An open community 
of Macintosh users,
for Macintosh users.

FineTunedMac Dashboard widget now available! Download Here

Topic Options
#33575 - 03/28/15 05:16 PM Latest Macbook Pro
MG2009 Offline


Registered: 08/05/09
I am thinking about buying the latest MBPro and am considering the 15" version because I currently have a 2011 - 17" . . . and want as large a monitor as possible.

Although I would consider a NON-RETINA display, this does not seem to be an option in the 15-inch model.

1. I would appreciate some feedback from anyone by way of comparing the RETINA vs NON-RETINA. displays. If there is no real advantage - or some disadvantage with the retina - then I may opt for the smaller 13" non-retina model.

2. Also, I have read that the 16 RAM and battery are permanently glued into the 15" models. Unable to further upgrade the 16 RAM is not a big deal to me for my uses. However, what happens if there is an issue with the battery life . . . in or out of the 3-year AppleCare Warranty period?

3. What, if any, advantage is there to the average user for the NVIDIA GeForce GT upgrade package.

4. Is there any buzz about the release dates for new models. (I'd hate to buy the latest version now only to have a newer version show up a month later!)

Thanks for any info anyone "in the know" can provide concerning the 13" and 15", Retina and Non-retina Macbook Pros.

Top
#33581 - 03/29/15 02:45 AM Re: Latest Macbook Pro [Re: MG2009]
jchuzi Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: New York State
If there is an Apple Store nearby, check out the differences between Retina and non-Retina to see if it's important to you. When I looked at iMacs, I found that the greatest difference was in the sharpness of text, which was quite noticeable. As to new models, Murphy's Law states that, whatever you buy, there will be something greater two minutes after the purchase.
_________________________
Jon

OS 10.14.6, iMac Retina 5K 27-inch, late 2014, 3.5 GHz Intel Core i5, 1 TB fusion drive, 16 GB RAM, Epson SureColor P600, Photoshop CC, Lightroom CC, MS Office 365

Top
#33582 - 03/29/15 02:58 AM Re: Latest Macbook Pro [Re: jchuzi]
artie505 Online


Registered: 08/04/09
I've been hoping you'd reply, and wondering if your perspective as a photographer would color your judgement, Jon, but you apparently don't see a difference between Retina and non-Retina in that respect.

Personally, I wasn't the least bit impressed by what I saw when I looked at a Retina Mac; I expected Apple's promo zebras to blow me away, and they didn't...not at all.
_________________________
The new Great Equalizer is the SEND button.

In Memory Of Harv: Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. ~Voltaire

Top
#33583 - 03/29/15 05:01 AM Re: Latest Macbook Pro [Re: artie505]
jchuzi Online


Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: New York State
The main reason that I opted for the Retina was that I might regret not spending a few extra bucks after the fact. I have never forgotten the advice that a now-deceased friend gave me about buying cars: Always go for the top-of-the-line model. That way, you'll never be disappointed.

Fortunately, I can afford the indulgence (and this was a present to myself for my 70th birthday).
_________________________
Jon

OS 10.14.6, iMac Retina 5K 27-inch, late 2014, 3.5 GHz Intel Core i5, 1 TB fusion drive, 16 GB RAM, Epson SureColor P600, Photoshop CC, Lightroom CC, MS Office 365

Top
#33584 - 03/29/15 09:41 AM Re: Latest Macbook Pro [Re: MG2009]
dkmarsh Offline
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09

There's a school of thought which holds that OS X 10.10 Yosemite is optimized for Retina displays, particularly with respect to system fonts. Many folks using non-Retina systems complained, upon upgrading to Yosemite, that the UI was much harder on the eyes than Mavericks and earlier versions of OS X. (It's probably also worth noting that Yosemite is optimized for large amounts of RAM!)
_________________________

dkmarsh • member, FineTunedMac Co-op Board of Directors

Top
#33586 - 03/29/15 11:52 AM Re: Latest Macbook Pro [Re: dkmarsh]
MG2009 Offline


Registered: 08/05/09
Thanks, Folks.

" . . . (It's probably also worth noting that Yosemite is optimized for large amounts of RAM!)"



16 RAM is the maximum available for the 15-inch MBPro. Is this considered a "large amount" or will restricting the machine to 16 RAM (since it is glued in) be limiting within a couple of years?
_________________________
Many thanks,
MG2009

Top
#33591 - 03/29/15 12:34 PM Re: Latest Macbook Pro [Re: MG2009]
dkmarsh Offline
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09

That's hard to answer, since I'm not privy to memory-management considerations in OS X versions under development.

But as a point of comparison: my Late 2012 Mac mini has 4 GB of RAM, which is clearly adequate for general computer use under Yosemite, but just as clearly insufficient for snappy performance once I've been up and running for awhile. This may be due primarily to Safari, whose memory use still seems inevitably to grow over time.

The main thing to remember is that Yosemite is designed to make as full use as possible of RAM, in oder to minimize virtual memory use, which is much slower. Hence the more RAM, the less writing to and reading from disk, and the snappier the response.

If you shut down on a daily basis and/or quit apps when not actively using them, you won't notice the difference nearly as much as someone who leaves regularly used apps open and keeps the computer on for days at a time.
_________________________

dkmarsh • member, FineTunedMac Co-op Board of Directors

Top
#33599 - 03/29/15 02:34 PM Re: Latest Macbook Pro [Re: dkmarsh]
MG2009 Offline


Registered: 08/05/09
Thanks. That IS useful information.

I use a minimum number of apps at one time and only run my computer when needed (i.e. shutdown after each use).

It would seem I would get a fair amount of mileage from 16 RAM for my purposes . . . unless SAFARI really takes over !!! (hehehe)
_________________________
Many thanks,
MG2009

Top
#33600 - 03/29/15 03:19 PM Re: Latest Macbook Pro [Re: dkmarsh]
joemikeb Offline
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Fort Worth, Texas
I have three Mac Minis, one with 16GB of memory running OS X 10.10.2, another with 16GB of memory running OS X 10.10.3(beta), and one rather elderly mini with only 8GB of memory. When I open Activity Monitor the "memory pressure" is comfortably in the green on all three of them. Additionally 16GB is the maximum RAM supported on any Mac mini, up to and including the latest one and the memory on the newer ones, like most new Macs, is soldered to the logic board and not upgradeable. All that is to say 16 GB will probably be more than adequate for at least the next few years or more.
_________________________
joemikeb • moderator

Top
#33605 - 03/29/15 05:02 PM Re: Latest Macbook Pro [Re: MG2009]
alternaut Offline

Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09
DK is right about Yosemite’s hunger for RAM: sooner rather than later it’ll use most of whatever you put in. I was used to the last PPC iMac (running Leopard) with 2.5GB of RAM, but that was wholly incomparable to the retina iMac on Yosemite I recently graduated to. It seemed the latter is continually running at 75-95% of RAM used, whether that was the initial 8GB or the current 16GB. I’m barely touching my CPU (except when downloads hang), but the RAM seems to max out all the time, regardless of what’s running. No issue with increasing the number of apps up, though; as joemikeb noted, the memory pressure tends to be low. Bottom line: I too recommend maxing out on RAM when you can, and in your case that’ll be from the get-go.
_________________________
alternaut moderator

Top
#33610 - 03/29/15 09:20 PM Re: Latest Macbook Pro [Re: alternaut]
MG2009 Offline


Registered: 08/05/09
The 15" model is available only with 16 RAM - no more, no less. (The 13" model has 8 GB or 16 GB RAM options at the time of purchase.)

Top
#33616 - 03/30/15 08:22 AM Re: Latest Macbook Pro [Re: alternaut]
joemikeb Offline
Moderator

Registered: 08/04/09
Loc: Fort Worth, Texas
I have always recommended maxing out the RAM and although Mavericks and Yosemite have a very different memory management scheme, I see no reason to change that recommendation. The memory management scheme used in OS X changed radically with the advent of memory compression in Mavericks. Regardless of how much RAM you have, the memory manager is now designed to keep RAM maxed out or nearly so. As DK said, the whole idea is to minimize any necessity of pageouts to or pageins from the swapfile(s) on the HD or SSD. (Technically some of the swapfile space is not on the HD or SSD but in compressed memory in RAM shocked )

SIDE NOTE; I used to have a web page pictorially describing the relationship between virtual memory, RAM, and swapfiles and how to interpret the information displayed in Activity Monitor that according to the number of hits it got was pretty widely used. Unfortunately it was rendered hopelessly outdated and in some aspects incorrect with the release of Mavericks. One of these days I am going to redo that page adding in all the changes that memory compression have brought about, but I will probably have to invest in some animation software to make it easily understood.
_________________________
joemikeb • moderator

Top

Moderator:  alternaut, dianne, MacManiac