No doubt some people will be disappointed by the recent rMBP update, that didn't include a new CPU. This is not Apple's fault, clearly, as the Broadwell-H chips simply aren't available, and may never be. However, it did give me pause for thought about whether the slowing pace of computer technology advancement might actually be a good thing.... Back in the late 80's & 90's we saw doubling or tripling of CPU speeds every couple of years, which meant large incremental performance improvements between CPU releases, and a bit of an "arms race" to keep up with the latest tech. In the last 2-3 years with Intel's Core chips, incremental performance gains have been minimal, so there's been little incentive to upgrade between generations. Yesterday's rMBP release is a case in point - not much better (SSD and GPU performance excepted) than 2013 models. I think we're naturally settling into a 3-4 year upgrade cycle, where you need to wait 2-3 CPU generations in order to get any worthwhile improvement. This probably suits most people better than having the "stress" of wondering whether their shiny new computer will struggle to run software in the next one or two years. It also aligns with Apple Care (3 years) and many corporate laptop refresh cycles (my company allows new machines every 3 years). I love tech advancement as much as the next nerd, but there's no doubt that for many of us the impulse to have the "latest and best" machine is an expensive addiction. Maybe in a few years computers will just become another commodity household item (especially with more processing being done on cloud services) - much like your fridge or washing machine. I don't see many people getting exited by this years Electrolux or Westinghouse appliance....you just buy a new one when the old one becomes unreliable and can't be fixed.