Retina Macbook Pro 15" official

[Koing]

In fairness nobody else is making a similarly-spec'ed machine, much less for anywhere near the price. The cost of the upgrade to 512 GB is indeed fairly spendy, but you do get the faster CPU as well. Yes, this is a $2800 laptop, but it is a lot of laptop for $2800.

I know what your saying, but lets not consider anything else but the SSD alone.

From the normal MBP! wtf?! LOL You could get 2x 512 for £800!
512GB Solid State Drive [+ £800.00]

Also no option to upgrade the Retina to 512 unless you go for the top spec Retina., but looking at those prices it would be insane anyway! lol

But yes the Retina is good value relatively speaking compared to the MBP. You get 4GB extra (about £80 if that ) and you have a 256GB SSD drive, and of course the Retina screen.

Koing

 

[Koing]

i feel like the non retina at 1680x1050 is still a solid buy. throw in an SSD and you're good.

Adding in the SSD makes it more expensive than the Retina and you have 4GB less ram...but you have the optical

Koing

 

[boomhower]

Adding in the SSD makes it more expensive than the Retina and you have 4GB less ram...but you have the optical

Koing

Even with a quality aftermarket SSD at $300 your still right at the Retina's price. I've played around with different configurations and I'm finding it hard to figure out how the Retina is not a great buy. Just making the older version equal on ram and SSD with cheaper non-apple parts still puts it at the same price, your almost getting the retina free. It's expensive but a good value for a mac, of course it's a lot more than a Windows machine, an Envy is probably $600 cheaper for a similar configuration.

 

[runawayprisoner]

an Envy is probably $600 cheaper for a similar configuration.

But you don't get the same nice screen and slim profile. It's been confirmed that the Retina Macbook Pro is thinner than the Macbook Air at its thickest point.

 

[TheStu]

But you don't get the same nice screen and slim profile. It's been confirmed that the Retina Macbook Pro is thinner than the Macbook Air at its thickest point.

Or dual thunderbolt. I would be interested in seeing how many displays you can hook up to this mother.

 

[runawayprisoner]

Or dual thunderbolt. I would be interested in seeing how many displays you can hook up to this mother.

Isn't the Thunderbolt Display able to daisy chain?

Why do I get the feeling you just suggested something very... ungodly?

 

[TheStu]

Isn't the Thunderbolt Display able to daisy chain?

Why do I get the feeling you just suggested something very... ungodly?

Dual Thunderbolt, and HDMI. Yes, with Daisy Chaining. I think that last week's Pros might be limited to just 2 Thunderbolt displays, but I could be mistaken.

 

[alexvoda]

I am surprised I haven't seen anyone mention this, here or other where.
The new Retina Macbook Pro is not a Macbook PRO. It is a 15" Macbook AIR.
Thin profile, SSD, Higher than average PPI screen, undiversified connectics, no DVD drive. This is a big Macbook Air. The best Macbook Air so far.
I expect the Pro line (Macbook Pro, Mac Pro) to die in at most two generations.
Apple Pro software is long dead. The Mac Pro is on its death bed. The 17" Macbook Pro is dead. The only trace of anything Pro Apple has is the non-retina 15" Macbook Pro, and to a lesser extent the 13" Macbook Pro.

I can't disagree Apple for killing their Pro line. Consumer stuff brings them a lot lot more money. But it does make me sad.

Let us mourn the death of the 17"



P.S.: Apple finally joins the 15" pseudo-ultrabook bandwagon after Acer and Samsung. Also Apple finally ads USB 3.0 after everyone else, reminds me of the one button mouse.

PS/2: I am the anti-fanboy (not against fanboys, opposite of fanboy, don't know what word that would be) of most all current last gen tech. I think the industry is heading in a bad direction, one I really don't like. However one that is a lot more profitable so I can understand why, but it makes me sad.

P.S.3: Hello everybody. This is my first post here.

 

[JackBurton]

Even with a quality aftermarket SSD at $300 your still right at the Retina's price. I've played around with different configurations and I'm finding it hard to figure out how the Retina is not a great buy. Just making the older version equal on ram and SSD with cheaper non-apple parts still puts it at the same price, your almost getting the retina free. It's expensive but a good value for a mac, of course it's a lot more than a Windows machine, an Envy is probably $600 cheaper for a similar configuration.

That's not even comparable.

 

[runawayprisoner]

Dual Thunderbolt, and HDMI. Yes, with Daisy Chaining. I think that last week's Pros might be limited to just 2 Thunderbolt displays, but I could be mistaken.

I haven't caught up on any recent news, but it seems like it's more a limitation with nVidia GPU only able to drive 3 simultaneous displays. I could be wrong on that, though.

I am surprised I haven't seen anyone mention this, here or other where.
The new Retina Macbook Pro is not a Macbook PRO. It is a 15" Macbook AIR.

I somewhat did mention that last page, but honestly, I don't think anybody cares that it's an Macbook Air or Ultrabook.

The screen is the spotlight here, and so are the newer additions to the ports.

Anyway, welcome.

 

[JackBurton]

I am surprised I haven't seen anyone mention this, here or other where.
The new Retina Macbook Pro is not a Macbook PRO. It is a 15" Macbook AIR.

I disagree. I think it is properly named the "next gen" MacBook Pro. It is the powerhouse laptop for Apple. It is thinner, but still pretty heavy weighing in at 4.45lbs. So in the future I think you'll have the ultra thin and light MacBook Air and then the powerhouse quad core MacBook Pro (next gen retina). The "regular" MacBook Pro will be phased out.

P.S.: Apple finally joins the 15" pseudo-ultrabook bandwagon after Acer and Samsung. Also Apple finally ads USB 3.0 after everyone else, reminds me of the one button mouse.

The only thing that an Acer or Samsung 15" laptop have in common with the new MacBook Pro is the screen size. As for USB 3.0, Apple went about it the right way, waited for Intel to release their controller. It saves space and also ensures reliability. I'd wait for a quality Intel USB 3.0 controller rather than shoehorn in a junk third party controller just to fill out a spec sheet. Same goes with SATA controllers. I'll wait for Intel, rather than trusting my data to some junk controller.

PS/2: I am the anti-fanboy (not against fanboys, opposite of fanboy, don't know what word that would be) of most all current last gen tech. I think the industry is heading in a bad direction, one I really don't like. However one that is a lot more profitable so I can understand why, but it makes me sad.

The industry is heading in the right direction. You may be just facing the wrong way.

P.S.3: Hello everybody. This is my first post here.

Welcome.

 

[TheStu]

I haven't caught up on any recent news, but it seems like it's more a limitation with nVidia GPU only able to drive 3 simultaneous displays. I could be wrong on that, though.



I somewhat did mention that last page, but honestly, I don't think anybody cares that it's an Macbook Air or Ultrabook.

The screen is the spotlight here, and so are the newer additions to the ports.

Anyway, welcome.

Well, I was talking about the last gen, with the AMD graphics. I don't know if anyone has tried to hook up 4 Thunderbolt displays to the Retina yet.

 

[alexvoda]

The screen is the spotlight here, and so are the newer additions to the ports.

The screen indeed is great. To bad they sacrificed the 17" for it.

And I wouldn't call the change to the ports anything amazing.
Compared to the Air the new ports are great. They are fit for a 15" Air.
But suppose you need Ethernet and Firewire and are not willing to pay 400$ for a Belkin docking station or 1000$ for a Thunderbolt display and instead you use the Apple adapters which are not daisy-chainable. You end up with only one HDMI port for the display which in most non-TV cases will be inferior to mini-DisplayPort (most monitors work better with DP-more accurate colors , TVs only come with HDMI and are optimized for it).

With the DVD drive removed they actually had a lot of space for ports.
They could have ALSO (extra to what it already has) included:
-4 USB 3.0 instead of 2 ports one of which could be a USB 3.0/eSATAp combo port (or a separate eSATA or USB2/eSATAp port if they don't want to mix it with USB 3.0)
-separate audio connectors
-proprietary mini ports and adapters for GbE and FW800(if they didn't want to add a bulge for them for esthetic reasons)
-infrared sensor(port) for remote control (because physical buttons with feedback are useful on a remote, so don't say "use the iPhone")
-even a ExpressCard slot (in which you could also fit the remote for travel) but they abandoned that standard
-mini-VGA (because it is still the most useful to have) but they abandoned this one too.(TB-> VGA requires an ACTIVE convertor)

P.S.: Yes, there exists USB3.0/eSATAp combo ports:
http://www.esatap.sg/featured/usb-3-0-or-esatap-6gbps-why-not-both/
http://www.delock.de/produkte/G_65285/merkmale.html?setLanguage=en

And eSATA (even the old SATA II 3Gbps based version) is still A LOT FASTER than USB 3.0. (It has slower burst speeds but higher sustained speeds because it has DMA)

 

[Anubis]

The screen indeed is great. To bad they sacrificed the 17" for it.

And I wouldn't call the change to the ports anything amazing.
Compared to the Air the new ports are great. They are fit for a 15" Air.
But suppose you need Ethernet and Firewire and are not willing to pay 400$ for a Belkin docking station or 1000$ for a Thunderbolt display and instead you use the Apple adapters which are not daisy-chainable. You end up with only one HDMI port for the display which in most non-TV cases will be inferior to mini-DisplayPort (most monitors work better with DP-more accurate colors , TVs only come with HDMI and are optimized for it).

With the DVD drive removed they actually had a lot of space for ports.
They could have ALSO (extra to what it already has) included:
-4 USB 3.0 instead of 2 ports one of which could be a USB 3.0/eSATAp combo port (or a separate eSATA or USB2/eSATAp port if they don't want to mix it with USB 3.0)
-separate audio connectors
-proprietary mini ports and adapters for GbE and FW800(if they didn't want to add a bulge for them for esthetic reasons)
-infrared sensor(port) for remote control (because physical buttons with feedback are useful on a remote, so don't say "use the iPhone")
-even a ExpressCard slot (in which you could also fit the remote for travel) but they abandoned that standard
-mini-VGA (because it is still the most useful to have) but they abandoned this one too.(TB-> VGA requires an ACTIVE convertor)

P.S.: Yes, there exists USB3.0/eSATAp combo ports:
http://www.esatap.sg/featured/usb-3-0-or-esatap-6gbps-why-not-both/
http://www.delock.de/produkte/G_65285/merkmale.html?setLanguage=en

And eSATA (even the old SATA II 3Gbps based version) is still A LOT FASTER than USB 3.0. (It has slower burst speeds but higher sustained speeds because it has DMA)

while i tend to agree with what you are saying, 99% of the people who will buy this prob don't know what 1/2 of that stuff is. and thats not an insult to apple users. most of the general computing public couldn't tell you the difference between USB 2,3 esata and whatnot

the display is nice but at least according to anand there is no way to enable the full rez on it yet and you are limited to 1920*1200 with 2x pixels so it looks slightly smoother. now this might be what they were going for all along as full rez as i stated earlier would be tiny. however someone will complain about it

 

[alexvoda]

I disagree. I think it is properly named the "next gen" MacBook Pro. It is the powerhouse laptop for Apple. It is thinner, but still pretty heavy weighing in at 4.45lbs. So in the future I think you'll have the ultra thin and light MacBook Air and then the powerhouse quad core MacBook Pro (next gen retina). The "regular" MacBook Pro will be phased out.

Exactly, the former Pros will be phased out.

The only thing that an Acer or Samsung 15" laptop have in common with the new MacBook Pro is the screen size. As for USB 3.0, Apple went about it the right way, waited for Intel to release their controller. It saves space and also ensures reliability. I'd wait for a quality Intel USB 3.0 controller rather than shoehorn in a junk third party controller just to fill out a spec sheet. Same goes with SATA controllers. I'll wait for Intel, rather than trusting my data to some junk controller.

15" size, being PSEUDO-ultrabooks (Intel does not knowledge anything above 13" as an ultrabook), lack of port diversity (it has the best in its class, but not the best of all, the best it could have), thin profile, no DVD drive. I think this is more than just 15" size.

The USB 3 thing is because Intel was lazy or had an agenda to push Light Peak(now Thunderbolt) instead of USB 3.(NOTE: TB replaces ExpressCard not USB 3.0. TB and USB 3.0 are non competing standards, but some didn't see it this way)
Also what does Intel have to do with SATA. AFAIK Intel kept up to date with the latest SATA.

The industry is heading in the right direction. You may be just facing the wrong way.

Never said right or wrong.
It is a right but bad direction.(out of the possible: right+good, wrong+good, right+bad, wrong+bad)

Welcome.

Thanks

 

[alexvoda]

Extra:
1. I have a 2007 Macbook White and when I bought it I was truly amazed.
The thing has OPTICAL audio inputs AND outputs. On a consumer grade machine.
That was incredible. Not even on many dedicated desktop sound cards could I find optical inputs. I could hook up my stereo by optical cable and digitize tapes WHILE monitoring the result on headphones. AMAZING. On consumer grade hardware - MIND BLOWING.
2. You know. My mom would not buy this thing. She does architecture. The CAD software needs a hardlock usb key, you can't do CAD without a mouse, and she always uses a USB flash drive to transfer stuff (plus occasionally a tv-tuner).
This means AT LEAST 3 USB ports. And on this computer this is unachievable without a hub.

99% of the people who will buy this prob don't know what 1/2 of that stuff is. and thats not an insult to apple users. most of the general computing public couldn't tell you the difference between USB 2,3 esata and whatnot

The right direction but the bad direction.
Give users the minimum they need and if they want more either charge them till it burns or say "no can do".
Same thing going on with dumbifing and tabletifing UIs(Gnome 3, Windows 8-on a desktop-OMG WTF?, Launchpad-to a lesser extent but the same trend).
Same thing with hiding traditional file systems from the user(iOS, Android, WP, Windows 8).
Etc., Etc....

It is the right direction: lower the knowledge/inteligence entry barier. get more people to use your product. shield them from any mishaps. MAKE MORE MONEY THIS WAY.
But it is the bad direction.

 

[JackBurton]

The USB 3 thing is because Intel was lazy or had an agenda to push Light Peak(now Thunderbolt) instead of USB 3.(NOTE: TB replaces ExpressCard not USB 3.0. TB and USB 3.0 are non competing standards, but some didn't see it this way)

That's just a conspiracy theory, nothing more.

Also what does Intel have to do with SATA. AFAIK Intel kept up to date with the latest SATA.

There were third party SATA 6Gbps controller offerings before Intel released their chipset supporting it.

 

[JackBurton]

The right direction but the bad direction.
Give users the minimum they need and if they want more either charge them till it burns or say "no can do".
Same thing going on with dumbifing and tabletifing UIs(Gnome 3, Windows 8 OMG WTF?, Launchpad).
Same thing with hiding traditional file systems from the user(iOS, Android, WP, Windows 8).
Etc., Etc....

It is the right direction: lower the knowledge/inteligence entry barier. get more people to use your product. shield them from any mishaps. MAKE MORE MONEY THIS WAY.
But it is the bad direction.

How is a Unix (BSD) based OS dumbing it down? If you are a novice, OS X is great. If you are technical, OS X is great. I fail to see the problem.

 

[alexvoda]

How is a Unix (BSD) based OS dumbing it down? If you are a novice, OS X is great. If you are technical, OS X is great. I fail to see the problem.

Way to miss the point I made before the conclusion you bolded and like any OS X enthusiast rely on the old OS X is UNIX argument (actually OS Xs kernel is XNU, which stands for "X is Not Unix", and is compatible with Unix) whenever someone suggests a possible inferiority of OS X, EVEN IF I was referring to the entire computing industry as a whole(in every single paragraph where I mentioned "bad direction").
EDIT: I guess the entire computing industry does include Apple and so it includes OS X, so I can see why you replied about OS X.

That's just a conspiracy theory, nothing more.

As I said: EITHER Lazy or with an agenda. Or maybe both. We will never truly know.
However USB 3.0 has been in use for YEARS.

There were third party SATA 6Gbps controller offerings before Intel released their chipset supporting it.

SATA III 6 Gbps is only truly needed for SSDs for which the market (and capacities) wasn't that big in 2010.
Sandy Bridge had SATA III and was available since early 2011.
So this was more bearable than the absence of USB 3.0 which would have benefited ANY (not only SSDs) external storage.

 

[JackBurton]

Way to miss the point I made before the conclusion you bolded and like any OS X enthusiast rely on the old OS X is UNIX argument (actually OS Xs kernel is XNU, which stands for "X is Not Unix", and is compatible with Unix) whenever someone suggests a possible inferiority of OS X, EVEN IF I was referring to the entire computing industry as a whole(in every single paragraph where I mentioned "bad direction").

It's actually BSD based, and I noted that right behind Unix. Secondly, I really don't know what point you are trying to make.

As I said: EITHER Lazy or with an agenda. Or maybe both. We will never truly know.
However USB 3.0 has been in use for YEARS.

Funny, I was never in a hurry for USB 3.0. Even with it included on the new MacBook's, I'll either use Thunderbolt for high speed external storage or a NAS for archiving and centralized storage. I really have very little use for USB 3.0.

SATA III 6 Gbps is only truly needed for SSDs for which the market (and capacities) wasn't that big in 2010.
Sandy Bridge had SATA III and was available since early 2011.
So this was more bearable than the absence of USB 3.0 which would have benefited ANY (not only SSDs) external storage.

You have your blinders on. IMO, SATA III is MUCH more important than USB 3.0. I have options if I don't have USB 3.0. I DO NOT have an option for faster transfer speeds on a laptop without SATA III support.

 

[alkemyst]

so much Apple misinformation.

 

[Eug]

My mom would not buy this thing. She does architecture. The CAD software needs a hardlock usb key, you can't do CAD without a mouse, and she always uses a USB flash drive to transfer stuff (plus occasionally a tv-tuner).
This means AT LEAST 3 USB ports. And on this computer this is unachievable without a hub.

Given a USB 2 hub is quite small and costs about $10 this is pretty much a non-issue.

You have your blinders on. IMO, SATA III is MUCH more important than USB 3.0. I have options if I don't have USB 3.0. I DO NOT have an option for faster transfer speeds on a laptop without SATA III support.

I don't give a chit about SATA III, to be honest. I betcha 98% of the Mac buying population doesn't care either.

I find USB 3.0 much more compelling an upgrade. MUCH more.

 

[JackBurton]

I don't give a chit about SATA III, to be honest. I betcha 98% of the Mac buying population doesn't care either.

I find USB 3.0 much more compelling an upgrade. MUCH more.

I find it odd people wouldn't care about overall system performance ESPECIALLY when paying so much for a high capacity high speed SSD, but REALLY care about USB 3.0 because they'll attach an external device once in a while. Seems like backwards thinking, but hey, to each their own.

If you care about USB 3.0, knock yourself out, the new MacBook Pro's have it. I really don't care about it though. I'll be using the internal SSD MUCH more than an USB external storage device, so the internal storage controller and the storage device are my primary concerns.

 

[Eug]

SATA III is an incremental boost over SATA II, but SATA II is already plenty fast. For the vast majority of usage, what's most important for SSD performance is random reads, and the performance delta of SATA III over SATA II is negligible. For example, boot times are pretty much identical between SATA II and SATA III modes using the exact same drive.

OTOH, USB 3 is roughly 10X as fast as USB 2 in the real world for sequential transfers, which is actually something people do with external drives.

As for Thunderbolt, we're talking something like a $200 premium over the drive just for the enclosure. No thx.

 

[boomhower]

That's not even comparable.

Wasn't trying to say it was, more of saying that for $600 you get a screen not available anywhere else, vastly superior build quality, and the OS. Seems like a fair trade. I'm buying one, not trying to diss it.