Wouldn't you prefer a 12-inch screen while keeping the same size (just slightly taller) and reducing the bezel?
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.
Warming-up for the all-new redesigned retina 2014 (2015?) MacBook Air
- Thread starter skaertus
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Wouldn't you prefer a 12-inch screen while keeping the same size (just slightly taller) and reducing the bezel?
There's the issue of cannibalisation of the MBP 13" but I'm really hoping for something like the PowerBook G4 *powerful yet portable and light.
Not really. The bezel's quite attractive but I wouldn't mind it vanishing.
The size though, is nonnegotiable. I've been using MacBooks (MacBook 2007, MBP 2009) with the default 'size' and aspect ratio but I've realised that the MacBook Air's current dimensions is fantastic (like a magazine as opposed to A4 paper).
Who wouldn't want a reduced bezel?
I look at the huge bezel on my 11" MBA and start to drool thinking about the larger display that could be added to my MBA if most of the bezel could be removed. .
That's why I 'requested' to pay $500 to upgrade from 8G to 16G. Then Apple shouldn't worry about the loss in revenue if I but a MBA rather than a MBP.
I don't want the larger size of the MBP and I'm willing to pay for it.
I doubt they can do better battery life
The retina display would make the price go higher, the battery would suffer and the performance too.
If it doesn't get any major update, i guess it'll get cheaper.
Do you guys think we're likely to see Apple release a Retina and non-Retina MacBook Air ?
Personally, I think Apple will move to fully eliminate non-Retina machines (perhaps by 2015), as to take advantage of economies of scale; but perhaps the price 'jump' (if any) would price the Macbook Air out of the 'market'.
I'm highly anticipating a redesign as well.
Personally, I think Apple will move to fully eliminate non-Retina machines (perhaps by 2015), as to take advantage of economies of scale; but perhaps the price 'jump' (if any) would price the Macbook Air out of the 'market'.
I'm highly anticipating a redesign as well.
I think they will improve the old models as they introduce the new retina version. Eventually (by 2015, like you say) I think Apple's notebooks will all be retina. Apple will be first to do that for sure.
They kept the the non-retina option available for all MBP introductions. I see no reason the old MBA (without retina screens) should immediately disappear.
Just wondering whether economies of scale can play a role in making it easier/cheaper to operate one-model rather than have non-retina models alongside. And some of those cost-savings can be passed on to the consumer thus reducing the starting price.
I suspect Apple will still keep the entry level macbook air around as a price point, until the time comes when they can comfortably offer a baseline retina macbook at $999. It will have limited options for upgrades, effectively forcing you to choose a retina macbook air if you want better specs, but it's there as an option for people who just want the cheapest Mac available.
I am thinking that if they replace the air's wedge-shaped base with the more boxy design of the macbook pro, that would leave more room for batteries. I am not sure if this would make the laptop heavier to the extent that it might not count as an "air", but I think Apple may consider just merging both the pro and air lines, dropping the name and calling them MacBooks with retina display.
I don't think so.
I think Apple will discontinue the current non-retina MacBook Air and release a brand-new retina MacBook Air to replace it. Of course I can be wrong, but I think the scenario here is completely different from the one in 2012, when Apple released the retina MacBook Pro. And here's why.
When Apple released the retina MacBook Pro, it was a very expensive machine because of
the retina display itself, which was more expensive than regular displays; and
the SSD storage, which was much more expensive than regular HDs.
For this reason, Apple kept the non-retina MacBook Pro at its regular price and introduced an overpriced retina MacBook Pro. In 2013, Apple reduced the prices of the retina MacBook Pros and discontinued the regular models (except for the lower-end 13-inch). Now, it's different, as the two elements that boosted the price of the Pros are not present here. Let me explain why I think so:
The retina display is not as expensive as it was in June 2012, when the retina Pro was released. In June 2012, ultra-high resolution displays were new and, therefore, very expensive. Now, they're becoming cheaper and cheaper. In addition, the rumored resolution of the new Air (2304x1440) is not the quadruple of the current Airs, as it happened to be with the Pros. So, the price increase will not be so great due to (i) a jump not-so-high in screen resolution and (ii) the popularization of high-resolution displays, which are cheaper now than in June 2012 (and will be even cheaper in mid-2014, when the retina Air is likely to become available).
Flash memory is still very expensive, but the Air already got it. When Apple released the Pro, it replaced the HDDs for SSDs, which resulted in an increase in the price. But the Air already has SSDs inside, so there's no price jump here.
Due to these reasons, I think Apple will discontinue the current Air (and perhaps even the entry-level non-retina Pro) and release a brand-new retina Air.
I dare to disagree.
Look at my post above.
In addition, look at the current prices (at Amazon.com) of similar laptops.
• 13-inch retina MacBook Pro (2560x1600) with 4 GB and 128 GB: US$ 1,269
• 13-inch Lenovo Yoga Pro 2 (3200x1800) with 4 GB and 128 GB: US$ 1,150
• 13-inch Zenbook UX301LA (3200x1800) with 8 GB and 256 GB: US$ 1,699
• 13-inch Samsung Ativ Book 9 Plus (3200x1800) with 4 GB and 128 GB: US$ 1,314
• 13-inch Acer Aspire S7 (1920x1080) with 8 GB and 128 GB: US$ 1,249
• 11-inch Sony Vaio Pro (1920x1080) with 4 GB and 128 GB: US$ 969
I don't think Apple will have any difficulty in releasing a US$ 999 12-inch 2304x1440 MacBook Air.
agreed
moreover, Apple master Retina technology since a while, production costs should have been quite reduced
newer technology does cost some because they need to handle production line, research and development etc...
even manufacturers have turned into 4K screen, 2K will be launched pretty soon (next Galaxy S5 and Sony Xperia Z2 will have it according rumors)
Retina for MBA its not luxury, its necessary
e.g my own smartphone has higher resolution and better display than my MBA, wtf?!
moreover, Apple master Retina technology since a while, production costs should have been quite reduced
newer technology does cost some because they need to handle production line, research and development etc...
even manufacturers have turned into 4K screen, 2K will be launched pretty soon (next Galaxy S5 and Sony Xperia Z2 will have it according rumors)
Retina for MBA its not luxury, its necessary
e.g my own smartphone has higher resolution and better display than my MBA, wtf?!
apple doesnt make the screens though...
those companies also make the screens for other OEMs as well...
but the point stands, the more 'retina' screens being made, the cheaper
those companies also make the screens for other OEMs as well...
but the point stands, the more 'retina' screens being made, the cheaper
yes its what i meant
the more they product and sell the less it costs
lets take comparison with 4K
its hugely expensive for now but price decreases step by step
the more they produce and the less it will be cost
some manufacturers are about to launch under less 1000$ for 4K screen
i bet Retina doesn't cost that much to Apple, they just spread marketing / commercial ********s like any of high tech company
the more they product and sell the less it costs
lets take comparison with 4K
its hugely expensive for now but price decreases step by step
the more they produce and the less it will be cost
some manufacturers are about to launch under less 1000$ for 4K screen
i bet Retina doesn't cost that much to Apple, they just spread marketing / commercial ********s like any of high tech company
I wouldn't go that far... The Air name is very popular. Even with the new iPad Air. The Air represents also the wifi capabilities. Keep in mind that the MBA line sells very well because it is an affordable notebook.
If Apple uses IGZO technology in the display they could leave the capacity of the battery as it is, because these displays are more energy efficient.
I remember that before the 15-inch retina MacBook Pro was launched, there were rumors that a 15-inch 2880x1800 screen would cost US$ 160, $ 92 more than the cost of the 15-inch 1440x900 screens that equipped the previous generation (and which costed $ 68 each).
So, even back in 2012, the retina display didn't justify a $ 400 price premium (perhaps these screens plus the flash memory did justify, though). Now, these screens are probably much cheaper than in 2012.
Price premiums that the customer sees can not be compared to the additional costs incurred by the manufacturer. Any business that charges 'x' dollars more for a premium feature certainly didn't simply pay just 'x' more dollars themselves. Companies usually make the most on their most expensive model.
Yes, of course Apple adopted the most expensive model. It's a matter of competition (offer/demand), and there was no competition to the retina MacBook Pro when it was released. Now, there is competition, and prices have dropped.
What I am saying is that a retina MacBook Air will not incur many additional costs to be made. So, Apple will have room to keep the same prices it practices now (or very similar, just a little higher).
1) It could be thinner and lighter using new technology.
2) It could be the first larger IGZO panels Apple uses.
What kind of technology could it use?
I think it could be thinner and lighter by reducing the size of the battery. It could be achieved because (i) Broadwell is supposed to be even more energy-efficient than Haswell (Intel is claiming a 30% increase); and (ii) it could use energy-efficient screen technology. I don't think Apple will replace aluminum for a lighter material at this time.
As for the screen technology, Apple could use IGZO because it's quite cheap. LTPS could be used as well, but it's more expensive.
It wouldn't surprise me if the rumor is incorrect in that the resolution is higher. A step backwards doesn't make sense.
For me, it wouldn't matter because I plan to use my new retina MBA at the highest native resolution (yes, it will be small, but I think I will be just fine with that).
A resolution of 2304x1440 would not necessarily be a step backward. If the effective resolution is indeed 1172x720, then of course real estate screen would be reduced. But you can use other effective resolutions due to Apple's scaling engine.
In addition, if Apple wants to keep some consistency within the MacBook line, then a resolution of 2304x1440 makes sense for a 12-inch screen, given that the 13-inch has 2560x1600 and the 15-inch has 2880x1800.
If the Air gets 2732x1536 or 2880x1800, it would be, in any case, inconsistent with the current line-up. If it gets a 2880x1800 resolution, the ppi will be much higher than the other retina offers. And if it gets a 2732x1536 resolution, then the aspect ratio will be 16:9, while the others use 16:10.
You make the assumption that the 13" and 15" MBP resolutions and their workspaces will be static. I remember reading a rumor that the 15" MBP may get a new 3,840 x 2,160 IGZO screen next year. Were the 13" MBP to also get an improvement in resolution, it would then make sense for the MBA retina resolution to be higher than the original rumor suggested.
In the end, I don't care. I just want a retina screen (any resolution) on the 11" (or new 12") MBA. It would be incredibly disappointing if the new screen in previous rumors is really for an iOS device rather than for a MacBook (Air or Pro).
Last edited:
Love it!! hahahaha