When the 13-inch MacBook Pro with retina display is going to be released?

[skaertus]

That only seemingly makes sense, because even if you knew something was coming, you would still buy Apple and your money goes to them. And of you were to buy a MBP now, you wouldn't buy a rMBP anytime soon, even if they released a 13" You'd feel betrayed, and nothing's won.

Well, Apple usually announces the new MacBook models right before shipping. It never announces them months before.

MacRumors could do a Roundup section on the 13-inch retina MacBook Pro, don't you think? The iPhone 5 is not the only Apple product that should deserve it. In fact, I'm much more excited about the 13-inch retina MacBook Pro than I was about the iPhone 5 (or any iPhone model before that).

 

[bill-p]

Well, Apple usually announces the new MacBook models right before shipping. It never announces them months before.

MacRumors could do a Roundup section on the 13-inch retina MacBook Pro, don't you think? The iPhone 5 is not the only Apple product that should deserve it. In fact, I'm much more excited about the 13-inch retina MacBook Pro than I was about the iPhone 5 (or any iPhone model before that).

According to past records, Apple introduced and released the 15" unibody redesign in Oct 2008. And then they introduced the 13" version in June 2009. That's about 8 months apart.

Given that the rMBP 15" was announced May 2012 and released close to June 2012, 8 months from that would be around January or February 2013. That would chime with reports that Apple would start production of the 13" Retina model by Q4 2012.

So I think... if they don't say anything this month, chances are they'll say it around February next year.

And they can introduce the Haswell spec bump to the 13" rMBP by around Oct 2013 or Nov 2013... after the Feb 2013 model has had a good 9 months. Sounds like a plan to me.

 

[El Salvador]

Well, Apple usually announces the new MacBook models right before shipping. It never announces them months before.

MacRumors could do a Roundup section on the 13-inch retina MacBook Pro, don't you think? The iPhone 5 is not the only Apple product that should deserve it. In fact, I'm much more excited about the 13-inch retina MacBook Pro than I was about the iPhone 5 (or any iPhone model before that).

Amen to that! Me too. I think this whole iPhone/iPad rage is just insane. rMBP deserves to get a decent announcement.

 

[skaertus]

According to past records, Apple introduced and released the 15" unibody redesign in Oct 2008. And then they introduced the 13" version in June 2009. That's about 8 months apart.

It's been four years, and my memory is not so good.

However, I've searched some old news published here and I found the press info released by Apple on this:

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2008/10/14New-MacBook-Family-Redefines-Notebook-Design.html

MacRumors also published some news on this:

https://www.macrumors.com/2008/10/14/apple-announces-new-aluminum-macbooks/

In October 14, 2008, Apple refreshed its MacBook line, and released the following models:

-A white polycarbonate 13-inch MacBook, with a Core 2 Duo 2 GHz processor, for US$ 999;
- Two all-new aluminium unibody 13-inch MacBooks, with Core 2 Duo processors, clocked at 2 GHz and 2.4 GHz, for US$ 1,299 and US$ 1,599, respectively;
- Two all-new aluminium unibody 15-inch MacBook Pros, with Core 2 Duo processors, clocked at 2.4 GHz and 2.53 GHz, for US$ 1,999 and US$ 2,499, respectively;
- A 17-inch MacBook Pro (aluminium, but not unibody) with a Core 2 Duo processor clocked at 2.5 GHz, for US$ 2,799.

Apple also updated its line of MacBook Airs at the time.

At the time, all 13-inch laptops were called MacBooks (there was no 13-inch Pro). In the next refresh, the 13-inch unibody models became known as MacBook Pros to differentiate them from the 13-inch polycarbonate models. So, there was one (and only one) generation of unibody MacBooks.

So, the 13-inch unibody MacBook Pro was indeed released in June 2009, but just because Apple changed the name of the 13-inch unibody MacBook changed to MacBook Pro. It was, in fact, the second coming of the 13-inch unibody design. Look here: http://www.apple.com/pr/library/200...for-Up-to-40-Percent-Longer-Battery-Life.html

As we can see, Apple redesigned the whole line MacBooks/MacBook Pros, except for the lower-end 13-inch model (because it would probably be too expensive to build it in aluminium) and for the 17-inch model. Apple would launch a 17-inch aluminium unibody in January 6, 2009, less than 3 months later (https://www.macrumors.com/2009/01/06/apple-releases-aluminum-unibody-17-macbook-pro/).

As a result, only 3 months after the release of the unibody design, the whole family of MacBooks (13, 15 and 17 inches) had a unibody design.

 

[skaertus]

So I think... if they don't say anything this month, chances are they'll say it around February next year.

And they can introduce the Haswell spec bump to the 13" rMBP by around Oct 2013 or Nov 2013... after the Feb 2013 model has had a good 9 months. Sounds like a plan to me.

I am leaning towards one of the following:

1. October/November 2012

Intel may (or may not) release updated Ivy Bridge mobile processors in the end of 2012. It has released updated Sandy Bridge processors in late 2011 (the 2640QM and the 2670QM, for instance) and it has also released updated Arrendale processors in late 2010 (the 580M and the 640M, for instance).

When Intel upgraded Sandy Bridge, Apple gave, in October 2011, a spec bump to its MacBook Pro laptops (https://www.macrumors.com/2011/10/2...pro-with-processor-graphics-storage-upgrades/). However, Apple had released the previous generation of MacBook Pros in February. When Intel upgraded Arrandale processors in the end of 2010, however, Apple did not upgrade its line of MacBook Pros, which it had last updated in April (but you should remember that the Sandy Bridge was just around the corner, expected to hit the shelves in early 2011).

Therefore, Apple may use a similar strategy and do a quiet bump of current MacBook Pros when (and if) Intel releases an updated Ivy Bridge processor, and also introduce the 13-inch MacBook Pro with a retina display.

2. Q2 2013

Haswell is expected to be released in Q2 2013, between March and June. Intel has not yet revealed the exact dates. It will be 9-12 months after the release of the last incarnation of MacBook Pros, so it will be just in time for an upgrade (the average time for the MacBook Pro refresh is 267 days).

 

[dnkbro]

I was hoping for October but it looks like we might have to wait until around March or April of next year.

 

[skaertus]

I was hoping for October but it looks like we might have to wait until around March or April of next year.

Well, the only fact we know so far is that nobody knows anything for sure. People may only guess, and sometimes it is an educated guess. But that is how it works for every Apple product which is released.

 

[yanksrock100]

I was hoping for October but it looks like we might have to wait until around March or April of next year.

Hope not...however there was just a rumor on the front page saying that its still scheduled for Q4 this year. If its not released whenever the "ipad mini" is released, I will probably just give up on hoping.

 

[dnkbro]

Well, the only fact we know so far is that nobody knows anything for sure. People may only guess, and sometimes it is an educated guess. But that is how it works for every Apple product which is released.

I was hoping the 13" inch retina screen part would leak by now or possibly some other newer parts.

 

[skaertus]

I was hoping the 13" inch retina screen part would leak by now or possibly some other newer parts.

That would be just great...

 

[0x000000]

I was hoping the 13" inch retina screen part would leak by now or possibly some other newer parts.

I can't think of a single mac part being leaked before, though. Nothing compared to iPhones and iPads.

Either the security is tighter or people don't care, but all I've ever seen were rumors and descriptions, and even those usually weren't really exact.

 

[skaertus]

I can't think of a single mac part being leaked before, though. Nothing compared to iPhones and iPads.

Either the security is tighter or people don't care, but all I've ever seen were rumors and descriptions, and even those usually weren't really exact.

I think people don't really care about Macs anymore. It's all about iOS devices.

 

[jacob.schmidt]

Well, today the 10th, invitations for the iPad event should've been out, but still nothing.. This is a bummer

 

[skaertus]

Well, today the 10th, invitations for the iPad event should've been out, but still nothing.. This is a bummer

And I guess they are not coming either...

 

[papetorh]

No ipad mini event

FORTUNE -- I have to take the fall for passing along the rumor -- apparently false -- that invitations were set to go out on Oct. 10 for an iPad mini unveiling on Oct. 17.
Given that the last three invites I've received from Apple Special Events arrived in my inbox before 12:01 p.m. Eastern, I had already almost given up hope when, at 12:08 p.m., I got this tweet from The Loop's Jim Dalrymple -- a blogger with unusually sources within Apple:
I think I'll take a break and go get some lunch. It's a quiet day.
That seemed like a pretty strong signal. It was followed a few minutes later by a fake headline tweeted by Macworld's Chris Brennan:
BREAKING imaginary iPad mini event invite late, iPad mini DELAYED. Imaginary apology from Tim Cook expected. More at Unicorn o'clock.
OK. I deserve that. My source was a major Apple (AAPL) investor who had heard it from three different sources. They were wrong about the timing. I was wrong to pass the tip along. I don't know what I was doing in the rumor business in the first place. Mea culpa.

 

[skaertus]

FORTUNE -- I have to take the fall for passing along the rumor -- apparently false -- that invitations were set to go out on Oct. 10 for an iPad mini unveiling on Oct. 17.
Given that the last three invites I've received from Apple Special Events arrived in my inbox before 12:01 p.m. Eastern, I had already almost given up hope when, at 12:08 p.m., I got this tweet from The Loop's Jim Dalrymple -- a blogger with unusually sources within Apple:
I think I'll take a break and go get some lunch. It's a quiet day.
That seemed like a pretty strong signal. It was followed a few minutes later by a fake headline tweeted by Macworld's Chris Brennan:
BREAKING imaginary iPad mini event invite late, iPad mini DELAYED. Imaginary apology from Tim Cook expected. More at Unicorn o'clock.
OK. I deserve that. My source was a major Apple (AAPL) investor who had heard it from three different sources. They were wrong about the timing. I was wrong to pass the tip along. I don't know what I was doing in the rumor business in the first place. Mea culpa.

Still, this only means that there are no invitations for an iPad mini event on the 17th of October. It says nothing on the release of 13-inch retina MacBook Pros...

 

[jacob.schmidt]

Still, this only means that there are no invitations for an iPad mini event on the 17th of October. It says nothing on the release of 13-inch retina MacBook Pros...

They would've been launched at the same event. So it actually say that neither will happen..

 

[golf1410]

I would love to see more people entering display lottery with me and others.
Samsung or LG?
Image retention or dead pixel/yellow tint?
Welcome to the club.
From 15" MBP Retina customers.

 

[jacob.schmidt]

So what do you guys do? I'm quite tempted to go for a ultimate air 13.. That would've been the closest thing to an rmbp13..

 

[sully677]

So what do you guys do? I'm quite tempted to go for a ultimate air 13.. That would've been the closest thing to an rmbp13..

Same. I think I will give it one week to 10 days and see. If nothing comes, then I will get a 512gb Air.

 

[skaertus]

So what do you guys do? I'm quite tempted to go for a ultimate air 13.. That would've been the closest thing to an rmbp13..

I'm not. Fonts look blurry on a non-retina Mac...

 

[jacob.schmidt]

I'm not. Fonts look blurry on a non-retina Mac...

Okay, I think people really needs to calm down on this retina-hype. I've had an rmbp for a couple of weeks and an Air, and yes, the screen is great, but not enough for me to not buy a Mac without it - and I write a lot! I would've liked these rumors to be true, but the air is a great substitute

 

[skaertus]

Okay, I think people really needs to calm down on this retina-hype. I've had an rmbp for a couple of weeks and an Air, and yes, the screen is great, but not enough for me to not buy a Mac without it - and I write a lot! I would've liked these rumors to be true, but the air is a great substitute

Well, it's not retina-hype for me.

Since I've bought my MacBook, back in 2008, I've noticed that fonts looked blurrier than they did under Windows. That was really annoying from the beginning. Then I found out all the stuff about the differences between Windows and OS X in regard to font rendering. The only way to make fonts look sharp on a Mac without changing the font rendering would be to radically increase screen resolution. At the time, I thought that screen resolutions would increase slowly and that we wouldn't see sharp text on a Mac screen so soon. Given that scenario, I started flirting with Windows again -- I write lots of text, and I want fonts to look on the screen as sharp as they would in a piece of printed paper. I don't want blurry text at all. So, I started writing in Word 2007/2010 for Windows.

However, when Apple released the iPhone 4 with a retina screen, back in 2010, quadrupling the resolution of the previous iPhone, things started to make sense to me. It was just a matter of connecting the dots, as Steve Jobs would say. So, a retina display, a hardware-based solution -- and not a software-based solution such as sub-pixel rendering -- was Apple's strategy to make fonts look sharp on its devices. So, I've been waiting for Macs with a retina display since the iPhone 4 was released. I'm not seduced by all this retina hype. And I will only buy a Mac if it comes with a retina display. Definitely. Not having a retina display is a deal breaker for me. If the Mac comes with a non-retina display, I would -- err -- prefer a Windows machine instead.

 

[jacob.schmidt]

Well, it's not retina-hype for me.

Since I've bought my MacBook, back in 2008, I've noticed that fonts looked blurrier than they did under Windows. That was really annoying from the beginning. Then I found out all the stuff about the differences between Windows and OS X in regard to font rendering. The only way to make fonts look sharp on a Mac without changing the font rendering would be to radically increase screen resolution. At the time, I thought that screen resolutions would increase slowly and that we wouldn't see sharp text on a Mac screen so soon. Given that scenario, I started flirting with Windows again -- I write lots of text, and I want fonts to look on the screen as sharp as they would in a piece of printed paper. I don't want blurry text at all. So, I started writing in Word 2007/2010 for Windows.

However, when Apple released the iPhone 4 with a retina screen, back in 2010, quadrupling the resolution of the previous iPhone, things started to make sense to me. It was just a matter of connecting the dots, as Steve Jobs would say. So, a retina display, a hardware-based solution -- and not a software-based solution such as sub-pixel rendering -- was Apple's strategy to make fonts look sharp on its devices. So, I've been waiting for Macs with a retina display since the iPhone 4 was released. I'm not seduced by all this retina hype. And I will only buy a Mac if it comes with a retina display. Definitely. Not having a retina display is a deal breaker for me. If the Mac comes with a non-retina display, I would -- err -- prefer a Windows machine instead.

Okay.. Haven't really noticed any blurred text at all on any of my macs

 

[0x000000]

Since I've bought my MacBook, back in 2008, I've noticed that fonts looked blurrier than they did under Windows.

Some more insight to that:

This was in fact !! a true difference between Windows and Mac systems. Windows systems did not use Anti Aliasing on their fonts and used hard pixel fonts, while Macs did use smoothing. Though it highly depends on the displays pixel density, fonts do look blurrier if you smooth them, especially small fonts.

The large this is the small text magnified 400%, so you can see the differences on a pixel basis.

But there's big cons to un-anti aliased fonts: Sharp pixel fonts only look good if you use fonts that are optimized for that; Arial or Verdana for example and only at small sizes. Using the wrong font or size and your text will look like crap.

At first I was also very disturbed by the smoothed fonts (although you can actually turn it off up to a certain font size in your preferences), but I got used to it quickly and I now believe it's more a matter of viewing habits than a real problem.

And if you switched in 2008, you may have missed it: At least since Windows 7 all Windows PCs also have default smoothing turned on The smoothed font on the left is actually a screenshot from a windows machine.