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

saintforlife

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Feb 25, 2011
1,045
329
http://www.theverge.com/2016/8/4/12373776/2012-macbook-pro-still-alive-not-dead-why

One thousand, five hundred and fourteen days. Or: four years, one month, and twenty-four days.

That’s how long it’s been since Apple released the last MacBook Pro to come without a Retina display. The $1,199 13-inch model was powered by a 2.5GHz Core i5 Ivy Bridge processor, a solid option for a midrange laptop in June 2012. I got one that month and am actually typing this column on it right now, having performed open hard drive surgery last night to bring it back from the dead.

Nothing unusual about that, of course — technology moves on. Except it’s now August 2016, and Apple is inexplicably still selling the exact same laptop.

For longtime Mac users, MacRumors’ Buyer’s Guide is an online institution. The publication catalogs the release dates of each major Apple product line and contrasts them against the company’s usually predictable timeframe for updates, ultimately delivering a verdict on whether it’s better to buy now or wait. It’s a hugely useful resource that I’ve often pointed people to when asked for recommendations on laptop purchases.

But right now, the Mac section of the guide makes for depressing reading. Apart from the 12-inch MacBook, which was refreshed in April, every single Mac line from the mini to the Pro is designated as "Don’t Buy" because of how long it’s been since Apple updated them.

The Retina MacBook Pro is 442 days into its current cycle, despite refreshes coming every 268 days on average in the past. The Mac mini has gone 657 days since its last update, which was controversial in itself since Apple removed quad-core options and made the product harder to upgrade after purchase. And the Mac Pro, released in December 2013 following much "Can’t innovate any more, my ass"-fueled fanfare? It hasn’t received a single update since then. "This is without a doubt the future of the pro desktop," Phil Schiller said when announcing the Mac Pro on stage that year. Did he mean that this was the precise model Apple expects professional users to use literally forever?​
 
While I think it's too expensive I don't mind the non-retina being around still. With the i7, 16GB of ram, and an SSD they're still rather competitive in terms of performance. I love mine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: baypharm and thewap
why stop at computers may as well stop selling old out dated smartphones like the 6s/6s+. lets get some new up to date hardware like wireless charging and fast charging just to name a few.
 
They can keep selling them, sure, they still work well, but they should not be charging 2016 prices for 2012/13/14 technology. What they are doing is cashing in on people who don't know any better and it's wrong.

Apple have an obligation to keep their machines current now that they've crippled them to a point they can't be upgraded by the end user at all. They should be embarrassed.
 
Fall 2016 better be good or I'm taking my money elsewhere. My 2010 MBP is aging but I'm not that desperate that I'll buy anything that Apple tries to shove. Enough is enough.

What exactly are you looking for in a computer? The 2015 retina models are very good computers. You can find them at discounts via the refurb store and even at Best Buy or Frys.

This thread is specifically about the non retina model, which for whatever reason, people are still buying. I hope you're not expecting Apple to actually update this model...
 
  • Like
Reactions: akdj
Same with the 16 GB iPhones... people still buy it because it is the cheapest version out there...

Alternatively, most people don't care. My dad is using an 8GB iPhone 5c and it does everything he needs. It's even got a gig or two available.

but it isn't good looking for Apple.

Not sure what you mean. Is Apple in some sort of trouble for selling people something that is exactly what they tell them they're selling?
 
  • Like
Reactions: HBOC
There is still a small market for these machines. I would buy one. I did two months ago (a used 15"). I also own a 13". For what I do they are fast enough and I don't need the size or the retina screen.
 
why stop at computers may as well stop selling old out dated smartphones like the 6s/6s+. lets get some new up to date hardware like wireless charging and fast charging just to name a few.

Yeah... Like the Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge.
 
  • Like
Reactions: maxsix
Yeah... Like the Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge.
you can't compare the E7 to the 6s+ as far as the newest tech inside of them. the edge has way more newer new stuff inside of it. like wireless charging, fast charge, amoled screen etc....
 
Not sure what you mean. Is Apple in some sort of trouble for selling people something that is exactly what they tell them they're selling?

I am looking on Apple's website right now.

Where does it say that it's a 2012 model with Ivy Bridge processor?
 
I am looking on Apple's website right now.

Where does it say that it's a 2012 model with Ivy Bridge processor?

My reply was specifically to a person about iPhone capacities, but to answer your question, here:

https://support.apple.com/kb/SP649?viewlocale=en_US&locale=en_US

The name of the Mac is - "MacBook Pro (13-inch, Mid 2012)"

Now it doesn't say it has an ivy bridge processor, but that is pretty typical of Apple. And again, what kind of processor do you expect to get in a Mac that has Mid 2012 in its name?
 
I expect Apple is pushing a large lead time for refreshes because it wants to justify a redesign that has compromises (USB C only). People will more readily embrace it if the alternative is a used model with specs from 3 years ago.
 
My reply was specifically to a person about iPhone capacities, but to answer your question, here:

https://support.apple.com/kb/SP649?viewlocale=en_US&locale=en_US

The name of the Mac is - "MacBook Pro (13-inch, Mid 2012)"

Now it doesn't say it has an ivy bridge processor, but that is pretty typical of Apple. And again, what kind of processor do you expect to get in a Mac that has Mid 2012 in its name?

Suppose I am on Apple's website and considering buying it, where does it said that it's a Mid-2012 model?
 
- Except in a very very very roundabout way at the bottom under footnote 4: "Wireless web testing conducted by Apple in May 2012"...
That's a footnote for something.

Ask your mother to read the page and see if she understands that this is a 2012 machine. :p
 
  • Like
Reactions: Steeley
Sure they should have updated the non retina model, I have one, bought it used on the Best Buy Employee only website 2 years ago for $450. Upgraded Ram to 16 and 500G Samsung SSD. Love it and would not trade it for a retina model, no way. Maybe their is something to be said for a model that has had a very successful run and is still available. Just used the DVD the other day to rip a few music CDs. Anyway a faster processor is really not that big of a deal for what most people do: internet, email, Social, etc. I dread the day that I have to replace it for some slim Jim retina model, but that day is probably not to far down the road. My battery cycles are 457 and age shows 2.8 years with an oct 2013 Manufacture date. Hoping for 3 more years, and by then the MBPros will probably be gone and will will all have iPad pros with keyboards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fanastasia
Apple have an obligation to keep their machines current now that they've crippled them to a point they can't be upgraded by the end user at all. They should be embarrassed.
I thought upgradability was one of the reasons Apple still sells the 2012 MacBook Pro. IIRC, it's their only notebook where people can upgrade the RAM and HDD (and use Ethernet without an adapter, and CD/DVDs without an external drive). Like below.

I have one, bought it used on the Best Buy Employee only website 2 years ago for $450. Upgraded Ram to 16 and 500G Samsung SSD.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fanastasia
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.