It will cost more than 999 for the 11" Retina, because Cook thinks greed is good(which it is not!)
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.
Redesigned MacBook Air Reportedly Planned for 3Q 2013 Launch, Possibly with Retina Display
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The only "facelift" I could imagine would be thinner bezels (but how with the full-sized keyboard?) and elimination of the wedge design.... but wouldn't that just make it a retina MacBook Pro? Maybe the facelift consists of a slate colored version and that's it?
I also have to say, please, Apple, improve battery life for the 11". It's the only thing I can't stand about mine.
I also have to say, please, Apple, improve battery life for the 11". It's the only thing I can't stand about mine.
The price increase is more attributable to the use of SSDs versus HDs....
Also - given Haswell will be the most power efficient architecture to date, what makes you so sure the tech isn't there yet? It also has a much more powerful integrated GPU.
IGZO will be the key moving forward for ALL of Apple's retina displays. Massive gains in power efficiency AND the ability to have much higher ppi displays. IF Apple goes retina in the MBA this fall, I'd bet it'll be an IGZO screen - as will the retina iPad mini and new iPad 5.
If making the screen retina takes a significant hit on battery life, then this update is a no-go for me. I'd be good with "only" 1080p resolution as it most likely wouldn't impact battery as much as 2560x1600.
And does the Air really need to be thinner? I feel like my Air is plenty thin. I'm not saying if they made it thinner I wouldn't buy it, I'm just thinking they could keep that space for meaningful components (like the battery, for starters).
And does the Air really need to be thinner? I feel like my Air is plenty thin. I'm not saying if they made it thinner I wouldn't buy it, I'm just thinking they could keep that space for meaningful components (like the battery, for starters).
I have not put an SSD in it yet, but have been considering it. If it was my main machine, I would have installed an SSD long ago, but I do most of my heavy lifting on my Mac Pro and I bring a 15" rMBP home from work often enough. I don't have a SSD in my Mac Pro yet either, so I have to make the decision on which machine gets a SSD first. I'm mostly playing the waiting game and watching SSD prices fall.
This is just speculation, but I would guess putting an SSD in an early-2008 MBP would make a world of a difference, even with the limitation of SATA 1.
BTW, another thing I've considered doing to extend the life of this machine: there are also some of these machines where you can install 6GB of RAM (4GB + 2GB). Since it's unmatched pair, you lose a slight bit of RAM performance, but probably make up for it by having more RAM. There is a way to find out if your model will work with that or not, but I can't seem to find the info at this particular moment. I would do SSD first, though.
I also use Aperture (on my Mac Pro, though), and am curious about how much putting it's library on an SSD would make a difference. I have 13GB of RAM, a 5770, and 8 cores, but run it on an HDD and Aperture is not exactly blazing fast. It's not slow, but there are enough pauses for certain operations that there is plenty of room for improvement. I regularly see Aperture use 2GB of RAM, so it must be doing a good amount of caching of photos. With only 4GB of RAM I imagine it probably strains, but I wonder if an SSD could make up for that.
+1
and re all this "it's the drivers" - how does it matter if it's the hardware OR drivers - IF APPLE NEVER DOES ANYTHING TO FIX IT ANYWAY?!?!
I would like a mba 11 with a smaller bezel - maybe a 12" then in the same form factor? I go retina when the rest of the world is ready, I make music on my macs and it will take ages before all music apps and plug ins are retina-ready...
I put an SSD in my MacPro and just built a W8 machine with one. Apps launch so fast and response times are great.
Both start up in under 8 seconds. I will never go back to anything again that isn't an SDD or similar.
still not a fan of the Air Macs, but lets see what gonna do
PS I love the Design , after that nothing else
my MBP 13" Non retina feels real ly awesome .......for now.
PS I love the Design , after that nothing else
my MBP 13" Non retina feels real ly awesome .......for now.
Exactly.
What the hell would you expect the difference between Retina Air 13" and rMBP 13" to be? The only difference between the two now is Retina display and slightly different CPU models. Everything else is already identical (including battery life, not including the extra size/weight that is required for to push 4x the pixels).
A MBPR 13" with a discrete GPU would be my ideal MacBook. I had a 15" Retina for a few days for that reason but returned it as it had issues. If they release a bumped up 13" though, I'll be the happiest of campers.
Agreed. When they said the 13" MBPR was coming, I thought for sure it was going to have the discrete GPU...when it didn't I couldn't believe it.
The 13"/15" MBPR need to have the same internal options for memory, cpu, etc. Let us decide what we want in speed, power, etc.
I'd rather have the 13" and then buy a display for it.
I agree 100%. The only difference the 13" Pro should have between the 15" Pro should be either the processor or a discrete GPU (meaning if Apple isn't going to give us a dGPU in the 13", it should have a quad core processor and if it doesn't have that, we should have a dGPU in its place). Offering a "Pro" machine with a dual core i5, no 16GB RAM option, and integrated graphics just doesn't seem right to me. They're essentially shipping an ultrabook with a high res screen. If they're gonna play the premium game, they should at least make the 13" perform at a premium level. Right now the i5 13" Pro benchmarks the same as an i7 Air.
The rMBP is thinner and lighter than the old MBP, but in terms of portability and comfort to use (typing around the wrists), the MBA is substantially more attractive.
The 13" MBPR already exists and only uses the Ivy Bridge Intell 4000 chipset to power the retina display.
Not sure why people keep saying the MBAR can't happen without a GPU when it already has happened on the pro.
----------
Agreed.
The 13" MBPR should be required to have a dGPU and offer 16GB.
Why? Because it's a PRO machine. That thing you listed above I agree with shouldn't even be allowed to be labeled as a PRO machine.
The MBA line should be defined by the thinner light weight, flash drive, low to mid range dual core CPU and base Intel 4000 (Ivy Bridge and upcoming Haswell) graphics.
The MBP line should be defined by sightly thicker, fusion drives (hopefully something similar coming) mid to high range quad core CPU and discreet/dedicated Nvidia GPU (Needs to be a GTX, not mid range GT either...such BS that the MBPR gets a mid range mobile chip when it needs the high range GTX).
Again, I think it should be up to the user to have the exact same options between the 13" and 15" MBPro. Up to them what size screen they want.
What if they just change the name then?
If it was a Mac Supreme what would its specs requirement be?
If it was a Mac SuperDo what would those requirements be?
I think it's amazing how you can tell what the product should have given it has PRO in the name. Is there like a reference book somewhere that says "if you name a product X, it's supposed to have Y"? Thanks in advance.
Oh no, but I JUST bought a 2012 MBA. Whatever will I do now?
Enjoy it, still enjoying our 3 2010 11" Airs, with 512 MB OWC SSD's
I'd agree with you if Apple themselves didn't market the machines the way they do. They make it very clear that they are professional level laptops that are meant to do professional work (video editing, photo editing, rendering, processor and GPU heavy workloads, hell, they even stress the gaming performance on their own webpages). If Apple wants to sell a 13" MacBook Pro and only ship it with 8GB of RAM max, a dual core chipset, and solely integrated graphics, that's fine. It's their machine and they can sell whatever spec they want.
But for them to then come out and stress how well the machine performs as if it's a machine which is the pinnacle of photo editing, video rending, and gaming bliss... that's just not right.
The Pro moniker has always stressed the ability to do professional work. The professional work in question demands upgraded internals (quad core CPUs, dGPUs, and maximum RAM available, often times in lieu of the cost constraints). The 13" rMBP doesn't live up to Apple's own claims, at least not in my book and for its price.
And yes, I do think naming it something means that the company has some right to deliver on with regards to its performance. If your friend buys a Mustang for $20,000 and you go out to the shop to look at a Mustang GT for $35,000 only to realize it has some nicer paint and the same engine, transmission, and interior, wouldn't you be a little ticked off too?
Do it, it's a great update. I don't see a need for upgrading the MBP in near time except for weight. I am running ML on the MBP and battery life was problematic in the beginning but with 10.8.2 it stabilized quite well.
See if you can put 6 MBP RAM into it. That helped quite a lot with Aperture. But I would do the SSD first.
Last edited:
Quite true. Eventually they will make them out of advanced carbon fiber materials, and make the inside a vacuum, so it weighs less than zero and floats like a balloon.
I doubt Retina in the Air yet because of battery life (unless that ARM rumor is true).
I expect an IPS screen though. That may be enough to keep me with the Air. DEF upgrading my laptop this year, so I am curious to see what Apple does with it. If no screen update to at least IPS, then I will most certainly go to the MBP.
I expect an IPS screen though. That may be enough to keep me with the Air. DEF upgrading my laptop this year, so I am curious to see what Apple does with it. If no screen update to at least IPS, then I will most certainly go to the MBP.
How about thinning the bezels, but keep the same overall size, allowing for a bigger screen. 12" screen in the previous 11" package.
As for a slate coloured version, I would totally dig that. It fits right in with the iPhone/iPad lineup.
Sounds good to me (would love a slate version), but I think I remember reading someone say for some reason they can't mess with the screen size because of scale or something.
Thanks, Nilk. The 500 GB Samsung 840 was on sale for $295 from BuyDig last week. I almost bought it over the weekend, but the sale just expired. It goes on sale fairly often, though. Just check this site:
http://dealmac.com/c625/Computers/Storage/SSDs/?e=1
OWC offers a 6 GB RAM kit for the 2008 MBP we have, but it's $128, which is expensive compared to newer RAM. SSD plus RAM would cost ~$430, which I hesitate spending on a five-year-old computer - especially one with a failure-prone GPU. My logic board went out a year ago, two weeks before my Apple Care expired, so I was able to get it replaced for their flat-rate fee of $310. There's no guarantee that the new one won't go bad, though. I suspect I'll continue doing what I've been doing for the past year: almost buying an SSD, and then hestitating at the last minute. I think that a Haswell MBA and an external monitor (which I have) would suit me just fine, and I'll wait for the refurbs to hit the online Apple store later this year.
----------
Thanks, Bened. As I mentioned to Nilk, I've been going back and forth on this, trying to decide how much money I want to put into a five-year-old computer. My MBP stays connected to an external monitor most of the time, so battery life isn't a big issue for me. 6 GB of RAM is $128 at OWC. I figured it would cost about $20, since newer RAM is so cheap, but I guess they don't make much of the old types anymore.
----------
Yes, any future computer I buy will have an SSD. The 512 GB modules are cheap enough for me, and that's more than enough primary storage for my computer.