true, but I know some people that just live on a single laptop. 128GB flash isn't going to cut it. and 4GB of non-upgradable ram is just going to kill the product very soon.
I guess Apple developed the RAM-compression algorithm precisely knowing their next models won't be upgradeable. To my knowledge it's the only OS to use it. But clearly 128GB isn't enough. I have a 120GB HDD on my other Mac, which is pretty much void of documents and only have a few apps, yet more than half of it is already used.
Well, in that case you better stock up with the non-Retinas before they are all gone.
I knew I would regret my decision not to get the antiglare late-2011 15" MBP while I could do it. I just didn't see the need for it back in early 2012
I would exchange it if I could.
But for $100 less, that thing apparently still sells to a dwindling number of those who like the 500 Gigs of storage and those who must have the built-in SuperDrive. Fwiw, it does have a couple of extra legacy ports as well.
I don't know who wouldn't be happy to have 500GB of internal storage. Because going external means just another peripheral to power, drawing battery life, making the machine not as portable as it claims to be
I must be one of the legally blind. Having such high resolutions on a TINY TINY 13" screen just doesn't impress me in the slightest, especially when the only thing Apple does for 90% of the time is pretty much scan-double everything, which only gets you slightly smoother edges and is hard to see any difference just doubling the size on tiny tiny 13" screens.
I thought 13" was too small before meeting a Mac. However, with Spaces, it's quite acceptable.
I wanted larger screens, not smaller ones and Retina seems to be all about tiny tiny screens (iPhones, iPads and 13-15" notebooks). Perhaps that's because larger monitors have had higher resolutions for YEARS now and you can actually make good use of it there. It's like people watching HDTV on a 7" pad and thinking they're in a movie theater. Sorry, I haven't been to a movie theater where I sit 12 inches from a 13" screen. That's hardly IMAX.
I get your point about larger screens, but they always come with a trade-off in weight penalty (although the 15" was light compared to PC standard of the day, it is still heavier by 500g than the contemporary 13", even more if you count the power adapter.) and shorter battery life. I guess many people wanted a machine that would be more portable but still powerful. We seem to be a dwindling species that use (
plz correct grammar if necessary) laptops to perform actual work for long hours, not as a toy for playing around at home.
No, that's too darn big, apparently.
I guess if you live up to your pseudonym and are a 1m95 strongly built man, then 17" isn't too big. But it may take a toll on other's back hauling it daily, especially on foot.
Frankly, I'd rather see better GPUs in Macs than useless higher resolutions that drag the crappy GPU to its overheating point.
Can't disagree with you here. I always felt ashamed for Apple for not including at least a powerful mobile GPU in its 13" "Pro" line, acknowledging there may not be enough room for a dual-GPU setup as the 15".
I can take out the ODD when discs finally become obsolete, just to save weight or add another drive at some point in the future.
Even if you think of ODD as obsolete, they're clearly not, considering the wide array of DVDs (and sometimes BluRay) available for loan in any library. There's no digital equivalent of this yet.
And it's still got a Kensington lock hole, which the new ones don't have.
Question, how are you supposed to secure your MBP to a desk when your job requires you either share the space with someone else, or is in a passing area?
Storage, who cares about internal storage? For 100$ you have your 2TB external WD for all your porn. 250GB is sufficient storge nowdays for 99% of the users.
No it's not. We do store other content than porn that still requires large storage, first because porn is best when it's fresh. Movies and music are an example of a content that need vast amounts of local storage (OK, maybe not music if we consider legitimate to pay Apple a yearly fee to keep our collection online). And you underestimate the size of the "Library" folder inside your home folder, probably because it's hidden by default since Lion.
I prefer cheaper stock MBP, than paying for extra storage I can get elsewhere much cheaper if I need it.
You can't easily upgrade the internal storage of a rMBP. Big SSDs aren't cheap by any means. I prefer a MBP that lives up to its "Pro" moniker. For the thin & light crowd that uses it for Facebook and light duties, there's the "Air" lineup.
With all availabe cloud storage services and cheap external memeries spending resource on increasing you internal SSD which you may or may not need, is complete waste of money, especially considering that its still too expensive.
Cloud storage has many problems.
1- It's slow. Dog slow. Especially on a coffee shop connection commonly capped to a reasonably high speed, but still significantly slower than your home connection.
2- Internet access is not pervasive yet in many cities / countries
3- Internet access is often capped down in North America to ridiculously low amounts.
4- Data isn't under your control. It's no longer private. If they close down their service, you're screwed if you haven't made any local backup.
5- You typically have to pay a yearly fee for a significant storage space.
6- Most cloud storage services don't provide an amount of storage even remotely comparable to a decent external HDD, side from hubiC with its 1TB plans.
More stock ram memory, cooler chasies, higer clock CPU and better GPU and display is what metters.
Yeah, we just needed yet another powerful machine crippled by the "all-cloud" craze. Think Chromebook.
I don't consider my desire for a built in optical drive to be an old fogy thing. My two daughters, both in their 20's, both bought non-retina MBs this past year specifically because they have built in optical drives. I'm quite irritated that I had to go buy an external optical drive for my new iMac. Why? So it can be thinner?
Apple made the correct call when they got rid of floppy drives in the 90's. They got it wrong this time. Or at least it was wrong to remove the option. My daughters are happy they have computers with built in drives. I'm unhappy I don't.
Agreed, see above. Optical discs are still commonly available from libraries, both CDs and DVDs, free of charge, even as actual videoclubs are closing.
Diskettes were already too small to be useful in the late 90's, and not used for anything else than data. UDF-formatted CDRW were the new kid on the block and allowed for diskette-like cheap storage.
Can get an external drive not really a big deal. The less moving parts inside of my machine the better.
Sure, how are you about added power draw?
Not having a form of built-in Ethernet REALLY sucks at the office and at places where WiFi isn't great. And yes, those places do exist and yes, not every office has WiFi. I know, total shocker right? Unbelievable, right? The things you learn after realizing that not everyone lives in the bubble you do.
Where it really hurts is lack of expansion and upgradability. For those of you praising this, you must either (a) have a lot of money or (b) not do much with your computer.
I'd lean for the b option. I would be ready to bet most Air and Retina buyers, especially the smaller sizes, do not do much more than browsing the Web, writing emails or typing texts, and treat these computers as status symbol, yet disposable machines. And it's not limited to Mac computers, but most electronics, cars, even relationships; if it breaks, let's just get another one, especially when it's too expensive to repair. Many don't think about repairability.
For people buying the Late 2013 13" MacBook Pro with retina, if you don't max out your RAM, you can easily be stuck with 4GB or 8GB, which might be fine today, but will definitely impact you down the road. Even for the current 15" MacBook Pro with retina, you might be fine today with 8GB and/or want to save that money; but you can't upgrade it later when it'd really help you out. That blows. The lack of a standardized SSD form factor is a pretty crappy deal; albeit there wasn't one for PCIe based SSDs at the time that the Late 2013 retina MacBook Pros came out, but there certainly is one now. This is similar to their practice with mSATA drives. Luckily, unlike crap like the Asus Zenbook, you do have aftermarket drive manufacturers like OWC and now Transcend (though the latter maker has yet to introduce PCIe drives), but still; this is an unstandard form-factor and as a result the cost of aftermarket upgrades is ungodly. None of you who are down with this can contest that, I'm sorry. Similarly, non-standard screw-types? Way to piss off the people who actually want to augment their computer, Apple.
Lastly the battery being glued to the unibody is lame; but given that it was never considered by Apple to be a user-replacable part, there's little difference to most consumers. It is hell for technicians, but few of you really care about the poor guy that actually has to repair your computer at the genius bars and AASPs. Yes, that display is awesome and it'll be great when more content/apps support it natively. And yes, PCIe SSDs are wonderful things. In all other areas, this new body style is a downgrade.
Thanks-
