More Claims of 13-Inch Retina MacBook Pro Coming at Next Week's Media Event

[mgipe]

Are you saying you could possibly tell the difference between 2560x1600 and 2880x1800 on a 13" screen?

Seriously?

It's not an issue of being able to see the different resolution pixels. It's a matter of fitting more application window information on the screen. The pixel doubled retina display at 2560x1600 shows exactly the same stuff on the screen as the non-retina display.

For example take Microsoft Word for Mac (one of the worst UIs around). So much space is taken with junk that there is little room left to show the contents of your document. Increasing the retina display from 2560x1600 to 2880x1800 gives you roughly 17% more document workspace on the screen, a substantially noticeable improvement.

Even so, if forced to choose between a retina IPS screen 800 pixels high or a non-retina TFT screen 900 pixels high, I would choose the retina for the color and the easiness on the eyes.

 

[Yebubbleman]

Hummm.... yes and no on part of that. The video card can't push the display higher then it's capabilities.

If I plug in a 27inch I can get 2560x1440 (non-retina) that is the native resolution.

If I plug in a non-apple 17inch display, the maximum resolution I could get is what ever that display's native resolution is.

But yes, you are also correct that the video card would also have to support that resolution as well.

For these retina laptops, Apple is also using display that supports a higher resolution. If I understand it correctly, then they half the resolution which yields 2x the pixel density. I am sure that is is a little more complicated, but that is the simple version.

Video cards output a certain number of pixels. If you do the math, the number of pixels outputted by the 15" retina display is substantially less than the maximum on either video card on the 15" rMBP. The card's ability to drive a specific resolution is based on how many pixels it can output. What you're talking about is much more a software/driver function than anything else, which, as I said, is where Apple/Intel/NVIDIA really need to do more work. The hardware is plenty capable as it stands. The software, on the other hand, leaves much to be desired.

 

[mmcxiiad]

It's not an issue of being able to see the different resolution pixels. It's a matter of fitting more application window information on the screen. The pixel doubled retina display at 2560x1600 shows exactly the same stuff on the screen as the non-retina display.

For example take Microsoft Word for Mac (one of the worst UIs around). So much space is taken with junk that there is little room left to show the contents of your document. Increasing the retina display from 2560x1600 to 2880x1800 gives you roughly 17% more document workspace on the screen.

That said, given the choice of a retina IPS screen 800 pixels high or a non-retina TFT screen 900 pixels high, I would choose the retina for the color and the easiness on the eyes.

True, but you really can't view the highest resolution. For example, while the 15in Retinia has a 2880x1440 resolution with 220 pixel density, they maximum usable resolution that you can choose from is only 1920x1200.

So on the 13 I am guessing that the maximum usable resolution will be 1680x1050.

----------

Video cards output a certain number of pixels. If you do the math, the number of pixels outputted by the 15" retina display is substantially less than the maximum on either video card on the 15" rMBP. The card's ability to drive a specific resolution is based on how many pixels it can output. What you're talking about is much more a software/driver function than anything else, which, as I said, is where Apple/Intel/NVIDIA really need to do more work. The hardware is plenty capable as it stands. The software, on the other hand, leaves much to be desired.

I don't mean it from a driver point of view. In fact, if I understand you correctly, I think we are both saying the same thing but about different hardware.

The video card is made with certain capabilities. Apple is using the video card to do some resolution independence to switch the resolution of the display with pixel density set by the video card. This is necessary to enable the retina display laptops.

I on the other hand am saying that the display itself must support the maximum resolution/pixel density. As I am sure we are all aware of, no one else is using laptop displays with this capability. This is also necessary to make the retina display laptop.

Without all three - the video card that could push the resolution, display capable of running it, and the software to do the scaling, this isn't possible. Which if I am re-reading your previous post correctly you were pointing out the card and software. I should have done a better job stating that apple is using special displays that are also necessary to make this possible.

 

[jasomill]

who would buy the simple macbook pro when they can choose between air and retina pro, depending on their budget?

IT departments who have already budgeted and planned a phased MacBook Pro rollout? People who value performance and stability over resolution and weight? Like them or not, the Air and Retina MacBook Pro are inarguably different products, not "plug-compatible" replacements like the Ivy Bridge updates.

Incidentally, as of today, I wouldn't trade my 17-inch, non-glossy Sandy Bridge MacBook Pro (upgraded to 16GB RAM and 6Gbps SSD) for both a 15-inch Retina MacBook Pro and an Ivy Bridge Air, and not only because I already own one of the latter. I am hoping for a 17-inch Retina option by the time my AppleCare contract lapses in mid-2014, however.

 

[Markiie]

I'm sure it's possible. Like putting a 2.0L 4-banger in a Corvette can make it move forward a bit.

I know a few 3.0L that can. : )

 

[SpyderBite]

ok now get the imac confirmed

Ok. Now take the iMac demands to the iMac forum and leave the iPad, MBP, iPhone and iPod threads alone. We don't care and apple isn't listening.

 

[Bampei]

This all makes sense. This will be the "little" event.

1. Smaller iPad
2. Smaller Retina MBP
3. Updated Mac Mini

Call it a teeny event!

 

[mgipe]

True, but you really can't view the highest resolution. For example, while the 15in Retinia has a 2880x1440 resolution with 220 pixel density, they maximum usable resolution that you can choose from is only 1920x1200.

So on the 13 I am guessing that the maximum usable resolution will be 1680x1050.

----------



.

But you are talking only about using the display in non-retina mode. If this is what you intend to do, why bother spending the extra money for the retina display?

My example assumes that you have set up the graphics for its intended use, as a retina display, with 2560x1600 actual pixels, displaying window elements at the usual 1280x800 size. With a retina display, an icon, for example, is displayed at the same physical size as a non-retina display, but with four times the number of pixels, giving a smoother, higher resolution image.

 

[mmcxiiad]

But you are talking only about using the display in non-retina mode. If this is what you intend to do, why bother spending the extra money for the retina display?

My example assumes that you have set up the graphics for its intended use, as a retina display, with 2560x1600 actual pixels, displaying window elements at the usual 1280x800 size. With a retina display, an icon, for example, is displayed at the same physical size as a non-retina display, but with four times the number of pixels, giving a smoother, higher resolution image.

Oh, I agree. I was just making a point. I think it is silly that the Air, which we all know will be less expensive, will have a higher native display (vs retina at optimal resolution.

 

[mgipe]

Oh, I agree. I was just making a point. I think it is silly that the Air, which we all know will be less expensive, will have a higher native display (vs retina at optimal resolution.

I agree. Very true.

 

[KnightWRX]

Oh, I agree. I was just making a point. I think it is silly that the Air, which we all know will be less expensive, will have a higher native display (vs retina at optimal resolution.

If you want to make it easier to understand what you mean, use correct terminology. In Quartz parlance, what you're referring to are points. The MBP has a 1280x800 point display, which on a retina screen would be rendered using 2560x1600 pixels. What you find hard to swallow is that the MBA has a higher point density, 1440x900 points, so that it can show more things on screen than the 13" MBP.

 

[mgipe]

pricing

My prediction for 13" rMBP pricing:

Base model $2099
2.9 GHz i7 dual core
8GB RAM
512 GB SDD
HD 4000 graphics

Optional configurations
750 GB SDD +$900
16 GB RAM +200

One or both of these options may not be available.

 

[iSayuSay]

Don't knock it to much, it's actually pretty decent for integrated graphics!
It runs gta SA pretty well on max settings!

If you can change "SA" to "4" in the same sentence. Then yes, it's the truth

San Andreas runs on any GPU nowadays. Pretty much like original Nintendo games.

 

[hamkor04]

Imaaaaaac!!!

yes!! where is it??? we need that bl**dy iMac

 

[mmcxiiad]

But you are talking only about using the display in non-retina mode. If this is what you intend to do, why bother spending the extra money for the retina display?

My example assumes that you have set up the graphics for its intended use, as a retina display, with 2560x1600 actual pixels, displaying window elements at the usual 1280x800 size. With a retina display, an icon, for example, is displayed at the same physical size as a non-retina display, but with four times the number of pixels, giving a smoother, higher resolution image.

Been thinking about this for a while. If the native resolution is 2560x1600 and you run it at a scaled resolution of 1680x1050 it should still have a higher pixel density then a standard display.

So there may be benefits of the retina 13 even if you are running at higher then the native resolution.

 

[mgipe]

If you want to make it easier to understand what you mean, use correct terminology. In Quartz parlance, what you're referring to are points. The MBP has a 1280x800 point display, which on a retina screen would be rendered using 2560x1600 pixels. What you find hard to swallow is that the MBA has a higher point density, 1440x900 points, so that it can show more things on screen than the 13" MBP.

Nicely stated. Thanks!

 

[Oracle1729]

1) Why do people always take a rumor of product X to mean that Apple is not also working on product Y?

Because Apple has demonstrated time and again that despite having $100 billion the bank they can't handle working on two projects at the same time.

 

[Stetrain]

Because Apple has demonstrated time and again that despite having $100 billion the bank they can't handle working on two projects at the same time.

Strange. If the rumors are true they will have released the following in less than a 6 month timespan:

1. OSX Mountain Lion
2. 15" Retina Macbook Pro
3. Ivy Bridge Macbook Pro (13" and 15")
4. Ivy Bridge Macbook Air
5. iPhone 5
6. iPod Nano
7. iPod touch
8. iOS 6
9. iPad Mini *
10. 13" Retina Macbook Pro *
11. Ivy Bridge iMac *
12. Ivy Bridge Mac Mini *

* Rumored

Such slackers they are. Of course no matter how long that list is if the product you want them to release isn't on it they're managing things poorly.

 

[playdrv4me]

My prediction for 13" rMBP pricing:

Base model $2099
2.9 GHz i7 dual core
8GB RAM
512 GB SDD
HD 4000 graphics

Optional configurations
750 GB SDD +$900
16 GB RAM +200

One or both of these options may not be available.

That is highly unlikely given the relative price-point of the 15" rMBP to a similarly configured 15" non-Retina model. Also that price would be very unattractive to shoppers who are already looking at the 15" rMBP.

I think I fall in line with pretty much everyone else who has assumed 1499. 1799 is another possibility, but I paid 1899 for my base 15" rMBP at Best Buy, so I still don't think that's enough of a difference between the two when potential retailer discounts are taken into consideration. 1499 is an attractive price-point low enough to grab attention during the fierce Holiday shopping season, but still high enough to have plenty of profit in the machine. People who want a 13 inch MBA will likely still buy one for other reasons. Not to mention the fact that it's no secret many retailers already have special arrangements with Apple to sell the entry level 13 inch for 999.00 every so often (and this will probably become the non-Retina's new standard price-point before it reaches its demise).

I also agree that the general performance problems with the 15" rMBP have more to do with software optimization of the HiDPI support, than anything really related to hardware. If you're waiting around for Haswell because you think it's going to magically solve those issues, you're in for a long wait, and a rude awakening. Just because Haswell is Intel's 2013 architecture, doesn't mean Apple will release Haswell hardware on any different schedule than it normally does. Thus, Summer to Fall of 2013 is when the MBPs are likely to see Haswell updates. It is more likely that Apple will have revised their HiDPI support by then and all of the Retinized machines will be operating more smoothly. This is their (and the industry's) first "at-bat" with this new paradigm of ultra high-res machines. They're still cracking the intricacies necessary to make these displays operate as smoothly and clearly as the age-old pixel densities many of us have grown so tired of.

I'm definitely looking forward to this announcement. I have a great deal of respect for those of you who are attached at the hip to your old 17 inch MBPs (and by the way, that size is almost assuredly DEAD), because even the 15 inch rMBP is simply too gigantic to comfortably go everywhere with. Especially for someone like me who did *everything* on my 11 inch MBA. It was my only machine and while I love the high density display on this monster, the 13 inch will much more beautifully split the difference between the two. At 1499 the 15 inch gets returned, at 1799 or higher I'll have to really think about what I'd be losing in terms of hardware.

 

[metaxeno]

so if the event is the 23rd, when will the products be available for sale? a few days later like the iphone 5?

 

[Oracle1729]

Strange. If the rumors are true they will have released the following in less than a 6 month timespan:

Truly amazing how you can twist facts to suit your needs. So after a a major drought on every product except the laptops, they give the rMBP with a new OS, 3 months later the new iPhone. And minor tweaks to the other laptops and some of the iPhone features made it into the itouch.

So the way I see it, in a year, they've given us the rMBP/ML and the iPhone5/iOS6. 2 Products in a year. Wow.

 

[Stetrain]

Truly amazing how you can twist facts to suit your needs. So after a a major drought on every product except the laptops, they give the rMBP with a new OS, 3 months later the new iPhone. And minor tweaks to the other laptops and some of the iPhone features made it into the itouch.

So the way I see it, in a year, they've given us the rMBP/ML and the iPhone5/iOS6. 2 Products in a year. Wow.

Truly amazing how you get to define what a product is and isn't.

You expect them to release multiple completely new product lines every year?

You don't consider the redesigned iPod touch to be a product update? Or the iPod nano that's an even bigger redesign? If you're expanding this discussion to all of 2012 then don't forget the 3rd gen iPad and AppleTV.

Also now the October 23rd event is confirmed, with multiple sources reporting an iPad Mini, 13" Retina Macbook Pro, updated iMac, and updated Mac Mini.

If those reports turn out to be true, then by my count that leaves the iPod shuffle, iPod Classic, and Mac Pro as the only major product lines to not be updated in 2012. Like I said, to some people it doesn't matter how long the list of updates is as long as their favorite device isn't on it.

What more are you expecting? A complete break-away redesign of every product line every year with a couple of completely new product lines thrown in to boot?

 

[Oracle1729]

You expect them to release multiple completely new product lines every year?

Not new lines, new products within existing lines. And not every year, the every year cycle is more apple stupidity. When there's new tech that makes it worth it. Ivy Bridge/USB3 alone make every apple desktop very obsolete.

You don't consider the redesigned iPod touch to be a product update? Or the iPod nano that's an even bigger redesign? If you're expanding this discussion to all of 2012 then don't forget the 3rd gen iPad and AppleTV.

Really adding 1080p to appleTV...wow major innovation, must have spent 100,000 developer hours on that one.

Making an iPhone 5 without the cellular module, must have been a least a million dev hours.

How come every other hardware vendor had an Ivy Bridge desktop within a week of the chips being out? How come every other cell phone maker in the world releases more than one handset per year? And not on pathetic annual cycles. When new tech is available the vendors make it available to their customers. Apple is the only company leaving their users in the stone age.

Also now the October 23rd event is confirmed, with multiple sources reporting an iPad Mini, 13" Retina Macbook Pro, updated iMac, and updated Mac Mini.

Oh a mac mini too. Not going to happen. Not the point, you're already crediting apple with rumor? And from what the rumors say, the iMac and mini will at best be tweaks so they're 6 months out of date instead of 18.

13" Retina is just a minor product variant too, not a new product.

If those reports turn out to be true, then by my count that leaves the iPod shuffle, iPod Classic, and Mac Pro as the only major product lines to not be updated in 2012. Like I said, to some people it doesn't matter how long the list of updates is as long as their favorite device isn't on it.

Rumor is there's going to be 24 mini variants. Well I guess there's 24 distinct innovative products by your mindset. Hey they should license crayola and make 64 colors of every product, there's some major innovation that will up their number of releases.

What more are you expecting? A complete break-away redesign of every product line every year with a couple of completely new product lines thrown in to boot?

No, just modern tech less than 2 years before it hits the market. Even the iPhone 5 is a 4S with a slightly longer screen, crappy enclosure, and crappy battery. That was worth waiting a year for. LTE, they're literally years behind. They're the only so-called high end smartphone that's not 720p

How can any computer company possibly sell computers without USB3 in 2012? USB3 is 2009 tech. There's all sorts of PC's as cheap as $200 that have it, but not a single apple desktop at all. Not a single apple product before 2012.

I'm not even interested in the iMac's or minis anymore. Ivy bridge is so 6-months ago, it's already too old to bother buying. But I'm not going to wait 4 years for Timmy to bring out Haswell.

Apple is a joke. When you see an Apple logo on someone's computer you can laugh at them for paying premium prices for obsolete junk. When you see someone with an iPhone you can laugh at them for paying premium prices for a cheap second-rate handset that would have been decent 2 years ago.

I'm done with them. I have multiple real apple desktops in use, but my latest is a Hackintosh that blows every apple on the market out of the water and cost $1000. It's so much better I doubt I'll ever buy another apple desktop. I'm about to replace my iPhone 4S with Galaxy S3. I can't stand the dinky iPhone screens anymore. My Sandy Bridge MBP is nice and I'd be happy to buy another when Haswell comes out, but if they just switch to retina and airs, I'm done buying Apple laptops. So basically I was a die hard apple user, I've converted at least a dozen people. And I'm so totally finished with apple.

 

[Stetrain]

Really adding 1080p to appleTV...wow major innovation, must have spent 100,000 developer hours on that one.

You're the one who said that they couldn't work on two things at once. I guess dismissing most of the things on the list is a good way to back up your statement.

Making an iPhone 5 without the cellular module, must have been a least a million dev hours.

Have you actually looked a the iFixit teardowns of these devices? I don't see a single component in the iPod touch 5th gen (maybe the camera modules?) that's just an iPhone 5 part in a new shell. Speaking of the shell it's completely different than either the iPhone 5's shell construction or the previous iPod touch.

Obviously you don't think it's a great feat of engineering (nor am I saying it is), but why does every single update have to be to count as worthy in your eyes?

How come every other hardware vendor had an Ivy Bridge desktop within a week of the chips being out?

I agree that it's silly for the iMacs and Mac Minis to have been kept off of Ivy Bridge for so long. My guess is that with a redesign in the works, updating to Ivy Bridge would have meant and update in June and another in October. Can you imagine the whining on here from people who had just bought the Ivy Bridge spec bump?

How come every other cell phone maker in the world releases more than one handset per year?

Because that's their business model. Create every single possible type of handset that someone might want to buy so that they can have a big display section at the carrier store. Most phone manufacturers don't even reach the sales volume of the iPhone when you add all of their different smartphone models together.

Both ways have merits, but Apple's seems to work pretty well for them. If you want something else you're free to choose a different device. They don't owe you anything in regards to the product selection they choose to offer.

Apple is the only company leaving their users in the stone age.

I get by now that dramatic flair is your style, but stone age? Really?

The Mac Pro may fall into this category a bit. The worst part to me isn't the lack of constantly latest-and-greatest tech but rather that they keep their prices constant over the cycle. A sandy bridge iMac costs the same today as it did when it debuted. I understand why they do that but it's a pretty bad deal for consumers.

Oh a mac mini too. Not going to happen.

So I qualify my statements about the upcoming event as "rumored" and "as reported", but I see you have direct knowledge of what will and will not happen at the event. Interesting.

Not the point, you're already crediting apple with rumor?

I think I pretty clearly qualified them as rumored products.

And from what the rumors say, the iMac and mini will at best be tweaks so they're 6 months out of date instead of 18.

The most recent rumors I've seen point to an iMac redesign, which again isn't a great excuse but I see why they didn't do a spec bump 3 months early.

If the Mac Mini doesn't change in design then I agree that there's no excuse at all for not having updated it yet.

13" Retina is just a minor product variant too, not a new product.

Ok.

Rumor is there's going to be 24 mini variants. Well I guess there's 24 distinct innovative products by your mindset.

Why would I think that? How is crediting the Air being updated to Ivy Bridge (the same thing you're complaining about not being done to the desktops) comparable to crediting them with minor variations of a single new product?

If you want to accuse me of that then I can go back and append iPod and iPhone color variations to my list. I don't think that's fair, but you seem set on me being unfair.

No, just modern tech less than 2 years before it hits the market.

That would be quite a feat.

USB3 is 2009 tech.

Strange how Intel didn't support it until recently then.

I'm done with them. I have multiple real apple desktops in use, but my latest is a Hackintosh that blows every apple on the market out of the water and cost $1000. It's so much better I doubt I'll ever buy another apple desktop. I'm about to replace my iPhone 4S with Galaxy S3. I can't stand the dinky iPhone screens anymore. My Sandy Bridge MBP is nice and I'd be happy to buy another when Haswell comes out, but if they just switch to retina and airs, I'm done buying Apple laptops. So basically I was a die hard apple user, I've converted at least a dozen people. And I'm so totally finished with apple.

Ok, go for it. That's your choice. Have fun, be safe, and try to put a bit more optimism in your thoughts.

Have a nice day.

 

[Eidorian]

Strange how Intel didn't support it until recently then.

I was waiting for this one. AMD slapped support in back when Llano launched under the A75. Intel rolled it out with the Pather Point (Intel 7 Series) chipset. That still does not mean that every motherboard vendor did not want to slap in a $10 controller, in addition to that SATA 6 Gbps, the PLX switching for try to avoid bottlenecking the DMI bandwidth available, and juggle dual GPUs back on P55 in 2010. DMI 2.0 resolved the bandwidth issue for USB 3.0 and SATA 6 Gbps on Cougar Point (Intel 6 Series).

USB 3.0 traction is amazing compared to Thunderbolt, even before you had it supported on a PCH/FCH. Some magic there. USB 3.0 dead, without Intel support? Alright...