out iFixit for the tear down of the new RMBP. The new battery is massive compared to the old shape MBP. It's 95 Wh vs last year's 77.5 Wh.

The iPad also had to increase in size for the new battery and they added quad core graphics to make it all work smoothly.

oh, I agree on the battery. Wouldn't want the air to be either heavier or lose battery life. But then again, I am perfectly happy with the screens it sports already so probably not the target audience

 

[shurcooL]

Retina on MBA will follow. But after the price goes down.

This.

It just needs more time, for prices to fall, power requirements to go down, performance needed for high-resolution screen, etc.

 

[Beanoir]

No..

Apple decided to exclude MBA and MBP13 from the Retina upgrade for multiple reasons.

1. Those product lines are doing incredibly well, in no need for a Retina upgrade to keep selling. 15 Inch sales were in decline and needed saving (somewhat).
2. By not including the Retina display in smaller models, the profit margin on these laptops increased, proving more valuable to the company.
3. The 15 inch retina displays were a huge investment for Apple, and were too expensive to be included in smaller models with smaller price tags and smaller profit margins. They were included in the 15 incher because the price tag is high enough to justify an increase in initial costs.
3.5. As Retina Display production prices decrease, they can be included in lower priced items.
4. Currently, the Retina-Battery trade off is too high in MBA's. The MBP15 was able to keep 7-hours because moving parts were removed and larger/better batteries fill the space... The MBA battery capacity, as of now, is maxed out.
5. Apple is looking to phase out optical drives, but they can't just take something out without adding something in. Apple wants you to believe Retina Display > Optical Drive.
6. Graphics/Processing power isn't there yet in the MBA's (due to space, mostly battery constraints), so a Retina Display couldn't even be powered properly by the machine.

When you say "Apple decided" did you actually mean to say "I think"....?

 

[ericcumbee]

1) as we have seen with the ipad, Retina uses more juice, by having more pixels, and needing more GPU power to handle it which in turn uses more power, and of course you pay for it again having to remove the heat. if you look at the teardown of the 2011 MBA 90% of the internal capacity is already battery. you really dont have much room to add more battery and possibly cramming in a discrete gpu as well, guessing that the HD4000 is not quite up to apples requirements for retina.

2) Apple has positioned the Air for two markets, the thin and light crowd, and the economy crowd. putting all the guts needed for retina would compromise both of those market appeals.

 

[hbtd]

I did find it strange that with the 2012 MBAs the stated battery life is still the same 5/7 hours even with the new more efficient CPUs. It appears that the battery is a big constraint to a "better" display.