Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Is the 13" rMBP worth the extra $325 over the same 13" uMBP?
- Thread starter dmk1974
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yes. Especially with the great Best Buy Open Box deals that sometimes pop up at the moment.
I went to BB with intentions to purchase an Air with the special they have for $200 off. I ended up walking out with an open box retina 13" for $1350 after an additional 10% discount on the already reduced open box price. Of course I got to inspect everything since it was open already and there were no scratches or anything.
Even if Haswell provides significant improvements here in a few months, I think I may be able to sell my Gen1 retina and probably get close to what I paid for and enjoy the latest and greatest in the meantime. Since I use VMs, I figure the 8GB ram should be beneficial. I'll have to watch my SSd capacity closely however due to only being 128GB vs 256GB if I had gotten the Air instead.
The RAM bump was huge. This was DDR2 to DDR3; Apple hadn't done a RAM transition since the switch to Intel as PowerPC machines were original DDR and the early Intel days were DDR2. The introduction of the Mini DisplayPort was also big. The use of integrated graphics that shared the die with the system chipset (and didn't suck anywhere nearly as bad as the contemporary Intel ones) was huge, and the ability to, on the 15" and 17" MacBook Pros, switch between integrated graphics and discrete graphics for battery usage optimization was seriously huge. The Core 2 Duos used were the same, and USB 2.0 was still the same, as was gigabit ethernet, but those are about the only things that stayed the same.
As for practicality, I wouldn't go so far to say that removing the latch mechanism from the Late 2008 models to the Early 2009/Mid 2009 models killed all that much practicality. They replaced a 4-hour battery that would only last 300 charge cycles with a 7-hour battery that would last 1000 cycles, eliminating any practical need to remove and replace your battery. Though if you wanted to, they make off-the-shelf screwdrivers to remove those fairly easily and they charge just as much for the battery replacement itself as they used to for the battery on those 2008 and earlier machines. Otherwise, if you want access to literally any component in your machine, just pop off the bottom cover and you have access to it. This is unlike any computer (by Apple or otherwise) before or since that I can recall. Certainly the Asus Zenbooks have that, but they are straight copying much of the MacBook Air design which uses this design philosophy (albeit with the annoying pentalobe screws in 2010 and later ones). Still though, simply from a construction standpoint, this is a vast difference from the prior model.
The retina is still a unibody laptop; the chassis is engineered exactly the same. The new fan design is definitely different; the battery is larger and impressive, though it is unarguably a downgrade in terms of ease of replacement and recycling from the prior design. The thermals are no different in this model than its c/uMBP equivalent (non-retina MacBook Pro with Kepler and Ivy Bridge); this has everything to do with Ivy Bridge and Kepler on the parts of Intel and NVIDIA, respectively, and nothing at all to do with Apple's redesign. Screen aside, the only thing DRASTICALLY changed from the previous design was the type of SATA drive used, the logic board layout (which includes the loss of SATA ports, and FireWire/Ethernet) and the battery.
16GB of soldered RAM only bothers me from the standpoint of the substantially increased cost of repair in the event of a RAM failure (cost of an entire logic board versus cost of a $35 RAM module); otherwise, I know that 16GB is the maximum amount of RAM supported by the chipset anyway, so lack of upgradability isn't the problem there. On models that ship with 8GB of soldered RAM, however, this becomes a substantially more annoying inconvenience. If you want your machine to last you a good year or two longer, you are forced to pay $200 to Apple and at the time of purchase for something that would otherwise cost half that, if not less from Crucial. This is both expensive and inconvenient.
.
The non-retina unibody design is and was plenty portable. It's not like I'm carrying a 27" iMac to Starbucks every time I use my 15" non-retina. Is it as light as the retina? No, but frankly, if thinness means that I lack the ability to upgrade my RAM or remove my battery from my laptop's chassis, then it's really not worth it on such a high-end machine. On low-end machines like the MacBook Air, I feel as though such trade-offs are worth it, but on machines that cost me a good $2000-3500, it's not good.
Yeah, a second mSATA port would've been really nice. Though, I'd imagine that the loss of a battery cell would mean a sizeable hit on the battery life.
No, you're right, lack of on-board Ethernet isn't that bad in light of Thunderbolt adapters. Same with lack of FireWire. I'd prefer not to have to pay $30 per adapter, but given how infrequently I use them, it's not that bad a price. I guess my gripe here is that I use Thunderbolt itself even more infrequently, so it's kind of a bad trade-off...at least for now. I'd like to eventually have more of a regular use for Thunderbolt down the road because it is nifty and it is the fastest port connection out there right now.
I haven't used ODD for a year when I bought mine, thats when I replaced it with a 2nd drive caddy.I don't miss it at all.
A lot of people are this lucky. Unfortunatlely for me, I find myself driving a vehicle that lacks an auxiliary input as well as a cassette deck, so I have actually had to burn *gasp* audio CDs. Similarly, I still have software that isn't online nor is distributed on USB drives. Also, on occasion, I burn DVDs of files for people because mass-quantities of thumb drives are still not as cheap as dual-layer DVDs are and really, I don't need the discs I burn returned. With a thumb drive, I would need it back at some point.
This is very true. And really, as someone who is supportive of the adoption of this technology, I appreciate that people need to buy these two machines before a third is ever released and so forth. Frankly, I'd have given serious consideration to buying a retina MacBook Pro if the rest of the computer retained the design of the non-retina unibodies. I bought the first Intel iMac with a Core Duo at a time Apple sold both it and the iSight iMac G5 models side-by-side. Lack of native software was annoying for the first year or so, but my patience eventually paid off and that machine last me a good while longer than the iSight iMac G5 would've. Still, in this case, given that it's not an OS or hardware architecture transition, I don't feel like I need to hop on the bandwaggon just yet. Though I'm grateful that you guys, who aren't as dependent on software that will never be updated for (and thusly looks horrible on) the retina display, are taking the plunge now for me so that when I buy my next MacBook Pro and it comes with retina, there will be much more out there supporting and taking advantage of it.
I buy a new Mac once every five to six years. Sooner if I need to be able to run something well that I can't on current hardware, longer if I don't.
I've played with many a retina MacBook Pro already. They're nice. That screen is nice. But given both cost and lack of things that will stave off my inevitable upgrade and replacement of my current machine, it really wasn't sensible for me to get one.
When the Haswell retinas come out and the cMBP is discontinued, I'll be envious of the newer and faster Intel hardware, but only until I remember that the Conroe (Core Duo) CPU that I had in my Early 2006 20" iMac was eventually replaced by Merom (Core 2 Duo) and that I had known of Merom's eventual existence when I bought that iMac. Just as I knew about Haswell when the Sandy Bridge MacBook Pros were coming out, just as I'm already aware of Broadwell and Skylake right now. Intel having a roadmap kind of reassures me that there's always something new around the corner and that the current tech is never the definitive stopping point, but just another stop along the road.
But barring Haswell, there's nothing about the discontinuation of the non-retina design that will make me that much more envious of those with the retina design. I'm not a consumer whore like that. I only replace my hardware with newer hardware when there's a practical reason to as I'm not filthy rich. Also, on top of that, I have legitimate reasons to not favor the retina design as much as the non-retina design. Eventually, when it's naturally time to replace what I have now, and that's my only option, I'll welcome it, but only because I don't have any other option for MacBook Pros.
You really don't know how this stuff works. That's not how models of Apple machines eventually lose their value. It goes by time, not by specs, and not by design changeovers. My non-retina MacBook Pro will devalue at the same rate that anyone with a Mid (15") or Late (13") 2012 retina MacBook Pro will. They cost more money than my machine did, so yes, they will be worth more than mine was. But that doesn't mean that my machine will devalue substantially faster than those machines will just because mine has an older body style. That's not how the used Mac market works.
Meanwhile the early rMBP adopters have been enjoying retina for a year and will be content with their purchase for years to come, getting the full enjoyment out of the product's design life cycle. Sure, it will get faster with time, but we will walk by the Apple Store all year and beyond without wondering what could be.
Yeah, I hate to break it to you, but even though most people are superficial, very few are THAT superficial. I'm never going to wonder what my life would be like with a retina instead.
I've been on the cutting edge of Apple transitions before, I know what the first year is like. One or two apps that work amazingly with the new tech and a whole lot that don't and a ton of others that never will (that eventually fade away into obscurity).
In this case, I'm not losing out on tech that's any newer than what my machine has. I have the latest Intel technology in my machine right now. I have the same Ivy Bridge CPUs and the same Kepler graphics that exist in the 15" retina right now. Even better than that, I don't have to deal with the fact that Apple and Intel/NVIDIA haven't worked enough on drivers and optimizing OS X to properly utilize the power in the Intel HD 4000 and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M so that the framerate issues currently plaguing the retina machines aren't solved. I don't have to worry about or be inconvenienced by any of that.
Just because a design came out of Jony Ive's ass at a newer date than any other design doesn't really mean anything. Hate to break it to you.
Last edited:
The only thing I don't like about the 13" rMBP is that you can't upgrade the ram to 16gb. That's a pretty anti consumer move on Apple's part.
This is true, but that is partially due to the fact that the technology was available at the time. If Apple waited one year with retina for haswell and cut-off the cMBP at the same time, the same thing could be said.
I'll admit that - replacing anything (although there isn't all that much to replace) on the MacBook cMBP is extremely easy.
That hasn't changed all that much on the retina, set aside the wretched pentalobe screws.
From recycling point of few there isn't a problem - they can remove it from the aluminium. From replacement point of view, it's a pain in the ass. I really hope this battery lasts me as long as my computer does. I had to replace 3 batteries in 4 years on my 1st gen unibody.
The thermals are optimised - the fans are different (quieter), they don't need to run as fast as on the cMBP; the air vents are on the side, and the opening between the hinge and the screen is bigger, the cooling pipes are designed completely differently, and the fans run asymmetrically (speed-wise). It's not as drastic, but they did NEED to retool the whole body ground up in order to make it half as thin and still make it run more efficiently and still pack as much power.
Okay, touché. Nothing to add here.
Honestly, I appreciate a little the fact that I can pack the same amount of power into 35% less weight. Will I do have some 2nd thoughts about the future of design, given the success of the retina, i can't help it - i really enjoy mine, and I really really like to tamper with machines since my first PC.
Not really, it has 6 cells, the l/r one are the smallest, shouldn't be more than 15% by removing one.
Ah. I pretty much shifted to online sharing when I need mass quantities, but I see your point. Still, do you really need an internal drive for it? If anything, I hold it against apple that they didn't remove the ODD in the cMBP and replace it with a better GPU or a second CPU.
I can understand that, funny or not, my biggest dilemma was supporting the market statistics in favour of un-upgradeable MacBook. Didn't feel right.
But in the end, thunderbolt ports + separate HDMI were more important than the retina screen - believe it or not. I wish Apple made a fair choice and removed dying standards from the uMBP(like FW800 and ODD) and replaced it with something better. Extra TB port, HDMI port on the other side (Where no optical drive would be) and perhaps 2xmSATA connectors where the optical drive is. So much space in that computer.
We're not getting DDR4 with Haswell, so I fail to see how this could be the case. I mean, if Apple solely put out retina Ivy Bridge MacBook Pros and discontinued the entire line of non-retina Sandy Bridge MacBook Pros without updating them as they did the 13" and 15" models, then sure, it would be seen as a much larger jump. But otherwise, the design change isn't all THAT different compared to pre-unibody and unibody.
Really, I think the lack of replacement argument on the retinas centers on the screws, the RAM, and the battery...barring those features, it's just as easy to get at the parts of a retina MacBook Pro as it is a non-retina MacBook Pro; but again, that's because they're both based on a unibody design.
The first gen Unibody batteries, if I recall correctly, were kind of spotty in general though. As I recall, that got smoothed out fairly soon after they made the batteries removable, but non-hot-swap-able.
I'll grant that, but moving from pre-unibody to unibody literally was a complete rethinking to the chassis. I'm not saying that they didn't have to retool the design of the retina machine; obviously they did. But fundamentally, it still uses a unibody chassis. Even though they changed how my RAM would be connected to the rest of the logic board and the fans and battery, they're still all residing in the machine in the same fashion as they were before, albeit, in a different shape and form.
I have a feeling that mSATA will become more popularized and more standardized to the point where we'll be upgrading the storage in our retina MacBook Pros in the same way that we do our non-retina MacBook Pros. My only hope there is that we get to a point where we don't need to use the TRIM Enabler app to get the OS to use TRIM with third-party SSDs.
Otherwise, I'm cool with the extra weight given the extra functionality with the base machine. Though, down the road, I'll likely be fine lacking the things that I explicitly bought the non-retina model for today.
That's just over an hour of battery life that you'd be removing. Not sure how well that'd go over.
Online sharing costs tons of money and is reliant on a fairly fast internet connection. Otherwise, I'd be doing that too.
As for needing an internal optical drive, I find that desktop Macs without optical drives isn't at all inconvenient as even with an iMac, I'll always have things hooked up to the back of it. An external optical drive (that is, in most cases, better than what Apple would've given me) is probably preferred at that point. But for a laptop, where I want to have as little wires as possible and given that, with my computer, some weeks I'm a basic computer user, but other weeks, I'm a gamer, and other weeks, I'm a video editor, and other weeks, I'm an IT guy, it's nice to just have everything I could possibly need right there and at the ready. I don't use my optical drive often, but when I do, I'm happy it's there and I don't need to go hunting for it or worry about having enough USB ports to plug it in.
I read a great article that someone wrote about that topic and now I can't find it. But it basically said that consumers have always had a say in the direction Apple headed in and that by supporting the MacBook Air, customers have essentially showed support for the retina MacBook Pro and that based on sales numbers, we'll basically be casting our opinions out there based on what we buy. Though, I believe that in this case, there's a bit of Apple arrogance in there; they don't care about those of us that like upgradable machines, hence the Pentalobes, and they don't care about those of us that prefer standard SATA drives and optical drives because in their mind, that stuff's stupid. I think the assumption that users won't want to upgrade their RAM is dumb, but hey, I'm sure that their sales numbers of retina MacBook Pros and 2012 MacBook Airs will accurately show how many customers opted for 8GB of RAM on the Airs and 16GB of RAM on the retina Pros.
The optical drive didn't take up as much space as people like to think it did. Sure, it's plenty long and wide, but it's extremely thin and weighs extremely little on its own. There's no reason why it had to be the impeding factor for any of the advancements that you would've liked to see there.
As far as FireWire 800, I feel like Apple really messed up that entire techology roll-out. It never caught on the way FireWire 400 did; plus Apple obviously didn't care when FireWire 1066 came out as we've never seen it in a Mac. The fact that FireWire 800 didn't come to any model of iMac until it appeared on 24" iMacs in 2006 and then in 20" iMacs in 2007, as well as never once appearing in an iBook, 12" PowerBook G4, MacBook or a MacBook Air, or never appearing in a Mac mini until 2009, especially when it came out all the way back in 2003, is mind-mindbogglingly stupid. Apple rolling out Thunderbolt to every Mac (hopefully including the Mac Pro at some point) is a good way to ensure that never happens again.
HDMI is something I can't argue with. It's great on the Mac mini models and the fact that it's now on the retina MacBook Pros is even better. It's a solid benefit. Ironically, I myself connect my MacBook Pro up to a TV so seldom that I'm fine with a Mini DP to HDMI adapter. But there you go.
Since I generally agree with other things, i'll bite into this:
in fact here is a retina write-up i did: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1520194/
Unfortunately here is my frustration: I'm dying to find a TB enclosure for an external SSD drive, because USB3.0 is too laggy. There is NONE. Now I have two thunderbolt ports with nothing to connect to them... Great huh? One would think you'd find plenty ultra-thin 7mm TB enclosures for SSD, but no...
I miss my 2nd disk bay so much it's giving me a bit of buyers remorse
I've read that article.
in fact here is a retina write-up i did: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1520194/
I don't know. The original unibody chassis could be made into a screaming portable. They could slap the retina screen on, improve the termals and use ODD space to make something crazy with it, still in a laptop thats thinner than most of the market.
FW was quite a fiasco yeah. It could have become defacto standard for external disks and thumb drives, because it does offer significantly better performance. I believe one of the problems was also that it needs a controller while USB relies on CPU.
Yes, but you can use a HDMI>DVI/Displayport adapter to keep the TB ports free.
Unfortunately here is my frustration: I'm dying to find a TB enclosure for an external SSD drive, because USB3.0 is too laggy. There is NONE. Now I have two thunderbolt ports with nothing to connect to them... Great huh? One would think you'd find plenty ultra-thin 7mm TB enclosures for SSD, but no...
I miss my 2nd disk bay so much it's giving me a bit of buyers remorse
Have you considered the Seagate GoFlex Thunderbolt adapter? The connector is standard SATA III.
Yeah, but i want a portable drive. That thing is expensive and clunky, I'd rather go with buffalo 500gb.
It seems like most people don't care or know about the image retention problem with the LG screens...Is this true?
I've sold many used Macs and I can tell you that most people are quite aware of Apple's design cycles. While I'm sure there are people out there looking for the best specs for the price regardless of design model, the vast majority of buyers I've dealt with want the newest Apple machine they can get for less than retail. This is precisely why so many people sell their Apple products just before a rumored design refresh because they know they can get so much more for it.
Either way, even though you think you're getting your money's worth by keeping a machine 5-6 years versus upgrading every 2-3 like many of us, the loss in resale value puts a huge dent into that strategy. Yea, you probably save a little bit of money (not much if you do the math), but you miss out on the thrill of something new every few years. There is a value in that for many people.
----------
One of the Mac's huge selling points is it's stunning design. If all I cared out was price to performance ratio, I'd go down to Best Buy and pick up some Dell Inspiron hunk of plastic and be done with it.
But I like to own the latest and greatest design Apple has to offer. Not to show it off (my Mac stays in my house most of the time anyway) but just for my own personal satisfaction of seeing the computer I own front and center on Apple's site. Just like someone who appreciates driving a brand new model car, I appreciate using a brand new model Mac.
Last edited:
It is worth it if you get a 'good' screen, meaning a screen YOU love to look at. Reading text was a pleasure on my 13" rMBP, but the overall sepia/yellowness of everything on the screen caused me to return it. I played with the calibration settings for a week and a half, before reluctantly doing so. It is otherwise a perfect machine for me. I'm sure there are 13" rMBPs that have cool toned or neutral screens, but I'm not into jumping on the exchange merry-go-round. At these prices, that type of variation between screens of the same computer diminishes Apple, and I'm a fan. I wish they would take that oft touted 'extra cash' and create their own screen manufacturing division, instead of relying on other companies/competitors to make them.
Last edited:
wrong quote mateI've sold many used Macs and I can tell you that most people are quite aware of Apple's design cycles. While I'm sure there are people out there looking for the best specs for the price regardless of design model, the vast majority of buyers I've dealt with want the newest Apple machine they can get for less than retail. This is precisely why so many people sell their Apple products just before a rumored design refresh because they know they can get so much more for it.
Either way, even though you think you're getting your money's worth by keeping a machine 5-6 years versus upgrading every 2-3 like many of us, the loss in resale value puts a huge dent into that strategy. Yea, you probably save a little bit of money (not much if you do the math), but you miss out on the thrill of something new every few years. There is a value in that for many people.
----------
One of the Mac's huge selling points is it's stunning design. If all I cared out was price to performance ratio, I'd go down to Best Buy and pick up some Dell Inspiron hunk of plastic and be done with it.
But I like to own the latest and greatest design Apple has to offer. Not to show it off (my Mac stays in my house most of the time anyway) but just for my own personal satisfaction of seeing the computer I own front and center on Apple's site. Just like someone who appreciates driving a brand new model car, I appreciate using a brand new model Mac.
Sorry, just edited it. There was so much going on in the post I was trying to quote, I messed up who I was responding to. My apologies.
We must be on different eBays, then. Because the Mac mini (Late 2009) isn't going for all that much less than the Mac mini (Mid 2010), just as the MacBook Pro (15" Late 2008) doesn't go for all that much more than the MacBook Pro (15" Early 2008). Prices for the computer I paid for, which is a current Mid 2012 15" MacBook Pro that is as top of the line as you can get while not stuffing it with Apple-supplied SSDs will be cheaper than the prices for the top of the line 15" retina, but that's because it is a more expensive computer. The two machines will devalue at the same rate. The reason why the retina will always be worth more is because it was worth more initially...otherwise, they're both MacBook Pros and they devalue at the same rate. No one pays more because it has a newer design. They pay more because it is one gen newer, whether the difference between gens involves a design change or not. My non-retina MacBook Pro is a Mid 2012 model. It has Ivy Bridge and Kepler. A 15" retina of current is also a Mid 2012 model. It also has Ivy Bridge and Kepler (the same parts might I add). It will be worth more for the same reasons why they are worth more brand new, SSDs and retina. But make no mistake, the devaluing is identical and constant.
Well, no *****. That's the whole point of buying used.
Um, no. Many people sell their Apple products before ANY refresh because they, like you, have this obsession over having the latest and greatest. But that happens every rev and not just when there's a new design. People, like Ploki, who bought the first rev of the now-previous design are now due up for an upgrade, so yeah, it makes sense to, given that, buy the newer design. Though in this case, given an option, people like Ploki, can and have weighed the differences between the two available designs and have found that the compromises of the newer one are no big deal and that, for them, it makes sense to go that route. Personally, I have a ton older software that will never get updates that I still use and that will look terrible on that display; I also prefer internal ports without adapters, and I do use an optical drive at enough odd intervals that I will want the drive built-in. More than that, while I believe that the retina machine is a stunning machine in its own right; the non-retina is also a stunning machine in its own right (and in my opinion, maybe even a little bit moreso). Do I care about my machine being featured on Apple's homepage? No. No sensible person does. I spent $3000 on this machine; if it were a $1000 machine, maybe I'd care about looks. Unfortunately for me, money doesn't grow on trees, so I can't afford to throw that $3000 into something like a retina with only 512GB of internal storage and a screen that will make most of my apps look like crap. Ooo, it's NEW...and ooo, it's thinner! Big freakin' deal; I can carry a 15" non-retina MacBook Pro; it's no biggie...hell, it's nothing compared to the 17" PowerBook G4 that I was once given.
First off, I've already done your math. If you sell a brand new MacBook Pro at every next refresh and you buy something new, then, over the same 5-6 year period, you save $1000. That assumes that in all six of the eBay/Craigslist listings you have nothing go south. I've had enough of those to know that those aren't odds you can count on. Also, unless I always have the money to have both computers at the same time (so, $3000x2), which I don't and never do, I'm without a computer for a fair amount of time each time. Plus, I have to deal with the quirks of the migration assistant in going from computer to computer to computer. Not fun. Though it's either that or re-set up everything anew, a task I enjoy doing every 5-6 years, but not every 2-3 and certainly not every year.
Secondly, given the above, if I were to transition to an every 2-3 year cycle (and thusly spend half as much on my machine as I did this past calendar year), then I'd probably be spending somewhere between $1400 and $1800. That allows me to either get a really decent 13" non-retina MacBook Pro (which is moot because it's likely to be discontinued in favor of the MacBook Air and the 13" retina Pro), a semi-decent 13" Air, a base-model 13" retina, or a base model 15" non-retina (which will also likely be getting the axe soon). Well, shucks, I want discrete video, so that eliminates everything but the base model 15" non-retina. And yes, I could've gone with that model. But, I do not want to pay that much money and only walk away with 512MB of VRAM, especially in 2012 (or 2013, for that matter). But, if I conceded that, I probably would be a little more comfortable discarding that machine in three years. Plus, at that point, I'd buy my own 8GB kit and my own hard drive upgrade, and I'd probably be fine for 2-3 years, having spent proportionately less money. Such an option would not have been available with a retina machine.
I unbox new machines for people at work every day. The thrill of doing so really only lasts so long. I haven't gotten over it when it comes to the new iMacs, but for MacBook Pros and MacBook Airs, I'm over it. When it comes to my own machines, it is thrilling, but really, buying a new machine scratches the itch caused by the deficiencies of my former machine. If my former machine has no defficiencies, then why am I spending money I don't have on a new one? To feel cool? To feel proud that my Mac is still on the Apple site? I'm sorry, but that logic is dumb.
Indeed, that's why I bought the Mac that I did. The design was both stunning and practical. They got the first part down with this retina redesign. Not so much the second...
No, price to performance doesn't mean buying the cheapest piece of crap there is. It means paying for what you get. Sure, Dell Inspirons are a good way to do that, but you can pay higher amounts of money and get more of a machine out of it. Again, kudos to you if you can afford to spend money on superficial things like fancy cars and needless features like retina, but when I save up money for a computer, I've gone a few weeks eating Top Ramen in order to do so; I need to ensure that I'm getting the most out of what I buy, and frankly, there's no evidence to suggest that I won't do that with the machine I bought. Sure, it won't be worth as much as a retina will in two years, but it isn't worth as much as some retina models today!
But I like to own the latest and greatest design Apple has to offer. Not to show it off (my Mac stays in my house most of the time anyway) but just for my own personal satisfaction of seeing the computer I own front and center on Apple's site. Just like someone who appreciates driving a brand new model car, I appreciate using a brand new model Mac.
Good for you. But that is entirely superficial and not even remotely practical. Also, some of us have this thing called a life, that we like to have away from our computers. And in that thing called a life, very few people look at me and think I'm even remotely cool for owning the latest and greatest. They'll congratulate me when it's my time to upgrade to the latest and greatest, but if I told those same people a year or two later that I, once again, got the latest and greatest, I'm sure most of them would look at me and say "didn't you just do that a year or two ago?" And they'd be completely right. No one needs superficiality like the latest exterior design or a new computer when their pre-existing one is less than three years old.
Last edited:
I think the first rMBP was a proof-of-concept device not intended for large volume sales, much like the MacBook Air prior to October 2010. It's clearly the future, but it certainly isn't for everyone yet. People like me who bought the MacBook Air in February 2008 are the same kind of people who are buying the rMBP. I remember the Macworld boards were abuzz with people saying how the Air was a "failure" and that people who liked the light weight were too "lazy" or "weak" to carry around a 4.5lb MacBook that sported all those ports and an optical drive for less money. Now the Air is a mainstream device and the most successful "Ultrabook" even if it doesn't carry that name.
If the 2012 rMBP isn't for you, that's fine. Chances are pretty good that the 2014 or 2015 rMBP will be, though.
Oh for sure. Inevitably, I'll adopt some form of this current design, if not its immediate successor. I guess that bit depends on how long Apple uses this new body style as I plan on keeping my current machine in use for a good while. But today, while I have a choice, I'm going to more prefer the older style as it has benefits that are now gone from the newer one.
You said WAY WAY more in your last post for me to respond to everything, so I'll just say go with whatever works for you and makes you happy. Hey, I'm an Apple guy, and the cMBP's design has stood the test of time and still looks really nice in 2013 despite coming out in 2008.
I have no need to swap out drives, and 8GB of RAM is plenty for 95% of what I do with my machine. Plus, the retina screen is gorgeous which is why I bought it.
I got $1,150 for my 2 1/2 year old 27" iMac on Craigslist and received a corporate discount on the rMBP which came to $1,597. I'm not made of money either but I could afford that difference.
As far as having a life outside of Macs, believe me I do. Work, marriage, dog, NFL football, you name it. Just trying to have a conversation. You're the one responding to these posts at 2am so go figure. (edit: seems like you are on the West Coast so I take that back).
Enjoy your cMBP for as long as you decide to keep it.
to me even thou the screen is nice i have seen one the retina's are not worth the price and no one and i mean no one needs the retina at that size resolution in a laptop but its my opinion so i am sure people will disagree with me
Man, if only I could be responding to forum posts at 2am...stupid work, making me go to sleep at respectable hours.
Anyway, the point, I was trying to drive home is that design differences don't amount much in sales unless there's something technological under the hood driving the difference. In this case, we have retina displays and SSDs, two pricey commodities. Given that, they are worth proportionately more than the models that don't have this but are otherwise technologically identical. My point is that these two machines will not lose over time at any different of a rate. If they did, I would've hopped on board as soon as the 2008-2013 unibody design started and taken advantage of cheaper Early 2008 model MacBook Pros, but alas, that never happened as they lost their value at the same rate as their Late 2008 unibody successors did.
Otherwise, sick discounts! When did you get the iMac? And which model was it? Also, which retina did you end up getting? I'm curious to know your savings with these suckers.
The 27" iMac I sold (which I loved) was the 2.8 quad i5 mid-2010 model. It was a great Mac, but I kind of missed the portability of a MacBook for around the house and occasional trip (not an iPad guy. It's limited and too redundant with my iPhone right next to me).
The 13" rMBP was announced right around the time the Seagate HDD recall for the iMac was put in place so the stars kind of aligned to move on to the next Mac. Could have held out for more on the sale of the iMac, but because I don't deal with ebay (and shipping of a 30lb behemoth) I was limited to the sketchy back and forth of Craigslist. Ended up selling to a college student and didn't beat her up over the extra $100-150 I could have held out for.
Anyway. My company has a decent little corporate Apple discount even though we have crappy Dells everywhere, and the base 13" rMBP was $102 off at $1,597. We had an even better deal on the 15" at $2,027, but didn't want to spend that much on a notebook that had way more power than I need.
Now I'm just waiting for an updated Thunderbolt Display to pair with the rMBP and I'll have the best of both worlds...screen size of the iMac with the portability of the MBP. And yes, the TB Display has to be new before I buy it. The current model is over 2 years old and its widely expected the refresh will adopt some of the benefits if the new 27" iMac (reduced glare, adhered screen to glass, USB 3, etc).
The TB display is only a year old. The design is two years old, as it is identical to the design of the 27" non-Thunderbolt LED display. I hear ya though, the improvements made to the 27" iMac solely in terms of the display have to come to the Thunderbolt display at this point. Obviously, MagSafe with a supplied MagSafe 2 adapter will simply be replaced by MagSafe 2 (leaving owners of original MagSafe and Thunderbolt equipped users out in the cold in terms of charging their stuff [oh well, standard Apple for ya]) plug, USB 2.0 ports will be replaced by USB 3.0, and the FireWire port will be dropped in favor of a second Thunderbolt port; the Gigabit Ethernet port will remain. It's inevitable and, at this point, it's almost a no-brainer. My only hope is that they continue to offer the "current" non-Thunderbolt 27" display as there are tons of people stuck with machines without Thunderbolt but still in need of such a display (such as every Mac Pro owner).