Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Next MacBook Air Update to Focus on Retina Displays Too?

The Graphics card or the lack of it

Retina displays are a good thing but the Intel Graphics card would not be able to deliver performance good enough for the Retina displays. Apple would need to install a high performance GPU, unlike the mediocre GPUs installed in the present MBAs.
 
markiv810 said:
Retina displays are a good thing but the Intel Graphics card would not be able to deliver performance good enough for the Retina displays. Apple would need to install a high performance GPU, unlike the mediocre GPUs installed in the present MBAs.
Click to expand...

Performance in what respect? The HD4000 supports 4K resolutions.
 
Mr. Retrofire said:
Ahh that makes sense. iCloud only for iPhones in rural areas, and not for iPods. A wonderful idea! Not?

And regarding the price: Yeah the prices for the iPhone and the iPod touch are the same. I agree 100 percent!
Click to expand...

The difference between the iPad wifi and iPad LTE or iPad 3G is 130$. So to add a cell chip to an iPod would be 130$. So, now you have a 330$ iPod. The iPhone 3GS is 375$, so a 45$ difference. So, yes I'd say the prices are pretty much the same considering the iPhones have more features than the iPods, including Cell network chips and GPS. It's simply not worth it for Apple to create a new line of iPods for a 45$ difference. Buck up and buy the iPhone 3GS.
 
markiv810 said:
Retina displays are a good thing but the Intel Graphics card would not be able to deliver performance good enough for the Retina displays. Apple would need to install a high performance GPU, unlike the mediocre GPUs installed in the present MBAs.
Click to expand...

Current Airs have enough graphics power to support the Thunderbolt Display with it's 2560 x 1440 resolution easily. Doubling the current resolution would be 2880*1800, do you think it's such a huge difference? I'm not professional on this area.

And I can also imagine that doubling the resolution is not even necessary because simply a higher res should do the trick as well. The problem with it is that the current OS X interface looks so nice on 1440*900. I'm used to it and if I set the res of my MBA to 13" MBP resolution (1280*800) everything becomes not only pixelated but inconveniently large too. So if Apple went "only" with the doubled 13" MBP resolution (so: 2560*1600) of course the PPI would be high, but the everything would remain large and bulky, am I right? That is unless if they modify somehow the OSX to accommodate to various resolutions and display sizes.
 
at higher resolutions the icons and desktop elements would be smaller at the same pixel size, i.e. higher ppi=smaller pixels :)
 
Peace said:
So i'm guessing from all the reading yesterday that no professional or corporation has any of these right ? There is no ethernet port.

But I agree that it's going to take some beefed up graphics power to support the 13" Retina model.
Click to expand...

I guess the upcoming Intel HD 4000 should be fine :)
 
NutsNGum said:
Performance in what respect? The HD4000 supports 4K resolutions.
Click to expand...

Supporting a resolution is different from performing. Intel HD 4000 which supports 4k resolution cannot take place (replace) a dedicated mid-level graphics card by ATI/Nvidia. For gaming and playing HD movies, editing video, photoshop, rendering of images be it 2D or 3D, having a dedicated graphics card would be a better option. Just my two cent or maybe a penny for a thought.
 
Please stop with the "Apple is still considering USB3 support".

Intel is designing Apples motherboards. The USB3 ports will be there whatever Apple wants it or not.

----------
markiv810 said:
Supporting a resolution is different from performing. Intel HD 4000 which supports 4k resolution cannot take place (replace) a dedicated mid-level graphics card by ATI/Nvidia. For gaming and playing HD movies, editing video, photoshop, rendering of images be it 2D or 3D, having a dedicated graphics card would be a better option. Just my two cent or maybe a penny for a thought.
Click to expand...

You are right about performance.
But.
The thing with Retina/OSX 10.8 will be resolution independence. The era of looking at what resolution you use is over. The next OS wont even show what resolution you use.
 
Retina would be (very) fine with me, as long as they don´t compromise battery life or brightness. I´d rather have a brighter screen for longer, to be honest.
And as for a release, I caught myself wishing they´d unleash the whole lineup at WWDC. Maybe a new, probably even redesigned Mac Pro? Wild dreams, I tell ya. :rolleyes:


What baffles me though is how Lion (not mountain lion) will look on those newfangled displays. If they do release at least the MBP at WWDC, there will be virtually no HidPi icons yet, even for Apples own Apps. Not to speak of 3rd party Devs. So either Apple says "who cares anyway" and still releases them or they´ll show us all these nice new models and won´t actually ship them before Mountain Lion goes Golden Master. Which won´t be before september, I guess.

And now I suddenly find myself wanting to buy a 2011 MBA. But wait - there´s no USB3 on it! Bugger. :rolleyes:
 
ristlin said:
Here are a few more headlines MacRumors could use:

Next iPod Touch to Focus on Retina Display As Well?
Retina Display on iPod Nano?
New Apple TV to come with Retina Display?
Galaxy Vision: Samsung's Answer to Retina Display?
Retina Display?
Click to expand...

New Mac Mini to come with retina display!
 
Moonjumper said:
And on the drop Mac Pro point. For the market it serves, no other Mac is a suitable substitute for many. I'm not in the market for one, but only because it is too expensive. I wish they did a user configurable Mac that wasn't server component based.
Click to expand...

firewood said:
Size and cost.

Many pro users and gamers need lots of not-too-expensive storage (a big HD) and/or a higher-end GPU (hotter, thus needing more heat dissipation and battery volume), which are too big to fit in an MBA, as well as raising the build cost (thus cutting Apple's profits if not "Pro" priced).

But the slimmer cheaper-priced MBA sells a ton of units also.
Click to expand...

I guess my point is, how big is the market for MBPs versus MBAs and what's the difference in profit margins? Apple dropped the Xserve because it wasn't selling well. Apple hasn't updated the Mac Pro in over a year (not even an update for GPUs or whatever). I find Apple is going more towards the consumer route since that's where the biggest market is. Why spend time, effort and money on a product that sells only 1 million and gets $100 profit when you can spend the same resources on something that sells 10 million and gets $200 profit (or whatever the numbers are)?
 
brandonindallas said:
Every mac geeks fantasy right here. At WWDC Apple would come out with all new Macs ranging their whole lineup from Mac Pro to Macbook air with retina displays and ivy bridge. The whole line would get a price cut and mountain lion would be revealed more/released.
Click to expand...

I'd bet many Mac geeks will still be unhappy until they get their cheap tower (the mythical xMac)
 
fertilized-egg said:
I'd bet many Mac geeks will still be unhappy until they get their cheap tower (the mythical xMac)
Click to expand...

It doesn't have to be cheap, just affordable. A smaller, consumer grade Mac Pro. Desktop equivalents to the laptop components in an iMac. Costs less because you add your own monitor, and lasts longer because you can upgrade it and easily replace hard drives. Sounds good to me.
 
shompa said:
The thing with Retina/OSX 10.8 will be resolution independence. The era of looking at what resolution you use is over. The next OS wont even show what resolution you use.
Click to expand...

You might want to understand what Retina is, it has nothing to do with resolution independence, there will be no RI in 10.8, Apple has removed RI completely from OS X.

Apple will using HiDPI modes instead with Retina.

Navdakilla said:
uh ohhhh… so I shouldn't buy the current air, (I was about to buy the 11")
Click to expand...

Probably not, Airs are at the end of the product cycle. The Ivy Bridge chips that fit the Airs' limit are supposed to arrive mid June/July, so don't expect any updates until July at least.
 
Macbook Air Retina - HD Video

this would be a MAJOR step into the future for the mac book air, I just hope unlike the iPad 3 it has superior HD VIDEO performance.

my macbook pro with Matt screen, is clearly superior in video playback of both HD and non HD video. I am not certain if it is the video card that the iPad 3 has or the retina display itself. (I returned my iPad 3 back to the store after seeing how much better my 1 year old MBP was for at streaming video & youtube playback was over the Retina display of the iPad 3!)

Maybe HiDPI as someone said on this forum will be used, but Retina as we know it current is missing a key element for Video.

A 1080 Progressive screen that can playback at least as well as a better Samsung HD full size TV is needed on the air and MBP.

This and as mentioned above one where the Retina display does not produce chopper, dull and lower detailed moving images. With Samsung's SUPER OLED
TV announced to be released soon, Apple must answer with something at least 'somewhat' as great in video broadcasting/playback to the world.

(it also would be nice if ALL macs, both MBP & Airs offered at a price the screen I am looking at now as I write this) Anti Glare geniune Matt screen. Currently only the 15" and 17" (17" MBP will be discontinued)
offers this. No more glass and in the case of the AIR no more sub par anti reflective screen.
--The 13" 2013 MBP needs this option along with the new Air model---
 
Last edited:
Mr. Retrofire said:
Ahh that makes sense. iCloud only for iPhones in rural areas, and not for iPods. A wonderful idea! Not?

And regarding the price: Yeah the prices for the iPhone and the iPod touch are the same. I agree 100 percent!

You pay the same for both? Interesting! :p
Click to expand...

You're missing the point. Some kid, or even an adult, with an iPod Touch doesn't care about always being connected to iCloud in "rural areas" because it is an iPod. If you want an always on internet connection in the middle of nowhere, get an iPhone-- that is what a smartphone is. You are buying the wrong product if you purchase an iPod Touch and expect to always be online.

Adding a 3G radio adds cost to the device. Look at the price difference between the WiFi iPad and 4G/Cell iPad. That, and there is a monthly fee, that depending on your carrier, may be close (or equal to) the cost of a data plan of a phone.
 
I don't think apple will talk about the air at the WWDC.

I think people will be impressed with the pro updates and Apple won't want to steal market share from the pro model sales.

Then, i think people would be even more impressed by the new airs... Either way, I'm waiting for a new air, and if it's not so great, I'd consider buying a current gen...
 
I wonder if we will get to see the forums flooded with [insert-color-here]-tint-issue-threads when the new Macs get released.
 
Shuri said:
I guess the upcoming Intel HD 4000 should be fine :)
Click to expand...

Yes the HD 4000 should be fine, especially if the iPad 3 with its ARM based cpu can run Retina display, I am sure Ivy Bridge can do it just fine. A lot depends on what you do with it - if you are serious game - than getting a low power cpu would not be your first choice anyway. But I am sure it will do fine with video.
 
All we really need are a few bumps:
-Yes the processor is a given... but I am happy with my Mid 2011 11" MBA's performance

1. 8GB RAM
2. More than 5 hours of battery life with the screen brightness taken all the way down for the 11" MBA

And thats really it. I'd like a better camera with a flash... but that is nitpicking. I love this baby. The SSD that comes standard is awesome and the 1.6 GHz dual core processor is plenty of juice for what I use it for + some light graphic design stuff.

I upgraded my Mid 2011 iMac to have 16GB RAM, so the 4GB that my MBA came with seems bare bones/bottom line. I'd really like more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back