Apple has lost it if they think a 13" laptop is worth $1700.

^ There's a guy who's never seen a retina display.

Dude I paid 2000 for a 12 inch MacBook Pro back in the day. It might not be worth it for you, but for people who care about beautiful displays it's worth it. Besides wait a year and the price'll come down.

In all fairness, who gives a shit about what technology *used to* cost?

I paid over $400 for a 40 MB hard drive once. That doesn't mean that spending four hundred dollars on mass storage is worth it to everyone today.

Here's the thing... these displays do really cost quite a wad to get each. That cost is added on top of the macbook pro line. But is it worth it? Yeah, that is the question... maybe to a designer?? Not sure if these IPS hi-ppi displays live up to the tasks of a dedicated photographer or printer. Oh, and I hate the term "retina" for a display.... because that is BS marketing hype, but then again... I hate any kind of brain-washing.

Originally Posted by blahblahbber

, and I hate the term "retina" for a display.... because that is BS marketing hype, but then again... I hate any kind of brain-washing.

since when? "Retina" has an agreed upon definition - pixels indistinguishable at the average viewing distance of the device. I don't see how that's marketing hype.

$1700 for a all flash based computer that is super thin, wicked performance, excellent battery life and a magnificent screen. Sounds good to me. If price mattered when it came to Apple products nothing would sell since everything is priced on the high end. You can also find 13" and 11" PC laptops int he $2000+ range too. Its more a niche market. The Panasonic tough books for example are over $2k

Originally Posted by hayesk


since when? "Retina" has an agreed upon definition - pixels indistinguishable at the average viewing distance of the device. I don't see how that's marketing hype.

agreed upon by who?? crApple? Another brain-washed victim.

Originally Posted by blahblahbber

[QUOTE=hayesk;4197304]
since when? "Retina" has an agreed upon definition - pixels indistinguishable at the average viewing distance of the device. I don't see how that's marketing hype.

agreed upon by who?? crApple? Another brain-washed victim.[/quote]

Defined by the company that first introduced products to meet that criterion to the mass market.

Their privilege.

Agreed upon by "Science!" as factually accurate.

What's "brainwashed" about creating a marketing term based upon clear-cut and very simple math?
Just that it's beyond your ability to research and judge?

Originally Posted by blahblahbber

Here's the thing... these displays do really cost quite a wad to get each. That cost is added on top of the macbook pro line. But is it worth it? Yeah, that is the question... maybe to a designer??

You don't own, or regularly use, any devices with retina resolution.

The difference is actually most stunning with text. You know, the stuff you're looking at right now.

As opposed to a 72 ppi 6bit monitor, or an 8bit or a 10 bit? The difference is huge and people who deal with images for a living do notice the difference in colour reproduction and specifically in detail. That's why they pay huge amounts for better quality monitors and calibration equipment, because it actually 'means' something to them and to the customers they serve.

People have been using 10 bit monitors at 72ppi for a very long time for what people deem to be professional jobs.

And as has already been stated the term 'retina' is accurate because it looks like a printed page, the eye can't discern any more detail. The ppi makes an enormous difference regardless of colour depth.

folks... I just don't like the term, because really it should bear the name hi-ppi.... that way folks actually know what and how much ppi it actually bears. Keeping the public stupid has always been the tactic for crApple.

I know what it refers too, I've been an art director while Quark had a good ride (I still use Quark for certain stuff).... so spare me the tech behind it. Just saying the TERM. Thanks

While I love the new IPS panel apple is using, the added cost to buy one outside of apple is astronomical.... try looking one up on ebay to see what I mean. So if you didn't get a "Rectina" (funny right?) MBP, then you might want to wait until next year for the WiFi ac version of the "Rectal"

I wonder when they are going to run out of hyped up one-liners for the web debuts of their crApple products... I will place my bets that their product pages will begin to sound redundant starting next year.

Remember when Apple coined the term "Airport" back in 1999? That was because nobody had a ****ing clue what WLAN was supposed to be.

Apple sells because they make technology graspable and accessible. One of the methods they use to do so is by ignoring specs that aren't relevant to the experience, and giving those that are too abstract household names.


Also, you seem like a reasonably eloquent adult. You might want to consider dropping the "clever" puns like "crApple" and the like. That's jarring to readers not because it feels like a jab hitting home, but because it flips the mental image of you back and forth between responsible adult and completely immature moron.
Should this not be possible, I suggest thalo.net for your needs. It's a refuge for professional designers who go into fetal position when confronted with colored window control buttons.

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot

Remember when Apple coined the term "Airport" back in 1999? That was because nobody had a ****ing clue what WLAN was supposed to be.

By the way, the term "WiFi" has been around before "airport".... and people knew what that meant. Now that crApple finally uses the term properly, what is your argument now?

The term "wi-fi" wasn't used commercially until summer of 1999, and NOBODY in the consumer space had ever heard of it, let alone WLAN, before then.

Apple introduced their first Airport products in July '99.

Apart from that: I take it you agree with my assessment, since you're resorting to pedantic nit-picking using made-up details?

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot

The term "wi-fi" wasn't used commercially until summer of 1999, and NOBODY in the consumer space had ever heard of it, let alone WLAN, before then.
Apple introduced their first Airport products in July '99.
Apart from that: I take it you agree with my assessment, since you're resorting to pedantic nit-picking using made-up details?

agree with some stuff, like the "simplicity" but a lot of it is way over-reached, like "bonjour".... Do you expect people to REALLY know what the hell crApple really means?? yeeeaeah, thought so.

It used to be "Rendezvous", which was a lot better, IMO. Much better than "zeroconf", at any rate.

"Bonjour" wasn't Apple's first choice, anyway. It was the result of a lawsuit. Yay.

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot

It used to be "Rendezvous", which was a lot better, IMO. Much better than "zeroconf", at any rate.
"Bonjour" wasn't Apple's first choice, anyway. It was the result of a lawsuit. Yay.

Agreed