^ This

While the rMBP style computers are the future, the future aint ready for primetime just yet. The 15" rMBP drops frames like a demon even scrolling on everyday webpages in safari and that thing has pretty darn powerful dGPU. Using only the integrated intel 4000 GPU doesn't seem like a great idea.

The next revision or two of these retina laptops should have GPUs perform considerably better than the current gen with Intel's Haswell and improvements from nvidia and amd coming down the pipe. I think I'll wait for rev. 2.

My 16/768 Retina MBP display is very smooth. Haven't noticed dropped frame or glitches.

I have tons of screen shearing problems with mine.

The resolution game is getting insane. Retina spec displays have the potential to look pretty, yes, but I guess I'm in the minority who's perfectly comfortable and happy with a low res (1920x1200) 17" laptop screen. Oh the dpi horror and only being able to support 1080p.

For those that read the Isaacson Jobs biography, here's Steve's yacht design...

http://mashable.com/2012/10/28/steve-jobs-yacht-revealed/

^ This

While the rMBP style computers are the future, the future aint ready for primetime just yet. The 15" rMBP drops frames like a demon even scrolling on everyday webpages in safari and that thing has pretty darn powerful dGPU. Using only the integrated intel 4000 GPU doesn't seem like a great idea.

Exactly my experience when I was in the Apple store. Damn. Back to the drawing board.

For those that read the Isaacson Jobs biography, here's Steve's yacht design...

Yuck.

^+1

Is it possible to order an i7 Air? This seems to suggest so:

http://www.macworld.com/article/1167418/ultimate_macbook_air_2012_models_put_to_the_test.html

But I cannot order it online.

I tried to order it and did not see a problem (of course, I didn't want to actually put in my cc...)

http://store.apple.com/us/configure/MD224LL/A?

The 2.0 128GB version is i7.

wierd. I couldn't figure out how to get to that point, the processor option was never there. Thanks!

There was a refurbed one in the Apple store last wk. Can't check now behind the VA firewall, but perhaps worth checking.

Just bought a new one and waiting for it to arrive and compare to my retina mbp.

Report back. Curious what you think.

I'm in the market for a refurb'd 15" MBP. I will most likely be getting a late 2011 model. I'm noticing that Apple offered two different screen resolutions on that version: 1440x900 and a "hi rez" 1680x1050 version. Any Head-Casers have experience with either of these? I'm old and blind, and really tiny text bothers me. After a couple years I had to get a glasses prescription to read my 2008 MacBook's screen comfortably. Curiously, on this late 2011 13" MBP, I do not. It's the same size and resolution (1280x800), but a much better binned pannel.

I'm wondering if the 1680x1050 screen provides a useful amount more of workspace, or if it just means I'll always need to remember my glasses when I go out DJing.

I'm in the market for a refurb'd 15" MBP. I will most likely be getting a late 2011 model. I'm noticing that Apple offered two different screen resolutions on that version: 1440x900 and a "hi rez" 1680x1050 version. Any Head-Casers have experience with either of these? I'm old and blind, and really tiny text bothers me. After a couple years I had to get a glasses prescription to read my 2008 MacBook's screen comfortably. Curiously, on this late 2011 13" MBP, I do not. It's the same size and resolution (1280x800), but a much better binned pannel.

I'm wondering if the 1680x1050 screen provides a useful amount more of workspace, or if it just means I'll always need to remember my glasses when I go out DJing.

Old eyes need the 1440x900. I bought a new 2012 MBP this June in 1680x1050 and couldn't read the screen. The emulated 1440x852 on the 2012 MBP left all the black lines looking too grey, so it wasn't useful in anything but native resolution. I preferred my old late 2008 unibody MBP instead.

The new antiglare 1680 x 1050 was quite nice, but the silver bezel was not as great of a border when watching movies. If I recall, the blacks on the 1680x1050 antiglare were darker, like with movies.

Regardless, I returned it within a week and ordered a retina MBP, which I usually leave in 1440x900 mode most of the time, but sometimes will use emulated 1280x800 which is sharp as a tack too. As a matter of fact, the Retina model looks good with any screen size (including 1680x1050 and 1920x1080).

But the std 15" in 1440x900 looks quite good, and if you can't get a retina MBP and have old weak eyes then you don't want the 1680x1050.

PS: I forgot - You asked about extra useable desktop space - the 1680 x 1050 isn't that much extra useable desktop space, but it's enough to sneak a calculator and small video screen off the to side of your browser window, or maybe get two pages of MS Word side by side. But you'll end up zooming the text larger in your browser window. The 1920x1080 mode of the retina MBP does give a bit more extra desktop space, but it requires my glasses if I'm in a dark room at that point. The retina MBP is nice for poor vision because you can set it for a 1280x800 mode that is crisp and sharp but on a larger 15".

The attached screen shot shows a text edit window that fills up the 1440x900 screen, so you can see at the right and bottom border how much extra screen you get.

Edited November 4, 201213 yr by HeadphoneAddict

PS: Here is the retina MBP set for 1920 x 1080 mode, and the text edit window in the screen shot would be full size on a 1440 x 900 screen.

On Windows, you can change the font size on a per application basis without changing the screen resolution.

Or so I've heard -- never had to do it myself.

On Windows, you can change the font size on a per application basis without changing the screen resolution.

Or so I've heard -- never had to do it myself.

Yeah, i was having to do that with web browsing and in word processing when I had the 1680x1050 screen, and even found a way to make Safari browser default to a larger font size by loading a CSS profile on launch. You can also zoom in on the Mac screen anytime you want, to see a small portion in a larger size, but it was a PITA dealing with the native res being too high to comfortably see everything.

After deciding not to wait for the new iMacs, my office just plunked down for four loaded Mac-Minis and four new Thunderbolt displays to run them with.

Should be a nice upgrade over the 2007 24" iMacs we are replacing. The new iMacs do look nice, but aesthetically I like the look of the Mini + Thunderbolt display a lot better. I've just never been a fan of the 3-4" metal under-hang below the iMac display.

EDIT: Kind of disappointed with the Apple volume/business discounts. We only ended up getting 5% off. Apparently bigger discounts don't start kicking in until the $30k mark.

Edited November 6, 201213 yr by TMoney

anyone using an apple tv to feed music wirelessly to their rigs? right now the system is as follows.

apple tv -> optical out -> ps audio dac -> headphone amp -> headphone.

I didn't want to keep using the usb input as it forces me to be too close to the heater that is my amp. i purchased an apple tv thinking that for speakers it would be vital as i could play my computer stuff via speakers/headphones whenever i wanted to but have run in to a big fucking problem. when streaming audio to the apple tv, it delays audio by at least a second regardless of what i am using - safari (youtube/lectures from school/vimeo etc), iTunes, vlc, quicktime. given the lag, the first second of the song always gets dropped and watching movies/tv shows is pretty impossible. i was trying to watch on the macbook air but have audio come from the headphone amp.

any thoughts? i called apple and both times the customer service people told me to sell the dac and buy a tv and use the tv speakers to listen to whatever i want to listen to...

will take it into the apple store tomorrow to see if they are more help than these retards.

Do you have another DAC you can try? It sounds like the DAC may be slow in locking onto the signal. Also, do you have another optical cable you can try?

Edited November 15, 201213 yr by morphsci

optical cable is one i just got from blue jeans cable. no other dac either.

i don't understand how the guy suggested i take it to the apple store. there is nothing to hook up the apple tv to. so no way to connect it to their wifi to even test the optical signal. don't know why i didn't think of that earlier.

sd video in quicktime is the only media type that has no delay. 128kbps music has the delay so i don't think it is a locking issue.

CJ, I think that is going to be the case with the Apple TV or Airport Express no matter what. You probably just need to get some thing like this from rogue amoeba.

http://rogueamoeba.com/support/knowledgebase/?showArticle=AirfoilVideoPlayer

Thanks Shelly. I just found that as well. Trying to make sure it will do what I want before I spend the $25.

Exactly, Airfoil video player is what you need. I own it and tried it, and it did get the audio to sync up when transmitting video from Macbook to the new Apple TV when using the HDMI DAC built into my HDTV. I assume it would do the same when using the optical digital output as well.