Is the 13" rMBP worth the extra $325 over the same 13" uMBP?

[alohamade]

No, it's not worth it. You have one of the only two machines that have retina on them, and thusly, very little in the way of apps and web content will be optimized for your spiffy screen. The thinness is silly; if you need a thin computer, get a MacBook Air; The MagSafe 2 adapter brings about the worst of both generations of original MagSafe adapters, yay! As for HDMI, I can't knock that, it's a legitimate plus, but is it worth a glued battery, soldered on RAM, and proprietary SSDs? Not a chance!

I agree with the statement above, especially those last three things (Yebubbleman, I guess you and I are the biggest proponents of the cMBP on these forums ). I was in the exact same situation, and decided to go with the 13'' cMBP/uMBP over the 13'' rMBP. Reason being is that I love the user upgradeability, and for most cases, if something breaks, you can fix it yourself. I'm sure the Retina is a wonderful machine but there is definitely something to be said about the ability to change things. Hope you enjoy your choice!

 

[duervo]

By purchasing the base 13" cMBP now, you are essentially buying a computer that came out in October 2008 sans a better Intel chip. Go retina and be happy.

Now, now ... I wouldn't go that far.

I see your point, but for those that are possibly going to take you literally ...It's more than just a "better Intel chip" (and it's a much, much better Intel chip at that.)

SATA3 & faster RAM are also much better than their 2008 counterparts. The CPU, RAM, and storage controller / drive in any system are the three components that will have the largest impact on its overall performance.

 

[alohamade]

Now, now ... I wouldn't go that far.

I see your point, but for those that are possibly going to take you literally ...It's more than just a "better Intel chip" (and it's a much, much better Intel chip at that.)

SATA3 & faster RAM are also much better than their 2008 counterparts. The CPU, RAM, and storage controller / drive in any system are the three components that will have the largest impact on its overall performance.

To add to your point, if it means anything, my higher end 13'' cMBP with 16GB of RAM and a Samsung 840 Pro SSD scores 8721 on Geekbench, which is 1000+ higher than the higher end 13'' rMBP. I can't front when it comes to screen resolution because the 13'' cMBP screen feels dated, but hey, it accounts for something.

Modern parts do make a difference, and yes, Ivy Bridge is far beyond what we had in 2008 (can't remember the exact code name).

 

[dmk1974]

To add to your point, if it means anything, my higher end 13'' cMBP with 16GB of RAM and a Samsung 840 Pro SSD scores 8721 on Geekbench, which is 1000+ higher than the higher end 13'' rMBP. I can't front when it comes to screen resolution because the 13'' cMBP screen feels dated, but hey, it accounts for something.

Modern parts do make a difference, and yes, Ivy Bridge is far beyond what we had in 2008 (can't remember the exact code name).

Does the SSD used influence the Geekbench score?

Which would be better (or perhaps it doesn't matter):

• 128 GB Samsung 830 SSD
• 256 GB Crucial M4 SSD

 

[Poisonivy326]

Only you can decide whether it's worth it. For me it wasn't because I use my computer mainly to write up word documents and powerpoint files. I don't use it to watch movies (have a nice flatscreen TV for that), or to read books or even do much web-surfing (have a retina ipad for that). Plus when I bought the machine it was my first week of being on a payroll after being semi-unemployed for several months. I had lived with a broken Sony VAIO for months because I couldn't afford to spend money on a non-existent paycheck. So I wanted to treat myself but couldn't afford a rmbp, so I purchased the base cmbp and upgraded to a 500 GB SSD and 16 GB of RAM.

With that being said, I could see if I played a lot of video games, downloaded a lot on netflix, did a lot of photo editing, or wrote HUGE documents instead of lesson plans and worksheets (I'm a teacher), the nice retina screen would be worth it. It's all what you plan to do with a computer.

I'd also say that if I had all the spare change in the world, I'd definitely go for the 15" rmbp, instead of the 13". It just seems like a much better bargain in terms of, well, everything.

 

[KPOM]

Does the SSD used influence the Geekbench score?

Which would be better (or perhaps it doesn't matter):

• 128 GB Samsung 830 SSD
• 256 GB Crucial M4 SSD

I think Geekbench is processor-intensive, so it shouldn't make a difference. As for SSD speeds, both the ones you mentioned are pretty good. AnandTech would be a good source for comparisons. I think the Samsung 830 is slightly faster and holds up better to intensive writing.

 

[duervo]

AFAIK, GeekBench scores are not affected by the storage in the system. I believe it's a purely CPU and RAM benchmark.

http://support.primatelabs.com/kb/geekbench/interpreting-geekbench-scores

 

[Ploki]

To add to your point, if it means anything, my higher end 13'' cMBP with 16GB of RAM and a Samsung 840 Pro SSD scores 8721 on Geekbench, which is 1000+ higher than the higher end 13'' rMBP. I can't front when it comes to screen resolution because the 13'' cMBP screen feels dated, but hey, it accounts for something.

Modern parts do make a difference, and yes, Ivy Bridge is far beyond what we had in 2008 (can't remember the exact code name).

dunno. I get 10 points difference running 1440*900 normal or HiDPI, and 20 points less when using discrete GPU over integrated. Although +/- 30 would account for error imo.

something else might be causing rMBP scoring lower.

SSD shouldn't affect geekbench as it only benches CPU and RAM, and I just squared out resolution, i think your RAM bandwidth is better because you have more of it - only reason I can think of.

 

[PatriotInvasion]

Absolutely, for the screwdriver-shy it becomes a much better value.

However, it's worth mentioning that upgrading the non-Retina isn't the James bond secret job some people think. In fact, instructions on replacing RAM and upgrading the hard drive are included in the manual for the standard MBP. It's very much supported by Apple and super, super easy. All it takes is a screwdriver.

Adding a second drive to the Optibay or replacing the battery requires special screwdrivers and is mildly more complicated, but Apple has made replacing RAM and replacing the hard drive a piece of cake. Takes seconds once you remove the bottom panel (which is just a bunch of screws and it lifts right off)

In fact my MBP has been the easiest to upgrade laptop I've ever owned!

Perhaps this forum isn't the best place for my point, but I know that when my wife, sister, Dad, and Mom buy a laptop, they buy what it has stock and will never touch a screw on it.

I think the vast majority are the same way, and thus putting in aftermarket RAM and especially SSD's just won't happen. In this case, the price difference between the 13" rMBP and an identically configured cMBP on Apple's site is $200. A price many are willing to pay for a MUCH better screen and a thinner, lighter design.

----------

I agree with the statement above, especially those last three things (Yebubbleman, I guess you and I are the biggest proponents of the cMBP on these forums ). I was in the exact same situation, and decided to go with the 13'' cMBP/uMBP over the 13'' rMBP. Reason being is that I love the user upgradeability, and for most cases, if something breaks, you can fix it yourself. I'm sure the Retina is a wonderful machine but there is definitely something to be said about the ability to change things. Hope you enjoy your choice!

I appreciate some people's preference for user upgradability, but it's obvious that Apple has no interest in keeping this going long-term, so you'll have to get on the bandwagon at some point if you still want a Mac. The cMBP won't last forever.

 

[el-John-o]

Perhaps this forum isn't the best place for my point, but I know that when my wife, sister, Dad, and Mom buy a laptop, they buy what it has stock and will never touch a screw on it.

I think the vast majority are the same way, and thus putting in aftermarket RAM and especially SSD's just won't happen. In this case, the price difference between the 13" rMBP and an identically configured cMBP on Apple's site is $200. A price many are willing to pay for a MUCH better screen and a thinner, lighter design.

----------



I appreciate some people's preference for user upgradability, but it's obvious that Apple has no interest in keeping this going long-term, so you'll have to get on the bandwagon at some point if you still want a Mac. The cMBP won't last forever.

On point 1;

Actually, I agree, however I also have a hard time seeing those same people spend that much for a computer. People who aren't comfortable with something as simple as a RAM and Hard Drive upgrade. People like my grandmother, my wife, my mom.. people who wouldn't upgrade their own machines, probably wouldn't spend $1700+ on a laptop. I really see them being more in the Air/non-Retina category.

Of course I could be totally wrong, but I think the number of consumers who would both want to upgrade their machines beyond Apples stock configurations, AND be willing to spend close to $2000 for a 13" laptop, would probably also be a market capable (and more importantly, willing, as it's not technical or difficult) to do the work themselves.

I could be totally wrong, but that's my perception. There are some, but I don't think 'many'

On point two, I also agree.

Over the years, less and less has become upgradable. When is the last time you upgraded your math co-processor? Your FPU card? How about your 2D accelerator card? What about swapping out your hard disk controller with a new one with the latest SATA standard came out?

Most of these items are either obsolete or integrated. It was only a matter of time before RAM became another integrated component and the CPU became non-user upgradable on a number of machines. That's fine, because upgrades aren't happening as fast either!

Back in the early 90's my computers had 7 or 8 or 10 add-on cards. Now, my most powerful machine in my home has one, and it's a graphics card. Every other function is soldered right on to the motherboard. It has everything that old computer had, but it's all built on to the motherboard.

So I'm okay with it in a couple of years. Especially as we learn to make things faster, lighter, and smaller by eliminating things that are made purely to make them interchangeable. Similar to how Apple removed all of the hardware necessary to make a quick-changeable battery, knowing that few notebook users swap batteries anymore, and batteries (the Li-Po type Apple uses anyway) tend to live the life of most users laptops anyway, and fewer and fewer are replacing them, it made sense to ditch the hardware to make a semi-permanent battery that was larger in capacity whilst taking up less space. Speaking of old computer, my first laptop was a 25MHz laptop with a black and white screen. It came with two batteries, a big two battery charger, a car charger, and a wall charger. It ALSO had an internal battery that would last for about 10 minutes, you could use that to swap the external battery while you were working. Things have changed a lot since then, and despite that being a must have 'I'll never buy a laptop without this feature' feature then, I'm perfectly okay with my build in battery now. Why? It lasts 7 hours (longer than those two batteries combined), it'll last for years, and even when it fails it can be replaced relatively easily, or have Apple do it for roughly the same cost as just buying the battery! (Just the inconvenience of having to wait for it).

I'm just waiting on mSATA 'blades' to drop in price honestly. 8GB of RAM is sufficient, the only reason I have 16 gigs is because it was like 20 bucks more than 8 gigs, so I said 'hey why not'. When the Retina display drops in price a bit, mSATA blades become inexpensive, I'll be happy with the value of a Retina. Even as a chronic upgrader. Truth is, today's technology moves a little slower than it did years ago. I mean we get new chips every year, but not like we used to. In 6 months you could get a CPU that DOUBLED in speed, EVERY 6 months. Being able to upgrade was a NECESSITY otherwise you'd be forced to upgrade your entire computer every couple of years, just to run the latest OS (which also came out more rapidly). It's just not the case anymore. 3-4 years after owning a retina MBP, I'd want to move to the newest I/O and have a faster CPU anyway, so I'd be ready to upgrade the whole machine.

Again, the biggest kick for me was the storage space. 128 gigs even enough, even 256 isn't enough, and compounded with the premium price on the Retina, 512 was just out of reach. Yet 512 in a standard 2.5" drive is much more reasonable. What Apple does with the MBPr is not proprietary, it's a standard mSATA blade. It's just, there aren't many people making them and they are incredibly expensive. With 'ultrabooks' becoming mainstream, I suspect that'll change in a few years.

 

[maxosx]

It's not as simple as yes or no, (poll choices).

It all depends on how you plan to use it.

My 15" MBP retina is a very nice machine, but personally I believe the retina is overrated. Yes, it's nice, but it's not that stunning if you've worked with high resolution IPS displays. It's just a matter of personal preferences.

 

[el-John-o]

It's not as simple as yes or no, (poll choices).

It all depends on how you plan to use it.

My 15" MBP retina is a very nice machine, but personally I believe the retina is overrated. Yes, it's nice, but it's not that stunning if you've worked with high resolution IPS displays. It's just a matter of personal preferences.

I kind of had the same impression. It's hands down a great notebook display, but for me it doesn't provide much utility. It's a no go for photo editing, for the same reason ANY laptop display is a no go. It's difficult to calibrate a display that you move! You'd have to re-calibrate it each time you sit down. Changes in lighting, viewing angle (though that doesn't matter as much with an IPS), etc. So people needing an IPS display will mostly likely still stick to an external IPS. As do I. I may review or crop photos on my notebook display 'on the go', transfer files from the SD/CF cards, or even do work in photoshop such as stitching photos together for a Panorama. Though I will readily admit a non-retina 13" is not ideal for any of those, but it DOES work, and I prefer the footprint of the 13" on the go, for the following reason; when I get home it gets attached to a 27" Apple Cinema Display. 27", calibrated frequently, 2560x1440 (usable non-scaled so I have tons of screen real estate), etc. That's where ANY color correction happens, and ultimately where MOST photo editing happens (though I will do some minor stuff if I'm bored).

The resolution is great, for sure. But ultimately it doesn't provide that much over just a sharp image. For me, playing with them in the store, I really didn't find the lower scaling options to be all that usable, so I was reverting back to the same screen real estate I already have on my non-retina.

Of course, everyone is different! I'm sure it's a dream for video, web design, and just all around use. And if you've got the money, go for it! Plenty of people argue that there is 'no' use for a Mac at all, because they are 'overpriced'. Simply because things like build quality, battery life, support, OS stability, etc., don't rank as high on those individuals priority list as price, CPU-RAM-Hard Drive numbers, and, whatever other advantage a Windows laptop might have (selection of ports maybe?)

It's all subjective.

 

[Yebubbleman]

sad old mbp owner?

Not even remotely sad. I'm actually very happy my upgrade timed perfectly with the release of the Mid 2012 models. Also, they're no older than the 15" retina given that both were released at the same time and with the same Intel processors and chipsets as well as the same NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M (and/or Intel HD 4000) GPUs. The only thing "old" is the body design, which really, is far better than the retina design. The qualification exams that ACMTs have to take to become qualified to service the retina MacBook Pros only further illustrate just how needlessly ridiculous some of the design changes were under the hood. So, no, I'm not a "sad old mbp owner", I'm a "happy current gen non-retina mbp owner".

all my apps are updated besides "caffeine" and they look AWESOME. i also love the highter screen resolution, more space to work with and yes the thinner size does matter.

i have both and i would never go back to a "regular" mbp

I have no trouble lifting five pounds, my 1680x1050 resolution is plenty and it gives me the same real estate that my 20" Early 2006 iMac did, and I'm clinging to apps that will never be updated (like Final Cut Studio 3, QuickTime Pro 7, WarCraft III, Disk Inventory X, among others) as well as apps that will likely see a very slow transition to retina if ever (StarCraft II, Steam, games that are not Civ 5 and Diablo III, Adobe CS5 apps, etc.). So, no thanks. Glad you're happy with it though. The more people that are happy with retina, the more developers and content creators (as well as other computer manufacturers) will speed along this transition to retina displays so it becomes standard and not a novelty, because that's obviously where display technology (and software supporting it) is to be headed.

13" doesn't have glued battery.

I also have both my old classic and retina at the moment, 15"... So happy I got the retina.

Two of the battery cells are removable. The rest of them are not. The ones that are not, are glued. The removable battery cells are not listed as order-able parts in GSX and they are not intended to be removed or replaced.

First of all, when you configure a 13" cMBP with 8GB of RAM and a 128GB SSD, it comes out to $1,499. That is just $200 less than the $1,699 price tag of the rMBP (to all of those do-it-yourself RAM and SSD upgraders: know that the masses have little interest in tearing open their $1,000+ machine to add aftermarket parts).

Good for the masses; sometimes people don't have money to pre-upgrade their computer and they'd rather not have to spend so much money on upgrades. Opening up a $1000+ machine so that you can spend $60 instead of $200 doesn't sound to me like a bad thing. Or do you feel that I'm wrong in that?

Also, bear in mind that as far as cMBP vs. rMBP debates go, the 15" rMBP when configured identically to a 15" cMBP is $200 cheaper. The fact that the opposite is the case with the 13" model is stupid. You cannot refute that.

So for an extra $200 (when you compare apples to apples), you get 4x the resolution in a thinner, lighter, and more modern design. That was worth it to me for sure. After staring at the retina display, go look at the cMBP and be prepared to cringe at that non-IPS pixelated screen. It's like holding and iPhone 3G up against an iPhone 4 or 5.

Would you like some water with that Kool-Aid?

By purchasing the base 13" cMBP now, you are essentially buying a computer that came out in October 2008 sans a better Intel chip. Go retina and be happy.

That is the most ignorant thing I've heard anyone on these forums say in a long time, and mind you, you have some stiff competition in that arena!

Let's see what's different about the Mid 2012 (non-retina, unibody) 15" MacBook Pro from the Late 2008 (non-retina, unibody) 15" MacBook Pro:

-USB 3.0

-Thunderbolt

-Built-in battery with 7-hours of battery-life (versus the 3-4 of the Late 2008 and earlier batteries)

-QUAD-CORE PROCESSORS

-60% faster RAM

-WAY faster graphics

-SATA III/6.0Gbps

-2012 Intel Chipset technology (compared to the GeForce 9400M's functionality as a system chipset), though maybe that's cheating given that I've labelled off a ton of its benefits already

Now, let's see what's different between the (Mid 2012) MacBook Pro versus the (15" Mid 2012/13" Late 2012) retina MacBook Pro:

-mSATA connector instead of SATA connector (still the same version of SATA otherwise)

-One additional Thunderbolt port

-HDMI

-Soldered on RAM (same RAM type and speed)

-glued on battery (offering the same operational battery life of 7 hours)

-Retina display (about the only groundbreaking new feature setting the two models apart)

-MagSafe 2 (same wattage)

-Removal of ports (which really doesn't speak to technological advancement as it does to needless minimalism)


The differences cited in the first list are far more drastic than the differences cited in the second list unless you're only paying attention to the superficial details, but you wouldn't be so superficial as to do that now, would you?

Choose 13" rMBP over 13" cMBP, I would. But much better investment I think, 15" rMBP is. Yes, hmmm.

If we're talking about good investments, then a computer you can't upgrade is a worse investment than one that you can, especially if their technical specs (display quality aside) are identical. But if you're talking bang for buck, then the cMBP wins in the 13" arena and the rMBP wins in the 15" arena, assuming you're only considering models with Apple-supplied SSDs in them.

I agree with the statement above, especially those last three things (Yebubbleman, I guess you and I are the biggest proponents of the cMBP on these forums ). I was in the exact same situation, and decided to go with the 13'' cMBP/uMBP over the 13'' rMBP. Reason being is that I love the user upgradeability, and for most cases, if something breaks, you can fix it yourself. I'm sure the Retina is a wonderful machine but there is definitely something to be said about the ability to change things. Hope you enjoy your choice!

Heh...yeah, we do seem to be a fan of practicality. A feature that appears to be lost on the majority of Mac users these days. Oh well. Soon the non-retina unibody MacBook Pros will be gone and this new design will be the only option. I'll eventually be comfortable with it. But I'm not now and I don't think I will be until I'm naturally ready to replace my Mid 2012 non-retina 15" MacBook Pro in five years.

 

[Freyqq]

Since it can only support 1 DIMM of ram, it has worse performance. I would actually get the macbook air at 13" instead.

 

[PatriotInvasion]

Again, the biggest kick for me was the storage space. 128 gigs even enough, even 256 isn't enough, and compounded with the premium price on the Retina, 512 was just out of reach. Yet 512 in a standard 2.5" drive is much more reasonable. What Apple does with the MBPr is not proprietary, it's a standard mSATA blade. It's just, there aren't many people making them and they are incredibly expensive. With 'ultrabooks' becoming mainstream, I suspect that'll change in a few years.

I agree that 128GB and 256GB SSD's aren't enough space for many. But for me, 512GB isn't even enough (I record a lot of HD sports games using EyeTV). That made it an easy decision to go with the base 13" rMBP with the 128GB SSD. It holds everything I use daily with ~50GB to spare, and I keep all of my larger files on an external 1TB LaCie Thunderbolt drive as well as backed up to my 1TB Time Capsule for wireless access to everything I need if need be.

Until 1TB SSD's are affordable, 128, 256, and 512 mean nothing to me because I'll need external storage either way. So the 128 made sense.

 

[PatriotInvasion]

That is the most ignorant thing I've heard anyone on these forums say in a long time, and mind you, you have some stiff competition in that arena!

Let's see what's different about the Mid 2012 (non-retina, unibody) 15" MacBook Pro from the Late 2008 (non-retina, unibody) 15" MacBook Pro:

-USB 3.0
-Thunderbolt
-Built-in battery with 7-hours of battery-life (versus the 3-4 of the Late 2008 and earlier batteries)
-QUAD-CORE PROCESSORS
-60% faster RAM
-WAY faster graphics
-SATA III/6.0Gbps
-2012 Intel Chipset technology (compared to the GeForce 9400M's functionality as a system chipset), though maybe that's cheating given that I've labelled off a ton of its benefits already

Now, let's see what's different between the (Mid 2012) MacBook Pro versus the (15" Mid 2012/13" Late 2012) retina MacBook Pro:

-mSATA connector instead of SATA connector (still the same version of SATA otherwise)
-One additional Thunderbolt port
-HDMI
-Soldered on RAM (same RAM type and speed)
-glued on battery (offering the same operational battery life of 7 hours)
-Retina display (about the only groundbreaking new feature setting the two models apart)
-MagSafe 2 (same wattage)
-Removal of ports (which really doesn't speak to technological advancement as it does to needless minimalism)

The differences cited in the first list are far more drastic than the differences cited in the second list unless you're only paying attention to the superficial details, but you wouldn't be so superficial as to do that now, would you?

Yes, there have been speed and I/O upgrades over the years and the cMBP is no slouch in that department. My point was that if you're into the latest/greatest design from Apple (like many Apple fanatics are), the cMBP is over 4 years old already - an eternity in modern electronics. The weight, thickness, and most off all, the screen technology in a world where screens are all the rage are quite dated. And, if user-upgrades aren't important to you, shelling out a little bit more for an SSD-equipped Retina-screened MBP makes more sense to me if you want to not feel behind the times in a year or so when the cMBP is discontinued.

 

[Ploki]

That is the most ignorant thing I've heard anyone on these forums say in a long time, and mind you, you have some stiff competition in that arena!

Let's see what's different about the Mid 2012 (non-retina, unibody) 15" MacBook Pro from the Late 2008 (non-retina, unibody) 15" MacBook Pro:

-USB 3.0

-Thunderbolt

-Built-in battery with 7-hours of battery-life (versus the 3-4 of the Late 2008 and earlier batteries)

-QUAD-CORE PROCESSORS

-60% faster RAM

-WAY faster graphics

-SATA III/6.0Gbps

-2012 Intel Chipset technology (compared to the GeForce 9400M's functionality as a system chipset), though maybe that's cheating given that I've labelled off a ton of its benefits already

Now, let's see what's different between the (Mid 2012) MacBook Pro versus the (15" Mid 2012/13" Late 2012) retina MacBook Pro:

-mSATA connector instead of SATA connector (still the same version of SATA otherwise)

-One additional Thunderbolt port

-HDMI

-Soldered on RAM (same RAM type and speed)

-glued on battery (offering the same operational battery life of 7 hours)

-Retina display (about the only groundbreaking new feature setting the two models apart)

-MagSafe 2 (same wattage)

-Removal of ports (which really doesn't speak to technological advancement as it does to needless minimalism)

Ethernet on laptop is unnecessary for 95% of users. It's like bitching why it doesn't have VGA (still more people connect their laptops to cheapo projectors more often than on ethernet).
2TB ports + discrete video port is a lot more.
cMBP + external display and you are left with no TB ports to use for high speed expandability.

Firewire800 is going to die, its basically dead. I use it all the time (bought the adapter along with the laptop) and even I prefer than I can transform it into something else...

 

[KPOM]

Since it can only support 1 DIMM of ram, it has worse performance. I would actually get the macbook air at 13" instead.

There are 2 4GB DIMMs in the rMBP. If you look it up in About This Mac it shows it as such.

 

[1member1]

My brother has the regular mbp and i have the rmbp.
I just can't work with his screen anymore rmbp way better off

 

[alohamade]

I appreciate some people's preference for user upgradability, but it's obvious that Apple has no interest in keeping this going long-term, so you'll have to get on the bandwagon at some point if you still want a Mac. The cMBP won't last forever.

You're right about Apple not keeping it long term, I could not agree more. The regular consumer doesn't care about the ability to swap their parts. But, for now, I'm tremendously happy. My cMBP runs really well, but at the same time, I'm sure five years from now when I upgrade again, MacBooks as a whole will have some ridiculously high battery life and all the storage one could want.

Heh...yeah, we do seem to be a fan of practicality. A feature that appears to be lost on the majority of Mac users these days. Oh well. Soon the non-retina unibody MacBook Pros will be gone and this new design will be the only option. I'll eventually be comfortable with it. But I'm not now and I don't think I will be until I'm naturally ready to replace my Mid 2012 non-retina 15" MacBook Pro in five years.

Right? For me, I'm happy I see the practicality in being able to swap out things at ease I definitely wouldn't want glued to a logic board. Yet, like the poster said above, it'll be a fate one day we inevitably have to go through. I know for certain my next computer will be a MacBook Air, but that's 4-5 years from now. For now, I take pride in the fact I have an extremely fast, extremely serviceable machine...I'll live with the screen.

 

[el-John-o]

You're right about Apple not keeping it long term, I could not agree more. The regular consumer doesn't care about the ability to swap their parts. But, for now, I'm tremendously happy. My cMBP runs really well, but at the same time, I'm sure five years from now when I upgrade again, MacBooks as a whole will have some ridiculously high battery life and all the storage one could want.




Right? For me, I'm happy I see the practicality in being able to swap out things at ease I definitely wouldn't want glued to a logic board. Yet, like the poster said above, it'll be a fate one day we inevitably have to go through. I know for certain my next computer will be a MacBook Air, but that's 4-5 years from now. For now, I take pride in the fact I have an extremely fast, extremely serviceable machine...I'll live with the screen.

I'm okay with a lack of upgradability as, as I've said before, it's a 30 year long trend towards integrating parts into the logic board or CPU. We've just finally hit the part where the RAM is part of that as well. No big deal, constant upgrades aren't a necessity anymore.

The only problem I have, right now, is the glued battery. Now, technically, the non retina wasn't user replaceable either but all it took was a screwdriver. I use my battery ALOT (it's part of why I paid a lot of money for a MacBook Pro, I wanted the solid 7 hour battery!). So, in a couple years I may not be ready for an upgrade, but my battery may be dead. A hundred bucks and a screwdriver and I'm back in business. I'm perfectly okay with that.

However, not being replaceable AT ALL is a bit troubling. UNLESS Apple is going to do it, in-house, for a reasonable price. I mean they'll swap out the non retina for like $120, which means it's around 20 bucks more (or the same price) as buying the battery, it's a good deal. They'll do it in the store, and you'll be good to go. What I wouldn't be thrilled about, is jacking the price to replace it way up, and having to ship it off to have it replaced!

 

[Alex889]

I thought about just buying the 13in retina but the ssd is only 128gb, and its still not user upgradable.

I dont really think its worth it unless you want that crazy screen resolution.

 

[Ploki]

I thought about just buying the 13in retina but the ssd is only 128gb, and its still not user upgradable.

I dont really think its worth it unless you want that crazy screen resolution.

OWC offers 480GB for 570$, still heaps cheaper than Apples offering

 

[alohamade]

I'm okay with a lack of upgradability as, as I've said before, it's a 30 year long trend towards integrating parts into the logic board or CPU. We've just finally hit the part where the RAM is part of that as well. No big deal, constant upgrades aren't a necessity anymore.

The only problem I have, right now, is the glued battery. Now, technically, the non retina wasn't user replaceable either but all it took was a screwdriver. I use my battery ALOT (it's part of why I paid a lot of money for a MacBook Pro, I wanted the solid 7 hour battery!). So, in a couple years I may not be ready for an upgrade, but my battery may be dead. A hundred bucks and a screwdriver and I'm back in business. I'm perfectly okay with that.

However, not being replaceable AT ALL is a bit troubling. UNLESS Apple is going to do it, in-house, for a reasonable price. I mean they'll swap out the non retina for like $120, which means it's around 20 bucks more (or the same price) as buying the battery, it's a good deal. They'll do it in the store, and you'll be good to go. What I wouldn't be thrilled about, is jacking the price to replace it way up, and having to ship it off to have it replaced!

Yeah, I agree with all you said there! I think we've kinda hit a wall with where computer upgradeability is, now. We've been coming toward this point in integration for a while, and thus, we've finally hit it.

As for the issue about the battery, yes, it's a little troubling. The MacBook Pro's battery is best in class, and having those cells glued in the Retina models whereas other models just took a simple fix is a little...troubling. It puts the ball in Apple's court a little too much, but hey, we're in the minority here.

In perspective, I guess that's how it all is. Most MacBook users won't even want to go near their precious, +$1000 computers because they feel like they'll break something. I work in IT, and I know the sentiment all too much. I guess we'll just all have to get used to it, but in the mean time...who says we can't enjoy our current, classic, serviceable machines, right?

 

[Alex889]

OWC offers 480GB for 570$, still heaps cheaper than Apples offering

Oh yeah, I don't need that much storage though. I have a Crucial M4 256gb in mine right now. I really appreciate this machine over my old t61p .