Should I buy new macbook pro retina or the none retina macbook pro

Boywonder27 wrote:

So Im either going get MBP 13" or the base 15" 2012 model.

Good for you! See that you finally made up your mind!

I would go with the base 15" - that's just me.

Clinton

BoyWonder27,

Thanks so much for writing this post, I've been going-back-and-forth endlessly between maxing out a new 13" MBP (adding 16GB RAM and 512GB SSD myself) or getting low-end 15" retina, and I think I'm ready to take the plunge on a maxed out 13". I briefly considered an Air but I think 16GB RAM is a requirement for my next machine, and Air maxes out at 8GB.

I use Lightroom/Photoshop and plug into a 24" external and really want a snappy machine to replace my 2008 aluminum MacBook. I've been reading stories about screen-burn with the retinas, and just don't want to pay $3k for a laptop. I've also read that Lighroom/Photoshop don't really need a discrete GPU and moreso just need a fast processor and all the RAM you can throw at it.

What heavy apps do you use? (Lightroom/Aperture/etc.)

Daniel,

I know I've butted in here before, so let me jump in.

I would definitely go with the user-upgradeable 13". I'm a heavy Photoshop CS6 user - I use a multitude of CS6 apps, as a matter of fact. I have 16GB of RAM and a 512GB SSD and things couldn't be snappier. I think you'll find that to be the case as well. As you already have a 24" external monitor, you wouldn't need the extra screen real estate that comes with the 15". As you are an Photoshop and Lightroom user (which I used to be - PS CS6 satisfies all those needs now) I would recommend a screen calibration system such as the Spyder4 Elite (or one of the other Spyder products if you don't feel you need the Elite).

In my opinion, you're making a wise decision - I just don't see spending $4k+ for a maxxed out Retina display when you can get a machine that you can upgrade yourself for much less.

Just my 2¢...

Clinton

CLINTON....

do you have the 13" or 15" and which one 13" or 15" 2.3 or the higher end?

Also if you went 15" did you spend the extra $100 for High Res Glossy or Hi Res Antiglare?

13" are dual core

15" are Quad Core

Andreas

I'm having the retina or non retina debate as well.. The reports of the image retention problem, as well as the lack of repairability make me reluctant to take the plunge on the retina. I'd be using it with photoshop, video editing and compositing, music production, and such, so i don't think I could get away with not having a discrete gpu.

you can get a 15" non-retina with discrete gpu etc, outfitted the same as the retina model, but upgradable down the road.

I've been doing more research and it seems like Lightroom doesn't really need a killer/discrete graphics card, just tons and tons of RAM and CPU:

What's more important for using Lightroom, memory, or vid...

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1076643

"As long as the video card is adequate for the monitor you will be using, ie the right type and number of connections, then any modern card will provide enough processing power. The largest performance difference will be related to the CPU clock speed. Get the fastest CPU that fits in your budget. Supposedly the new IVY Bridge chips that should begin shipping this spring will have a 10-20% performance increase at the same clock speed over the current Sandy Bridge chips. You may want to consider waiting because you can then either buy the new chips and motherboard or buy a current i5 or i7 at a reduced cost when the Ivy Bridge becomes available. Of course, if you need the upgrade now, then there is no point in waiting."

Another friend of mine made an interesting point about not being able to 'trust' what is shown on the retina display as it is just so different that what shows on a non-retina screen as well as what would be printed.

If they come out with a Retina 13" (which is what i actually wanted), I'll bet it will also overcharge you for a 512gb ssd.

Anyone have a sense if Lightroom can take advantage of quad cores?

Thanks for the post. I'm debating this too, and as it seems like "champagne problem" to have, this will be first new computer for me in 10 years. Yes, I had some help from a tech guru friend of mine to rebuild an old Dell. But that's another story...

What strikes me as problematic: If Apple is releasing the MBP RD now; and also releasing the standard MacBook Pro, Apple seems to ask consumers to decide, as Kyle Wiens aptly suggests:

http://ifixit.org/2763/the-new-macbook-pro-unfixable-unhackable-untenable/

Primarily what bothers me is: Apple's deliberately chosen a product development method that anti-environmental. Wiens refers to this as "Planned obsolescence" similar to the autor industry. He's right.

However, it all depends on your use of the machine, what your primary apps are, and what RAM you need to support those needs.

I will be using CS6 constantly (PShop, Illustrator, InDesign) for illustration and design. But I'd also like to be able to venture into video, since I have a Nikon D90 that will work well. (Believe it or not I like to have the flexibility to work from hand-drawn images, process them as digital images, and then outputting them again as digital images.)

Where I'm stuck is: Will that 4x of pixel density really make a difference to my work?

*The next best solution is the MBP Standard with high-res upgrade 1680-by-1050, SSD, and 16GB RAM--and it's upgradeable and fixable.

The latter point may seem unnecessary. But, say I'm traveling, doing a workshop abroad in Europe, and no one can repair my machine--not even me-- so I must wait two weeks minimum to expect it back. I would likely pay through the nose for repair. This scenario most likely would occur within days of the expiration of AppleCare. Then what worth is my MBP with Retina Display? Then what worth is the approx. 1 lb. less (4.46 lbs) of laptop?

Thoughts?

michaelvan wrote:

I will be using CS6 constantly (PShop, Illustrator, InDesign) for illustration and design. But I'd also like to be able to venture into video, since I have a Nikon D90 that will work well. (Believe it or not I like to have the flexibility to work from hand-drawn images, process them as digital images, and then outputting them again as digital images.)

Where I'm stuck is: Will that 4x of pixel density really make a difference to my work?

You make some excellent points for not buying the MBP-R: I wouldn't either. At this point - concerning the CS6 suite, the only app that's been shown to work with native Retina display is Photoshop and know one knows, at present, if it's going to actually ship, how it will be marketed, etc.

Maybe in five years or so, all apps from major vendors will be 'Retina-friendly' - it likely depends on the success of Apple sales for the product and/or whether it will be integrated into future products or the technology (or something like it) presented on a Windows platform.

With just Apple apps, at this time, taking advantage of full Retina display, I don't see the necessity in investing in it. But that new 2012 'standard' MBP seems awfully appealing to me...

Regards,

Clinton

I did purchase the MBP 15" with HD screen, not the Retina display, and so far there's one issue: https://discussions.apple.com/thread/4087798

Do you live in a fairly humidity-free climate? (Arizona, etc.) I would imagine that the static electricity would be greater, however what you describe in the referenced thread just doesn't seem normal. I'll read the thread throughout and see if you ever found a solution.

BTW - you bought wha I would have purchased had I been in the market for a new MBP!

Clinton

I just took delivery of the updated MBP 15 inch, 2.6ghz, 1TB, hi res glossy, it shipped in 1 week. Jaw dropping display, lightning performance. Take the weight hit and save a fortune! It is awesome :)

It is NOT saving a fortune, and the retina display is slightly better in most cases, but not at the expense of losing the FW and Ethernet ports and the internal DVD/CD drive.

I've been testing a few MacBookPro (MBP) models, and while Apple did well on these models, there's a list of needed improvements I'll list in another thread. The MBP is very enjoyable to use.

As always, the keyboard is the best feeling one available, and the trackpad usability and sensitivity is exquisite. Compiling a list of excellent features and at least six problems. One of the most exciting improvements is that the charge time to usage time ratio is very small. Apple engineers could have blocked the light poking out from under the transilluminated keys, and should have eliminated the often reported electrostatic sensation when using the two pronged adapter.

Ordered yesterday (7/16/2012) the 2012 15.4" Macbook Pro (NON retina)

With:

2.6GHz i7 CPU

1GB GPU

HR Antiglare Screen

750GB 7200 RPM HDD (soon to be replaced with Crucial M4 SSD with a fresh install of Mountian Lion)

I really wanted the rMBP but just could not see the real value of the Retina display when the (HR) 1680 X1050 is really ideal for me. I also have the late 2011 Macbook Air that has 1440 X 900 resolution, it's not antiglare and not glossy either. I also have a 2006 Black Macbook with 1280 X 800 and it's not antiglare and not glossy. If the rMBP offered a antiglare display I'd probably still be deciding (took 3 weeks already).

The thoughts that keep me on the fence between the 15" rMBP and 15" MBP was "I need to buy the future and not invest in the past".

And since I made the decision Im glad I did (15" MBP Antiglare).

my Pros/Cons list

rMBP MBP

Speed X X (tie, if add SSD)

Expansion X

Weight X

Generation X (decided long ago to NOT buy 1st generation anything, if possible)

Repairability X

Resale X (not sure here but makes since, new beats old)

Antiglare X

Cost X

Ports X (FW800, Gigabit Ethernet, DVD/CD drive)

Value X

Well I got the MBP 13" 2.9 GHz. I weighed all the options the price differences and pros and cons. I'm am very happy with my dission.

The Retina was way out of price range for what you get. The ability to no upgrade unit was a huge turnoff. And to buy it fully loaded was not even worth it. I don't have that kinda dough to throw around, and I think it highly over rated. It's new and has a wow factor, but does not make sense. Millions of great photos connived and edited before retina display, so to say its needed or worth it at that price is not logical for me.

The 15" was a close to me, but $700 difference out of pocket still was not sure for me after selling my old MPB. portability was issue, and if my old 13" MBP did my editing ok in PS CS5 and Lightroom 4 then the new 13" should be no problem.

What I got:

I got MBP 13" 2.9MHz i7. I figured it have a better resale value in long run over the 2.3MHz i5.

the size is perfect as I travel all the time. I'm a pilot full time so it fits in my camera bag perfect.

I added my already owned 256GB SSD drive in it, and upgraded to 16GB RAM for $110. It's amazing fast. 4 sec open PS CS6.

I have been using it to edit my photos in LTR4 and PS CS6, no problem and fast. In the 14 days owned I have not even opened the cover of my laptop, it's always been used on external 27" display. So money saved I upgraded my gear New CF Cards, USB 3.0 HUB, USB 3.0 Card Reader, USB 3.0 External Hadrive. Still money saved, cause I sold all my old USB and Drives and Cardsbon EBay too. The USB 3.0 was main reason I upgraded, it's worth it to. 3.0 makes a differencebandni can see the transfer speed differences. So much faster.

So theres my reasons for doing what I did.