Wait for 13" rMBP?

[Slivortal]

A few things:

First of all, I highly doubt that there will be a 13" RMBP for the reasons listed above. The 15" RMBP is packed, and the only way I see to shrink it is by shrinking the battery or pulling the graphics card.

And the graphics card CERTAINLY is important. While its not used most of the time, it is necessary when anything graphical is done (from video games to photo editing).

And even if Apple was able to come up with a 13", it would not be more than $400 MAXIMUM less than the 15" (probably $100 or $200). The fact that it's 2" smaller does not account for the fact that an incredible amount of engineering would be done to fit all but a portion of the battery (the least expensive part) in.

Also, for those of you talking about RMBAs, no way. RMBAs don't even have a "real" processor (they use ULV), so I highly doubt they'd be able to fit both a real battery and a processor to power an RMBA.

 

[barjam]

Rmba is inevitable. It may be years off but it is inevitable.

What I want to know is why is the mbp13 current resolution so awful? It is the worst of all MacBooks afaik and for what I do (writing software) it is useless. I will probably buy a MBA 13 just because it comes with a moderately usable screen (1440x900).

 

[Slivortal]

Rmba is inevitable. It may be years off but it is inevitable.

What I want to know is why is the mbp13 current resolution so awful? It is the worst of all MacBooks afaik and for what I do (writing software) it is useless. I will probably buy a MBA 13 just because it comes with a moderately usable screen (1440x900).

Sure, it's inevitable. Maybe in 2014 with the Broadwell 14nm die shrink/MCM design, but until the components are small enough, no way (and far future tech is kind of irrelevant when talking about future purposes). 14nm might not even be small enough, as I really don't believe the components are small enough for a 13" RMBP.

And idk why the 13" MBP's res is so bad. It should at least be 1440x900, but the fact that it's screen is terrible isn't exactly a testament to how Apple would be fitting a 2560x1600 or whatnot in their anytime soon.

 

[Stetrain]

And idk why the 13" MBP's res is so bad. It should at least be 1440x900, but the fact that it's screen is terrible isn't exactly a testament to how Apple would be fitting a 2560x1600 or whatnot in their anytime soon.

For the past couple of years the 13" MBP has been Apple's high volume entry level Macbook, taking over from the white plastic Macbook. They're all over the place at colleges. Keeping the price down and the margins high was pretty important because of that.

Now I think Apple is trying to push the 13" MBA into that slot. The base 13" MBA now costs the same as the base 13" MBP. It has a higher res (but not higher quality) display and a default SSD. I wouldn't be surprised to see them keep dropping the price further, maybe even eventually $999 for the 128GB 13".

If the Air takes over the entry level position, then Apple could retarget the 13" MBP as a high end portable machine. Maybe starting at $1500 or $1600. More along the lines of the Vaio Z.

 

[Slivortal]

For the past couple of years the 13" MBP has been Apple's high volume entry level Macbook, taking over from the white plastic Macbook. They're all over the place at colleges. Keeping the price down and the margins high was pretty important because of that.

Now I think Apple is trying to push the 13" MBA into that slot. The base 13" MBA now costs the same as the base 13" MBP. It has a higher res (but not higher quality) display and a default SSD. I wouldn't be surprised to see them keep dropping the price further, maybe even eventually $999 for the 128GB 13".

If the Air takes over the entry level position, then Apple could retarget the 13" MBP as a high end portable machine. Maybe starting at $1500 or $1600. More along the lines of the Vaio Z.

Right, but that still doesn't do away with the technical limitations, or the cost that comes with designing a computer to the extent of those limitations. I'm sure Apple would like to sell all their products for $500 and make a $500 profit on each, but Retina screens as well as the technology don't come cheap. Assuming they can get that level at all.

 

[Stetrain]

Right, but that still doesn't do away with the technical limitations, or the cost that comes with designing a computer to the extent of those limitations. I'm sure Apple would like to sell all their products for $500 and make a $500 profit on each, but Retina screens as well as the technology don't come cheap. Assuming they can get that level at all.

I don't really see any obstacles to building a 13" RMBP with a dual-core processor, a low end dedicated GPU (like a 620M or 630M), and a 2560x1600 display. Especially if they can use Sharp's new IGZO display (which would explain the delay compared to the 15") which would give better battery life.

 

[Slivortal]

I don't really see any obstacles to building a 13" RMBP with a dual-core processor, a low end dedicated GPU (like a 620M or 630M), and a 2560x1600 display. Especially if they can use Sharp's new IGZO display (which would explain the delay compared to the 15") which would give better battery life.

I certainly do. The biggest issue with a 13" RMBP is the battery. If you've looked at pictures of the 15" RMBP, most of the internals are dedicated to housing the enormous battery, as well as the cooling system. Neither of these would be decreased significantly by going to 13".

I could see a post-Haswell 13" if Haswell brings the type of battery efficiency that Intel promises (with a 2013 WWDC launch), but I honestly don't see it this fall. After Broadwell's MCM, I'd be surprised if it doesn't happen.

I just don't see how a 13" RMBP is feasible with current tech.

 

[Stetrain]

I certainly do. The biggest issue with a 13" RMBP is the battery. If you've looked at pictures of the 15" RMBP, most of the internals are dedicated to housing the enormous battery, as well as the cooling system. Neither of these would be decreased significantly by going to 13".

I could see a post-Haswell 13" if Haswell brings the type of battery efficiency that Intel promises (with a 2013 WWDC launch), but I honestly don't see it this fall. After Broadwell's MCM, I'd be surprised if it doesn't happen.

I just don't see how a 13" RMBP is feasible with current tech.

The 13" wouldn't need such a big battery because it probably won't have the same power hungry quad core CPU + GT650M GPU combination. Since 2560x1600 has been a common resolution for so long, they could possibly even get away with no dedicated GPU at all. That means either a dual core CPU, or the 35W quad core, which is not much of a step up from the power requirements of the current 13" MBP.

The smaller screen could result in somewhat less of a backlight power requirement, and an IGZO display would mean that the backlight power could basically be the same as the current 13" MBP.

By getting rid of the ODD and HDD and moving the storage to the logic board, they could increase the size of the battery much like they did when going from the 15" MBP to the 15" Retina.

I agree that it makes a bit more sense with Haswell, but then so does the 15" RMBP. Anandtech's article points out that major changes in design tend to be accompanied by only minor changes in CPU/GPU architecture.

 

[fejker]

Regarding the power needed for driving retina pixels - my mid 2010 13" MBP drives it's own screen (1280x800) and my external 24" HP (1920x1200) quite well. There are some slowdowns at first when it comes to expose, but otherwise the experience is quite smooth.

2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
8 GB 1067 MHz DDR3 (upgraded)
NVIDIA GeForce 320M 256 MB

I don't see why hardware that is two-three generations younger would not be able to drive such a display and even more. But then again I don't see why Apple is still sticking dual cores into the 13" MBP - probably to get people to buy the 15".

Well, let's hope they give the 13" a nice boost with the next upgrade, my money is waiting.