new macbook pro retina display... no firewire !

[Wayne Fox]

The highest resolution available to the user is 1900x1200 (right now).

will it ever be "native" resolution? That's sort of the point of the retina display, enough resolution that everything looks sharp no matter which resolution you choose, unlike most displays which only look good at native resolution. That's been apples goal for some time, eliminating the need for a "native" resolution.

At native resolution everything would be so small so your choice is to zoom in, enlarge stuff, or just choose a different resolution.

 

[tashley]

Mac Benchmarks - Geekbench Browser

Geekbench test scores to get an idea of how the new ones stack up against the ones we all have already..

 

[Geoff]

Tashley -

The big issue (IMHO) on your MBP is the spin drive. I have a 2.66 I7 drive, 4 gb ram and SSD drive, and most of the time the machine is fast enough. The 100% views in C1 are a bit slow, that's really all. But my son's 13" MBP with a spin drive is like molasses. SSD helps a lot.

 

[tashley]

Thanks Geoff,

Actually I just Geekbenched my Macbook Pro and it comes in at 3,853. My Mac Pro (2008 but with 16 gig ram) is around 10,000. The new Retinas are making 12,250 and the best config new 13" Air is around 7,000 so if I got one of those with 8 gig of RAM it'd have to be a lot faster than my current book and halfway to my main system. Not bad for something that weighs less than two iPads with covers on!

 

[jonoslack]

I think these new macs are all splendid . . . but when I wanted something decently portable and decently fast I could see the writing on the wall - built in SSD and RAM means paying Apple prices, and as I expected, a new, fully loaded, 15" is the best part of £3000.

I got a 2.5Ghz i7 17" with 4gb RAM and a 750Gb spin disk (£1700) . . . added 16gb RAM (168) and an SSD (from the old machine), and it really is quite acceptable - nearly 11,000 I guess. Sure, it doesn't have a Retina display, but it does have firewire, and I can update the SSD when bigger ones become available. it's not as light as two iPads, but even an old man like me can carry it around when I need serious power . . . . when I don't the ipad or the Air will be decent substitutes.

Just for once my wallet is staying in my pocket (and I'm enjoying my non-reflective 17" screen!)

 

[tashley]

Last summer's travels for me were all done with a GH2 and and iPad and it was all gloriously light. But for this US trip it'll be a proper photo journey which means 2 d800s, five lenses and the right level of computing power. I guess the 13" air will hack it but I'm just too old in body to carry a 17 incher :-(

 

[jonoslack]

Last summer's travels for me were all done with a GH2 and and iPad and it was all gloriously light. But for this US trip it'll be a proper photo journey which means 2 d800s, five lenses and the right level of computing power. I guess the 13" air will hack it but I'm just too old in body to carry a 17 incher :-(

I wouldn't dream of taking the 17" on a big trip (it was left firmly at home when we went to China). The 13" Air did a grand job with MM files - smaller than D800, but not that much!

Still, you only have to leave one of those big Nikon lenses behind, and that's the difference in weight between a 13" air and a 17" MPB!

 

[Zerimar]

I think the mistake is the i7 in 2010 was a duo-core and now they are quad cores. So, yes it is faster. Quad core i7's made their way to the MBP in 2011.

Didn't know mine was a dual core. I was told that it was quad.

 

[Godfrey]

I wouldn't dream of taking the 17" on a big trip (it was left firmly at home when we went to China). The 13" Air did a grand job with MM files - smaller than D800, but not that much!

Still, you only have to leave one of those big Nikon lenses behind, and that's the difference in weight between a 13" air and a 17" MPB!

I wouldn't carry either a MBP 17" OR the larger Nikon lenses around on travel. I had an MBP 17" for about six months once upon a time and was traveling a lot—gave it to my boss in exchange for his 15". MUCH better.

If they'd put the quad-core processor in the MBA 11", I'd buy one of those ... maybe. ;-)

 

[douglasf13]

Greetings from my first GetDpi post with my Macbook Pro Retina! I like the modular way that Mac is going. I've got a USB external DVD drive, ethernet adapter, etc., and I use them infrequently enough that I welcome removing them natively from the computer. This Macbook Pro Retina is a great combination of all of the things that I like about my Macbook Air and regular Macbook Pro. I got the 16GB of ram, since it isn't upgradeable, but I opted to only get the 2.3 Ghz and 256 GB internal, because I use little internal storage these days, and OWC will surely have replacement hard drives in the future, if necessary.

I haven't had a chance to profile the screen yet, but it is gorgeous.

 

[ustein]

Got mine too. Works great with FCPX. Full 1080p is a window in the editor.

If you max out the fast GPU it gets hot (my Mac Pro 2009 is left in the dust here).

 

[Lars]

Didn't know mine was a dual core. I was told that it was quad.

They came as quad or dual core if I recall correctly.

 

[Lars]

Greetings from my first GetDpi post with my Macbook Pro Retina! I like the modular way that Mac is going. I've got a USB external DVD drive, ethernet adapter, etc., and I use them infrequently enough that I welcome removing them natively from the computer. This Macbook Pro Retina is a great combination of all of the things that I like about my Macbook Air and regular Macbook Pro. I got the 16GB of ram, since it isn't upgradeable, but I opted to only get the 2.3 Ghz and 256 GB internal, because I use little internal storage these days, and OWC will surely have replacement hard drives in the future, if necessary.

I haven't had a chance to profile the screen yet, but it is gorgeous.

Base CPU speed is fully adequate. The 2.3 GHz is probably the i7-3600 series, which has 6MB cache and lacks support for VT-D virtualized I/O and vPro management. None of those should matter for OSX, I think. Stepping up to a higher speed CPU is costly and only gives you a few percent in performance.

 

[spencer007]

mbp has usb 3 as well as thunderbolt, i have no problems using the adapter cable to firewire to my phase one