Apple Announces new MacBook Pro with retina display...

[Jettatore]

Also, to those of you out there who are complaining about the high price...  why do you think so?  Are there comparable laptops out there for much cheaper?

This is what I'm trying to figure out. I have a netbook now and a desktop for editing. I'm thinking about buying the 13 inch MBP for a year long trip I'm taking to South America next year to do photo editing on. Was thinking of getting the refurb i7 from the end of 2011 for around $1150. But now i'm wondering if I should just buy a smaller MacBook Air sized ultrabook(with hopefully better specs and around  the same price or cheaper than 1100 bucks.)
Does anyone have any suggestions?
Is windows or mac better for editing?
thanks in advance!

Windows and Mac use mostly the same tools for editing and mostly use the same underlying hardware in both systems, so for all intents and purposes they are nearly identical while actually using the tools you will likely use to edit.  If you prefer the operating experience/user interface of one over the other, or if a single piece of editing software that is exclusive to one or the other is indispensable to you, then your choices become obviously, limited.

That said, if you are looking for a cheaper budget/travel laptop editing machine (and not just a bleeding edge, top of the line rig) then I think it would be a mistake to try to match specs.  There are for example, processors out in the wild for $1,000 that are only marginally faster than $300 cpu's.  Same with every component in the system.  You should be able to find a good value in the machines you are already looking at, if you want more power for the same price or would prefer a cheaper price altogether, you will probably find some accommodations on the Windows PC side of things.  And to be blunt, any current mid-range or better laptop is for most purposes, including professional ones, overkill for 2D image editing alone so you have little to worry about.  If you are gaming or doing something much more intensive, you probably already know what you will need and aren't even reading this....

Personally I opted for a cheaper, less powerful, reasonably portable machine with a multi-touch + wacom digitizer built into the screen that can eek out something like 18 hours in power saving, low-usage mode.  I can do normal editing work, and general usage computing away from a plug basically all day if and when needed and I don't need to bring along any external tablets or any other accessories.  All in all, I'm fairly happy with that decision to put it humbly, my choices on what to buy for photography equipment on the other hand were naive at best but in the end I have most what I need if not more...

I did a test, putting a 2pixel by 2pixel image in photoshop and painted a black and white checker pattern on it displayed at 100% on this screen which has a rather humble 1366x768 12.5" display.  All I will say is that I'm laughing inside.  My head has to be over the keyboard to readily discern individual pixels even at high contrasts.  Good luck with whatever you buy, hope it serves you well.  Cheers.

edit: I've attached a 32x32 pixel black and white checker grid.  If you view it at 100% each black or white patch should fill exactly 1 pixel on your display.  Unless you get close, it will probably look most similar to a 50% gray patch, as it does on my monitor, which probably has about as low of a resolution as you can even get outside of a netbook or phone.

[7enderbender]

I'm pretty disappointed since I was getting ready to "go Mac". Both my laptop and my desktop are in need of replacement.

I had kind of settled on the idea of first getting a Mac Mini, trick that out a bit and connect two good monitors. Should work for my photo editing and audio recording needs. I had hoped for an update on that one.

Next I was thinking about something like the 15" or 17" hi res matte MBP. On the one hand it's good that those are still available (even with USB3 now) - but then there is the MBP "retina" which let's me rethink the whole idea of moving away from Windows PCs/laptops.

If that is the direction they are going then I want nothing to do with it. Let me explain: first there is the "retina" display which is really supposed to operate at 1400x900 resolution equivalent in order to work as designed. The "retina" part is probably nice with programs that are designed that way and actually show photos and videos at full 2800 resolution. But there is no gain in real estate - actually there is a loss compared to the previous "hi res" versions. Wondering how the scaling to 1600 or 1900 looks.

But worse: has anyone seen the "iFixit" tear down of the thing? Zilch user serviceable parts, glued in battery, soldered memory, funky SSD, new screws that require special tools just to open the darn thing, no space for a second hard drive or SSD. So basically a disposable MBP for close to $3000 in a halfway workable configuration. Once photoshop or an audio application has busted the SSD by using it as a scratch disk you can toss it out. Or at least it seems that's what you're supposed to do.

To me this looks like another shiny Apple designer gadget for pretty people at Starbucks surfing the web. I hope enough people still prefer the more traditional approach of the updated "regular" 15" non-retina MBP.

So I'm torn now if I should even go with Apple for the desktop and invest heavily just to find out later that the laptop choices are not for me.

[deathbyfish]

I'm going to pick one of these up when I am in Hong Kong this summer, the prices are incredibly cheap there! I've already found someone to purchase my late 2011 macbook pro, only had it for 6 months but this update seriously looks brilliant. I'm heading to an apple store this weekend to see it myself.

[TexPhoto]

Looks nice and I am thinking of getting one to replace my iMac 27.  I'd add a cinema display.

What bugs me is why this can't have the same G3/4 internet service as the iPads have.  This would make a laptop so much more useful.  Of course you can add an iPhone and various USB dongles, but that is not the solution I am looking for.

[bchernicoff]

Have you seen a desktop with 4 quad core xeons or opterons with over 100 GB ram. Or a gaming i7 with nitrogen cooling or  fan the size of a bowling ball, running at 4.5 GHz, or 4 full sized video cards. With a 1200W power supply??

What's your point? Both are specialized machines...one is optimized for server workloads and the other to give  boners to nerds. While laptops aren't quite a match for high-end consumer desktops, the gap probably isn't significant for the majority of this forums users' needs. Yes, my Core i7 iMac has a faster processor than my Core i7 MBP, but the MPB has an SSD (both of have 8gb of RAM) and it handles all my RAW imports and photo editing much faster. Sure, the iMac would be faster still with an SSD, but my real point is that for the majority of this forum's workload, the difference isn't all that great and depends more on I/O speed than anything else.

[samueljay]

... and as such, the Laptops have actually surpassed / matched the desktops in specs.. so it makes the decision a lot harder.

You havent a clue about how wrong you are and this will probably never happen. I build powerful workstation and gaming machines - and the distance between desktops and notebooks havent changed over the years. Have you seen a desktop with 4 quad core xeons or opterons with over 100 GB ram. Or a gaming i7 with nitrogen cooling or  fan the size of a bowling ball, running at 4.5 GHz, or 4 full sized video cards. With a 1200W power supply?? The main parts - the CPU and the graphics card they use are not the same even though they are named similarly. Laptops carry lite versions of almost all its hardware. Comparing notebooks with desktops is like comparing your pretty 4x4 'monster' pickup with an 18 wheeler carrying a 50 ton load.

Yes I have actually, I work on a $10,000 12 core Mac Pro at work, but I'm not a fan because for most tasks my 15" MBP is faster. You missed my point, maybe you should re-read my initial post which you (mis)quoted, I was never talking about PC's, I was speaking about Apple's lineup exclusively, and in particular, the Macbook Pro and the iMac (as stated in my initial post), as they are my two choices, as such, while some of the specs haven't exactly surpassed it (processors are still better in the iMac) you can get a bigger SSD in the new MBP, and the RAM in the new MBP is much better as the iMacs haven't been updated in a while now. Also, in case you didn't know, the iMac in fact uses Laptop components, so your argument is false.

Edit: Thank you bchernicoff, exactly what I'm talking about.