Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Read that again, and tell me what is so wrong about that claim.

Clarification - while some dual-band routers claim 900 Mb/s throughput, that is using both 2.4 GHz and 5.0 GHz channels simultaneously (450 Mb/s each). However, both channels cannot be bonded together, as far as I know, to create one really fast 900 Mb/s connection. My mistake. However, even at 450 Mb/s, that is still almost half GigE speed on wireless, which is really fast. For the remaining 50% GigE performance, if you need it, you can get the adapter.

Of course, if you are running a file server at work then you need GigE. But you wouldn't be using a RMBP as a file server, right?

Again, the RMBP is designed for people who do not necessarily need to be wired the majority of the time. Why is it difficult for people to understand that? Sure, you can point out that it lacks a GigE port, but the target buyer of the RMBP doesn't need a wired network connection. For those people, an adapter works just fine for the handful of times they need to get wired. I fall into this category and am thrilled that I don't have to carry around a heavier, bulkier laptop simply to support technologies which I don't use. Thanks Apple!
 
Are you not aware of dual-band 2.4/5.0 GHz routers which achieve a throughput of 900 Mb/s? I believe 900 Mb/s is 87% of gigabit ethernet speed. Where am I wrong? Of course you won't get this speed at Starbucks...
Apple's Wireless-N implementation tops out at 450Mbps. What you mentioned above requires matching router-network adapter combos - for that high price I'd pour the money into 10-GigE instead!

You are still wrong.
 
So it's apparent you and I will agree to disagree and we look for different things in our notebooks. Mine is a tool, weight and thickness mean nothing when I have to add carry-ons to compensate for its shortfalls. Good day.

This is exactly why it's silly for people who need wired ethernet, FireWire, removable hard drive, etc. to be criticizing the RMBP - it's not designed for you! That's why Apple also makes a regular MacBook Pro available for purchase to those who need those things. Two different form factors for different needs. The person who buys the RMBP wants pro performance in an Air-like package. Why can't people accept two different models targeted at different sets of consumers? Why does everything have to devolve into a fight between one model versus another, when each model is targeting a different customer?
 
*technobabble*

Again, the RMBP is designed for people who do not necessarily need to be wired the majority of the time. Why is it difficult for people to understand that? Sure, you can point out that it lacks a GigE port, but the target buyer of the RMBP doesn't need a wired network connection. For those people, an adapter works just fine for the handful of times they need to get wired. I fall into this category and am thrilled that I don't have to carry around a heavier, bulkier laptop simply to support technologies which I don't use. Thanks Apple!
Funny that you're here attempting to educate me on the benefits of the MBPR versus obsolete, antiquated MBP tech...

and failing spectacularly.

I think you are trolling.
 
Funny that you're here attempting to educate me on the benefits of the MBPR versus obsolete, antiquated MBP tech...

and failing spectacularly.

I'm not trying to convince you of anything. We are having a lively, spirited debate about the pros and cons of each machine which indirectly helps others with their purchase decisions. I didn't realize this was all about you. Wow.

I think you are trolling.

Too bad, as I was enjoying our conversation.
 
I'm not trying to convince you of anything. We are having a lively, spirited debate about the pros and cons of each machine which indirectly helps others with their purchase decisions. I didn't realize this was all about you. Wow.

Too bad, as I was enjoying our conversation.
Tired of Appleturfing on DailyTech yet, Tony Swash?
 
This is exactly why it's silly for people who need wired ethernet, FireWire, removable hard drive, etc. to be criticizing the RMBP - it's not designed for you! That's why Apple also makes a regular MacBook Pro available for purchase to those who need those things. Two different form factors for different needs. The person who buys the RMBP wants pro performance in an Air-like package. Why can't people accept two different models targeted at different sets of consumers? Why does everything have to devolve into a fight between one model versus another, when each model is targeting a different customer?
I got to agreed on you on this. If only Steve is alive I definitely sure we wont have this debate. Either he will force everyone to upgrade rMBP without giving you a option of getting cMBP. Or he will continue the cMBP but he will leave all the bell and whistle what rMBP has. Like 2.6ghz Ivy Bridge. 1 GB Nvidia 650, USB3. Like what he did with white macbook.
 
I got to agreed on you on this. If only Steve is alive I definitely sure we wont have this debate. Either he will force everyone to upgrade rMBP without giving you a option of getting cMBP. Or he will continue the cMBP but he will leave all the bell and whistle what rMBP has. Like 2.6ghz Ivy Bridge. 1 GB Nvidia 650, USB3. Like what he did with white macbook.

When the new laptops were announced, I did initially feel that selling a thinner, lighter Retina MacBook Pro alongside a heaver and thicker non-Retina model is not something Jobs would have done. It's useless to speculate about "what would Steve have done", but that was my gut reaction. Jobs was about simplifying and streamlining product lines, but this latest announcements gives me hope that Apple is willing to diversify its offerings somewhat so as to appeal to a wider customer base. This move feels like it has Cook's fingerprints on it, and if so this is a good direction for Apple.
 
This is exactly why it's silly for people who need wired ethernet, FireWire, removable hard drive, etc. to be criticizing the RMBP - it's not designed for you! That's why Apple also makes a regular MacBook Pro available for purchase to those who need those things. Two different form factors for different needs. The person who buys the RMBP wants pro performance in an Air-like package. Why can't people accept two different models targeted at different sets of consumers? Why does everything have to devolve into a fight between one model versus another, when each model is targeting a different customer?

It may not be designed for me now, but it is the clear path that Apple is taking in the future design of their notebooks, which may likely force those of us who need those features to look elsewhere, which is the troubling part.
 
When the new laptops were announced, I did initially feel that selling a thinner, lighter Retina MacBook Pro alongside a heaver and thicker non-Retina model is not something Jobs would have done. It's useless to speculate about "what would Steve have done", but that was my gut reaction. Jobs was about simplifying and streamlining product lines, but this latest announcements gives me hope that Apple is willing to diversify its offerings somewhat so as to appeal to a wider customer base. This move feels like it has Cook's fingerprints on it, and if so this is a good direction for Apple.
Yup Tim is not Steve. But then that might turn off some of the fanboy.
 
Once you boot back into Mac OS, your overclock is gone. What you are suggesting will only work while you are in Bootcamp using Windows. Very few people that I know use their MacBook Pro just to run Windows. This is not a very useful option unless you are using your MacBook Pro just to run Windows. Personally I like knowing that I am getting 100% of my GPU performance on the Mac side as well.

To clarify I wasn't implying that someone would or should use a MacBook Pro just to run Windows (although fine by me if one were to ;)) . Some gamers, however, elect to run Windows to play games, either because the game is not available on the Mac or it is but the Windows version runs better. Regardless of the reason, a gamer who elected to use Windows for gaming could overclock the graphics card in the regular MacBook Pro to the same speed of the one set in the Retina. And gamers, unless I'm mistaken, are the main type of user who would benefit from an overclocked graphics card.



Can you point to any statistics or tests to back this up?
I can't recall where I read this, but someone just below my original post explained why this is the case.

Lastly, I believe in another post you mentioned that the battery in the Retina is 20% better than the one in the regular MacBook Pro. That's not really accurate. The battery in the Retina MacBook Pro is indeed larger than the one in the MacBook Pro, but the one in the MacBook Pro lasts longer because the Retina is more power hungry. As per Macworld:

"Both Retina laptops lasted about five hours in our test. Even with their larger batteries, they didn’t last as long as the regular 15-inch MacBook Pros, which lasted several minutes longer. The previous generation of 15-inch MacBook Pros actually outlasted the new models by a significant margin."

http://www.macworld.com/article/116...ay_redefines_the_concept_of_a_pro_laptop.html
 
Last edited:
Lastly, I believe in another post you mentioned that the battery in the Retina is 20% better than the one in the regular MacBook Pro. That's not really accurate. The battery in the Retina MacBook Pro is indeed larger than the one in the MacBook Pro, but the one in the MacBook Pro lasts longer because the Retina is more power hungry.

Thanks for bringing this up. I incorrectly stated that the rMBP battery is 50% larger than the cMBP. That is only correct if you compare with the 13" cMBP, which is not an accurate comparison - I misread when I was scanning the specifications. In reality, the rMBP has a 95 watt-hour battery compared to the cMBP's 77.5 watt-hour battery, or 22% larger. Yes, a larger battery is needed to drive the rMBP, probably due to the higher power requirements of the retina display's backlight. I don't think I said that it lasts longer. Both machines are rated at a 7 hour battery life.
 
Thanks for bringing this up. I incorrectly stated that the rMBP battery is 50% larger than the cMBP. That is only correct if you compare with the 13" cMBP, which is not an accurate comparison - I misread when I was scanning the specifications. In reality, the rMBP has a 95 watt-hour battery compared to the cMBP's 77.5 watt-hour battery, or 22% larger. Yes, a larger battery is needed to drive the rMBP, probably due to the higher power requirements of the retina display's backlight. I don't think I said that it lasts longer. Both machines are rated at a 7 hour battery life.

By the way, do you own an rMBP? If so, why don't you add it to your signature? :rolleyes:. If not, why are you preaching your love to rMBP without having one? :eek:. Are you the kind of guy who dates a woman 2 or 3 times, then ask her to marry him?:eek:. You are acting the same way with the rMBP... :D
 
this is a web problem, not a retina problem. Standard def broadcast programming looked like garbage when HDTVs came out. you see how that went. in three years pretty much every monitor or laptop screen will be 4k. the web will adapt.

No one is arguing about potential widespread adoption of high res screens. What I WAS addressing was the fact that's someone tried to claim that CURRENT web images actually look better on RMBP, which clearly makes no sense and is a blatant lie.
 
No one is arguing about potential widespread adoption of high res screens. What I WAS addressing was the fact that's someone tried to claim that CURRENT web images actually look better on RMBP, which clearly makes no sense and is a blatant lie.

depends on what you call "look better". im currently looking at an ad for the blue man group on macrumors as we speak. text looks a little fuzzy but the colors are dramatically better and the contrast ratio looks amazing. so were walking the line here.

And by the way, calling someone a blatant liar is pretty harsh, tone it down a bit.
 
By the way, do you own an rMBP? If so, why don't you add it to your signature? :rolleyes:. If not, why are you preaching your love to rMBP without having one? :eek:. Are you the kind of guy who dates a woman 2 or 3 times, then ask her to marry him?:eek:. You are acting the same way with the rMBP... :D

Will you marry me?
 
depends on what you call "look better". im currently looking at an ad for the blue man group on macrumors as we speak. text looks a little fuzzy but the colors are dramatically better and the contrast ratio looks amazing. so were walking the line here.

And by the way, calling someone a blatant liar is pretty harsh, tone it down a bit.

the colors and contrast ratio arent anything special on the RMBP unless you're comparing this to some really cheap TFT panel. color on the non-retina 2012 macbook is pretty much the same as retina one. on a semi-related note, adobe rgb representation is actually better on non-retina macbook.

although i have no idea how you're discerning contrast ratio and color accuracy from a tiny little, presumably leaderboard sized ad, which is always going to be as compressed as possible. especially when i'm sure you don't know what the original working files even look like.
 
the colors and contrast ratio arent anything special on the RMBP unless you're comparing this to some really cheap TFT panel. color on the non-retina 2012 macbook is pretty much the same as retina one. on a semi-related note, adobe rgb representation is actually better on non-retina macbook.

although i have no idea how you're discerning contrast ratio and color accuracy from a tiny little, presumably leaderboard sized ad, which is always going to be as compressed as possible. especially when i'm sure you don't know what the original working files even look like.

plenty of people have already done the research, if you want technical answers you can google it. Now, your definition of "special" could be subjective, but the fact that higher pixel densities can and do give better contrast ratios, and color fidelity is not up for debate.. any more than 1080p looks better than 720p.
 
When the new laptops were announced, I did initially feel that selling a thinner, lighter Retina MacBook Pro alongside a heaver and thicker non-Retina model is not something Jobs would have done. It's useless to speculate about "what would Steve have done", but that was my gut reaction. Jobs was about simplifying and streamlining product lines, but this latest announcements gives me hope that Apple is willing to diversify its offerings somewhat so as to appeal to a wider customer base. This move feels like it has Cook's fingerprints on it, and if so this is a good direction for Apple.

When Jobs was alive they did release the thinner, lighter MacBook air alongside a heavier and thicker MacBook. :eek:

Don't over think things.:D

I would be guessing if I told you the cMBP will be gone in 4 years. Apple may keep one model around with a humongous hard drive as an alternative to an all SSD model. Time and hardware development will tell.
 
No one is arguing about potential widespread adoption of high res screens. What I WAS addressing was the fact that's someone tried to claim that CURRENT web images actually look better on RMBP, which clearly makes no sense and is a blatant lie.

Web images absolutely will appear sharper on the Retina if you run your display at anything higher than "best for retina" resolution. The reason for that is this: the higher the scaled resolution setting, the smaller the images appear on the display. When you shrink an image physically in size but can still display the full pixel count, as you can on the Retina, the image will look sharper due to the reduction in size. Same image detail @ smaller size = increased perceived sharpness.

This is an effect of the scaling mode used and how our eyes perceive detail, not the Retina display itself.
 
Is the user-base of hardware tinkerers big enough for apple to even care about alienating? I hope it is because it's one of the true joys I get out of computers (I have a homebuilt desktop and I absolutely love going in there and upgrading stuff, and I love doing it on notebooks too).. it makes me feel like it is really "mine" (stupid, I know).

That said, the retina display rocks really hard but ethernet is an absolute must-have for me (as is, oddly enough, a platter HDD at least for the time being).
 
I've seen it, and I really don't like it.

1: I can see through the hinge area. It's very distracting to see my desk surface through that opening.

2: Doesn't say "Macbook Pro" below the display. It looks cheap to me.

3: The vents on the edges would be blocked if I had one and placed it on my lap. Defeats the point of them really...

4: UI lag. My Mid-09 Macbook Pro 15" that only had a 9400m didn't lag that bad in Lion, and ML on the Retina is even worse in some cases.

5: Anything non-Retina looks awful, and full Retina support is still many years away from what I can tell (by then my cMBP 2012 will be out of date anyways).

6: Small SSD/big price upgrades. Using the proprietary "blade" SSD wasn't necessary as we now make conventional SSD's much thinner than before, same thing for HDD's. A HDD + SSD or SSD + SSD combo would have still been easily obtainable in the current thickness of the rMBP.

7: Macsafe 2. I don't care that it's a new connector, that's all fine and dandy. But why the crappy ass T-Style connector again? It's just not a comfortable connection to use.

This is all based on experience with the rMBP we have where I work. We all took it home for a few days to try out, and I stopped using it the first day. I'm far from a fan of it.

1. You don't want to like it, that's blatantly obvious. Most likely because you'll never own it. To nitpick something like that makes it glaringly obvious that you're trying to find everything wrong with it, especially since I couldn't see my desk through the vent if I had a damn parascope, not that it would matter, to me or anyone in their right mind, if I could.

2. You're just being completely ridiculous. This point and the first one take any semblance of credibility out of all of the other points you try to make in this post.

3. What I said in the answer to #2. And how wide do you spread your damn legs when you rest your laptop on it? Those vents are more than 14 inches apart.

4.Very few people have reported anything aside from a very minimal screen lag, so I seriously doubt apple would put a faulty computer on the floor to attract customers.

5. Many years away? In what moon man world is that years away? The iPhone had more than 70% of its apps with full retina support before a full year since its release...this will be quicker if anything. I don't know where youre getting these estimations from but its definitely not a rational human mind.

6. No one wants an HDD in the rMBP, if you want an HDD, thats what the classic MacBook Pro is for. The selling point for the rMBP is, aside from the retina display, its faster flash data storage, show me a notebook HDD that gets 400 MB/s write speeds and 450+ MB/s read speeds. All of that was considered and engineered to make the rMBP as thin as possible, there's no way you could fit an HDD in there. None in hell, or else they would have made it even thinner.

7. The MAGSAFE 2 connector functions far better than the damn L-style connector when it comes to serving the purpose for which it was designed, which is an easy, damage-preventing pullout if there is a sudden, unexpected yank on the power cord. I can't tell you the number of times the L-Shaped connector yanked my computer along with it. What exactly is it makes the T-Style Connector Crappy?
 
I sat here, looking at my MBPR, laughing at the first page of ******** nitpick arguments to be made against this beautiful piece of machinery.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.