# Apple Updates Processors & Prices of MacBook Pro with Retina Display



## Cristian_25H (Feb 13, 2013)

Apple is making the MacBook Pro with Retina display faster and more affordable with updated processors and lower starting prices. The 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina display now starts at $1,499 for 128 GB of flash, and $1,699 for a new 2.6 GHz processor and 256 GB of flash. The 15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina display now features a faster 2.4 GHz quad-core processor, and the top-of-the-line 15-inch notebook comes with a new 2.7 GHz quad-core processor and 16 GB of memory. Apple today also announced that the 13-inch MacBook Air with 256 GB of flash has a new lower price of $1,399.







The MacBook Pro with Retina display features the world's highest resolution notebook display. Whether you're reading emails, writing text, editing home movies in HD or retouching professional photography, everything appears vibrant, detailed and sharp, delivering an unrivaled viewing experience. The MacBook Pro with Retina display features flash storage that is up to four times faster than traditional notebook hard drives, and delivers improved reliability, instant-on responsiveness and up to 30 days of standby time.

*Pricing & Availability*
The updated MacBook Pro with Retina display and MacBook Air models are available today through the Apple Online Store (www.apple.com), Apple's retail stores and Apple Authorized Resellers. Pricing details, technical specifications, configure-to-order options and accessories are available online at www.apple.com/macbook-pro and www.apple.com/macbookair.

*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 13, 2013)

Apple flaming in 3.....2......1


----------



## Fourstaff (Feb 13, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Apple flaming in 3.....2......1



Pretty hard to flame Retina Display if you ask me. 

As usual, if people feel like flaming there will be prizes, top one being a permanent ban from TPU


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 13, 2013)

Fourstaff said:


> Pretty hard to flame Retina Display if you ask me.
> 
> As usual, if people feel like flaming there will be prizes, top one being a permanent ban from TPU



1,400 bucks for a 13" screen? Question is how can you NOT flame.


----------



## aayman_farzand (Feb 13, 2013)

I want one...but at this point I see no reason to move from my 2011 MBA.


----------



## Darkleoco (Feb 13, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> 1,400 bucks for a 13" screen? Question is how can you NOT flame.



That $1,400 is more than I paid for my Asus G75 and thats with a 17" 1080p display, i7-3610QM, and a gtx 660m. At some point people are going to realize all they are paying for with Apple is a brand. Not to mention why would I want a retina display on a laptop? Apple needs to quit pushing their over-hyped displays into all of their products especially a 13" laptop :shadedshu


----------



## Fourstaff (Feb 13, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> 1,400 bucks for a 13" screen? Question is how can you NOT flame.



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


----------



## Dos101 (Feb 13, 2013)

Darkleoco said:


> That $1,400 is more than I paid for my Asus G75 and thats with a 17" 1080p display, i7-3610QM, and a gtx 660m. At some point people are going to realize all they are paying for with Apple is a brand. Not to mention why would I want a retina display on a laptop? Apple needs to quit pushing their over-hyped displays into all of their products especially a 13" laptop :shadedshu



If my G73 had the same build quality and and unibody aluminum body as the MBP I'd pay extra for that.

Lots of people who do things with photography and video would benefit from the Retina display, that's why you'd want it on a laptop.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 13, 2013)

Fourstaff said:


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



Why do you need 2560x1600 on a 13" display? Sounds to me like Apple got a good deal on some displays and are making a killing on people that apparently don't know what they are doing or looking at? ALSO its not like the GPU in that thing can even PUSH anything at 2560x1600. Would be good to watch blu-rays on it.......oh wait THERE IS NO OPTICAL DRIVE.



Dos101 said:


> If my G73 had the same build quality and and unibody aluminum body as the MBP I'd pay extra for that.
> 
> Lots of people who do things with photography and video would benefit from the Retina display, that's why you'd want it on a laptop.



13" for image manipulation and or video editing?


----------



## brandonwh64 (Feb 13, 2013)

Fourstaff said:


> Pretty hard to flame Retina Display if you ask me.
> 
> As usual, if people feel like flaming there will be prizes, top one being a permanent ban from TPU



Retina display is OK but there are screens out there on devices like kindle HD that is VERY close to quality.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-57507846-94/amazons-kindle-fire-hd-joins-retina-ranks/


----------



## Darkleoco (Feb 13, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> 13" for image manipulation and or video editing?



This. It would hardly be practical to try and do image manipulation or video editing on a 17" laptop let alone one of their 13" toys. It's not about cramming as many pixels into your display as possible it comes down to is it practical and the real answer in this instance is no.


----------



## Fourstaff (Feb 13, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Why do you need 2560x1600 on a 13" display? Sounds to me like Apple got a good deal on some displays and are making a killing on people that apparently don't know what they are doing or looking at? ALSO its not like the GPU in that thing can even PUSH anything at 2560x1600. Would be good to watch blu-rays on it.......oh wait THERE IS NO OPTICAL DRIVE.



I certainly dont need 2560x1600 on a 13" display, but I am sure there are people out there who will need them. This product caters to those people, not people like me who is fine with 1366x768 on 15". Blu-ray? Well given that Blu-ray is only capable of doing 1080p those people who prefer to watch movies on their laptop screens will be better served by buying other native 1080p laptops which come with a blu-ray drive. Simple. 

Yes, 1fps with 2560x1600 screen is pretty useless to most, but people looking to play games should look elsewhere instead of considering MBP Retina. Well if they buy MBP Retina and attempt to game on it bless their courage (or stupidity).


----------



## brandonwh64 (Feb 13, 2013)

Fourstaff said:


> I certainly dont need 2560x1600 on a 13" display, but I am sure there are people out there who will need them. This product caters to those people, not people like me who is fine with 1366x768 on 15". Blu-ray? Well given that Blu-ray is only capable of doing 1080p those people who prefer to watch movies on their laptop screens will be better served by buying other native 1080p laptops which come with a blu-ray drive. Simple.
> 
> Yes, 1fps with 2560x1600 screen is pretty useless to most, but people looking to play games should look elsewhere instead of considering MBP Retina. Well if they buy MBP Retina and attempt to game on it bless their courage (or stupidity).



Also 13 inch screen at that resolution is cause for a head ache if you do not have the DPI truned up.

Also WHO would cater from having 2560x1600 on a 13" display? I cannot think of a single reason?


----------



## Easy Rhino (Feb 13, 2013)

my god you people are morons. honestly, go back to your troll caves.

if you don't like the retina display then don't buy it. the world doesn't revolve around your wants and needs.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Feb 13, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> my god you people are morons. honestly, go back to your troll caves.



Now this is flaming! I asked a simple question if you think we are morons then please give us a reason for what we asked.



Easy Rhino said:


> if you don't like the retina display then don't buy it. the world doesn't revolve around your wants and needs.



Who said we hated the retina display?


----------



## lZKoce (Feb 13, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Why do you need 2560x1600 on a 13" display?



I don't know now- so many opinions. Is this a good example then?: Middle/high ranked manager on the run....try opening a couple of Excell spreadsheets to manage your data when making an analysis? - now do it on  1366x768- feel the difference? Your are an university professor on the run, writing his PhD, pls multitask on 1366x768 and write me back. I get your point that for video editting you need moar power and stuff, but sometimes, someone may be can benefit from a 13 inch hi-res display.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 13, 2013)

Fourstaff said:


> I certainly dont need 2560x1600 on a 13" display, but I am sure there are people out there who will need them. This product caters to those people, not people like me who is fine with 1366x768 on 15". Blu-ray? Well given that Blu-ray is only capable of doing 1080p those people who prefer to watch movies on their laptop screens will be better served by buying other native 1080p laptops which come with a blu-ray drive. Simple.
> 
> Yes, 1fps with 2560x1600 screen is pretty useless to most, but people looking to play games should look elsewhere instead of considering MBP Retina. Well if they buy MBP Retina and attempt to game on it bless their courage (or stupidity).



My point is man I work in the field where 2560x1600 is NICE to have but, at 13" its USELESS. This isn't me hating on Apple. Been using Apple since before the clone days. Older Macs were tanks and well thought out. Graphite's, Quicksilvers, Mirror Doors. Bad ASS towers. These prices for what you get now are NOT worth the money. The build quality is no where what they were 10 years ago AND now 1,400 bucks for a 13" screen? DAFUQ! Anyway that's all Im gonna say on this because a lot of people will chime in just because its Apple and cool to hate. I don't "hate" on them. I'm just sad Apple isn't what it used to be and now that Jobs is gone it will never go back.



lZKoce said:


> You are kidding right? I give you a scenario or two. Middle/high ranked manager on the run....try opening a couple of Excell spreadsheets to manage your data when making an analysis? - now do it on  1366x768- feel the difference? Your are an university professor on the run, writing his PhD, pls multitask on 1366x768 and write me back. I get your point that for video editting you need moar power and stuff, but sometimes, someone can benefit from a 13 inch hi-res display.



1,400 dollars to do Excel sheets. This is why no one can afford college anymore and most professors are retards.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Feb 13, 2013)

lZKoce said:


> You are kidding right? I give you a scenario or two. Middle/high ranked manager on the run....try opening a couple of Excell spreadsheets to manage your data when making an analysis? - now do it on  1366x768- feel the difference? Your are an university professor on the run, writing his PhD, pls multitask on 1366x768 and write me back. I get your point that for video editting you need moar power and stuff, but sometimes, someone can benefit from a 13 inch hi-res display.



The resolution is not the issue, its the 13 inches its spread across is were we are questioning the need for it.


----------



## lZKoce (Feb 13, 2013)

brandonwh64 said:


> The resolution is not the issue, its the 13 inches its spread across is were we are questioning the need for it.



Aaah ok, I dunno that much. I am not rich enough to afford Apple anyway.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Feb 13, 2013)

brandonwh64 said:


> Now this is flaming! I asked a simple question if you think we are morons then please give us a reason for what we asked.



lol seriously? the usual suspects are in this thread trashing an apple product. 




> Who said we hated the retina display?



i am not accusing anyone of hating it. i am saying that if you hate it then don't buy it. maybe move on to a different thread. go help somebody with a technical problem, etc.


----------



## Fourstaff (Feb 13, 2013)

brandonwh64 said:


> Also 13 inch screen at that resolution is cause for a head ache if you do not have the DPI truned up.
> 
> Also WHO would cater from having 2560x1600 on a 13" display? I cannot think of a single reason?



Just increase font size, simple. Mac is not Windows where if you change the font size it screws everything up. 

I don't know who needs 2560x1600, but laws of economics states that if there is a product at a price there will be a number (including 0) of people who will need/want it. The best I can do is those graphic designers who needs a mobile platform (obviously TMM is not included), or someone who cannot stand shitty resolutions (I have had "arguments" with people who apparently can't stand 1366x768 and would prefer 1920x1080, I believe same reasons apply for people going from 1920x1080 to 2560x1600).

Finally, laptops need to stop embarrassing themselves when compared to smartphones, SGSIII has 1280x720 4.8". Yes you don't hold your laptop as close to your face as your phone, but lets not go there.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Feb 13, 2013)

lZKoce said:


> Aaah ok, I dunno that much. I am not rich enough to afford Apple anyway.



This is the only reason I ask, I am not flaming or saying down with apple but I am questioning their need for such a large resolution on a tiny screen size. I could imagine they could turn the DPI up but then it would not be worth the added resolution size get my argument?



Fourstaff said:


> Just increase font size, simple. Mac is not Windows where if you change the font size it screws everything up.
> 
> I don't know who needs 2560x1600, but laws of economics states that if there is a product at a price there will be a number (including 0) of people who will need/want it. The best I can do is those graphic designers who needs a mobile platform (obviously TMM is not included), or someone who cannot stand shitty resolutions (I have had "arguments" with people who apparently can't stand 1366x768 and would prefer 1920x1080, I believe same reasons apply for people going from 1920x1080 to 2560x1600).
> 
> Finally, laptops need to stop embarrassing themselves when compared to smartphones, SGSIII has 1280x720 4.8". Yes you don't hold your laptop as close to your face as your phone, but lets not go there.



Understandable but still wouldnt that be a waste of resolution on that tiny 13 inch screen if you still have to increase font size to see it which takes up more and more of the screen?


----------



## Easy Rhino (Feb 13, 2013)

Fourstaff said:


> Just increase font size, simple. Mac is not Windows where if you change the font size it screws everything up.
> 
> I don't know who needs 2560x1600, but laws of economics states that if there is a product at a price there will be a number (including 0) of people who will need/want it. The best I can do is those graphic designers who needs a mobile platform (obviously TMM is not included), or someone who cannot stand shitty resolutions (I have had "arguments" with people who apparently can't stand 1366x768 and would prefer 1920x1080, I believe same reasons apply for people going from 1920x1080 to 2560x1600).
> 
> Finally, laptops need to stop embarrassing themselves when compared to smartphones, SGSIII has 1280x720 4.8". Yes you don't hold your laptop as close to your face as your phone, but lets not go there.



funny how people argue "need" on tpu. you don't need water cooled 4.5ghz processors and 2x titan gpus but you have them. hypocrits...

(not you fourstaff, just in general)


----------



## Prima.Vera (Feb 13, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Apple flaming in 3.....2......1



Second one:

Any games except Crazy Birds can you play at that resolution without having a slideshow?? 



brandonwh64 said:


> Also 13 inch screen at that resolution is cause for a head ache if you do not have the DPI truned up.
> 
> Also WHO would cater from having 2560x1600 on a 13" display? I cannot think of a single reason?



Agree with you, buy I think Apple has a different DPI scaling system than the crappiest ever used by M$. I might be wrong...


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 13, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> funny how people argue "need" on tpu. you don't need water cooled 4.5ghz processors and 2x titan gpus but you have them. hypocrits...
> 
> (not you fourstaff, just in general)



Yeah? Look at my rig. You see any OC or anything? Everything in it was planed out for budget and purpose. Why can't you just admit 2560x1600 at 13" is USELESS FOR ANYTHING.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Feb 13, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> funny how people argue "need" on tpu. you don't need water cooled 4.5ghz processors and 2x titan gpus but you have them. hypocrits...
> 
> (not you fourstaff, just in general)



Honestly I do not see a need for that either. 4.5ghz nowadays is more for fun cause a stock 3770K will do everything you need it to do at stock clocks alone. The need for two titans... yea thats pretty ridiculous.


----------



## Fourstaff (Feb 13, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> funny how people argue "need" on tpu. you don't need water cooled 4.5ghz processors and 2x titan gpus but you have them. hypocrits...
> 
> (not you fourstaff, just in general)



The human brain is pretty special you see: if its something I want whatever the product is its the second coming of the messiah. If its a product I don't want its the black death reincarnate:  purge it before the rot spreads! Reasonable people suddenly becomes unreasonable, trolls come out of their caves in full force, innocent sheeps slaughtered for fun.



TheMailMan78 said:


> Yeah? Look at my rig. You see any OC or anything? Everything in it was planed out for budget and purpose. Why can't you just admit 2560x1600 at 13" is USELESS FOR ANYTHING.



Well, if you can't think of a use for it doesn't mean that there is not a use for it. Also, sometimes a product needs to be physically there before you can find a use for it. You don't always go "I need to do X, therefore I invent Y to help me do X", sometimes its "lets invent Y and see what we can do with it". Viagra is one of the more famous examples, in a slightly different setting. 



brandonwh64 said:


> Honestly I do not see a need for that either. 4.5ghz nowadays is more for fun cause a stock 3770K will do everything you need it to do at stock clocks alone. The need for two titans... yea thats pretty ridiculous.



I don't know, if you find getting 4.5Ghz is pretty fun I am sure someone will find 2560x1600 pretty fun too. Humans are easily amused.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Feb 13, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Yeah? Look at my rig. You see any OC or anything? Everything in it was planed out for budget and purpose. Why can't you just admit 2560x1600 at 13" is USELESS FOR ANYTHING.



and bill gates said you will never need more than 640K of ram. honestly, you are ruining TPU. please go away.


----------



## lZKoce (Feb 13, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> funny how people argue "need" on tpu. you don't need water cooled 4.5ghz processors and 2x titan gpus but you have them. hypocrits...
> 
> (not you fourstaff, just in general)



You could easily say that in the Noctua thread, where people are bitching about a brown fan  why its not black/red/blue>? If it was purple it would match the colour of my sneakers 

I am not judging, it's complicated, that's all.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Feb 13, 2013)

Fourstaff said:


> The human brain is pretty special you see: if its something I want whatever the product is its the second coming of the messiah. If its a product I don't want its the black death reincarnate:  purge it before the rot spreads! Reasonable people suddenly becomes unreasonable, trolls come out of their caves in full force, innocent sheeps slaughtered for fun.



LOL :shadedshu 

Ok well seeing as how asking questions about the need for that resolution on that screen is "unreasonable and trollish" then I guess I am not a realist and just bitching. 

Never the less, I did not say this product is worthless but only questioned the need for a certain feature.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 13, 2013)

Fourstaff said:


> The human brain is pretty special you see: if its something I want whatever the product is its the second coming of the messiah. If its a product I don't want its the black death reincarnate:  purge it before the rot spreads! Reasonable people suddenly becomes unreasonable, trolls come out of their caves in full force, innocent sheeps slaughtered for fun.


 I'm just looking at this from a common sense point of view. Not to sound like a hipster but I was using Apple professionally WAY before they were the bees knees. 13" at that price just doesn't make sense in todays market or any practical use.



Easy Rhino said:


> and bill gates said you will never need more than 640K of ram. honestly, you are ruining TPU. please go away.


 Nice. Completely irrelevant to anything in this thread.



Fourstaff said:


> Well, if you can't think of a use for it doesn't mean that there is not a use for it. Also, sometimes a product needs to be physically there before you can find a use for it. You don't always go "I need to do X, therefore I invent Y to help me do X", sometimes its "lets invent Y and see what we can do with it". Viagra is one of the more famous examples, in a slightly different setting.



Let me know when you find a use to justify that price.


----------



## Fourstaff (Feb 13, 2013)

brandonwh64 said:


> Ok well seeing as how asking questions about the need for that resolution on that screen is "unreasonable and trollish" then I guess I am not a realist and just bitching.



I never said anything about "Ok well seeing as how asking questions about the need for that resolution on that screen is "unreasonable and trollish"", if you want the reason this is a good thread to find out whatever reason there is to need a 2560x1600 screen.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Feb 13, 2013)

Fourstaff said:


> I never said anything about "Ok well seeing as how asking questions about the need for that resolution on that screen is "unreasonable and trollish"", if you want the reason this is a good thread to find out whatever reason there is to need a 2560x1600 screen.



Well it seemed as your post about the trolls coming out of the closet was hint enough.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Feb 13, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> and bill gates said you will never need more than 640K of ram. honestly, you are ruining TPU. please go away.



Yes, one man single handedly is ruining TPU. :shadedshu 

I think you have finished your work in this thread, go get your money from Apple.


----------



## Fourstaff (Feb 13, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> I'm just looking at this from a common sense point of view. Not to sound like a hipster but I was using Apple professionally WAY before they were the bees knees. 13" at that price just doesn't make sense in todays market or any practical use.



Well I have since got rid of common sense when it comes to looking at new product launches, there are so many crazy inventions out there that 13" MBP Retina is just one of the more mundane and predictable things. "Move along, nothing to see here" attitude. To me the only difference between a Dell (generic laptop) and a MBP is Retina display, take away Retina and suddenly it becomes almost impossible to justify the price. 



TheMailMan78 said:


> Let me know when you find a use to justify that price.


Will do. I suspect you will know the reason before me, given that you work with the creative industry.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Feb 13, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Let me know when you find a use to justify that price.



doctors use high res monitors every day. having a high res monitor on a mobile device makes all the difference in the world to patient care. now go away.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Feb 13, 2013)

I honestly like the retina displays and believe more and more company's should offer such style screens. Like I had mentioned to lZKoce in PM, I would like to see this product close up and maybe it will answer more questions I have.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 13, 2013)

Fourstaff said:


> Well I have since got rid of common sense when it comes to looking at new product launches, there are so many crazy inventions out there that 13" MBP Retina is just one of the more mundane and predictable things. "Move along, nothing to see here" attitude. To me the only difference between a Dell (generic laptop) and a MBP is Retina display, take away Retina and suddenly it becomes almost impossible to justify the price.
> 
> 
> Will do. I suspect you will know the reason before me, given that you work with the creative industry.



Seriously if someone can come up with a practical use Ill admit I was wrong. However I am willing to bet whatever that use may be it will be for a VERY SMALL market and I doubt Apple is catering to just them. Anyway I'm done here. I just wish Apple would be Apple again.



Easy Rhino said:


> doctors use high res monitors every day. having a high res monitor on a mobile device makes all the difference in the world to patient care. now go away.



You are kidding right? This is FAR from being a medical grade monitor AND do you really want a doctor to look at a brain scan on a 13" screen? You are grabbing at straws now.


----------



## Fourstaff (Feb 13, 2013)

brandonwh64 said:


> I honestly like the retina displays and believe more and more company's should offer such style screens. Like I had mentioned to lZKoce in PM, I would like to see this product close up and maybe it will answer more questions I have.



Walk into the nearest Apple store and give it a spin. If you don't have an Apple store nearby, wait for the show-off to get one and then take a look at his/hers.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Feb 13, 2013)

Fourstaff said:


> Walk into the nearest Apple store and give it a spin. If you don't have an Apple store nearby, wait for the show-off to get one and then take a look at his/hers.



I have one in chattanooga mall and my wife shops there a lot so yep I will check it out. I am thinking on paper of what would look like and a hands on experience would be the best bet


----------



## Easy Rhino (Feb 13, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Seriously if someone can come up with a practical use Ill admit I was wrong. However I am willing to bet whatever that use may be it will be for a VERY SMALL market and I doubt Apple is catering to just them. Anyway I'm done here. I just wish Apple would be Apple again.
> 
> 
> 
> You are kidding right? This is FAR from being a medical grade monitor AND do you really want a doctor to look at a brain scan on a 13" screen? You are grabbing at straws now.



uhm, ive seen them use the new ipads with retina displays to show patients high res mri and xray scans. much easier than waiting to have the film developed or walking out a massive med cart with a workstation attached to it.


----------



## Fourstaff (Feb 13, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Seriously if someone can come up with a practical use Ill admit I was wrong. However I am willing to bet whatever that use may be it will be for a VERY SMALL market and I doubt Apple is catering to just them. Anyway I'm done here. I just wish Apple would be Apple again.



Inadvertently serving a niche market is always good. Also, Apple has since become a luxury good which has lost most of its roots. This is not uncommon: examples being Blackberry, Range Rover among others.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 13, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> uhm, ive seen them use the new ipads with retina displays to show patients high res mri and xray scans. much easier than waiting to have the film developed or walking out a massive med cart with a workstation attached to it. .



If your doctor is using an iPad to review medical images you need to find another doctor. Also showing a patient an image and reviewing them for a diagnoses is two VERY different things.


----------



## lemonadesoda (Feb 13, 2013)

Once again I say to all these retina naysayers... WHAT PRINTER DO YOU HAVE? I bet all the fire in satan's hell you don't have a 120dpi printer, but more like 600dpi and higher. Why? Why? Why, do you bother with a 600dpi printer if you "like" low resolution? Hmm? Dot matrix for you!

Er, as MM said, I do hope no-one is using a 13" screen for medical images. In fact, not even a regular IPS TFT is good enough? Why, because medical images are B&W/greyscale and with 24bit colour, that gives only 8bit greyscale. That just isnt enough for proper analysis of medical images. You need a *high bit monitor* and an appropriate *workstation GPU* to drive it.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Feb 13, 2013)

lemonadesoda said:


> Once again I say to all these retina naysayers... WHAT PRINTER DO YOU HAVE? I bet all the fire in satan's hell you don't have a 120dpi printer, but more like 600dpi and higher. Why? Why? Why, do you bother with a 600dpi printer if you "like" low resolution? Hmm? Dot matrix for you!



What does printers have to do with this? We do Plotter DPI of 2400 at work on 1080P screens fine. I am just curious on why printers are way better with retina?


----------



## Easy Rhino (Feb 13, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> If your doctor is using an iPad to review medical images you need to find another doctor. Also showing a patient an image and reviewing them for a diagnoses is two VERY different things.



i never said they were exclusively using ipads to review scans... i mentioned patient care... is your brain broken?


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 13, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> i never said they were exclusively using ipads to review scans... i mentioned patient care... is your brain broken?



Then you don't need a retna display for that then do you?


----------



## lemonadesoda (Feb 13, 2013)

When you charge your patients $500 per hour, it helps to impress them


----------



## brandonwh64 (Feb 13, 2013)

I have yet to see an Ipad at a Doc office unless its a secretary checking facebook on break. Most of the devices I have seen are the dell laptops with the reversible screen with USB connections.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Feb 13, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Then you don't need a retna display for that then do you?



yes, you do need a retina display because it shows the image much clearer. you can zoom into specific spots. the patient can hold it and look around while the doctor explains to them what they are seeing in much higher resolution than 720p. you turned your brain off, didn't you?


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 13, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> yes, you do need a retina display because it shows the image much clearer. you can zoom into specific spots. the patient can hold it and look around while the doctor explains to them what they are seeing in much higher resolution that 720p. you turned your brain off, didn't you?



Considering 99.999999% of people have no clue what they are looking at I still do not see a need for a DOCTOR to use an iPad to show a patient something they don't know what they are looking at. So again common sense is not so common. Anyway this thread is not about ipads. Its about a 13" laptop with no practical purpose for 2560x1600.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Feb 13, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Considering 99.999999% of people have no clue what they are looking at I still do not see a need for a DOCTOR to use an iPad to show a patient something they don't know what they are looking at. So again common sense is not so common. Anyway this thread is not about ipads. Its about a 13" laptop with no practical purpose for 2560x1600.



this thread is about the 13in laptop with a retina display. you questioned the purpose of having a retina display in a 13in laptop. well the same reasons apply to the ipad having a retina display. it's pretty simple.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 13, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> this thread is about the 13in laptop with a retina display. you questioned the purpose of having a retina display in a 13in laptop. well the same reasons apply to the ipad having a retina display. it's pretty simple.



So in your world a iPad does the job with a retna display. Then why use the 13" laptop?

Seriously man you are REALLY grabbing at straws. There is no practical use and you know it.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Feb 13, 2013)

I feel that the tension here with the retina display is really over done. Yes you can see things clearer and yes it is more colorful but the original statement was "Why do you need 2560x1600 on a 13" display?"

Not the purpose of retina.


----------



## Mindweaver (Feb 13, 2013)

Guys, I'll say this once, and only once any more derogatory remarks and infractions will be in order. Carry on.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 13, 2013)

brandonwh64 said:


> I feel that the tension here with the retina display is really over done. Yes you can see things clearer and yes it is more colorful but the original statement was "Why do you need 2560x1600 on a 13" display?"
> 
> Not the purpose of retina.



Yup. Anyway I'm really done this time. No one has put forth a legitimate argument against my statement so the debate is over. G'Day sirs.


----------



## Disparia (Feb 13, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Considering 99.999999% of people have no clue what they are looking at I still do not see a need for a DOCTOR to use an iPad to show a patient something they don't know what they are looking at. So again common sense is not so common. Anyway this thread is not about ipads. Its about a 13" laptop with no practical purpose for 2560x1600.



Common sense was the old way. Today they actually base bedside manner training on psychological studies and metrics which has greatly improved doctor/patient relations. Source: Mom, a nurse who has seen the training evolve over a 34 years.


----------



## 3870x2 (Feb 13, 2013)

I imagine that if a hospital is using an iPad or Macbook for work related doings, it is time to switch.  I don't feel like paying the hospital for their luxury devices.

+1 on the reversible dell touchscreen laptops, that is what I see most of the time.  They are the industry standard and very useful.

They are also tough and can usually withstand a drop from any persons height.  A mac / iPad would explode if dropped.


----------



## Kaynar (Feb 13, 2013)

The other news concerning Apple today (can be found on tomshardware):
-Tim Cook says OLED looks awful
-Tim Cooke says "we are unrivalled in innovation, we have no limits"

Didn't know if I should facepalm, laugh, or both together...


----------



## brandonwh64 (Feb 13, 2013)

3870x2 said:


> I imagine that if a hospital is using an iPad or Macbook for work related doings, it is time to switch.  I don't feel like paying the hospital for their luxury devices.
> 
> +1 on the reversible dell touchscreen laptops, that is what I see most of the time.  They are the industry standard and very useful.
> 
> They are also tough and can usually withstand a drop from any persons height.  A mac / iPad would explode if dropped.



I have seen these in about ever doctors office. Its either dell or HP reversible laptops with touch screens and stylist.


----------



## tokyoduong (Feb 13, 2013)

I would use it as a photographer on the go. I find that tablets have their weakness. A thin mbp 13" will take up just slightly more space than an ipad or trasnformer infinity while giving me a good keyboard and battery life. Not to mention I don't have to use "apps". 
And no, there's no windows equivalent to this laptop. If there was, I'd take it in a heartbeat


----------



## Frick (Feb 13, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Yeah? Look at my rig. You see any OC or anything? Everything in it was planed out for budget and purpose. Why can't you just admit 2560x1600 at 13" is USELESS FOR ANYTHING.



WTH are you on about man? I have not read the entire thread, but this is just stupid. If the OS can cope with DPI scaling a high DPI is very very nice indeed. Is the 2,048 × 1,536 the iPad has useless? Not a chance. It puts you closer to the content. Why is that different than this? It would be bad on a Windows machine but to my understanding OSX does that sort of thing way better.


----------



## Disparia (Feb 13, 2013)

Don't forget that when talking about DPI scaling in Windows that *your* problem is not *my* problem, and not necessarily a problem for everyone else 

If I won a retina device, I'd certainly use it. Bootcamp to Windows and admire the awesomeness of the screen.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Feb 13, 2013)

I dont see the point of "Retina" (Which is just a marketting scheme) display on laptop screens. I want to see that shit on 40+ inch TVs.


----------



## Frick (Feb 13, 2013)

Jizzler said:


> Don't forget that when talking about DPI scaling in Windows that *your* problem is not *my* problem, and not necessarily a problem for everyone else
> 
> If I won a retina device, I'd certainly use it. Bootcamp to Windows and admire the awesomeness of the screen.



In Windows 7 it certinaly is a problem. Imagine looking at the login screen with that machine..



MxPhenom 216 said:


> I dont see the point of "Retina" (Which is just a marketting scheme) display on laptop screens. I want to see that shit on 40+ inch TVs.



Ever used a newer iPad or iPhone? Look at the text, look at the pictures. Reading on an retina iPad is awesome. Why would that be different on a laptop? Again it depends on how the OS does DPI scaling.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Feb 13, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> So in your world a iPad does the job with a retna display. Then why use the 13" laptop?
> 
> Seriously man you are REALLY grabbing at straws. There is no practical use and you know it.



i have given you an ACTUAL real world example of a profession currently and actively using a retina display and you have no response. let the record show.


----------



## Aquinus (Feb 13, 2013)

Frick said:


> WTH are you on about man? I have not read the entire thread, but this is just stupid. If the OS can cope with DPI scaling a high DPI is very very nice indeed. Is the 2,048 × 1,536 the iPad has useless? Not a chance. It puts you closer to the content. Why is that different than this? It would be bad on a Windows machine but to my understanding OSX does that sort of thing way better.



Last time I checked the goal of retina was to have a pixel density so high that your eye can't tell the difference. If the resolution on the 15" and 13" retina is the same, there is no gain. Just because the display gets better doesn't mean that your eyes do. Anything that you need that crisp of a picture for, you'll be wanting a bigger display anyways. As for the case when doctors are examining x-rays or what ever, I would expect the doctor to use a large display to analyze it then use something like an iPad to show the patient.

I have to agree with TMM on just about every point. There is very little benefit to having retina on a 13", even more so since it's driven by Intel's oh so powerful HD 4000 graphics. There isn't enough in the laptop, in my own opinion, to warrent such a price for a laptop. At this point they should have just ditched the 13 MBP and just relied on the Air. I would rather invest in a retina display on a 13" MBA than an MBP, but if it were my money, I would get neither.


----------



## Disparia (Feb 13, 2013)

Frick said:


> In Windows 7 it certinaly is a problem. Imagine looking at the login screen with that machine..



Nope, no problem for me and that's probably the worse example you can give to prove there's an issue.


----------



## lemonadesoda (Feb 13, 2013)

Windows isnt very good at retina. Therefore, retina is crap and worthless. QED.

Windows isnt very good at sex. Therefore, sex is crap and worthless. QED.

Catch my drift?

Retina (or high pixel density) is great.  If Windows is shit at scaling, that's windows problem not retina's problem. Retina is for font rendering and readability... just like cleartype attempts to increase pixel density through pixel tricks.

Trickery or the real thing?


----------



## Prima.Vera (Feb 13, 2013)

Frick said:


> Ever used a newer iPad or iPhone? Look at the text, look at the pictures. Reading on an retina iPad is awesome. Why would that be different on a laptop? ...



Because you don't keep the monitor screen as closed as you keep your phone or tablet?? Seriously people, use your brains for a while...


----------



## Jstn7477 (Feb 13, 2013)

Apple's user interfaces seem to scale pretty well with resolution changes. Nobody complained about iPhone 4/4S which has 4x the pixel density of the iPhone/3G/3GS, yet all the UI stuff is exactly the same. Apple would probably be shunned for putting out a notebook with a screen where you couldn't read anything because it was too small.


----------



## TriggerWolf (Feb 13, 2013)

I own a late 2011 13" MBP. While I do agree that 2560x1600 on a 13" display is overkill, I wouldn't mind 1080p on this laptop at all.

Imho a blatant marketing scheme, while I really like Apple's products this just seems unnecessary.

Cheers everyone


----------



## Easy Rhino (Feb 13, 2013)

TriggerWolf said:


> I own a late 2011 13" MBP. While I do agree that 2560x1600 on a 13" display is overkill, I wouldn't mind 1080p on this laptop at all.



i really don't think this is overkill. it has a lot of professional uses and even if you don't use it professionally you still get the huge benefit of a clearer display and less headache. what's more, it pushes the hardware envelope. lcd/led resolution is THE reason for the lag in gpu developement.


----------



## tehehe (Feb 13, 2013)

For unaware: you can run 1280x800 with perfect pixel mapping on a 2560x1600 display. That means you can run gpu demanding apps at 1280x800 fullscreen with perfect picture quality (same as native resolution).


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Feb 13, 2013)

Frick said:


> In Windows 7 it certinaly is a problem. Imagine looking at the login screen with that machine..
> 
> 
> 
> Ever used a newer iPad or iPhone? Look at the text, look at the pictures. Reading on an retina iPad is awesome. Why would that be different on a laptop? Again it depends on how the OS does DPI scaling.



Yes, my friends all have iPhones and iPads. I still dont see the point in running these screens on such small displays. And thats my opinion, judge if you want.


----------



## erocker (Feb 13, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> i really don't think this is overkill. it has a lot of professional uses and even if you don't use it professionally you still get the huge benefit of a clearer display and less headache. what's more, it pushes the hardware envelope. lcd/led resolution is THE reason for the lag in gpu developement.



Sorry, but 13" is too small for "professional use". They're getting it right with higher resolution, but they need a larger screen at this price point.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Feb 13, 2013)

erocker said:


> Sorry, but 13" is too small for "professional use". They're getting it right with higher resolution, but they need a larger screen at this price point.



how is it too small for professional use? if you have a 27 inch LCD with 1600p resolution attached to a desktop, wouldn't you want the same thing on a mobile platform? The point is the resolution, not the display size. If you are out on a freighter mapping possible locations for an oil rig and you are viewing deep sea 10000x10000 images wouldn't you like to look at them on a retina display laptop or tablet first before shipping them off to the desk jockies back at the office to further analyze? let's say you are up in the ISS and one of your jobs is to take super high res photos of the earth. You can't obviously lug a desktop up there but you still need a display that makes it easy to get around with. Let's say you are working with a patient who has been immobilized and you want to show him or her the latest x-ray scans before the printouts are available and you don't want to cart around one of those massive workstations on wheels. You can show them the high res scan on a 13in laptop and manipulate the image easily while you explain what the patient is seeing so he or she better understands the care they are getting and can make the best future care decision. 

i could go on all day the ways professionals can and do use retina displays on small devices like a 13in laptop or a tablet. it makes sense because they already do this stuff but are chained down to those massive monitors. now they can be mobile and have the same advantages.


----------



## Fourstaff (Feb 13, 2013)

erocker said:


> Sorry, but 13" is too small for "professional use". They're getting it right with higher resolution, but they need a larger screen at this price point.



Sit closer, and your 13" will look like 26". Easy


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 13, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> how is it too small for professional use? if you have a 27 inch LCD with 1600p resolution attached to a desktop, wouldn't you want the same thing on a mobile platform? The point is the resolution, not the display size. If you are out on a freighter mapping possible locations for an oil rig and you are viewing deep sea 10000x10000 images wouldn't you like to look at them on a retina display laptop or tablet first before shipping them off to the desk jockies back at the office to further analyze? let's say you are up in the ISS and one of your jobs is to take super high res photos of the earth. You can't obviously lug a desktop up there but you still need a display that makes it easy to get around with. Let's say you are working with a patient who has been immobilized and you want to show him or her the latest x-ray scans before the printouts are available and you don't want to cart around one of those massive workstations on wheels. You can show them the high res scan on a 13in laptop and manipulate the image easily while you explain what the patient is seeing so he or she better understands the care they are getting and can make the best future care decision.
> 
> i could go on all day the ways professionals can and do use retina displays on small devices like a 13in laptop or a tablet. it makes sense because they already do this stuff but are chained down to those massive monitors. now they can be mobile and have the same advantages.



All those things you listed could easily be done on a lower resolution device with a bigger screen for far cheaper. 13" is to small man for any real professional work. Sorry.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Feb 13, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> All those things you listed could easily be done on a lower resolution device with a bigger screen for far cheaper. 13" is to small man for any real professional work. Sorry.



oh, im sorry i thought you left this thread. also, i notice you did not rebutt one of my examples and you still have completely ignored by real life story of retina display use by doctors. so...please go away.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 13, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> oh, im sorry i thought you left this thread. also, i notice you did not rebutt one of my examples and you still have completely ignored by real life story of retina display use by doctors. so...please go away.



I rebutted all your examples in one shot. KABOOM!

Oil rig sending them off? Most are streamed real time.
ISS. Same thing.
Doctor? Already debunked that.

And Oil companies can afford better things then 13" Airs. Really these new 13"s are just marketing at its finest. Poor mans MBP.


----------



## Fourstaff (Feb 13, 2013)

Guys, guys, what if MBA Retina 13" was created as a "want" item rather than a "need" item? We can stop arguing and make up now 

Before you fine gentlemen come up with a witty remark, think of all those graphic cards, they exist because we want to play games, not because we need


----------



## mandis (Feb 13, 2013)

I think people in this thread simply love to argue as there is no other rational explanation for what has been posted here... 

I think the 15" Retina model has pretty decent specs. I know the price is high but It's good to buy high quality stuff every now and then. Looks great too!


----------



## Fourstaff (Feb 13, 2013)

mandis said:


> I know the price is high but It's good to buy high quality stuff every now and then.



I have bad news for you .... Apple's quality, while still somewhat better than your budget stuff, is no better than competition nowadays.


----------



## hellrazor (Feb 13, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> 1,400 bucks for a 13" screen? Question is how can you NOT flame.



If I had the money I would simply buy the 15" screen and just use it for my computer. I don't care for size too much (15" is fine), I care about dpi because I'm not fucking blind like Darkleoco over there.


----------



## aayman_farzand (Feb 13, 2013)

I honestly did not expect anyone to argue the need for any high-end component here in TPU.

I for one would definitely get one of these if I was in the market for one and I had the cash to spare. Looking at an iPad display, I can't stand my MBA's display anymore, and even my desktop monitor feels annoying at times. The experience is better, plain and simple.

I hope other OEMs catch up and start matching the resolution. At least we'd then get some quality display at the sub-$1000 market without compromising on anything else.


----------



## NC37 (Feb 13, 2013)

I wonder how much more glue Apple is using to keep them together this time. ;D


----------



## Fourstaff (Feb 13, 2013)

NC37 said:


> I wonder how much more glue Apple is using to keep them together this time. ;D



Glue is pretty effective, it holds violin parts together for decades if not centuries.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 13, 2013)

Fourstaff said:


> Glue is pretty effective, it holds violin parts together for decades if not centuries.



You know what works better than glue? Steel screws.


----------



## Fourstaff (Feb 13, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> You know what works better than glue? Steel screws.



Over engineering is a problem just as much as under engineering.


----------



## Prima.Vera (Feb 13, 2013)

Guys relax. Those "retina" displays can only be used by Apple users and their OS. I mean I have to agree, everything looks better when posting to Facebook, TPU, browsing pictures and play online card games or stuff. And lets cut the crap with professional use and such because id getting ridiculous. As far as I'm concerned, those 13" laptops are just toys for snobs, fanboys and the rest of vanity users that wants to show off and think they are better than the rest. No need for proof, I have a lot of "friends" that thinks exactly like this. So those products are EXACTLY for those type of users. Apple marketing at its finest


----------



## Fourstaff (Feb 13, 2013)

Prima.Vera said:


> Guys relax. Those "retina" displays can only be used by Apple users and their OS. I mean I have to agree, everything looks better when posting to Facebook, TPU, browsing pictures and play online card games or stuff. As far as I'm concerned, those 13" laptops are just toys for snobs, fanboys and the rest of vanity users that wants to show off and think they are better than the rest. No need for proof, I have a lot of "friends" that thinks exactly like this. So those products are EXACTLY for those type of users. Apple marketing at its finest



So how do you classify people with 3930K, 7970 crossfire to play games at 1080p? Surely they are snobs too, no?


----------



## hellrazor (Feb 13, 2013)

Fourstaff said:


> So how do you classify people with 3930K, 7970 crossfire to play games at 1080p? Surely they are snobs too, no?



Blind snobs.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 13, 2013)

Fourstaff said:


> So how do you classify people with 3930K, 7970 crossfire to play games at 1080p? Surely they are snobs too, no?



Depends on the game. Metro 2033 maxed out?


----------



## Fourstaff (Feb 13, 2013)

hellrazor said:


> Blind snobs.



Pretty dangerous to live in this post recession world, you are not allowed to have nice shiny toys lest you will be called a snob


----------



## Prima.Vera (Feb 13, 2013)

Fourstaff said:


> Pretty dangerous to live in this post recession world, you are not allowed to have nice shiny toys lest you will be called a snob



Agree. But how do you call a guy who owns an iPhone 4 and then buys an iPhone 4S just to have the latest? 




TheMailMan78 said:


> Depends on the game. Metro 2033 maxed out?



Just a little off topic now. Maybe I'm wrong, but the game seems kinda un-optimized if you ask me. I mean the graphics is not that jaw dropping to justify that low fps in some areas. 
Also there are a lot of console ports out there are even worst optimized that can put a crossfire system to its knees on 1080p.


----------



## wickerman (Feb 13, 2013)

Fourstaff said:


> So how do you classify people with 3930K, 7970 crossfire to play games at 1080p? Surely they are snobs too, no?



I'd put them in a whole other category given such a laughably low resolution wouldn't tax half that graphics system in most properly optimized games.

Apple has always targeted "professionals", but when you do that you also wind up attracting people with money who think they need "professional" hardware even if that is not the reality. Hell how many times have there been threads at TPU or other forums popping up where people saying they have like 5 grand to spend on a PC and want to buy the best parts they can get for that, even if all they do is use facebook and play counterstrike from time to time. Apple really doesn't make any low end products in the way that HP and Dell do, they don't have anything based around Celerons and Atoms, everything uses a pretty high end Intel chip, is available with an SSD, and none of their laptops use the crappy 1366x768 panels that most laptop vendors are forcing on the market.


----------



## Fourstaff (Feb 13, 2013)

Prima.Vera said:


> Agree. But how do you call a guy who owns an iPhone 4 and then buys an iPhone 4S just to have the latest?



A guy who accidently killed his iPhone 4?


----------



## erocker (Feb 13, 2013)

Prima.Vera said:


> Agree. But how do you call a guy who owns an iPhone 4 and then buys an iPhone 4S just to have the latest?



Why would this be anyone else's business?


----------



## Aquinus (Feb 14, 2013)

wickerman said:


> none of their laptops use the crappy 1366x768 panels that most laptop vendors are forcing on the market.



Ever use a 13" Macbook Pro without Retina?
I don't call 1280x800 better than 1366x768.





Source



erocker said:


> Sorry, but 13" is too small for "professional use".



Worked well for my programming needs. I took the Air because I had the option. I like the higher resolution, the lighter weight, and the IVB i5 is just as peppy as the SB i5 with better battery life and an SSD. I guess it depends on what you consider "professional use." I see a DJ being perfectly happy with a 13" MBP just as I was happy with it being a system admin and a programmer.


----------



## hellrazor (Feb 14, 2013)

Prima.Vera said:


> Agree. But how do you call a guy who owns an iPhone 4 and then buys an iPhone 4S just to have the latest?



I don't want the screen just to have the latest, I want the screen because current moniters have a dpi that would make the oldest of grannies with the thinnest of glasses complain at how bad it looks.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Feb 14, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> I rebutted all your examples in one shot. KABOOM!
> 
> Oil rig sending them off? Most are streamed real time.
> ISS. Same thing.
> ...



mmmhmmm, ive got some AMD stock to sell you as well. you clearly are a savvy industry professional who knows what the market wants and needs. 

the need for high res mobile devices crosses several different types of industries. it's not just programmers who enjoy super high res when on the run, but engineers and medical professionals. these people are already using these devices because they are clearer and allow them to view high res images on a smaller screen with proper scaling.

my bet is that when microsoft decides to finally catch up and create a super hi res tablet everyone will say it is perfectly fine and made from the finest of bill gates pubes.


----------



## wickerman (Feb 14, 2013)

Aquinus said:


> Ever use a 13" Macbook Pro without Retina?
> I don't call 1280x800 better than 1366x768.
> 
> http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=50044&stc=1&d=1360800510
> Source



While I agree with you that 1280x800 is no better than 1366x768 in terms of raw pixels, Apple DOES use far better panels in their standard MacBook Pro than you see in just about every other vendor, with exception to Sony and ASUS on some models. But Apple is well known for using high quality panels and fully calibrating from the factory, not just with their laptop panels but on the phones and tablets as well. But the 1366x768 panels I was complaining about offer poor viewing angles, poor color accuracy, contrast, and are just terrible in comparison to a quality panel you see from Apple and some other vendors. I should have been clearer on that, I apologize.


----------



## Andrei23 (Feb 14, 2013)

Apple products. Not even once.


----------



## Kantastic (Feb 14, 2013)

NC37 said:


> I wonder how much more glue Apple is using to keep them together this time. ;D



Did someone say glue?

Go M$oft! Best company! Highest quality! Sells 64GB tablet and only provides 50% of the available space! Sells Surface Pro for more than an iPad! Takes a higher percentage of sales than Apple from the application store! #1 company!



wickerman said:


> While I agree with you that 1280x800 is no better than 1366x768 in terms of raw pixels, Apple DOES use far better panels in their standard MacBook Pro than you see in just about every other vendor, with exception to Sony and ASUS on some models. But Apple is well known for using high quality panels and fully calibrating from the factory, not just with their laptop panels but on the phones and tablets as well. But the 1366x768 panels I was complaining about offer poor viewing angles, poor color accuracy, contrast, and are just terrible in comparison to a quality panel you see from Apple and some other vendors. I should have been clearer on that, I apologize.



It's not your fault that most Apple haters care only about resolution and SPEKZ!@!!! so don't apologize.

LOOK AT THIS SIMILAR PRICED MACHINE WITH 10X BETTER SPEKZq@@!! NOW LOOK AT MACBOOK AIR LOL RIPOFF


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 14, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> the need for high res mobile devices crosses several different types of industries. it's not just programmers who enjoy super high res when on the run, but engineers and medical professionals. these people are already using these devices because they are clearer and allow them to view high res images on a smaller screen with proper scaling.


 I can't argue with that.....only not on a 13" screen for 1,400 bucks.


----------



## Kantastic (Feb 14, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> I can't argue with that.....



Fixed that for you buddy!


----------



## acerace (Feb 14, 2013)

We have two fanboys here. Who wants popcorn cause another flame war is gonna start soon.


----------



## DannibusX (Feb 14, 2013)

I dislike Apple and their pricing scheme.

I did get to toy with a 13" MBA in the wild recently.  I was impressed.  I'd totally buy one if it wasn't so spendy, but it really is a nice little machine.


----------



## zAAm (Feb 14, 2013)

I'm certainly not an Apple fan, and would never buy one. But the sooner higher resolution displays get mainstream on the Macs, the sooner it will become standard on larger displays for PC. People should stop with the whole "1080p is enough", otherwise we will never see higher resolutions such as 4K being used on desktops...

We really need to get out of the 1080p rut.


----------



## swirl09 (Feb 14, 2013)

I'm not caring much for the doctor arguments. But I will say this, every idevice I have that's transitioned to retina has been a night and day experience. It's nothing short of amazing to look at. Not going near the need/want or what professionals might use it.

If you get used to HD, you find SD harder to watch. If you get used to SSD load times, whenever you experience HDD you feel like your back in the dark ages. One day, the trolls here will get used to retina, it hasn't come yet, but it will.

And for a story which I'm not gonna lie, I have a good giggle every time I think about it.
Last year I was talking to my mother (79), when she mentioned she loved a thing her friend had, it was the book of kells on one of them tablet things (bless her!) I was delighted to hear this, because I never know what to buy her and she's completely technophobic. So, I got her an iPad and the app and she loved it. Forward a month and I'm visiting for the holidays and she tells me hers looks better than her friends (I knew immediately what was going on, trying to hold a grin back because there is no way to explain to her I'm imagining if the average troll could just be a fly on the wall right now). Last word was her friend was taking hers back to the shop to see if they could fix it (lol)


----------



## mandis (Feb 14, 2013)

Fourstaff said:


> I have bad news for you .... Apple's quality, while still somewhat better than your budget stuff, is no better than competition nowadays.



I've only owned laptops from Apple and HP. My 2004 Powerbook G4 still looks and functions like day 1. Same goes for my HP omnibook XE2 which I bought in 2000... 

If all laptops are built like this nowdays then that's awesome!


----------



## Prima.Vera (Feb 14, 2013)

zAAm said:


> People should stop with the whole "1080p is enough", otherwise we will never see higher resolutions such as 4K being used on desktops...
> 
> We really need to get out of the 1080p rut.



Give me please a single GPU video card that can play Crysis or BF3 at +60fps with FULL details on a 4K resolution, and nobody will complain for having extreme resolutions on PCs or laptops.


----------



## Aquinus (Feb 14, 2013)

Take apart a Macbook Pro and replace the keyboard. There are at least 80 screws you have to take out and put back in just to remove the keyboard itself not including the screws you have to remove to take everything out of the laptop to get to the keyboard. Trust me, there is no glue in these machines to hold it together. 



Prima.Vera said:


> Give me please a single GPU video card that can play Crysis or BF3 at +60fps with FULL details on a 4K resolution, and nobody will complain for having extreme resolutions on PCs or laptops.



Find me dual GPU solutions that can do this, I think you would still be hard pressed.


----------



## Quantos (Feb 14, 2013)

Honestly, I don't see how a 13" laptop would be useful in a professional environment in the first place. I'm not saying it's not possible to work on a 13" laptop, but I don't see it being the best option in any case. Whether it be a high resolution retina display, or a low resolution normal display, the screen itself is just too small. A tablet / desktop PC combination seems just so much more versatile. Table for portability / showing stuff to people, and desktop PC for actual production. 

edit: I'm not specifying anything when it comes to the choice of tablet and computer, mind you. Those could be Apple, or MS, or anything else. I'm just talking about screen size and convenience here


----------



## tokyoduong (Feb 14, 2013)

Kantastic said:


> Did someone say glue?
> 
> Go M$oft! Best company! Highest quality! Sells 64GB tablet and only provides 50% of the available space! Sells Surface Pro for more than an iPad! Takes a higher percentage of sales than Apple from the application store! #1 company!
> 
> ...



wow super fanboy and apple hater. Why would you ever cross shop a MacBook Air with a G75 or equivalent? do you realize that the super slim form factor is a premium? do you realize that the G75 is not portable? I had a G74 so I know. I sold it because it just does not fit anywhere. Not to mention there are so many problems with both G74/75 models. Let's not even get into battery life and the superior screen. 



acerace said:


> We have two fanboys here. Who wants popcorn cause another flame war is gonna start soon.



^^Agreed

I don't understand why people can accept 720p and up on a 4.6-5" phone screen and think it looks fantastic. Then turn around and say 1560p on a 13" screen is too much? Do you realize they both come out to about the same dpi?

I don't understand why people can't accept the fact that some people enjoy a high res screen on their laptop for whatever they use without the need for hardcore gaming. Maybe these stupid fanboy gamers like to be cheated with the cheaper screens and think games still looks great.

Do I still dislike Apple's business practices? yes.

 Do I hate their high quality products that forced the rest of the computing industry to produce higher quality hardware/software to compete with them? absolutely not! Apple is the reason why we have 1200p tablets, 1080p+ laptops at a lower price. Some manufacturers actually has 1080p as the standard screen on their laptop now. We were stuck at 720/768p for a decade with low quality low angle screens. 

Will i buy this MBA? no, but I'm sure Asus or whoever will come out with something to compete with it and I'll pick that up. OSX is still not as useful to me as Windows.


----------



## WhiteLotus (Feb 14, 2013)

tokyoduong said:


> I don't understand why people can accept 720p and up on a 4.6-5" phone screen and think it looks fantastic. Then turn around and say 1560p on a 13" screen is too much? Do you realize they both come out to about the same dpi?



But Phones are no longer just phones. They are also cameras.


----------



## tokyoduong (Feb 14, 2013)

Quantos said:


> Honestly, I don't see how a 13" laptop would be useful in a professional environment in the first place. I'm not saying it's not possible to work on a 13" laptop, but I don't see it being the best option in any case. Whether it be a high resolution retina display, or a low resolution normal display, the screen itself is just too small. A tablet / desktop PC combination seems just so much more versatile. Table for portability / showing stuff to people, and desktop PC for actual production.



You obviously have not have to do any real work that is beyond the office. Where I work and most of my friends require high res, reliable, portable laptop. They have a dock on their desk and need to be able to grab their computer, throw it in their bag and move quickly. This is true in a lot of corporate environment if you're worth anything more than a data entry clerk. 
To name a few medical professionals(doctors, nurses, surgeons, bio labs, etc...), scientific researchers(physicists, hydrologists, chemists, etc...), statisticians, real estate agents, lawyers, any legal professionals more than a clerk, high level managers, photographers, accountants, logistics management etc.... the list goes on and on

I'm sorry if you're a data entry clerk or a cashier somewhere that does not benefit on a high quality laptop and can't even afford it but there are plenty of people that do. Apple sold millions to people where spending 1.4k on a laptop is not a big deal. Some will buy it for enjoyment but some will use it for actual work. Either way, having a high res screen on something that will fit in an envelope and gets excellent battery life is never a bad thing.


----------



## tokyoduong (Feb 14, 2013)

WhiteLotus said:


> But Phones are no longer just phones. They are also cameras.



And what is your point??!! we're talking about screen res/size = dpi and its utilization. Why can't you accept that 1560p i useful?

if you depend on your phone to be a real camera then you're as dumb as the guy that compares a mba to a gaming dtr because its specs are better. An 8 mp on a camera is worthless. Anything above 3 MP on a phone is worthless simply because of the pinhole they call a lens. If you want to take real photos, no phone will ever come close to the same league as a real camera.


----------



## Quantos (Feb 14, 2013)

tokyoduong said:


> You obviously have not have to do any real work that is beyond the office. Where I work and most of my friends require high res, reliable, portable laptop. They have a dock on their desk and need to be able to grab their computer, throw it in their bag and move quickly. This is true in a lot of corporate environment if you're worth anything more than a data entry clerk.
> To name a few medical professionals(doctors, nurses, surgeons, bio labs, etc...), scientific researchers(physicists, hydrologists, chemists, etc...), statisticians, real estate agents, lawyers, any legal professionals more than a clerk, high level managers, photographers, accountants, logistics management etc.... the list goes on and on
> 
> I'm sorry if you're a data entry clerk or a cashier somewhere that does not benefit on a high quality laptop and can't even afford it but there are plenty of people that do. Apple sold millions to people where spending 1.4k on a laptop is not a big deal. Some will buy it for enjoyment but some will use it for actual work. Either way, having a high res screen on something that will fit in an envelope and gets excellent battery life is never a bad thing.



Wouldn't 13" be slightly too small? You're quite right, I don't need the portability myself, so I've not experienced the various possibilities personally. I'm just curious, though. I understand the advantage of 13" is of course greater portability and convenience, but it just seems awfully small to me. Of course, I guess a good part of it might also be personal preference (or health, perhaps some people's eyes just cannot deal with smaller monitors). Anyway, personally I have a feeling I'd rather have a 15" laptop monitor.


----------



## WhiteLotus (Feb 14, 2013)

tokyoduong said:


> And what is your point??!! we're talking about screen res/size = dpi and its utilization. Why can't you accept that 1560p i useful?
> 
> if you depend on your phone to be a real camera then you're as dumb as the guy that compares a mba to a gaming dtr because its specs are better. An 8 mp on a camera is worthless. Anything above 3 MP on a phone is worthless simply because of the pinhole they call a lens. If you want to take real photos, no phone will ever come close to the same league as a real camera.



I never said that a 1560p isn't useful....?

And by your logic, I could say that if you depend on a 13inch laptop to display a high res picture, you too are a dumb guy.
Swings and roundabouts!
If YOU think that a 13inch display is right, then you go ahead and spend your money. I however do not think that I would want a 13inch display for that amount of money.


----------



## tokyoduong (Feb 14, 2013)

Quantos said:


> Wouldn't 13" be slightly too small? You're quite right, I don't need the portability myself, so I've not experienced the various possibilities personally. I'm just curious, though. I understand the advantage of 13" is of course greater portability and convenience, but it just seems awfully small to me. Of course, I guess a good part of it might also be personal preference (or health, perhaps some people's eyes just cannot deal with smaller monitors). Anyway, personally I have a feeling I'd rather have a 15" laptop monitor.



perfect example is just go look at ipad2 and ipad3. I have both so I know. I used to think that high res on anything below 24" monitor is not useful until I actually started using it. My eyes actually doesn't feel as strained and i get less headaches. Your brain adapts and fill in a lot of missing information on crappy screen. For example, everyone has 2 blind spots(1 in each eye) and your brain fills in that missing information. The other example is when viewing something blurry it takes longer read because your brain has to work harder. People with glaucoma doesn't realize they are losing their vision until it's far too late because their brain adapts and fill in the blind spots. It's better not to stress 2 of the most useful organs on your body on a daily basis. You'll feel it after you pass 30.


----------



## tokyoduong (Feb 14, 2013)

WhiteLotus said:


> I never said that a 1560p isn't useful....?
> 
> And by your logic, I could say that if you depend on a 13inch laptop to display a high res picture, you too are a dumb guy.
> Swings and roundabouts!
> If YOU think that a 13inch display is right, then you go ahead and spend your money. I however do not think that I would want a 13inch display for that amount of money.



Im dumb because you cannot accept other people's view point?
You just throw in cameras in a discussion about screens and then get your butt hurt because of your hate on an apple product? who's the dumb one here?
No I will not buy the MBA, I will wait for a mature Winidows equivalent as I have thousands of $$ worth of software on windows platform. Like I said, if Asus decides to make an equivalent product then I will jump on it. I do prefer a 14" better as it doesn't slide around as much in my bag.


----------



## WhiteLotus (Feb 14, 2013)

tokyoduong said:


> Im dumb because you cannot accept other people's view point?
> You just throw in cameras in a discussion about screens and then get your butt hurt because of your hate on an apple product? who's the dumb one here?



LOL hate an apple product. Where did you get that from?


----------



## tokyoduong (Feb 14, 2013)

WhiteLotus said:


> But Phones are no longer just phones. They are also cameras.





WhiteLotus said:


> LOL hate an apple product. Where did you get that from?





Lol wtf is the point of posting this? You sir are now in trolling zone.


1560p on 13 in is the same as 720p on 4.6in screen. People only have a problem with this MBA with high res because it's apple that came out with it first in a mainstream device. Please take your fanboy/trolling hats off and accept the fact the the windows/pc side will catch up later in the year or next year and we all can enjoy high res quality screens at an affordable price. I wholeheartedly welcome this MBA even though i'll never buy one.


----------



## WhiteLotus (Feb 14, 2013)

tokyoduong said:


> Lol wtf is the point of posting this? You sir are now in trolling zone.
> 
> 
> 1560p on 13 in is the same as 720p on 4.6in screen. People only have a problem with this MBA with high res because it's apple that came out with it first in a mainstream device. Please take your fanboy/trolling hats off and accept the fact the the windows/pc side will catch up later in the year or next year and we all can enjoy high res quality screens at an affordable price. I wholeheartedly welcome this MBA even though i'll never buy one.



Phones are having another use, they are being used to take pictures, some times brilliant pictures, and so the higher resolution on a phone can allow you to see if the picture you have just taken is any good. Although I think that a HD display on a phone too is somewhat completely overkill, I think it has more merit than a 13inch laptop. Do you see my argument now? And also, just because I don't think a 13inch HD display has merit, does not mean I hate apple. I sir hate apple for entirely different reasons!


----------



## Quantos (Feb 14, 2013)

Perhaps the 720p phone equivalent is not necessarily the same, though. iPhone applications are specifically designed for a resolution, so they look good. However, since there are numerous laptop resolutions, they might not be as optimized.


----------



## tokyoduong (Feb 14, 2013)

WhiteLotus said:


> Phones are having another use, they are being used to take pictures, some times brilliant pictures, and so the higher resolution on a phone can allow you to see if the picture you have just taken is any good. Although I think that a HD display on a phone too is somewhat completely overkill, I think it has more merit than a 13inch laptop. Do you see my argument now? And also, just because I don't think a 13inch HD display has merit, does not mean I hate apple. I sir hate apple for entirely different reasons!



No phones so far has taken brilliant picture. And they will never be able to, the lens is just too small and therefore less light. You cannot overcome this, it is physics. Phones rely to software to make the picture look better any photographers, even amateurs, can tell the difference immediately. If I took 2 pictures in any condition with an 8mp phone and 8mp decent camera and lay them side by side, even you will immediately tell the drastic difference.

so you think viewing a high res pic on a small screen phone is better than a 13" in screen?

You accept HD screens on a phone but not a laptop? are you kidding me? I think most people will argue with you that a high res 13" screen is much more useful than a high res 5" screen. The only factor is portability so it's what you need.

No i don't see your argument as it is too flawed for me to even accept your biased opinions. You may think that a high res 5" screen is better for you and I will even agree with you. But don't come in here saying a high res phone is more useful than a high res laptop. This merit you're talking about is simply subjective you're talking about

I don't bash you for your preference, but I will bash you for being so biased towards a product that I would even consider you dumb for thinking that. As I've listed so in previous posts a small example of who could possible benefit from this device regardless of who made it. Apple has millions and millions of potential customers for this even if you take out all the blind apple fanboys/girls. It's the truth, get used to it.


----------



## tokyoduong (Feb 14, 2013)

Quantos said:


> Perhaps the 720p phone equivalent is not necessarily the same, though. iPhone applications are specifically designed for a resolution, so they look good. However, since there are numerous laptop resolutions, they might not be as optimized.



we all know that, but the fact is that HD screen is useful. This 13" has roughly the same dpi as an HD smartphone that everyone praises. But it is used on a laptop and it's 13" instead of 5" or less. Please tell me which one is more useful? The vast majority will pick laptop. The phone is more of a toy at its size, battery life, and relatively slow performance. The laptop can do much more, run full programs/applications, bigger storage, much longer battery life, etc... You can get real work done with a laptop on the go vs a phone. IDK why it's even being compared because they're completely different markets.

Stop misdirecting the topic to find other excuses/reasons. The fact is this is a good product. Buy it if it suits your needs but don't bash it for dumb reasons.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 14, 2013)

tokyoduong said:


> we all know that, but the fact is that HD screen is useful. This 13" has roughly the same dpi as an HD smartphone that everyone praises. But it is used on a laptop and it's 13" instead of 5" or less. Please tell me which one is more useful? The vast majority will pick laptop. The phone is more of a toy at its size, battery life, and relatively slow performance. The laptop can do much more, run full programs/applications, bigger storage, much longer battery life, etc... You can get real work done with a laptop on the go vs a phone. IDK why it's even being compared because they're completely different markets.
> 
> Stop misdirecting the topic to find other excuses/reasons. The fact is this is a good product. Buy it if it suits your needs but don't bash it for dumb reasons.



Smart phones don't cost 1,400 bucks.


----------



## Prima.Vera (Feb 14, 2013)

@tokyoduong

Can you please post 3 posts in a row? Thank you.


----------



## tokyoduong (Feb 14, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Smart phones don't cost 1,400 bucks.



it's not even the same market. 
WTF is wrong with people here? The argument is that this screen is useful and it seems like a few of you just want to find every other reasons to bash it. Comparing it to a smartphone? give me a break. 
$500-800 for a smartphone is not cheap either. Just because you got it for $200 on a 2 year discount doesn't mean it won't cost you over 1k in its lifetime.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 14, 2013)

tokyoduong said:


> it's not even the same market.
> WTF is wrong with people here? The argument is that this screen is useful and it seems like a few of you just want to find every other reasons to bash it. Comparing it to a smartphone? give me a break.
> $500-800 for a smartphone is not cheap either. Just because you got it for $200 on a 2 year discount doesn't mean it won't cost you over 1k in its lifetime.



I didn't compare it to a smart phone. You did. 13" is just to small for any kind of real work papo!


----------



## Prima.Vera (Feb 14, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> I didn't compare it to a smart phone. You did. 13" is just to small for any kind of real work papo!



Relax man. Stop feeding the apple troll zealot(s).


----------



## Mindweaver (Feb 14, 2013)

@tokyoduong - Edit your posts, do not double post. 

@everybody - Take a 13" empty frame, and hold it up.. That's not better than 1600? A 13" display is plenty big enough to do any work smaller than 13".. I would rather have a 13" tablet then a laptop, but I can still see a lot of uses for a 13" laptop in a work space.


----------



## WhiteLotus (Feb 14, 2013)

tokyoduong said:


> No phones so far has taken brilliant picture.



Good enough for Facebook. And seeing how that is how ~70% of people who have smart phones use the camera for they will be quite happy.



> so you think viewing a high res pic on a small screen phone is better than a 13" in screen?


I'm pretty sure I said it was overkill. So way to twist my words.




> Apple has millions and millions of potential customers for this even if you take out all the blind apple fanboys/girls.


Customers like who? Who on this planet *needs* a 13inch laptop with a high res screen?Wants and needs are different things as has already been mentioned previously. A high res screen on a laptop that small is going to create problems. For one, if you want a high res picture, and you see a small portion of that you have to extensively zoom in. On a bigger screen you will not have that much of the same problem, because you can already see more detail.

Give me a 15inch retina display on a light weight laptop and I'll fight your corner. But 13inch is too big for a toy, and too small for practicality. Heck an iPad will be a better benefit, pinch to zoom functions make finding that small area of the high res picture easy.

Face it, a 13 inch retina laptop is a gimmick.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Feb 14, 2013)

WhiteLotus said:


> Give me a 15inch retina display on a light weight laptop and I'll fight your corner. But 13inch is too big for a toy, and too small for practicality. Heck an iPad will be a better benefit, pinch to zoom functions make finding that small area of the high res picture easy.
> 
> Face it, a 13 inch retina laptop is a gimmick.



this statement is hilarious. apparently a clearer picture is a gimmick.


----------



## WhiteLotus (Feb 14, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> this statement is hilarious. apparently a clearer picture is a gimmick.



On such a small display. Yes. Yes it is.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Feb 14, 2013)

WhiteLotus said:


> On such a small display. Yes. Yes it is.



You heard it hear first folks. On TPU of all places! A clearer screen is a gimmick! Please, rename TechPowerUp! to TechPowerDown!


----------



## tokyoduong (Feb 14, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> I didn't compare it to a smart phone. You did. 13" is just to small for any kind of real work papo!



Really? I have about 2000 people here in this building that will laugh in your face for saying that. You can't have a big screen and portability but you can have a high res screen and portability and it will work just as well....as long as you have good eyes.



Prima.Vera said:


> Relax man. Stop feeding the apple troll zealot(s).



me a troll? your post is pretty much trolling



WhiteLotus said:


> Good enough for Facebook. And seeing how that is how ~70% of people who have smart phones use the camera for they will be quite happy.
> 
> 
> I'm pretty sure I said it was overkill. So way to twist my words.
> ...



You obviously have no professional use for these kinds of hardware. I'm an accountant/accounts manager and do photography on the side and I need to move quickly from day to day. I know the few thousands of people in this building and hundreds of friends who will stick with a high res 13-14" laptop for all their work. There is no way around it when you are doing real work and needs to be mobile. Would they rather have 17" or bigger? yes but they'll take a huge hit for size and weight. With all the other paperwork, accessories, phone, etc... you have to carry you can conclude there's no room for a 17" laptop.

BTW try to inspect photos by pixels edge to edge on a smaller screen or try to fly through spreadsheets on a smaller screen. You can zoom in all you want but you will be going at half the speed I can. 

lol @ facebook photos. If you are taking photos for facebook purposes then please stick with low res cheap hardware as there is no purpose in having something you don't need. Some of us gets paid to take photos and we need higher quality stuff. I agree that it would be overkill for you.


Easy Rhino said:


> this statement is hilarious. apparently a clearer picture is a gimmick.



I'm sure they'll change their mind when these screens are in $600 laptops. For people it's more about affordability. They'll talk trash about things they don't need or can't afford.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 14, 2013)

tokyoduong said:


> Really? I have about 2000 people here in this building that will laugh in your face for saying that. You can't have a big screen and portability but you can have a high res screen and portability and it will work just as well....as long as you have good eyes.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



So your like a super hero? Accountant/Photographer? A Accountopher or a Photoatant?


----------



## tokyoduong (Feb 14, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> So your like a super hero? Accountant/Photographer? A Accountopher or a Photoatant?



No I'm a regular person with a job and does photography on the side after work because I like taking photos and other people's money. Is that so hard to understand? Maybe you spent all your time playing videogames so you wouldn't know.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 14, 2013)

tokyoduong said:


> No I'm a regular person with a job and does photography on the side after work because I like taking photos and other people's money. Is that so hard to understand? Maybe you spent all your time playing videogames so you wouldn't know.



Then you should invest in a bigger screen. Most Photographer I know have at least two monitors to work from. Photoshop tools take up a LOT of space on the screen.


----------



## tokyoduong (Feb 14, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Then you should invest in a bigger screen. Most Photographer I know have at least two monitors to work from.



I have a 27" dual off a radeon 7850 set up at home(desktop mid tower). I'm sure you can figure out why I can't bring that with me. 
You don't edit photos on the go. You need a high res screen to scan the pics to see if you need to take it again or adjust your cameras. Especially when I work with a new lens, I really need to scan down to the pixels. But I need the raw processing power of a desktop to make photoshop go faster when editing 20+ mp pics in raw format.
My eyes are still good enough to scan through huge spreadsheets on excel and access. Although I would prefer a 14" to be more comfortable. However, 14" is not as widely available as 13". More people prefer a 13" because it fits in a tiny briefcase. the MBA would fit in a folder. I can see tons of people going for this if they can afford this. I can also see a ton more people going for it if it was $900 and runs windows instead of osx


----------



## Prima.Vera (Feb 14, 2013)

Man, I donno. I don't take sides here, but one thing I hate is fanboism over 1 product.
I have an old 17" Dell laptop with 1200p resolution, and I have to tell you that having Windows 7 on it is a disaster. Naturally I cannot use default 100%DPI mode because I would have to use magnify glass to be able to read any menus, but everything above 115% DPI will make a COMPLETE MESS everywhere. Windows, menus, fonts overlapping, etc. And don't get me started with Java or Flash applications...worst crap ever invented which don't even scale or zoom.
So probably this very high res works best on MACs and other Apple devices, but not for Windows devices, so if you are NOT a gamer or do not work in IT or Engineering industry, please feel free to buy any Apple toys you might desire. End.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 14, 2013)

tokyoduong said:


> I have a 27" dual off a radeon 7850 set up at home(desktop mid tower). I'm sure you can figure out why I can't bring that with me.
> You don't edit photos on the go. You need a high res screen to scan the pics to see if you need to take it again or adjust your cameras. Especially when I work with a new lens, I really need to scan down to the pixels. But I need the raw processing power of a desktop to make photoshop go faster when editing 20+ mp pics in raw format.
> My eyes are still good enough to scan through huge spreadsheets on excel and access. Although I would prefer a 14" to be more comfortable. However, 14" is not as widely available as 13". More people prefer a 13" because it fits in a tiny briefcase. the MBA would fit in a folder. I can see tons of people going for this if they can afford this. I can also see a ton more people going for it if it was $900 and runs windows instead of osx



If all you are doing is reviewing images you can do that on an iPad much cheaper and why are you using your personal computer for the company?


----------



## tokyoduong (Feb 14, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> If all you are doing is reviewing images you can do that on an iPad much cheaper and why are you using your personal computer for the company?



No I can't. Ipad doesn't have an SD slot. I can buy the kit but that's more crap to carry/lose. Not to mention it's slower....much much slower. The only thing the ipad has going for it is the screen...it is one of the best in the tablet arena but we all know the pitfalls of apple products when it comes to compatibility. My ipads were free(gifts) and that's the only reason I have them.
I have the choice of having a company laptop or use my own. I don't want to have to carry 2 since the issued laptop sucks. My bag needs room for 2 cameras, at least 2 lens, extra batteries, cleaning kit, etc...I want to be as light as possible.
Come on man, I don't get into details before because I assume you already know this. A lot of working people in the city feels the same way. That's why 13" MBA and MBP sell so well. 13-14" ultrabooks are selling really well too since they've solved some of the problems.



Prima.Vera said:


> Man, I donno. I don't take sides here, but one thing I hate is fanboism over 1 product.
> I have an old 17" Dell laptop with 1200p resolution, and I have to tell you that having Windows 7 on it is a disaster. Naturally I cannot use default 100%DPI mode because I would have to use magnify glass to be able to read any menus, but everything above 115% DPI will make a COMPLETE MESS everywhere. Windows, menus, fonts overlapping, etc. And don't get me started with Java or Flash applications...worst crap ever invented which don't even scale or zoom.
> So probably this very high res works best on MACs and other Apple devices, but not for Windows devices, so if you are NOT a gamer or do not work in IT or Engineering industry, please feel free to buy any Apple toys you might desire. End.



agreed. A few years back when I early adopted high res monitors, it was a mess. Now it's still a mess when I run dualies with different res/size. I had to buy 2 identical samsung monitors for it to work correctly. Damn thing cost more than my tower which is unfortunate. Lesson learned, don't early adopt.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 14, 2013)

tokyoduong said:


> No I can't. Ipad doesn't have an SD slot. I can buy the kit but that's more crap to carry/lose. Not to mention it's slower....much much slower. The only thing the ipad has going for it is the screen...it is one of the best in the tablet arena but we all know the pitfalls of apple products when it comes to compatibility. My ipads were free(gifts) and that's the only reason I have them.
> I have the choice of having a company laptop or use my own. I don't want to have to carry 2 since the issued laptop sucks. My bag needs room for 2 cameras, at least 2 lens, extra batteries, cleaning kit, etc...I want to be as light as possible.
> Come on man, I don't get into details before because I assume you already know this. A lot of working people in the city feels the same way. That's why 13" MBA and MBP sell so well. 13-14" ultrabooks are selling really well too since they've solved some of the problems.
> 
> ...



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.


----------



## Kantastic (Feb 14, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Smart phones don't cost 1,400 bucks.



Decent smartphones cost an average of $500-700 (ignoring the Nexus 4, which is sold to make profits via other channels) for a significantly more limited and less capable device. I don't see your point.



Prima.Vera said:


> Man, I donno. I don't take sides here, but one thing I hate is fanboism over 1 product.
> I have an old 17" Dell laptop with 1200p resolution, and I have to tell you that having Windows 7 on it is a disaster. Naturally I cannot use default 100%DPI mode because I would have to use magnify glass to be able to read any menus, but everything above 115% DPI will make a COMPLETE MESS everywhere. Windows, menus, fonts overlapping, etc. And don't get me started with Java or Flash applications...worst crap ever invented which don't even scale or zoom.
> So probably this very high res works best on MACs and other Apple devices, but not for Windows devices, so if you are NOT a gamer or do not work in IT or Engineering industry, please feel free to buy any Apple toys you might desire. End.



The beauty of OS X is that it scales magnificently.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 14, 2013)

Kantastic said:


> Decent smartphones cost an average of $500-700 for a significantly more limited and less capable device. I don't see your point.



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


----------



## Kantastic (Feb 14, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> 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 (Feb 14, 2013)

Ummm, what was the subject again?


----------



## tokyoduong (Feb 14, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> 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 (Feb 14, 2013)

tokyoduong said:


> 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 (Feb 14, 2013)

tokyoduong said:


> 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.



Kantastic said:


> 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 (Feb 14, 2013)

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


----------



## tokyoduong (Feb 14, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> 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.



Prima.Vera said:


> @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 (Feb 14, 2013)

tokyoduong said:


> 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 (Feb 14, 2013)

brandonwh64 said:


> 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 (Feb 14, 2013)

tokyoduong said:


> 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 (Feb 14, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> 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 (Feb 14, 2013)

tokyoduong said:


> 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 (Feb 14, 2013)

Kantastic said:


> 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 (Feb 14, 2013)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> 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.



TheMailMan78 said:


> 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 (Feb 14, 2013)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> 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 (Feb 14, 2013)

Fourstaff said:


> 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 (Feb 14, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> 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.



cdawall said:


> 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 (Feb 14, 2013)

cdawall said:


> 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 (Feb 14, 2013)

Frick said:


> 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.
> 
> ...



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


----------



## Easy Rhino (Feb 14, 2013)

Frick said:


> 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.
> 
> ...



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 (Feb 14, 2013)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> 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.



Easy Rhino said:


> 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 (Feb 14, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> 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 (Feb 14, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> 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 (Feb 14, 2013)

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








Easy Rhino said:


> 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 (Feb 14, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> 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?


----------



## Frick (Feb 14, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> 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.



And still I disagree. Would I personally make use of that? Probably not, but it would be rather nice to have. I'm sure there are people in the world who could make use of it. And The only other 13-incher here that has at least 1920 x 1080 is the Asus Zenbook, which still is fairly pricey.


----------



## tokyoduong (Feb 14, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> 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.



It may be a gimmick to you but 1.4k for a laptop more portable than almost anything else on the market with the best screen you can buy in its class. They charge you a premium for having the latest and greatest. You know this, i know everyone here knows this. 

I'm posting this again to show you that it is not a gimmick. You eyes can see way more than this display can do. Therefore, this is no gimmick and it is in fact useful for many including me. 
http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/eye-resolution.html


----------



## tokyoduong (Feb 14, 2013)

themailman78 said:


> 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 said:


> 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...





themailman78 said:


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



lol


----------



## Athlon2K15 (Feb 14, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


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



2560  x 1600 gives you same amount of desktop space on a 13" as it does a 30".

I think you should be posting news (something you havent done in 8 months) instead of acting like you have powers of moderation.


----------



## Aquinus (Feb 14, 2013)

AthlonX2 said:


> 2560 x 1600 gives you same amount of desktop space on a 13" as it does a 30".



When you run Windows. Otherwise be prepared to get a magnifying glass and to squint because OS X tries to scale if it knows the size of the display. The 15" MBP with Retina does not make the desktop look smaller, it scales well, and costs a sh*t ton.


----------



## erocker (Feb 14, 2013)

After reading through this thread I think I'm going to buy one. I wonder if anyone will get upset about my buying decision? I also wonder why anyone would make it their business? Do we have a lot of financial planning and life-tasking guru's on TPU?


----------



## Aquinus (Feb 14, 2013)

erocker said:


> After reading through this thread I think I'm going to buy one. I wonder if anyone will get upset about my buying decision?



Only if you're threatening your livelihood by doing it or getting it for all the wrong reasons. 


erocker said:


> I also wonder why anyone would make it their business?



Because you're telling us about it instead of keeping it to yourself. 


erocker said:


> Do we have a lot of financial planning and life-tasking guru's on TPU?


I think we have a lot of, "I know everything" gurus here at TPU.


----------



## Fourstaff (Feb 14, 2013)

erocker said:


> After reading through this thread I think I'm going to buy one.



Do eet! 3 things can happen: you sell it off after x days/months/years, you grow to love Apple/the screen and proclaim your eternal love, or nothing happens


----------



## cdawall (Feb 14, 2013)

tokyoduong said:


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



How many would you like?

Onda V972, Chuwi V99, Freelander PD80, Nextway F9X, Ainol Novo9, Window N90FHD, Ployer momo11 Master, Hyundai X900 and the CUBE U9GT V all sell for roughly have the price if not less. Most of them are 1.5ghz ARM quad cores with multi core video that perform very well at that resolution (just under the sammy quad core). I personally purchased the Onda V972 since it seems to have better support than most of the others and features and aluminum case, lighter weight, and smaller dimensions than the Ipad.


----------



## Deadlyraver (Feb 14, 2013)

About time they decided to look around the market outside of their ripoff community.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 14, 2013)

AthlonX2 said:


> 2560  x 1600 gives you same amount of desktop space on a 13" as it does a 30"



Again good luck doing any work on that for a long period of time. 13" doesn't magically bend physics because it has high resolution. Its still only a 13" screen.


----------



## Kantastic (Feb 14, 2013)

erocker said:


> After reading through this thread I think I'm going to buy one. I wonder if anyone will get upset about my buying decision? I also wonder why anyone would make it their business? Do we have a lot of financial planning and life-tasking guru's on TPU?



Nobody is going to be upset, just prepare to be chastised because people (not me, because iApple) will feel you're an idiot.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Feb 14, 2013)

erocker said:


> After reading through this thread I think I'm going to buy one. I wonder if anyone will get upset about my buying decision? I also wonder why anyone would make it their business? Do we have a lot of financial planning and life-tasking guru's on TPU?



people will get upset. they will call you an apple fanboy and say you wasted your money because you were blinded my marketing and gimmicks.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 14, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> people will get upset. they will call you an apple fanboy and say you wasted your money because you were blinded *my* marketing and gimmicks.


 I KNEW YOU WORKED FOR APPLE!


----------



## Prima.Vera (Feb 14, 2013)

erocker said:


> I wonder if anyone will get upset about my buying decision? I also wonder why anyone would make it their business?



Not my business, don't care, hehe. But ,you know, sharing the info about you buying something overpriced and bragging about it seems like showing off. Showing off can lead to vanity. Vanity to snobism...You get the idea


----------



## cdawall (Feb 15, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> people will get upset. they will call you an apple fanboy and say you wasted your money because you were blinded my marketing and gimmicks.



See I don't think they are a bad product at all simply that it is *immensely* overpriced for what you are purchasing.


----------



## wickerman (Feb 15, 2013)

cdawall said:


> See I don't think they are a bad product at all simply that it is *immensely* overpriced for what you are purchasing.



Everyone is quick to point out that you can get a laptop from a competitor using similarly performing hardware for, well as you put it "immensely" cheaper, but a lot of people seem to ignore the other services Apple offer with their products that certainly add a lot of value. Automatic backups with free and expandable storage through iCloud is very useful on a laptop and even more so on other mobile devices and is something Microsoft is only now getting serious about but most other manufacturers won't go much further than offering you a few gb of cloud storage for you to manage yourself. Samsung has some services to compete but not quite as useful yet. But overwhelmingly what I hear is the best value Apple offers is their warranty and tech support service through local Apple Store locations. To be able to simply walk into the store and walk out with a hardware repair or replacement is far better than sending your laptop (and data) half way across the country and waiting a week or more to have it repaired and then sent back.

The hardware and software are only part of it, to say the warranty and convenience of service hold no value at all is just silly to me. I personally am willing to pay a premium for warranty and good service, I buy Dell monitors for that reason. I had my USB ports go bad on my U2711 last year and after 1 email I had a replacement at my door by noon the next day, with a pre-paid sticker to ship my defective unit back in the same box. Sure I paid like $500 more than an ebay Korean brand, but I can't imagine even if I had a proper warranty on one of those monitors, the cost of shipping my defective unit back to Korea and waiting for a replacement would probably wipe out that saving pretty quickly.


----------



## Prima.Vera (Feb 15, 2013)

wickerman said:


> I had my USB ports go bad on my U2711 last year and after 1 email I had a replacement at my door by noon the next day, with a pre-paid sticker to ship my defective unit back in the same box. Sure I paid like $500 more than an ebay Korean brand, but I can't imagine even if I had a proper warranty on one of those monitors, the cost of shipping my defective unit back to Korea and waiting for a replacement would probably wipe out that saving pretty quickly.



You're lucky to live in States. Here in Europe or Asia, you wont have this service, not in a million years. Sure Apple have some good service, but they took like 2 months to replace my little iPod nano a while ago, and that after 1 million mails and calls, and trips to the local Apple support center for chasing them...


----------



## Aquinus (Feb 15, 2013)

Prima.Vera said:


> You're lucky to live in States. Here in Europe or Asia, you wont have this service, not in a million years. Sure Apple have some good service, but they took like 2 months to replace my little iPod nano a while ago, and that after 1 million mails and calls, and trips to the local Apple support center for chasing them...



Yup. They're pretty responsive here but I think that Apple knows that a large portion of their market is in the US. This in by no means intended to be an insult but Americans tend to buy shiny things more than the average person in the world.


----------



## tokyoduong (Feb 15, 2013)

cdawall said:


> How many would you like?
> 
> Onda V972, Chuwi V99, Freelander PD80, Nextway F9X, Ainol Novo9, Window N90FHD, Ployer momo11 Master, Hyundai X900 and the CUBE U9GT V all sell for roughly have the price if not less. Most of them are 1.5ghz ARM quad cores with multi core video that perform very well at that resolution (just under the sammy quad core). I personally purchased the Onda V972 since it seems to have better support than most of the others and features and aluminum case, lighter weight, and smaller dimensions than the Ipad.



I apologize and you're right. There are other tablets with high res screen for half the price or less. But those things will fall apart like a teenager's cratered pimpled face. You can hate on apple all you want but you can't hate on their build quality. Regardless, you are right.




wickerman said:


> Everyone is quick to point out that you can get a laptop from a competitor using similarly performing hardware for, well as you put it "immensely" cheaper, but a lot of people seem to ignore the other services Apple offer with their products that certainly add a lot of value. Automatic backups with free and expandable storage through iCloud is very useful on a laptop and even more so on other mobile devices and is something Microsoft is only now getting serious about but most other manufacturers won't go much further than offering you a few gb of cloud storage for you to manage yourself. Samsung has some services to compete but not quite as useful yet. But overwhelmingly what I hear is the best value Apple offers is their warranty and tech support service through local Apple Store locations. To be able to simply walk into the store and walk out with a hardware repair or replacement is far better than sending your laptop (and data) half way across the country and waiting a week or more to have it repaired and then sent back.
> 
> The hardware and software are only part of it, to say the warranty and convenience of service hold no value at all is just silly to me. I personally am willing to pay a premium for warranty and good service, I buy Dell monitors for that reason. I had my USB ports go bad on my U2711 last year and after 1 email I had a replacement at my door by noon the next day, with a pre-paid sticker to ship my defective unit back in the same box. Sure I paid like $500 more than an ebay Korean brand, but I can't imagine even if I had a proper warranty on one of those monitors, the cost of shipping my defective unit back to Korea and waiting for a replacement would probably wipe out that saving pretty quickly.



Apple just has good build quality and hassle free warranties. Their product specs are not by any means superior(except the new screen) but the overall product is superior. You do pay a massive premium for it and are limited to what you can do because it is locked down. 



Aquinus said:


> Yup. They're pretty responsive here but I think that Apple knows that a large portion of their market is in the US. This in by no means intended to be an insult but Americans tend to buy shiny things more than the average person in the world.



Yes they are pretty responsive. I usually take it to the store if i have problems with the hardware. When I wanted to sell my ipod touch 1st gen, I went to the store with the buyer and had them remove everything and loaded the buyer's accounts. They also checked to see if everything is working right so the buyer is happy. I sold my ipod touch for 80% of what i paid for it after using it for 6 months. I have not seen any other brand that will give that kind of customer service or hold that kind of resale value.



Prima.Vera said:


> You're lucky to live in States. Here in Europe or Asia, you wont have this service, not in a million years. Sure Apple have some good service, but they took like 2 months to replace my little iPod nano a while ago, and that after 1 million mails and calls, and trips to the local Apple support center for chasing them...



Europe has better medical and education system. Asia has cheap cheap cheap stuff and you can have multiple wives legally. I'd pay more for tablet to legally marry 7 women. 1 for each day of the week


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 15, 2013)

tokyoduong said:


> I apologize and you're right. There are other tablets with high res screen for half the price or less. But those things will fall apart like a teenager's cratered pimpled face. You can hate on apple all you want but you can't hate on their build quality. Regardless, you are right.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Build Quality? Really? Do you know how many iMac have died on me in the past three years? Apple is no where NEAR what they used to be.


----------



## Frick (Feb 15, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Build Quality? Really? Do you know how many iMac have died on me in the past three years? Apple is no where NEAR what they used to be.



Their phones and pads are quite good though. I think they were talking about them.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Feb 15, 2013)

they make THE best tablets and notebooks. their imacs went downhill a couple of years ago but their new lineup is made better than ever. sony, hp, dell can't even come close to the imac. they are large piles of crap in comparison.


----------



## Frick (Feb 15, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> they make THE best tablets and notebooks. their imacs went downhill a couple of years ago but their new lineup is made better than ever. sony, hp, dell can't even come close to the imac. they are large piles of crap in comparison.



Ehhhh I wouldn't say crap. And it depends on which models you are comparing, Elitebooks and equivalent machines are usually pretty sturdy. my sisters small Lenovo Thinkpad Edge something is surprisingly sturdy for something that was about $500.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Feb 15, 2013)

Frick said:


> Ehhhh I wouldn't say crap. And it depends on which models you are comparing, Elitebooks and equivalent machines are usually pretty sturdy. my sisters small Lenovo Thinkpad Edge something is surprisingly sturdy for something that was about $500.



you can easily bend those when you type.


----------



## tokyoduong (Feb 15, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Build Quality? Really? Do you know how many iMac have died on me in the past three years? Apple is no where NEAR what they used to be.



I agree with you there. They are definitely not as reliable now as they were before. Even HP and Dell has improved and really narrow the gap of quality between their products. I still think apple has a slight lead. But with all the recent launches of products and problems...i get the feeling apple is more revenue than quality now. That apple premium is harder to justify now besides their retina screen.

I'm speaking from trying out products at stores and observations from my friends. Their laptops just feel solid, well constructed, hinges are not sloppy, and keyboards doesn't feel sloppy. For longevity, I know ipods and ipads are pretty durable. I drop my ipad on the hardwood floor from my bed damn near every day and it hasn't broken yet. I still have the really old ipod 30GB I bought probably over 6 years ago and it still works. I don't use it anymore since my phone can play mp3 just fine.


----------



## tokyoduong (Feb 15, 2013)

Frick said:


> Their phones and pads are quite good though. I think they were talking about them.





Easy Rhino said:


> they make THE best tablets and notebooks. their imacs went downhill a couple of years ago but their new lineup is made better than ever. sony, hp, dell can't even come close to the imac. they are large piles of crap in comparison.



their phone, tablet and notebooks are all solid IMO too. I think the other brands are catching up now. The new HTC and Nokia phones feels almost as solid. The Galaxy S3 feels too plasticky for my liking.



Frick said:


> Ehhhh I wouldn't say crap. And it depends on which models you are comparing, Elitebooks and equivalent machines are usually pretty sturdy. my sisters small Lenovo Thinkpad Edge something is surprisingly sturdy for something that was about $500.



Elitebooks are definitely well constructed but I think still slightly behind Macbooks. I'm surprised that Lenovo was able to keep QC up. They are pretty good too for a Chinese brand and price range. 



Easy Rhino said:


> you can easily bend those when you type.



You bent the keyboard? maybe i'm a light typer but I always test the feel of keyboards when I try out laptops. I've never bent any before. Although i still have nightmares with HPs a few years back when their laptops start popping buttons and panels after a few months of use. Their construction was pretty abysmal and they tried to cover it up with shiny plastic smh.


----------



## Fourstaff (Feb 15, 2013)

tokyoduong said:


> Elitebooks are definitely well constructed but I think still slightly behind Macbooks. I'm surprised that Lenovo was able to keep QC up. They are pretty good too for a Chinese brand and price range.


Good Elitebooks eat Macbooks alive when it comes to build quality. Also, Lenovo's heritage comes from the legendary IBM build quality, to think that its going to disappear within 5 years is an insult to IBM. Only those lines coming from IBM though, like their business Thinkpads



tokyoduong said:


> You bent the keyboard? maybe i'm a light typer but I always test the feel of keyboards when I try out laptops. I've never bent any before. Although i still have nightmares with HPs a few years back when their laptops start popping buttons and panels after a few months of use. Their construction was pretty abysmal and they tried to cover it up with shiny plastic smh.


I think he is talking about keyboard flex here, rather than "bent keyboard"

Also, don't doublepost, use edit


----------



## Easy Rhino (Feb 15, 2013)

Fourstaff said:


> I think he is talking about keyboard flex here, rather than "bent keyboard"



yup. the easy way to tell if a laptop is going to last you more than 2 years is to simply type on it. also, open and close the display a whole bunch of times to see if it feels cheap. those are the two major tells.


----------



## cdawall (Feb 16, 2013)

tokyoduong said:


> I apologize and you're right. There are other tablets with high res screen for half the price or less. But those things will fall apart like a teenager's cratered pimpled face. You can hate on apple all you want but you can't hate on their build quality. Regardless, you are right.



There is a reason I went with the aluminum cased Onda. It has good reviews no one has complained about build quality of it. No more hickups than you find with the ipads. The only gain with the Ipad is support which I have none of right now (deployed) and software which is a custom firmware from fixing that on the Onda.



Easy Rhino said:


> yup. the easy way to tell if a laptop is going to last you more than 2 years is to simply type on it. also, open and close the display a whole bunch of times to see if it feels cheap. those are the two major tells.



Bad comparison. Freaksaviors MBP is in way worse shape than my Gateway netbook both are roughly the same age. I have been a lot harder on mine than him (he is rather careful) two deployments a CPU upgrade and overclocked since day one my netbook soldiers on with all of its keys and fully functioning everything. His lacks keys and you can tell its a bit worn... $349 netbook outlasting a $2500 MBP? what quality.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Feb 16, 2013)

cdawall said:


> Bad comparison. Freaksaviors MBP is in way worse shape than my Gateway netbook both are roughly the same age. I have been a lot harder on mine than him (he is rather careful) two deployments a CPU upgrade and overclocked since day one my netbook soldiers on with all of its keys and fully functioning everything. His lacks keys and you can tell its a bit worn... $349 netbook outlasting a $2500 MBP? what quality.



i doubt it. ive seen used $150 macbooks outlast brand new gateways that cost $2000 after 6 years. please....just another person employed by dell...


----------



## cdawall (Feb 16, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> i doubt it. ive seen used $150 macbooks outlast brand new gateways that cost $2000 after 6 years. please....just another person employed by dell...



This gateway is the only laptop I have ever purchased. I looked at a 13" macbook at the time and it honestly felt cheaper. Having seen the models from that generation at work still most of them at the minimum are missing keys, couple on second screens most have a 10 minute battery life. Guess it comes down to personal preference personally I prefer not to buy apple. They are a perfectly average laptop with an awesome PR team that makes you think you need apple. No better than beats headphones.


----------



## Kantastic (Feb 16, 2013)

Fourstaff said:


> Good Elitebooks eat Macbooks alive when it comes to build quality. Also, Lenovo's heritage comes from the legendary IBM build quality, to think that its going to disappear within 5 years is an insult to IBM. Only those lines coming from IBM though, like their business Thinkpads



Have you purchased a ThinkPad recently? Or any Lenovo product? My ThinkPad X230 had a paint job/finish issue on the garbage trackpad, my sister's X120e is falling apart after 2 years (soon to be replaced with a MacBook Air), my cousin's boyfriend's decked out X1 Carbon came with only have a functional keyboard, and my best friend's Lenovo U410 Ultrabook has an unevenly planted trackpad, the monitor bezel is cracking, the laptop clicks whenever he opens it, and the webcam never worked. Let's also not forget Lenovo's  embarrassing shipping times and disgraceful return policy.

What's ironic is that a year ago I would be the first to recommend Lenovo products. Now the only thing I have to say is stay away.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Feb 16, 2013)

cdawall said:


> This gateway is the only laptop I have ever purchased. I looked at a 13" macbook at the time and it honestly felt cheaper. Having seen the models from that generation at work still most of them at the minimum are missing keys, couple on second screens most have a 10 minute battery life. Guess it comes down to personal preference personally I prefer not to buy apple. They are a perfectly average laptop with an awesome PR team that makes you think you need apple. No better than beats headphones.



please. you are employed by gateway. you cant sell me on your marketing tricks.


----------



## Aquinus (Feb 16, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> please. you are employed by gateway. you cant sell me on your marketing tricks.



Every gateway laptop I've used has been fairly solid but I don't feel that it feels more sturdy than an aluminum unibody Apple laptop. Okay support and half-decently priced laptops. I won't complain, I would more likely be more likely to get a Gateway laptop than a Mac unless I had money pouring out of my nose, in that case a 15" with Retina Display would be in my future. 

...and I'm not saying that because I would be wanting to blow money if I had it, but the 15" with Retina is a very nice laptop. I know someone who recently acquired one to replace his damaged (and AppleCare void due to wine spillage, the keys work just a couple are a little sticky on the inside) 13" MBP, which he sold on Ebay to recoup some of the cost for the 15". He got the 768GB SSD, the fastest i7 they got, 16Gb of ram and it all only costed $4000.00 USD.  

It is a gorgeous laptop though. I would be the first to admit that.


----------



## Frick (Feb 16, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> please. you are employed by gateway. you cant sell me on your marketing tricks.



You make some good points here and there and then you shoot yourself in the head.


----------



## WhiteLotus (Feb 16, 2013)

Frick said:


> You make some good points here and there and then you shoot yourself in the head.



Why aren't you a Moderator?


----------



## cdawall (Feb 16, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> please. you are employed by gateway. you cant sell me on your marketing tricks.



You caught me currently I am the only gateway employee deployed here also working on airplanes


----------



## Fourstaff (Feb 16, 2013)

Kantastic said:


> Have you purchased a ThinkPad recently? Or any Lenovo product? My ThinkPad X230 had a paint job/finish issue on the garbage trackpad, my sister's X120e is falling apart after 2 years (soon to be replaced with a MacBook Air), my cousin's boyfriend's decked out X1 Carbon came with only have a functional keyboard, and my best friend's Lenovo U410 Ultrabook has an unevenly planted trackpad, the monitor bezel is cracking, the laptop clicks whenever he opens it, and the webcam never worked. Let's also not forget Lenovo's  embarrassing shipping times and disgraceful return policy.



Not sure what kind of Lenovo you have over in the Stateside, the Lenovos I come across are pretty decent. I study in a university, I have seen (and talk to their owners) at least a few hundred laptops of all makes and based on what I see I think Lenovo makes good laptops as long as you stay away from their budget range. In fact as long as you are careful not to avoid lemmings most non-budget laptops are pretty decently constructed.


----------



## phanbuey (Feb 16, 2013)

TheMailMan78 said:


> My point is man I work in the field where 2560x1600 is NICE to have but, at 13" its USELESS.



Have you actually used it, and are saying this from experience, or are you just talking out of your ass again?


----------



## Easy Rhino (Feb 17, 2013)

Frick said:


> You make some good points here and there and then you shoot yourself in the head.



it was a joke  

it was in response to people saying i worked for apple because i like their products and don't think they are gimmicks. 



cdawall said:


> You caught me currently I am the only gateway employee deployed here also working on airplanes



i knew it


----------

