backtop


Print 45 comment(s) - last by TakinYourPoint.. on Oct 25 at 4:04 AM

Apple brings a retina display to the 13" MacBook Pro

Apple announced its 15" MacBook Pro with Retina display back in June. Now, it’s brought “Retina Fever” to the 13” MacBook Pro.
 
The new 13" MacBook Pro with Retina Display is only .75" thin and weighs only 3.57 pounds, one pound lighter than the previous version. As expected, the display now has a resolution of 2560x1600, features 29% higher contrast ratio, a 75% reduction in glare, 178 degree viewing angle, and brightness of 300 nits.
 
 

 
The new 13' MacBook Pro with Retina Display keeps the same design aesthetic as the previous version, and includes USB 3.0 ports, FaceTime HD, backlit keyboard, and of course, Thunderbolt. In order to achieve the weight targets and thin frame, Apple ditched the internal optical drive.
 
The new 13" MacBook Pro with Retina Display comes with dual-core Intel i5 or i7 processors, 8GB standard RAM, and up to a 768GB SSD. Battery life is rated at “up to” 7 hours.
 
The 2.5GHz Core i5 version with 8GB of RAM and 128GB of flash storage starts at $1,699 and is available today. 


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: I don't know man...
By ritualm on 10/23/2012 2:43:13 PM , Rating: 2
Cheesew1z69, normally we're on the same page as far as anti-Apple fanboyism goes, but I have to agree with Takin:
quote:
Optical drives are dead.

I had a DVD burner on my last custom-build desktop PC. Guess how many times I actually used it... once a month. Takes a crapload of space and - unlike hard drives and SSDs - does nothing useful the other 99% of the time.


RE: I don't know man...
By TakinYourPoints on 10/23/2012 2:52:24 PM , Rating: 2
My desktop PC is a full-size tower (Corsair 800D) and the single optical drive in it still feels like a waste of space given that I never use it.

If an optical drive can feel that wasteful on a desktop, how wasteful is it in something that you carry around? :)

Lose the thing, drop some weight, reduce the size. Not having it is so much more useful and logical than keeping it around for the majority of people. This is like when people clung onto their 3.5" floppies, silly given that better portable storage technologies exist.


RE: I don't know man...
By Solandri on 10/24/2012 9:13:34 AM , Rating: 2
There are a few areas where optical still excels:

- Offline TV/movies. Until Hollywood gets off the DRM train and accepts video distribution as simple files, they're gonna keep pumping out DVDs and Blu-Rays (even thought he DRM on both has been cracked). To rip your own movies requires you to have an optical drive somewhere. I suppose you could pirate everything, though that's not really a legitimate solution.

- One-to-many copies. If a musician needs to make a few hundred copies of their songs to sell after a gig, optical is the cheapest way at less than 10 cents per disk. Flash is getting there, currently at less than 50 cents per GB, but isn't quite there yet. I've been trying to get my friends doing this to shift to online MP3 sales instead (though the 30% hit on iTunes or Amazon or Google is discouraging).

- WORM (write-once, read-many). Most notable for use as permanent backups. Due to huge increases in hard drive capacities this function has mostly been shifted to external drives. But those carry the risk of accidental erasure. A good photo studio will keep an archival copy of everything they shoot on DVD or Blu-Ray. Those can't be erased, they must be physically destroyed before the data is lost.

I agree we're shifting away from optical, but it's a bit premature to call it dead. While I'd certainly like it to be dead, we aren't quite there yet.


RE: I don't know man...
By TakinYourPoints on 10/25/2012 4:00:58 AM , Rating: 2
The latter two are fringe cases. Needing to distribute many copies is a specific case (ie - musicians), and those same people can post links to buy their songs from Bandcamp or something. Backup has been replaced by external hard drives and cloud storage. Much more convenient than burning multiple discs, plus it is easier to update incrementally.

The main one that is still relevant is movies on Blu-Ray. That is still important because it offers substantially larger file sizes than a film streamed over Netflix, meaning that you get much better image quality.

That said, unless you have an HTPC in your living room there is little reason to have a Blu-Ray drive in your PC. I use a PS3 to watch movies on my plasma. Most people are also fine with streaming Netflix through their console or set-top box. Hell, I have a substantial Blu-Ray collection of films that I love, but if I just want to watch some movie that I don't care so deeply about I'll just stream it, no reason to get a disc.


"We basically took a look at this situation and said, this is bullshit." -- Newegg Chief Legal Officer Lee Cheng's take on patent troll Soverain














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki