Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
It could be the 17", 21.5" and 27" models too. I'm on a 17" monitor right now and it works perfectly fine. Makes a bit more sense when you think about how they dropped the 17" from their laptop line. 17 inches is a bit much to lug around. Trust me... I would know.

Or it could mean the 3 different "models" are the 21.5" and 27" regular iMacs and the 21.5" retina iMac is having some production issues. (With the 27" coming later.)

Just my thoughts. C'mon Apple... let's go already...
 
Didn't the 17" MacBook Pro see a unibody design after the 13" and 15" models?

Edit - 13" and 15" unibody MacBook Pro's came out in October 2008, with the 17" trailing behind, coming out in January 2009


Could we experience a similar scenario in which smaller, redesigned models release first, then the larger model releases later?

Gee I hope so. But hard to say amidst the rumours the 17" was discontinued due to poor sales. I'm crossing my fingers it's just a yields game though and we will indeed see it by the Haswell update next year..

----------

It could be the 17", 21.5" and 27" models too. I'm on a 17" monitor right now and it works perfectly fine. Makes a bit more sense when you think about how they dropped the 17" from their laptop line. 17 inches is a bit much to lug around. Trust me... I would know.

Or it could mean the 3 different "models" are the 21.5" and 27" regular iMacs and the 21.5" retina iMac is having some production issues. (With the 27" coming later.)

Just my thoughts. C'mon Apple... let's go already...

Still easier than a desktop though ;)
 
Any Retina iMac will either be an optional extra or a separate iMac line and maybe at a different screen size.

Some have said they want a 24" iMac, maybe this could be the Retina iMac, smaller than the 27" but higher DPI providing a better screen.

I'm still hoping to get a 27" 'normal' iMac, depending on price.

If you have 24" iMac With Retina i think it is enough space for Applications and no need for 27 inch.
i can compare my MBP'R with 21.5" iMac and i can say that i feel more comfortable with my retina than iMac. i have more space on retina and imagine this on 24" iMac if it has Retina display, this is huge improvement.
That will be great to work with especially in After Effects where space are critical.
 
If you open it whilst still in the US and have it in "hand luggage" you get through fine, same as everyone else using a laptop on the plane. I have done it before in the past.



No but I doubt VAT in the US is like 31% or whatever the difference is.

It could be pushing close to 10% which means it would suck up most of that $367

----------

I really don't want a retina panelled iMac
Image

I'd take a 40inch retina cinema display with hdmi over an iMac.
 
30 inch would be super super cool I just hope they release them all at the same time. I would be a little upset if they released the 27inch in Sep and I bought it and then come Oct they released the 30inch.

ya that would be pretty ****** if they did that ...
 
A new iMac design would be awesome!

Current design is fantastic, but new Apple design is ALWAYS welcome! :D

The current design is fantastic? Having to remove the glass panel and LCD in order to replace a hard drive that you can't replace with anything other than Apple OEM because they need to use an extra pin on the power connector to transmit heat sensor data because the whole thing is way too thin for how many hot components are in it? Fantastic you say? Keep on sippin' the kool-aid, bro.

Didn't the 17" MacBook Pro see a unibody design after the 13" and 15" models?

Edit - 13" and 15" unibody MacBook Pro's came out in October 2008, with the 17" trailing behind, coming out in January 2009


Could we experience a similar scenario in which smaller, redesigned models release first, then the larger model releases later?

The 17" MacBook Pro is dead. It's not coming back.

I think I'm gonna go and buy the current model. I really don't want a retina panelled iMac, would be such a waste of resources, especially for me. It really didn't wow me the retina MBP as long as its free from dead pixels, relatively bright and colourful a current iMac display is more than adequate.

Really, given how terrible the current design is, I'd wait for the next one, whether it has retina in tow or not; at least it has a shot at not being as terrible as this design has been.

I really hope the 13 rmbp has quad core and 4 gigs I ram. If it doesn't I don't know what to say.

Then prepare to be speechless because it ain't happening. An Ivy Bridge 13" rMBP will have the same CPU options as the current Ivy Bridge 13" cMBP. They can't magically will on a hotter CPU into a smaller space.

I really hope that if/when a 13-inch rMBP is released that it doesn't replace the current one. I just got mine!

If the rumors are to believed, it'll be alongside it for the current rev and when the next rev comes out the cMBPs will disappear leaving only the rMBPs to be just MBPs.

Of course it will, the rMBP 15" maxes out at 16 GB and they both need a powerful CPU/GPU combination to push out that many pixels. You have nothing to worry about.

No they really don't. The Intel HD 4000 alone can push out 1280x800 + 2(2560x1440), as well as 1680x1050 + 2(2560x1440). The fact of the matter is that it isn't an issue of not being able to push out that many pixels; the GPUs can push out that many pixels easily. It's clearly a software problem with OS X's HiDPI support (or lack thereof).

Finally! My Unibody 2008 is on its last legs.

Give it more RAM and replace its hard drive; also take better care of it; then it won't be "on its last legs". That's way too new of a computer to be on its last legs.

Been waiting for a retina 13" for ages. Hope it has a dedicated gpu though or it'll suck

No it won't, the Intel HD 4000 can easily push out that many pixels and have room left over for dessert. It's clearly a software issue.

I thought I read some reviews of the current 15" Retina MBP that indicated it *sometimes* seemed a bit laggy when closing, opening, or moving windows at full Retina resolution. That's with the discrete Nvidia GT650M GPU.

I wonder how a 13" variant would fare without a discrete GPU.

Just as poorly until Apple fixes the software issues surrounding HiDPI.

Noting says that a retina display would be twice the current resolution. The 27" iMac resolution approaches "retina" anyway once you take into account the greater viewing distance of desktop computers. It might be just 2x 1080p, or 3840x2080. Still a graphical power boost, but not quite as huge. Maybe they'll switch to a desktop GPU, delete the ODD, and use the space for bigger fans.

They will not switch to a desktop GPU as that requires that the computer be made thicker, and it's Apple we're talking about here. The optical drive won't make that much difference in that regard either; though removing it in favor of fans on the current design isn't a terrible idea; certainly no more terrible than sticking with the current design at all would be.

Good question. I have no idea.

I personally think they would use the same dual core CPU from the non-retina MBP 13 to keep a competitive price. But they will have to add a dedicated GPU, because the Intel HD Graphics 4000 is not powerful enough (I guess) to handle the retina display and its high resolution.

The hardware can handle it, it's the software that can't.

I seem to recall Intel bragging about the new Ivy Bridge (or third generation core-processors as Intel wants peoe to say) integrated graphics being able to handle anything up to 4K. Although I don't remember whether or not that only applied to the desktop versions or not.

It can drive 1280x800 (or 1440x900 or 1680x1050 for that matter) plus 2560x1440 x 2, I believe that adds up to 4K at the least, so yeah, the mobile versions can definitely do it.

Yep they did. If a 13" rMBP is made will they still keep the ordinary MBP? I guess they will since they sell the 15" cMBP but who knows?

According to Kuo rumors, the 15" and 13" cMBPs will be sold alongside their retina counter-parts this rev and then be discontinued when the rMBPs are updated next rev. It's sort of a get-it-while-you-still-can passing of the torch. Better than killing it cold.

The Ivy Bridge graphics of rMBP 13" won't be enough to deliver a smooth experience. Just look at the 15" rMBP when it's running on Intel Graphics, its choppy as heck. Now you, might be thinking that there is a difference in the number of pixels. Yes there is, but how different is 2880 by 1800 and 2560 by 1600?

Expect to get awful graphics out of rMBP 13", and this time you won't be able to switch to the discrete GPU! :eek: The hardware just won't be strong enough, you have to wait for Haswell for a good Graphics performance.

No, the hardware is strong enough, it's the software that lacks. The 13" MacBook Pro can output double the 2560x1600 display as well as its own 1280x800 display, last I checked, that's way more pixels than 2880x1800. We don't need Haswell for performance that's already here in Ivy Bridge; we need Apple to get their **** together when it comes to HiDPI support in OS X.

I agree, a rMBP without a discrete GPU doesn't make sense on any level.

Really, any MBP without a discrete GPU doesn't make any sense on any level. But as far as technological concerns go, the Intel HD 4000 is plenty sufficient to drive that many pixels on its own; OS X just isn't up to snuff when doing it.

Remove the optical drive and you should have enough room for a discrete graphics card.

You forget that making the computer thinner cancels out any benefit gained by removing the optical drive.

My thoughts exactly. I was thinking my early-2011 13" MBP may need replacing by the time the Rev. 2 13" rMBP comes out with Haswell next year.

Right because two years is just way too old for a computer; you have to be on the absolute bleeding edge of technology otherwise your MacBook Pro from practically yesterday will be functionally obsolete. Get real. :rolleyes:
 
If you have 24" iMac With Retina i think it is enough space for Applications and no need for 27 inch.
i can compare my MBP'R with 21.5" iMac and i can say that i feel more comfortable with my retina than iMac. i have more space on retina and imagine this on 24" iMac if it has Retina display, this is huge improvement.
That will be great to work with especially in After Effects where space are critical.

Yeah but I would imagine they want to keep the 27" iMac for price points, I would imagine the Retina no matter the size will cost a lot more than the current 27".

About 36 hours to go!

Right because two years is just way too old for a computer; you have to be on the absolute bleeding edge of technology otherwise your MacBook Pro from practically yesterday will be functionally obsolete. Get real. :rolleyes:

I'm still using my G5 PowerMac and it's going good, knock on wood. Maxed the RAM, bigger HDDs and it just got a new 24" LED.
 
Last edited:
NO IMAC 27''' !!!!!!!!! Faacckk..!!

Been waiting with 3000 Euro for the new Imac since May and now they are coming up with more problems and delay..!!! Faacckk..!!!

If Apple carry on like this we gonna see the new IMAC in 2013 OMG..!!!

seriously Apple.. hurry up with this model we are so SICK of waiting !!!!!
 
I could care less about any gimmicky retina. My 2011 i7 13mbp while doing fine with a double dvi and the 30 CD, goes kaput every so often via TD with the 27 CD. Let's see what they come up with and if I like it enough for Apple to fix my problem under warranty with a credit replacement. Or I could just keep getting the mother board replaced every two weeks until the end times....
 
Would be better with a quad-core in the 13'' instead. But I understand we have to wait until next year for that.
 
Been waiting with 3000 Euro for the new Imac since May and now they are coming up with more problems and delay..!!! Faacckk..!!!

If Apple carry on like this we gonna see the new IMAC in 2013 OMG..!!!

seriously Apple.. hurry up with this model we are so SICK of waiting !!!!!

Just buy the one that's currently available if you need it that urgently. You know what Apple's roadmap is like - there isn't one! So you can't be surprised that you have to wait and wait and you certainly shouldn't be complaining about it.
 
My thoughts on iMac line is that if Apple plans (if they) lounch retina iMac's then this is real that Apple will discontinue 27 inch iMac like they do with 17" MacBook Pro and bring back 24"
So, there will be 21,5" & 24" Retina iMac (i think)
24" Retina - this is huge place for apps & easely can replace 27" line.
 
Your maths is way, way off. Comparing "base" model and "top" model is nonsense, because they have totally different specs. Take the retina base model, then take the non-retina model _with the exact same specs_, and the retina base model is cheaper by $200.

Is it really hard to understand the comparison? :confused: :confused:

I compared the price of:

1) Base model non-retina vs. Base model retina.
2) Top model non-retina vs. Top model retina.

What I found was the average price difference between then. That's all I did.

Again, I 'm not comparing specs... I was just trying to figure out how much would cost the retina version of MacbookPro 13'.
 
The 17" MacBook Pro is dead. It's not coming back.

Understood.

But up to 2008 it was a model that received regular updates, except for a unibody redesign which it received months later in January 2009.

This would be a similar scenario if the 27" iMac has a redesign that comes out months after the 21.5" - regardless of what the current status of the 17" MacBook Pro is.

My point is, Apple released a total redesign on a family of a product, with being ok that a particular model within that family didn't get it's redesign until a few months after.
 
Again, I 'm not comparing specs... I was just trying to figure out how much would cost the retina version of MacbookPro 13'.

Then, as stated, your method was wrong. Look at what the 15" rMBP is by configuring a non-retina 15" to the same specs, and extrapolate from there. We can come to the conclusion that a base rMBP would probably be priced 1499$, ie, a base non-retina MBP 13" + 4 GB of RAM + 128 GB SSD drive.

The retina display is a "no-cost option" on the 15" model as it stands.
 
Then, as stated, your method was wrong. Look at what the 15" rMBP is by configuring a non-retina 15" to the same specs, and extrapolate from there. We can come to the conclusion that a base rMBP would probably be priced 1499$, ie, a base non-retina MBP 13" + 4 GB of RAM + 128 GB SSD drive.

The retina display is a "no-cost option" on the 15" model as it stands.

However, the 13" MBP is sold to cost conscious users, who might not want to buy a 128 GB SSD, and if the size of the 13" MBP is kept for the retina version, then there is no need to use a smaller SSD drive instead of the hard drive to save space. If you take the MBP, throw out the optical drive, fill that space with batteries, and add the retina display, you'll get a fantastic machine for the same price as the basic MBP.

I suppose it depends on how many retina displays Apple can purchase. No point selling a cheap 13" rMBP that everyone wants to buy if you can't deliver enough. I think that's why Apple started with the 15" rMBP.
 
Understood.

But up to 2008 it was a model that received regular updates, except for a unibody redesign which it received months later in January 2009.

This would be a similar scenario if the 27" iMac has a redesign that comes out months after the 21.5" - regardless of what the current status of the 17" MacBook Pro is.

My point is, Apple released a total redesign on a family of a product, with being ok that a particular model within that family didn't get it's redesign until a few months after.

Ah, I see your point now. Yeah, totally within the realm of possibility. Unprecedented for the iMac line, unless you count the side-by-side sale of the 17" and 20" iSight iMac G5s and the 17" and 20" Early 2006 (Core Duo) iMacs, but yeah, it COULD happen. Frankly, I don't see retina coming to this next design and barring that, there's not really a need to stagger the release in the way that Apple is currently doing with the MacBook Pro. With the MacBook Pro, Apple has to make absolutely sure they give stubborn people (like me) the option of sticking with an older design while giving them ample warning of its impending discontinuation, a need that has never really existed with the iMac.
 
this is what i love to hear!

Didn't the 17" MacBook Pro see a unibody design after the 13" and 15" models?

Edit - 13" and 15" unibody MacBook Pro's came out in October 2008, with the 17" trailing behind, coming out in January 2009


Could we experience a similar scenario in which smaller, redesigned models release first, then the larger model releases later?


Yeah! Keep that up, let's make this big dream happen already! i will definitely get a 17" powerful thinner, lighter - retina mbp.

Got my 15"rMBP (2.7Ghz/16GB/768SSD) yesterday, can't take my eyes off her, it is really strange - doesn't feel like i'm using a computer - it is so revolutionary and so futuristic, i'm used to putting discs into drives, so to plug an external super-drive was really really weird hahahahahaaa. But I had to do it I needed those files and wanted to watch Spirted Away!
 
I'm still using my G5 PowerMac and it's going good, knock on wood. Maxed the RAM, bigger HDDs and it just got a new 24" LED.

See that I wouldn't do, only because I am so dependent on the basics (i.e. iTunes, Safari, and Flash Player) which will have a hard time running in 10.5.8 soon if they don't already.

the current Imac is also awesome and i hope the new one will also be great.

The current iMac is NOT awesome. It's externally pretty, but it is otherwise a very poorly designed computer. If you want a computer that is both externally pretty and well designed, look no further than the current non-retina unibody MacBook Pros.

Yeah! Keep that up, let's make this big dream happen already! i will definitely get a 17" powerful thinner, lighter - retina mbp.

Got my 15"rMBP (2.7Ghz/16GB/768SSD) yesterday, can't take my eyes off her, it is really strange - doesn't feel like i'm using a computer - it is so revolutionary and so futuristic, i'm used to putting discs into drives, so to plug an external super-drive was really really weird hahahahahaaa. But I had to do it I needed those files and wanted to watch Spirted Away!

I think the person you quoted was more suggesting that, like the Unibody redesign of 2008 and 2009 (for the 17" model) to the MacBook Pro line, Apple could, just as easily, stagger out the launch of the next iMac redesign, replacing the smaller size while still issuing an update to the current 27" iMac to tide them over until the larger model can properly get the redesign too. I don't think that poster was talking about a comeback for the 17" MacBook Pro. I'm pretty sure that the 17" MacBook Pro is dead and not coming back. Apple still sells refurbished 17" versions from both the Early 2011 and Late 2011 generations, I'd nab one while you still can.
 
s
Again, I 'm not comparing specs... I was just trying to figure out how much would cost the retina version of MacbookPro 13'.

Well, you kinda need to. :) When you look at the upgrades from MBP to rMBP other than the screen, it turns out the retina screen actually has a negative cost.

If they make the 13" MBP solid state, it's basically an MBA. A rMBA would be at most $100 more than an equivalently spec'ed MBA - and it shouldn't even be that much.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.