Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

The Argument for an 11.88-Inch Retina MacBook Air

KohPhiPhi said:
No, YOUR post is ridiculous...

1) Scaled resolutions do NOT look better than native resolutions, no matter whether retina or not.

2) What is the point of offering a retina resolution to then scale it down artificially via OS adjustment?! it's self defeating!
Click to expand...

Although I've never seen a retina display, I suspect that you are right.

It still would be a major upgrade for me because I would not use the 'retina' higher quality text display (4:1 pixel ratio). I would use the max resolution and have more information shown (with tiny text) on my screen at once. I have good vision and, if the display's contrast is high enough, I suspect it will be fine.

That would be a huge improvement for me.
 
Last edited:
iRun26.2 said:
Although I've never seen a retina display, I suspect that you are right.

It still would be a major upgrade for me because I would not use the 'retina' higher quality text display (4:1 pixel ratio). I would use the max resolution and have more information shown (with tiny text) on my screen at once. I have good vision and, if the display's contrast is high enough, I suspect it will be fine.

That would be a huge improvement for me.
Click to expand...

I've seen a rMBP and with a scaled resolution imho it looks better than a native no-retina high res display (es: 1680x1050 15"). I'm quite sure they go with a res equal or lower than 13" rMBP. So all the "real-estate-whiners" will go with a scaled resolution.
 
teejaysplace said:
How about a 15" MB Air so ppl can actually use the thing? Every time I pick an 11" model in the Apple Store, I simply can't imagine attempting to use it as anything more than a portable movie player. I know a lot of users - myself included - for whom the only drawback of the 13" MBA is a dearth of screen real estate. You can design on a 15" screen if you really want to, but losing those last two inches make it challenging to fit in all the tool palates. (I rock a 17" now and sometimes even that's not enough.) Of course we don't need MB's in every size and configuration, but I'm nearly positive that 15" MBA would find a greater market that an 11" or 12", even with a retina display. Hear my prayers, Apple. Hear them and be benevolent!
Click to expand...

Depends what you are using it for. I have a 15" rMBP and an 11" Air. I use the rMBP as my main laptop and the Air comes with me when I need to travel light - it's a good little machine to backup my photos onto when I'm on holiday.

----------
puckhead193 said:
Pfff, bring back the 17" MBP!!!!! :D
Click to expand...

With an ethernet port! I hate adaptors that come loose all the time.
 
12" laptop? No thanks. I wish they still offered the 17", so there's no chance in hell I'd want a 12" screen.
 
11 and 12 inch way too small for a laptop.
but a retina 13 icm MBA is what I want.

and please change the design of MBP frontal bezel..it really doesn't have any personality..I mean no logo,nothing..looks in-complete.
 
either way I am not waiting, I am just about ready to pull the plug on an 11" MBA 2013 with 1.7 and 8GB/512GB with Applecare and keep it for 3 years.
 
ColdShadow said:
11 and 12 inch way too small for a laptop.
but a retina 13 icm MBA is what I want.

and please change the design of MBP frontal bezel..it really doesn't have any personality..I mean no logo,nothing..looks in-complete.
Click to expand...

I love the glowing Apple logo!

It's kind of like wearing the jersey of your favorite football player (in a nerdy kind of way)
 
Last edited:
cocky jeremy said:
12" laptop? No thanks. I wish they still offered the 17", so there's no chance in hell I'd want a 12" screen.
Click to expand...

I doubt the 17" MacBook will be back.

There is a much higher resolution 15" version coming out this year. I would think the higher contract, high resolution displays would be good enough for many of the 17" MBP users.

(17" MBP sound huge!)
 
iRun26.2 said:
There is a much higher resolution 15" version coming out this year.
Click to expand...

What, is there? (I haven't seen any rumors about a new HiRes retina MBP? A retina MBP 15" with, for example - a native retina 1920 x 1200 display?)
 
entropi said:
What, is there? (I haven't seen any rumors aboutt a new HiRes retina MBP? A retina MBP 15" with, for example - a native retina 1920 x 1200 display?)
Click to expand...

They refere to a 3,840 × 2,160 15" screen.

I never saw it on MacRumors (but maybe I missed it).

To find articles on it, Goggle : "MacBook Pro IGZO Sharp"
 
Last edited:
iRun26.2 said:
I love the glowing Apple logo!

It's kind of like wearing the jersey of your favorite football player (in a nerdy kind of way)
Click to expand...

I wasn't referring to the glowing apple logo on the back (that's awesome) I was talking about the front bezel of Mac Book pros..no branding,no logo, nothing just plain black,it looks so ugly and incomplete.I don't understand why they don't put a "Mac Book Pro" brand logo there anymore.or even a small :apple: logo like the iMac or cinema displays would enhance it's aesthetics significantly.
 
iRun26.2 said:
Possibly 3,840 × 2,160

I never saw it on MacRumors (but maybe I missed it).

To find articles on it, Goggle : "MacBook Pro IGZO Sharp"
Click to expand...

Makes no sense. 13" & 15" rMBP (and MBP in general) always had 16:10 aspect ratio screens. According to your prediction, they're shifting to 16:9 screens?
 
ColdShadow said:
I wasn't referring to the glowing apple logo on the back (that's awesome) I was talking about the front bezel of Mac Book pros..no branding,no logo, nothing just plain black,it looks so ugly and incomplete.I don't understand why they don't put a "Mac Book Pro" brand logo there anymore.or even a small :apple: logo like the iMac or cinema displays would enhance it's aesthetics significantly.
Click to expand...

Gotcha. I agree.

----------
smulji said:
Makes no sense. 13" & 15" rMBP (and MBP in general) always had 16:10 aspect ratio screens. According to your prediction, they're shifting to 16:9 screens?
Click to expand...

It's not my prediction. It's just what's I've seen discussed elsewhere.

All I really want is a retina 12" MBA (or, better, call it a MBP).
 
KohPhiPhi said:
No, YOUR post is ridiculous...

1) Scaled resolutions do NOT look better than native resolutions, no matter whether retina or not.

2) What is the point of offering a retina resolution to then scale it down artificially via OS adjustment?! it's self defeating!
Click to expand...

It's not self defeating. When you're looking at downsampled images on high resolution monitor, the "grids" are just not as visible as they would be otherwise. Not only the higher non native resolution such as 1920x1200 looks good, even the lower resolutions such as 1024x640 looks so much better because the downsampled edges are less blocky. However when I use Windows, it's just not the same despite changing the DPI setting because it doesn't downsample.

At least to my eyes the Retina MBP is the first LCD display computer I feel comfortable using non-native resolutions. However at a higher resolution, especially at 1920 x 1200, you can tell the computer is working much harder to those pixels so there's that problem, but it's still usable.

entropi said:
What, is there? (I haven't seen any rumors about a new HiRes retina MBP? A retina MBP 15" with, for example - a native retina 1920 x 1200 display?)
Click to expand...

That's an interesting question. I wonder how long it'll take for Apple and everyone else to move up to the 4K region for the 15" laptops. Probably going to be a few years I suspect though. I wasn't very impressed with the currently available 13" 3200px displays.
 
KohPhiPhi said:
No, YOUR post is ridiculous...

1) Scaled resolutions do NOT look better than native resolutions, no matter whether retina or not.
Click to expand...

Scaled resolutions do not look better than native resolutions true, but a scaled resolution on a retina screen looks better and sharper than a native resolution on a non-retina screen. And you don't need to take my word for it, go check out the original reviews of the initial retina macbook pros, especially those given by Anandtech.

2) What is the point of offering a retina resolution to then scale it down artificially via OS adjustment?! it's self defeating!
Click to expand...

So that you can change your screen real-estate while still enjoying the benefits of a spectacular display, duh...

----------
mirko.meschini said:
I've seen a rMBP and with a scaled resolution imho it looks better than a native no-retina high res display (es: 1680x1050 15"). I'm quite sure they go with a res equal or lower than 13" rMBP. So all the "real-estate-whiners" will go with a scaled resolution.
Click to expand...

That's everyone's experience and it's been mentioned in multiple reviews, the other poster doesn't know what he's talking about.
 
KohPhiPhi said:
No, YOUR post is ridiculous...

1) Scaled resolutions do NOT look better than native resolutions, no matter whether retina or not.

2) What is the point of offering a retina resolution to then scale it down artificially via OS adjustment?! it's self defeating!
Click to expand...

Read up on how OS X deals with Retina resolutions - it's not simple "scaling down". In a Retina-aware application, it is truly resolution-independent. You are getting the higher-quality, just with more pixels per interface element.
 
Anonymous Freak said:
Read up on how OS X deals with Retina resolutions - it's not simple "scaling down". In a Retina-aware application, it is truly resolution-independent. You are getting the higher-quality, just with more pixels per interface element.
Click to expand...

Does MS Windows do it differently?

(ie, what might expect if the new MBA has a retina display and I need to use MS Windows via BootCamp?)
 
iRun26.2 said:
Does MS Windows do it differently?

(ie, what might expect if the new MBA has a retina display and I need to use MS Windows via BootCamp?)
Click to expand...

Yes, Windows does it COMPLETELY differently. There are a few pieces of the interface that are resolution-independent, but most just take fixed-pixel-size elements and scale them badly.

Windows 8+ "Metro" interface is resolution independent, but the "Classic" desktop and non-Metro apps aren't.
 
elvisimprsntr said:
Since when is capitalism a bad thing? I don't see high quality, long service life, high resale value as a tax. You look solely at initial acquisition cost. I look at total cost of ownership. If you want to purchase low quality, disposable products from competitive companies that is your choice. No need to force your beliefs on everyone.



What exactly do you base your statement on? Prepubescent opinion or facts?
BTW, how are BB, Motorola, Nokia, Dell, HP, Sony, Palm, Nintendo, Blockbuster, Napster, TiVo, Replay, etc. doing these days?
Click to expand...

Sony seems to be doing a little better. As for the rest...:(

----------
iRun26.2 said:
My answer is absolutely not!

What the hell would I want a sleek rMBA / iPad hybrid if it was a toy running iOS? Software that is currently available for x86 processors blows iOS programs away. That may change eventually but Apple would be guaranteed to lose a lot of professionals who want the highest quality x86 ultra book available (even capable of running al Windows software) if they move the MBA to an ARM processor.
Click to expand...

iRun26.2 said:
Who said x86 is going away? Intel still has software compatibility and superior production technology on their side.

iOS is great for phones and tablets but it is not recognized as the OS of choice in professional software (science, engineering, software development, and many other disciplines).
Click to expand...

I just have this feeling that something is coming, something involving tight integration of iOS and OS X. Something with a touchscreen, detachable keyboard, etc. Something that's just as capable if not more than the current x86 MBA.
 
dampfnudel said:
Sony seems to be doing a little better. As for the rest...:(

----------





I just have this feeling that something is coming, something involving tight integration of iOS and OS X. Something with a touchscreen, detachable keyboard, etc. Something that's just as capable if not more than the current x86 MBA.
Click to expand...

Then the $2K that I hope to spend on a retina MBA will be spent, instead, on a Windows Ultra Book (probably from Sony) that can run the classic x86 applications I must use for my job. .

That would be such a pity becaus I bought my first MBA only wanting to learn how to write iPhone software yet fell in love with OSX. I'd hate to leave because they turn the MBA into something like what you describe.

Maybe there is more money in an ARM based MBA for Apple. It won't be my money, though.

EDIT: Additionally, if the new MBA isn't based on an x86 Intel chip, it will definitely be 'less capable'. I don't see how this point can be argued.
 
Last edited:
MacSince1990 said:
Yeah but... it was so fat :/
Click to expand...

At the time, it was one of the thinnest laptops available! Only "ultra-portables" were thinner, and they were largely *VERY* crippled. Today we have it good, even the MacBook Air has a relatively fast CPU, and fast storage system. Back in 2003, if you wanted something small and light, you got something *VERY* crippled. Like: CPU only as powerful as something from 4 years earlier crippled.
 
how is the notion silly? are some of you retarded?


all the displays sooner or later are going to be retina, just like sooner or later the processors for the MBA and 13" MBP are all going to be quad core.


like seriously, has time told us any different? what are some of you sniffing?



like what the hell are you guys talking about? of course everything is going to improve.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back