Back to Article

  • BSMonitor - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    Windows 8 compatible?? Reply
  • elitistlinuxuser - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    I don't get why this is a question it already can run Windows 7. So windows 8 shouldn't be an issue Reply
  • crimson117 - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    Details are still fuzzy, but I've heard it comes with Windows ME pre-installed, and if you mail in a post card they will send you a DVD containing a product key that will allow you to download Windows 8 via Steam. Reply
  • sonelone - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    Trololololololol Reply
  • ImSpartacus - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    You win all the internets. Reply
  • B3an - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    Sounds great. Even Windows ME would be better than OSX. Reply
  • zappb - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    Awesome - It looks like full resolution capable as in you should get extra screen real estate, not HiDEF? or whatever they used with the Ipad.

  • ssj4Gogeta - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    What does that mean? Reply
  • ImSpartacus - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    Since Apple doubled the resolution (1440x900 -> 2880x1800), they can double the DPI and all the UI elements will be the same size, but be twice as sharp and detailed.

    zappb is asking if OSX allows the user the option of NOT doubling DPI. So UI elements are a quarter of their typical size, but you can fit four times as much stuff on the screen.

    I know little about OSX, but I'd imagine there's also a middle road of choosing some non-integer multipler (i.e. not 1 or 2) that would yield an "best-of-both-worlds" effect. Everything is a little sharper, you can fit a little more on the screen and it's only a little smaller. The wild card is how OSX deals with non-integer DPI multiples.
  • zappb - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    Thanks for putting it into fluent english ImSpartacus,

    Just spotted this on the Apple Store - Configurable to 1680-by-1050 high-resolution glossy or antiglare display.

    This suggests that it does run at 1440x900 x 2 instead of actually being able to push 2880 x 1800. Would be interesting to see how Windows treats the resolution.
  • ssj4Gogeta - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    I think you misunderstood what ImSpartacus said. The display physically is still 2880x1800, and the GPU still "pushes" 2880x1800. It's just that some UI elements have to be increased in resolution (pixels) to keep them the same size on the screen (inches).
    A 100x100 button on a 2880x1800 screen will be a quarter the size in area of a 100x100 button on a 1440x900 screen. It will therefore have to be made 200x200 to keep it the same size, so that it is easily clickable.
  • ssj4Gogeta - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    Ah, thanks. zappb confused me because the screen should still be "full resolution capable" regardless.

    Windows lets you change the DPI setting in increments of 1. It would be really stupid of OS X to not include such a basic setting.
  • headbox - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    In anticipating comments about cost: stop letting the world know how cheap/broke/underpaid you are. Do you complain about the cost of a Rolex, a Ducati, or a Porsche too? Even if you can't get that through your thick skull, think about resale value. As a percentage of purchase cost, an Apple product retains value higher and longer than any other electronic part. A 3yo Macbook Pro will still fetch $1,200-1,800 depending on specs, and people will line up to buy it. Your Dell/HP/Lenovo becomes a paperweight after you list it on craiglist for 3 months. Who's the smart buyer now? Reply
  • MadMan007 - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    Depends upon how much absolute value each one loses, if it's the same then they are both equally smart purchases. Also, paying less means more money to utilize elsewhere. I'd like to say people would save or invest it but... Reply
  • Zodd - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    Mac's arent the Porsche of the computerworld, their the same volvo with a shiny finish and only one pedal. Reply
  • sonelone - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    Your analogy is slightly problematic. If Macs were the volvos, then netbooks would be like bicycles. Here's a slightly more accurate analogy:

    Bugatti Veyron: Alienware+Origin+Asus gaming laptops(Power and looks, low mpg)
    SSC Tuatara: New MBP 15
    Ferrari F12berlinetta: Samsung Series 7, HP Envy 15, Old MBP 15
    Porsche: Ultrabooks, MBA, Smaller MBP
    BMW 7 series: Dell XPS, Asus N Series
    Toyota Camry: Large Budget Laptops
    Honda Civic: Small Budget Laptops
    Tata Nano: Netbooks
  • Zodd - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    What i meant by the analogy, is that mac's use the same hardware inside as other manufactures. There's nothing special about them. Reply
  • ImSpartacus - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    A laptop isn't a box with hardware in it. If you're looking for that, there are ~$1000 laptops with quad core CPUs and capable discrete graphics.

    For the rest of us, the screen, keyboard, trackpad, battery life, connectivity and build quality matter. And since you correctly mentioned that computing hardware is mostly comparable, the only place for non-pricing differentiation is in the above areas.

    So, as most things in life, this comes down to personal needs.
  • Zodd - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    The only thing that's better is the display and the only reason apple started using them is because people will buy their laptops and accessories even if they take an insane profit like their 92% profit compared to BOM on ram. Reply
  • ImSpartacus - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    "Anybody can go buy the processors from Intel, but even the track pads from these companies can’t match Apple."

    That's from an analyst in a Wired article ( ) and I think it sums up the reason that Apple makes some of the best laptops on the market.

    The screen is not the only meaningful point of differentiation from other laptops. The quality of the keyboard or the build quality might not make it onto a nice little comparison table, but they matter.
  • solipsism - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    If you'd actually look at the HW inside them you'd see they contain a lot very specific components designed by Apple for Apple. They even talked about several of them during today's keynote. Reply
  • B3an - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    ...Yet another smug cunt Apple user. Die of cancer please, just like Steve. Reply
  • Impulses - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    Cost seems apropiate to me, truth be told they could charge whatever the heck they want since for now they're the only ones pushing this high a resolution at 15".

    However, I'm very disappointed none of the other models got bumped up... In some cases it's out of Apple's hands, they can only ship what display makers build, but ASUS is about to start shipping 1080p displays at 11.6" & 13". Where's Apple's Air equivalent? No wonder they dropped the price.
  • JimmyTheJ - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    That's 220.53 pixels per inch for those wondering. This is incredible! I gotta hand it to Apple for continuing their trend of improving screen resolution. It's one area where they are really having a great impact on the tech world. Reply
  • zappb - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    But they've killed 1920x1200 model and replaced it with retina it better? Reply
  • EnzoFX - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    And they say Apple doesn't innovate. It's about bringing great tech to the masses, not really about who does it first or whatever. In this case, I think they're both? Reply
  • mcnabney - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    Pretty sure Apple doesn't develop, design, or manufacture display panels.

    Buying off-the-shelf parts isn't innovation.
  • seapeople - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    Yes, because before Apple wanted them, there were all sorts of 15.4" 2880x1800 resolution panels out there waiting to be purchased. Heck, I just dropped by Sam's club a few weeks ago and picked a couple up to put in my Acer. Yep, no innovation by Apple here. Reply
  • rflynn88 - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    $2,199 base price Reply
  • bleh0 - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    This is a good product. Definitely out of my price range.

    Still wondering how close it will stick to "7 hours" in real world usage scenarios.
  • alexs42 - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    Nice laptop, but pricey. I'm a little puzzled though that everyone is so excited (except for the display - that is very nice), since Samsung series 9, 15 inch model was released back in March with longer battery life, thinner (0.58 for the series 9 vs 0.71 for MB pro), 8gb ram, and reasonable display (1600x900) for ~1400. I can't wait for the Ivy Bridge updated version to come out, w/ Keppler. I'd be happy w/ 1080 or 1200 vertical resolution.
    Now, Apple has done a nice job with presentation and all that, but this just does not seem as revolutionary in any way compared to the Win8 bonanza of transformers and touch seen at Computex....
    I'd love to know what folks think about that... Except for the retina display and the amazing show that Apple puts on, it really seems rather pedestrian compared to the developments on the PC side. Stunning that it has come to that, as Apple has been pushing the boundaries for so many years....
  • kkwst2 - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    Yeah, between the new announcments by Acer, the new Samsungs, and the new MBP, it really is pissing me off how Lenovo can't release a high resolution IPS panel on its T series Thinkpad notebooks. Because despite all the Apple brouhaha, Lenovo still in most respects makes the best business notebooks - best keyboard, best pointing device (trackpoint), best chassis, best expansion options, ability to easily add another HDD in the ultrabay.

    But their displays have gone to shit and they don't seem to care. There was a time when they had the best displays (while IBM still ran Thinkpad). Put one of the Samsung superbright IPS panels on a T430s and I'm sold again, even though they're tinkering with putting those damn chicklet/backlit keys that Apple drones love on it. I would still be happy with my trackpoint. But I'm not buying paying good money for another crap display. I'll stick with my T410s until I get a decent display option or finally setlle for a vastly inferior touchpad-only product.
  • sonelone - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    I wonder how much Apple is going to charge for the larger storage options. Reply
  • ImSpartacus - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    A lot.

    They always do.
  • CoLD FiRE - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    Only a tiny charge of $600. That's a bargain by Apple standards! Reply
  • iwod - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    I cant believe no sites, including Anand mention this. After all the review and crying about IPS on Notebook, we finally have another choose, and it comes with Retina Display!.

    It was mentioned on the features page

    Now only if Anand could find out what the SSD Controller is, it is listed as 500 Read, another Sandforce? Or May be we get a sane new Marvell 88SS9187 Controller?
  • crankerchick - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    I guess you missed the part where Anand says 2800x1800 IPS display... Reply
  • crankerchick - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    *2880 Reply
  • gus6464 - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    SSD is a Samsung 830 in blade config. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now