Whats wrong with the 13" retina macbook pro?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by mohsy90, Oct 23, 2012.

  1. mohsy90, Oct 23, 2012
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2012

    mohsy90 macrumors 65816

    mohsy90

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Location:
    New York
    #1
    Lets express our concerns here.

    At $1699, a $500 premium over the current 13" MBP, we get a 128GB SSD, new design and retina display, no dedicated graphics and no upgrade option to 16GB RAM = WAY OVERPRICED

    Wth Apple???
     
  2. Trubbles macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2012
  3. whiteonline macrumors 6502

    whiteonline

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2011
    Location:
    California, USA
  4. mohsy90 thread starter macrumors 65816

    mohsy90

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Location:
    New York
    #4
    Idk why the hell they wouldnt offer 16GB ram. Any way I look at this notebook, its an awful buy!!
     
  5. PEN10k macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2012
    Location:
    Denmark
    #5
    No dedicated graphics = deal breaker for me.
    Really hoped it was dedicated!
     
  6. OSMac macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2010
    #6
    No quad i7 option
    No RAM options
    Only HD4000

    $1699 - Saved.
     
  7. whiteonline macrumors 6502

    whiteonline

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2011
    Location:
    California, USA
    #7
    I would have paid the premium. Not getting quad core hurts, but I can manage. No dGPU is another non-concern.

    But locked to 8GB RAM is a deal breaker. Damnit. Was really, really hoping to downsize from the 15" high res I have.
     
  8. pgiguere1 macrumors 68020

    pgiguere1

    Joined:
    May 28, 2009
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    #8
    Specs are what I expected.

    My only problem is price. This should be $200 less to make sense compared to the MBA and 15" rMBP.

    It's even worse if you want to upgrade your 13" rMBP, considering that 128GB is not a lot of storage.

    Like I pointed out, a 13" rMBP configured with 256GB of flash and a dual-core i7 is exactly the same price as a 15" rMBP which is more powerful in every possible way.
     
  9. mohsy90 thread starter macrumors 65816

    mohsy90

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Location:
    New York
    #9
    I think for the majority, including my self, we expected no dedicated graphics. But at $1699, it should have at least come with 256GB SSD and an upgrade option to 16GB ram. $1599 also would have been better price.
     
  10. cokeb macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2007
    #10
    Sure, but the 13" is far easier to carry around. For those who value portability it would still be a better deal.
     
  11. PeterJP macrumors 6502

    PeterJP

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2012
    Location:
    Leuven, Belgium
    #11
    I extrapolated the differences between the 15" MBP & rMBP to estimate what a 13" rMBP would look like. It was 8GB, 256GB at €1730. To get that now, Apple charges me €2070 for the "upgraded" model. Yeah, I just love paying €340 more to get what I consider a base model !

    I could even (nearly) get an iPad mini for that money, if I could care.

    I was pondering replacing my desktop PC by a Mac. If I pay the price of a base Mac Mini, I get such a high end PC in a fanless aluminum case that it's shameful. The only thing that vaguely remains interesting in the Apple world is the MBA series, but that's being taken care of. Such a shame Windows 8 looks like a horrendous train crash of an OS.


    Peter.
     
  12. mohsy90 thread starter macrumors 65816

    mohsy90

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Location:
    New York
    #12
    Looks the like the only reason you should be choosing the 13" retina is if you want a 13" with a retina display. Aside from that, you could drop down the the Air and get better portability while saving a ton of cash.
     
  13. NewishMacGuy macrumors 6502a

    NewishMacGuy

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    #13
    This rMBP-13 option and pricing strategy reeks of hobbling the spec to avoid cannibalizing either the rMBP-15 or the high end MBAs. At this spec this thing should have been $1499 tops.
     
  14. MaxPower72 macrumors 6502

    MaxPower72

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2012
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois, Crooks County
    #14
    this "new" rMBP 13" has been really disappointing.
     
  15. Rizzm macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2012
    #15
    Really? "Far"? :rolleyes:

    I've used both. No. IMO of course.
     
  16. rmwebs macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    #16
    No offense but thats a pretty silly comment.

    The 15" rMBP is lighter than the standard 13" MBP, a year ago everyone who wanted a MBP used one of these 'heavy' models and survived just fine.
     
  17. cokeb macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2007
    #17
    And a couple of years ago we were used to even heavier stuff, but things are getting better all the time.

    It's not just weight, it's size as well.

    To say that some people will value portability, and are willing to pay for it, is not silly -- it's a fact.

    You might prioritize differently, of course.
     
  18. rmwebs macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    #18
    I was commenting more on your "far easier" - its mildly, minutely easier to the point where the difference in weight is 400 grams.
     
  19. Rhinoevans macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2012
    Location:
    Las Vegas, NV
    #19
    People paying a premium just to get thinner, lighter, pretty screen.

    I pay for performance, so it the cMBP for me. Maybe the last user upgradable computer, if Apple continues with this trend.

    Hopefully picking mine up tomorrow in Bahrain at the Navy Exchange

    Just wish they sold a 15" rMBP without the retina, 16G Ram and a 512 SSD. Now thats a computer to have!!!
     
  20. twietee macrumors 603

    twietee

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2012
    #20
    good thing about the 13"? It let's the 15" shine even more!

    Didn't follow the event and only partially the threads: any infos about the IR issue? Guess not...:rolleyes:
     
  21. tmanto02 macrumors 65816

    tmanto02

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2011
    Location:
    Australia
    #21
    I'm really angry, It is super expensive for what it is. The high end model has the same processor! And for that price it should start at 256 and go 512 with a 16gb option!
     
  22. oldtime macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    #22
    This is the way I look at it. I'll wait for an update that actually enthralls me to open up my wallet. None of us needs a new computer that bad. You can afford to skip an update or two if it isn't what you want.
     
  23. cokeb macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2007
    #23
    It's not just the weight, a smaller sized laptop is also easier to carry around.

    Not that I'd buy the 13" rMBP, mind you. Far too expensive for me.
     
  24. xxcysxx macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2011
  25. gpat macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2011
    Location:
    Italy
    #25
    My MacBook Pro (13" - 2011)
    8GB RAM - can get to 16 if i want (+)
    128GB SSD (+)
    320GB HDD in Optibay (+)
    Internal superdrive recycled as USB (+)
    Ethernet, no HDMI (=)
    Paid 1150€ for it including upgrades (+)
    Crappy screen (-)

    This MacBook Pro:
    Retina Display (+)
    Lighter, thinner (+)
    8GB RAM - non expandable (-)
    128GB SSD - non serviceable (-)
    No way to go Optibay (-)
    No included Superdrive (-)
    HDMI, no Ethernet (=)
    Costs 1779€ for base version (128GB) (-------)

    I think I'll switch to Windows once my Macbook dies, thanks.
     

Share This Page