Just made the switch to the retina world

Hello,

I've been a PC/Linux User for many many years, and with Apple switch to OSX, the only reason to ignore them was connectivity and those crappy resolutions, I've been running 1600x1200, 1920x1200 and lately 1920x1080 :-(, and the 1680x1050 of the MBP 15" was too small, but with the new retina I have no excuse, so I've just bought a 2.6Ghz, 512Gb SSD + 16Gb RAM, Apple Care, and the ethernet adapter for just under 3000€ with the student discount... too expensive, but I think that this time I should pay for the early adoption, as I've always asked vendors for better screens. It's supposed to arrive in 1-2 weeks, will try Linux and Windows, but I think I would keep OSX :-D

Regards,

 

If you want full control over resolutions, get RDM
Set your retina Macbook Pro's resolution to 3840x2400. Wait, what?? : apple

running it at a full 2880x1800 non scaled res is pretty cool

 

Jejeje, I'll will check that for sure as soon as I get my hands on it. Thanks!

 

I apologize for threadjacking, but does the MBPr really have 3840x2400 screen, or is it just scaling?

 

the screen is 2880x1800. If you set it higher, it scales down to 2880x1800.

the cool thing is that scaling down doesn't hurt the image quality the same way that scaling up does (blur), and it allows you to match the screen real estate of a 1680x1050 or 1920x1200 screen.

 

​

if you use the 3840x2400 mode (not HiDPI) then everything is drawn for a monitor of that res, but the screen is only 2880x1800, it it blurs a bit shrinking down... and if you think 2880x1800 is tiny, 3840x2400 is ultra tiny!

 

What's the command to check and see who the manufacturer of the LCD panel is?

 

you can look that in the system information AFAIK

 

Dell have just released the M4700 and M6700 (the other option I was waiting for), I've just configured an equivalent (but the screen of course) M4700, and it costs 3038€, about 40€ more expensive that the rMBP (using the student discount). I think something is wrong about "the rMBP is too expensive".

 

totally different machines ( workstations ). the quadro video cards etc are easily a $600 upgrade alone ( and almost necessary for some pro apps ) etc and are for different markets

m6700 is more like a quadro/fire pro equipped Mac Pro but with one CPU and portable

 

Well when it comes to Pro work there are some advantages to some of the options on the Dell, depending on your needs... but I hardly call them "equivalent" ... also two rMBPs take up less room than 1 4700

 

Still funny to see that the M4700 and the MBPr end up together on the short list of many folks. Each machine has its tradeoff. Part of it is the absence of the WUXGA option on the M4700 (and some versions before that) that makes people crave for the Retina display on a Precision like platform.

 

Also, a considerable component to the price of both machines is the SSD. In most builds it's usually better to buy an aftermarket SSD and save some money that way. Sadly, you can't do that in the rMBP.

 

yes, the quadro is supposed to be far better specially for pro cad apps, not sure about video/image processing, but even with that my options where the w530, the m4700 or the rMBP. after much complaining for the move from 1920x1200 to 1920x1080 I thought I was in debt with apple for pushing the res up, for them my money

 

What I like in the M4700 is that you can get it with only a mSATA SSD 256GB and keep the main HD storage bay for a larger SSD that you can purchase later. Same for memory you can start cheap and upgrade later. Some of that could have been done for the MBPr w/o wasting space. But unless a PC vendor comes quickly with a WUXGA or better screen I will probably succumb to the Apple offering.

 

I think Apple bought exclusive rights to the high res laptops screens for this year(for the Retina MBP anyway).

 

buying something in large quantities != from trade exclusivity agreements.

I hardly doubt that any OEM that uses windows would use such a high res panel, given that it aint optimized with the scaling. Its a pain for some to use a sony Z at 1080p and its over 40 ppi of difference.

 

You mean that font scaling is bad?

I'm using 125% font size on my 15.6" 1080P screen and it seems fine to me. At higher resolutions you couldn't use like 200% font size scaling or something?

 

the problem is that the scaling dont go well on all programs, and this is something that is a problem in both systems, however I dont see how only one product would affect the software makers to change their coding in the windows side, on the mac side...

 

Indeed. I got the (now discontinued) 1600x900 Z2 and I'm glad I did. Look at the rMBP in stores, I find that even on the larger panel, 1680x1050 is the highest resolution my particular set of eyes can handle.

 

I had the 1080p panel, loved it, but the build quality left with heartaches every time I entered the subway, sold it.

 

At the end I returned the rMBP, 2880x1800 native is not usable and 1440x900 is really low on desktop space. The scaled resolutions would be an option at 1920x1200, but the impact on performance is too big, also it is quite heavy, I was hoping a lighter notebook. If just they would forget about that retina and make a 1920x1200 screen on the old MacBook Pro form factor. In fact the retina screen was brighter that my W520 1920x1080 screen, but I suppose that if you are used to WUXGA, retina is not as impressive as if you are used to 1440x900. It's a pity, I really would have liked to love that laptop, but I suppose I will wait until next generation, maybe next year.

Regards

 

^^^^
It's interesting how different everyone's needs are when it comes to a notebook. Your decision is inline with what should have been the decision for myself. However, despite all data I've gathered and this excellent thread that details the exact two machine I now have, I still couldn't resist trying the rMBP myself.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/app...cbook-pro-retina-impressions-windows-guy.html

 

The W520 FHD screen is 270 nits. I haven't tested the rMBP screen brightness but they seem pretty close to me. I feel the scaling performance pain some, but it is offset by excellent pixel density.

There's no way I would recommend a W520 over a rMBP. I have no such reservation (at the moment) with the W530. The W520 Optimus implementation is flawed and most of the issues are resolved in the W530. That and the W520 has a checkered reliability history. That remains to be seen with the W530.

 

According to notebookcheck, rMBP has the average brightness of 272.6 cd/m² and maximum of 292 cd/m².

 

I was comparing to w520 as it is my current laptop, I mean, I cannot justify 3000€ for the few improvements over the W520. About the W530 optimus, are you able to output to external display using the HD4000?

 

The Intel iGPU only drives the laptop LCD panel. If you need other displays, Optimus must be enabled.

 

Basically why the rMBP would have made the shortlist had it been out when I needed to buy...

 

If you are into professional work such as professional CAD, heavy calculating programs, even photo/video editing, there would be many reasons why the m4700 is better than the rMBP:
1) m4700 is user serviceable
2) m4700 comes with standard 3 year onsite/nbd warranty
3) m4700 will probably last you longer in terms of build quality and "future proofing"
4) m4700 can have a total of 3 hard drives or ssd combos
5) although m4700 doesn't have a VERY high res screen, you can get one with much better color reproduction than the rMBP
6) m4700 has a professional-grade GPU which outperforms the gt650m in things like CAD..etc
7) m4700 can be configured with better processing and ram
8) Did I mention the m4700 is user serviceable?? That is extremely important for a lot of professionals who don't want to be stuck with soldered down components.

 

I disagree with #1&7 and #8 is duplicate with #1 so you basically only have 5 points. Entry rMBP can now be configure with better CPU &SSD. Sure it won't get you 32GB Ram, but they are still configurable. It is true that rMBP is not user servicable is it's not neccessary a good reason for say Professional CAD, photo/video editor. You can't assume that they are also geek that want to service the notebook themself.

 

doesn't really matter, this isn't the m4700 vs. rmbp thread.

 

I'm seeing faster speeds on the rMBP than the Elitebook 8760w... dreamcolor was nice though

 

The HP Elitebooks with Dreamcolor are really expensive.

 

not overly, a base CTO 8770w with DC2 and 8/320/3720qm/firepro is $3300 - the 24% coupon is about $2500.00 then go nuts on 32GB for $200 and a 256 ssd and your back to just under 3K

 

What issues are there exactly with the W520's optimus implementation and reliability history? I don't have the new rMBP but compared to the 2011 MBP, I would hands down give the recommendation to the W520.

 

Optimus on the W520 is FUBAR. You can only drive two external LCD panels. You can only use a projector when the BIOS is set to discrete.

Go take a look at the massive thread on SSS that is 16 months long with no resolution. SSS stands for Sudden Shutdown Syndrome.

At this point it would be better to consider the W530 anyway. Longer battery life and a better Optimus implementation.