Being a "Pro" is relative. Why don't you say that the 15'' shouldn't be call a Pro when it can be called an Expert. So we can continue calling the 13'' Pro. Maybe the 13'' is call a Pro because it has a retina which is "better" than air? Who knows?!? This is a pointless discussion.
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.
Should the 13" even be considered "Pro"?
- Thread starter nStyle
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Being a "Pro" is relative. Why don't you say that the 15'' shouldn't be call a Pro when it can be called an Expert. So we can continue calling the 13'' Pro. Maybe the 13'' is call a Pro because it has a retina which is "better" than air? Who knows?!? This is a pointless discussion.
This reply, your signature. I am your newest fan.
Apple does not include "pro" graphics in any computer it sells, bar the Mac Pro. It's that simple. Every other discrete graphics card they put into their machines is a consumer level part that is usually severely compromised by the form factor of the machine they put it in. The 750M and M370X throttle because of heat and because they draw more power than the power supply can deliver.
Look, they don't care about ultimate performance anymore. They care about battery life and anorexic form factors. If you want a truly "Pro" level workstation class notebook, there are any number of PC makers that would be glad to sell you one. Apple isn't one of them.
Depends. A lot of the apple hardware is extremely high performance, it just depends on how you measure it. IO throughput on the SSDs they have is better than anything else on the market. The GPU/CPU options they pick for their mobile machines are better in terms of power efficiency for performance than anything else in the market.
Perhaps apple realise (as i have myself) that attempting to stuff ultra high end GPUs in a "portable" machine results in something that isn't really any more portable than a new Mac Pro...
No, there are simply tradeoffs to make. Razer and Lenovo both accomplish this different ways. Razer made a thin gaming notebook with a powerful processor and GPU but less battery life. Lenovo makes a notebook with optional Xeon CPUs and Quadro graphics that is about the size of the classic Macbook Pro.
I am an artist I really don't think 13 rMBP should be Pro....Why? The screen is too small to work with Photoshop.
So pro means only photoshop use???
That's a very narrow (and narrowminded) definition you have there.
The 13 inch RMBP is a very powerful thin light machine that will do everything most professional computer users need with speed, style and grace, that is why it is a pro machine. Most professional users are people who need office and powerpoint and internet over wifi wherever they go, no need for quadcores or huge graphics or large screens just something that fit's nicely on a flight tray and is stable and works as you want when you want.
Of course the rMB will take some of these users as time goes on I'm sure.
I hear how because I have a Macbook Pro it should be capable of doing XY and Z, yet as mentioned in this thread the Pro moniker is a name that the marketing team threw on it, particularly to differentiate the older MacBook line, which was more entry level student focused at the time.
That`s already happened for me, I will definitely update my 1.2 rMB to Skylake same for my 15" rMBP on release, not so much my 13" rMBP unless Apple does something very special for the next release of the 13" form factor.
The Retina Macbook can easily deal with business related applications, the 15" MacBook Pro deals with the "heavy lifting" that neither the 12" or 13" are really very good at. All the same the 13" rMBP is without any doubt Apples most balanced portable and offers by far the best value for money. My choice is more a function of my usage/workflows than a criticism of the 13" rMBP.
Q-6
Last edited:
Yes 13 inches rMBP are great for something else but handle little slow when you are working on mighty FCPX - rending video.
And that makes them unsuitable for the hundreds of millions of professionals that don't render video in FCPX??? This is the problem you have and it's assuming that everyone uses a computer professionally as you want to. The vast majority of them don't.
The 13 inch rMBP is just about the most balanced compromise between performance, battery life, screen, connectivity and portability available in computing and this is perfect for a huge number of professionals.
No, the 13" is a joke. The first gen 13" pro at least had Nvidia graphics (the 9400m was much more capable than the 2011 13" with integrated Intel graphics). It's been over 6 years since that model was introduced. The 13" should have a 4 core CPU, 8 GB RAM, and a 256 SSD with either an AMD or Nvidia GPU at minimum to be considered 'Pro'.
quad-core on the 13" rMBP would indeed be nice, but we don't know for sure how it would manage the heat. Dedicated GPU is not needed in that model, but if you really want to have a decent GPU, then there are some solutions ( eGPU >>> dGPU ). In my opinion, the 13" rMBP is very well balanced, kinda like "jack of all trades, master of none". It fills a specific gap / need and that's completely fine.
As for the label... really?! Some people actually buy their hardware so that it fits their needs, not because it's called in a way or another. As for the rest, well, c'est la vie... get something else next time than bitch about a stupid label that means nothing.
As for the label... really?! Some people actually buy their hardware so that it fits their needs, not because it's called in a way or another. As for the rest, well, c'est la vie... get something else next time than bitch about a stupid label that means nothing.