Apple Updates Processors & Prices of MacBook Pro with Retina Display

[Kantastic]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

I paid 99 bucks for my wife's Galaxy 3 then she wanted the Note and I paid 199. Try again?

Sure I'll come again. What does your monthly phone bill cost? Because you're talking about subsidized pricing where carriers eat you on the monthly bills. Also, it's good that you didn't deny the "more limited/less capable" part, otherwise you'd be insane.

[MeanBruce]

Ummm, what was the subject again?

[tokyoduong]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

Why does speed matter if you are just reviewing images? To me it looks like your making excuses to buy this thing. A 15" MBP is FAR MORE suited for your needs IF you have to have Apple. You can hook an external monitor up to it and ditch your desktop completely.

By the way they sell good because Apple is popular and a good Apple Laptop is almost double the price of the 13" Air.

Excuses? I don't have this new mba. If you want to know how slow it is on an ipad3(~500-700) then buy it with a camera kit($50). That thing takes forever to load images. If you take 8mp photos using jpeg then it's perfectly suitable. If you take 24mp RAW+jpeg like me then it's a whole different story. The folder system in the ipad is annoying also. I would know, I have the camera kit and I've tried using it. Of course, I tried using the wifi feature on one of my camera(Nex 5R) and IOS does not work with the PlayMemories app. Even though the app worked perfectly fine with iOS 5.x, iOS 6 has done nothing but cause network problems and screw up some of the apps i use.
No excuses, you just haven't tried to use it.

And if work calls me when I'm out doing something I have to log in on my comp for email and secured websites that just doesn't work on tablets. I would have to carry laptop + tablet. So no ipad and 15" is just a tad too big and heavy to fit in my bag with everything else. The only person making up excuses here is you and you haven't really try to do real work with these devices.

[MxPhenom 216]

Originally Posted by tokyoduong

Excuses? I don't have this new mba. If you want to know how slow it is on an ipad3(~500-700) then buy it with a camera kit($50). That thing takes forever to load images. If you take 8mp photos using jpeg then it's perfectly suitable. If you take 24mp RAW+jpeg like me then it's a whole different story. The folder system in the ipad is annoying also. I would know, I have the camera kit and I've tried using it. Of course, I tried using the wifi feature on one of my camera(Nex 5R) and IOS does not work with the PlayMemories app. Even though the app worked perfectly fine with iOS 5.x, iOS 6 has done nothing but cause network problems and screw up some of the apps i use.
No excuses, you just haven't tried to use it.

And if work calls me when I'm out doing something I have to log in on my comp for email and secured websites that just doesn't work on tablets. I would have to carry laptop + tablet. So no ipad and 15" is just a tad too big and heavy to fit in my bag with everything else. The only person making up excuses here is you and you haven't really try to do real work with these devices.

You Obviously Don't Know Mailman......

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by tokyoduong

The only person making up excuses here is you and you haven't really try to do real work with these devices.

Um yeah......yeah I have. That's why I said its no good. As a matter of fact I'm posting this from an iMac which hardly does a decent job and its a LOT better then that 13" joker.

Originally Posted by Kantastic

Sure I'll come again. What does your monthly phone bill cost? Because you're talking about subsidized pricing where carriers eat you on the monthly bills. Also, it's good that you didn't deny the "more limited/less capable" part, otherwise you'd be insane.

60 bucks a month unlimited data. Something I would be paying anyway. Point is I didn't pay 500 bucks a month like you claim. Not even sure what this has to do with the conversation.

[Prima.Vera]

@tokyodong
It seems that except your screen you have more problems with Apple devices than you have advantages, hehe. Just saying... )

[tokyoduong]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

Um yeah......yeah I have. That's why I said its no good. As a matter of fact I'm posting this from an iMac which hardly does a decent job and its a LOT better then that 13" joker.

Did you seriously just compared an imac(desktop) to a mba(laptop)?
I don't own the mba, I have the samsung 9 13in and i wish it had this 1560p screen everyday.

Originally Posted by Prima.Vera

@tokyodong
It seems that except your screen you have more problems with Apple devices than you have advantages, hehe. Just saying... )

no $#%^ I've stated several times I don't own apple laptops. I need to use software that OSX cannot run properly. My experience with ipads is already enough for me to stay away from them. But regardless of how i feel about their ios/osx, their build quality and screen is/should be a benchmark for others in the industry.

[brandonwh64]

Originally Posted by tokyoduong

no $#%^ I've stated several times I don't own apple laptops. I need to use software that OSX cannot run properly. My experience with ipads is already enough for me to stay away from them. But regardless of how i feel about their ios/osx, their build quality and screen is/should be a benchmark for others in the industry.

You know the retina display is made by samsung right?

Here’s the problem with Apple: The company is intent on solving problems we never knew we had. The tablet form-factor was laughed at when Steve Jobs first introduced it. Tens of millions in iPad sales later, and the naysayers are eating crow

[tokyoduong]

Originally Posted by brandonwh64

You know the retina display is made by samsung right?

Here’s the problem with Apple: The company is intent on solving problems we never knew we had. The tablet form-factor was laughed at when Steve Jobs first introduced it. Tens of millions in iPad sales later, and the naysayers are eating crow

ok...your point being?
Samsung does not have it on any of their final production goods yet. Samsung produced the part but Apple made it work in a whole package. When samsung has it in their 9 series then I'm upgrading.

I've always liked the the tablet idea and has used several pre-ipad tablets. Remember the Archos with physical buttons? I owned 2 of those.
I can't really praise the current situation since ios6 launched. having no SD slot is a deal breaker for me.

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by tokyoduong

Did you seriously just compared an imac(desktop) to a mba(laptop)?
I don't own the mba, I have the samsung 9 13in and i wish it had this 1560p screen everyday.

My point is a Apple desktop can hardly do the job correctly never mind a 13" laptop.

[Kantastic]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

Um yeah......yeah I have. That's why I said its no good. As a matter of fact I'm posting this from an iMac which hardly does a decent job and its a LOT better then that 13" joker.



60 bucks a month unlimited data. Something I would be paying anyway. Point is I didn't pay 500 bucks a month like you claim. Not even sure what this has to do with the conversation.

You said the Apple's retina display devices are outrageously priced because they, unlike smartphones with similar PPI, cost $1400 and smartphones do not, and as such, are not overpriced. You went on to say that your smartphones, a Galaxy S3 and a Galaxy Note 2, cost $99 and $199 respectively. I'm refuting your argument that smartphones are better value because they have a low immediate cost, but a much larger long term cost. You are paying artificially inflated monthly fees so that your carrier can recoup the discounted phone they provided you. It's economics and marking in its most primitive nature.

So no, smartphones are not a great value, but you have no problem dishing out anywhere from $500 to $700 for a 4-5" "retina display" smartphone over the span of 1-2 years. Yet you seem to have a problem with the price of a much larger, much more capable Apple device that offers a proportionately more functionality for the proportionately higher price.

That's what your phone expenses have to do with this conversation.

[MxPhenom 216]

Originally Posted by tokyoduong

ok...your point being?
Samsung does not have it on any of their final production goods yet. Samsung produced the part but Apple made it work in a whole package. When samsung has it in their 9 series then I'm upgrading.

I've always liked the the tablet idea and has used several pre-ipad tablets. Remember the Archos with physical buttons? I owned 2 of those.
I can't really praise the current situation since ios6 launched. having no SD slot is a deal breaker for me.

Samsung cannot have "Retina" display on their assets because the rights to it are owned by Apple. Samsung won't pay Apple to be able to use their screens on their systems.

I think you might be forgetting, that Retina display is all marketting. Its just what Apple calls their high pixel density screens. Any other company can have screens with as many pixels as apples "Retina" displays. Will they be called Retina? most likely not, unless Apple has licensed it out, because we all know that Apple loves to patent the english language.

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by Kantastic

You said the Apple's retina display devices are outrageously priced because they, unlike smartphones with similar PPI, cost $1400 and smartphones do not, and as such, are not overpriced. You went on to say that your smartphones, a Galaxy S3 and a Galaxy Note 2, cost $99 and $199 respectively. I'm refuting your argument that smartphones are better value because they have a low immediate cost, but a much larger long term cost. You are paying artificially inflated monthly fees so that your carrier can recoup the discounted phone they provided you. It's economics and marking in its most primitive nature.

So no, smartphones are not a great value, but you have no problem dishing out anywhere from $500 to $700 for a 4-5" "retina display" smartphone over the span of 1-2 years. Yet you seem to have a problem with the price of a much larger, much more capable Apple device that offers a proportionately more functionality for the proportionately higher price.

That's what your phone expenses have to do with this conversation.

Im gonna pay that for a phone ANYWAY. So yeah its a far better deal then spending 1,400 dollars on something that's stuck between a tablet and a laptop.

[Kantastic]

Originally Posted by MxPhenom 216

Samsung cannot have "Retina" display on their assets because the rights to it are owned by Apple. Samsung won't pay Apple to be able to use their screens on their systems.

I think you might be forgetting, that Retina display is all marketting. Its just what Apple calls their high pixel density screens. Any other company can have screens with as many pixels as apples "Retina" displays. Will they be called Retina? most likely not, unless Apple has licensed it out, because we all know that Apple loves to patent the english language.

You completely missed tokyoduong's point. Woosh Nobody gives a flying * if there's no "Retina" label on the box. What td is trying to get across is that Samsung, despite manufacturing the panels, doesn't use it in their own products. Why? Nobody knows. Maybe because they're a crappy company, and as with all crappy companies, let real entrepreneurial spirits like Apple open up the market before coming in from behind like a little * and hoping for a small piece of the pie.

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

Im gonna pay that for a phone ANYWAY. So yeah its a far better deal then spending 1,400 dollars on something that's stuck between a tablet and a laptop.

Far better deal? Stuck between a tablet and a laptop?

[tokyoduong]

Originally Posted by MxPhenom 216

Samsung cannot have "Retina" display on their assets because the rights to it are owned by Apple. Samsung won't pay Apple to be able to use their screens on their systems.

I think you might be forgetting, that Retina display is all marketting. Its just what Apple calls their high pixel density screens. Any other company can have screens with as many pixels as apples "Retina" displays. Will they be called Retina? most likely not, unless Apple has licensed it out, because we all know that Apple loves to patent the english language.

thanks for the info. I never said retina because i know it's marketing bs. What i did say is 1560p res that I want/need to be a little more productive. I'm by no means an extraordinary person and do a lot of the same things many other professionals needs. A high res screen is a must for dense spreadsheets and photography. There's a ton of jobs that requires that. These days, jobs requires you to be mobile and telework often. It's no surprise that the vast majority of people in my building(~4k) has laptops. And a little over half of them are 13-14in.

Here's an article with actual testing on the human eye to show you that even retina display are far from overkill.
http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/eye-resolution.html

Yes, I can tell the drastic difference between the 1560p and a 900 or 1080p screen. The bigger the screen, the more apparent it becomes. With cameras boasting bigger mp count and better lens every year, we need better display with higher res and better color calibration out of the box. This is one of the pros of apple products I absolutely defend. Otherwise, I do not like ios/osx and i think it's boring.

[cdawall]

Originally Posted by Fourstaff

Find me a 13" 2560x1600 laptop cheaper than 15 Benjamins. Oh right you cant

Give it time and they will come. There are already high res equipped tablets that go for less than half the price of the ipad. Right now Apple has high res displays. They are not worth $800 more than the equivalent laptop with a standard display.

[Frick]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

that's stuck between a tablet and a laptop.

It isn't. To me 13 inches is the sweet spot for a laptop. 15 inches and above is just too big to me, 14 inches is nice, but 13 inches is perfect. If I wanted a new laptop with a nice screen and had the money I would sooooo go for this. I would rather have a Thinkpad in the same size with the same resolution, but they don't do that so I can't.

You have made some good points in this thread but now you are just either trolling or being stupid.

Originally Posted by cdawall

Give it time and they will come. There are already high res equipped tablets that go for less than half the price of the ipad. Right now Apple has high res displays. They are not worth $800 more than the equivalent laptop with a standard display.

ARRGHGHGHHG WERE ARE MY AFFORDABLE 1440P/1600P MONITORS DANGNABBIT!

[tokyoduong]

Originally Posted by cdawall

Give it time and they will come. There are already high res equipped tablets that go for less than half the price of the ipad. Right now Apple has high res displays. They are not worth $800 more than the equivalent laptop with a standard display.

Name me one high res tablet less than half the price of ipad3/4.

there are cheaper alternative like the asus transformer infinity but it is definitely not as good or half the price lol. I would still pick the transformer over the ipad for its SD slot and excellent dock.
The only tablet I see might be worth my time is the new MS win8 pro tablet when. But the damn thing is too expensive and sucks too much battery.

A 1.4k price of MBA is not $800 more than equivalent laptop in its class. My samsung 9 cost me nearly 1k on a sale lol. Zenbooks and its equivalent with inferior hardware cost 1k or more. Apple has about 200-300 premium but it has a better display. I'm not putting any laptop over another but they all have their pros and cons. Apple's cons has always been high price for high end hardware but what did you expect?

[MxPhenom 216]

Originally Posted by Frick

It isn't. To me 13 inches is the sweet spot for a laptop. 15 inches and above is just too big to me, 14 inches is nice, but 13 inches is perfect. If I wanted a new laptop with a nice screen and had the money I would sooooo go for this. I would rather have a Thinkpad in the same size with the same resolution, but they don't do that so I can't.

You have made some good points in this thread but now you are just either trolling or being stupid.



ARRGHGHGHHG WERE ARE MY AFFORDABLE 1440P/1600P MONITORS DANGNABBIT!

Seen those Korean monitors? Micro Centers have them in stock now.

[Easy Rhino]

Originally Posted by Frick

It isn't. To me 13 inches is the sweet spot for a laptop. 15 inches and above is just too big to me, 14 inches is nice, but 13 inches is perfect. If I wanted a new laptop with a nice screen and had the money I would sooooo go for this. I would rather have a Thinkpad in the same size with the same resolution, but they don't do that so I can't.

You have made some good points in this thread but now you are just either trolling or being stupid.



ARRGHGHGHHG WERE ARE MY AFFORDABLE 1440P/1600P MONITORS DANGNABBIT!

yea know, it wasn't that long ago that people thought that anything higher than 1920x1080 was a waste on a screen smaller than 42inches. the people here saying it is a gimmick or that it's not for professionals or that it's overpriced are wrong. simply as that.

[Frick]

Originally Posted by MxPhenom 216

Seen those Korean monitors? Micro Centers have them in stock now.

Bring a Microcenter to Sweden and we'll talk. And no, I will not buy a monitor from ebay.

Originally Posted by Easy Rhino

yea know, it wasn't that long ago that people thought that anything higher than 1920x1080 was a waste on a screen smaller than 42inches. the people here saying it is a gimmick or that it's not for professionals or that it's overpriced are wrong. simply as that.

I do kinda agree it's overpriced though, because they are expensive. It still (sadly) is a bit of a novelty though, and it is unique, so I don't blame Apple too much for that.

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by Easy Rhino

yea know, it wasn't that long ago that people thought that anything higher than 1920x1080 was a waste on a screen smaller than 42inches. the people here saying it is a gimmick or that it's not for professionals or that it's overpriced are wrong. simply as that.

News Flash. Its not the DAMN RESOLUTION that is useless. Its that RESOLUTION at 13 INCHES. At that size 1,400 bucks is just flat out a gimmick.

[Easy Rhino]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

News Flash. Its not the DAMN RESOLUTION that is useless. Its that RESOLUTION at 13 INCHES. At that size 1,400 bucks is just flat out a gimmick.

that is exactly what was said of those 37in monitors with 1080p resolution. they said that 1080p resolution at 37inches is useless!!!

also note that you are not paying 1400 just for the display...

[MxPhenom 216]

Oh boy, when Mailman and Easy Rhino get into it. That is my queue to leave.

Originally Posted by Easy Rhino

that is exactly what was said of those 37in monitors with 1080p resolution. they said that 1080p resolution at 37inches is useless!!!

also note that you are not paying 1400 just for the display...

You are also getting Intel hardware, oh wait you can get the same hardware in Windows Ultrabooks and Laptops that cost a fraction of the price.

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by Easy Rhino

that is exactly what was said of those 37in monitors with 1080p resolution. they said that 1080p resolution at 37inches is useless!!!

also note that you are not paying 1400 just for the display...

I didn't. You want another infraction for putting words in my mouth?