It frustrates me more than it should when these high profile articles make mistakes about basic Mac hardware facts. >.<
> Recall that Apple made the discrete GPU-less 13.3” Retina MacBook Pro thinner last year, but not the 15.4” model. These facts would match up nicely with a three-tier laptop segmentation strategy. Eventually, Apple would sell only three Retina MacBooks ranging from thinnest to thickest, stratified by price and screen size: 11.9”, 13.3”, and 15.4”.
The latest 13" rMBP was made thinner than the 13" rMBP before it, but it only _caught up_ to the thinness of the original 15" rMBP. The first 13" rMBP was actually thicker than 15" rMBP (something I found quite odd when it first happened).
(Mid 2012, Early 2013, Late 2013) 15" rMBP - 0.71 in high
(Late 2012, Early 2013) 13" rMBP - 0.75 in high
(Late 2013) 13" rMBP - 0.71 in high
So that entire paragraph is making an argument based on an incorrect statement.
> Recall that Apple made the discrete GPU-less 13.3” Retina MacBook Pro thinner last year, but not the 15.4” model. These facts would match up nicely with a three-tier laptop segmentation strategy. Eventually, Apple would sell only three Retina MacBooks ranging from thinnest to thickest, stratified by price and screen size: 11.9”, 13.3”, and 15.4”.
The latest 13" rMBP was made thinner than the 13" rMBP before it, but it only _caught up_ to the thinness of the original 15" rMBP. The first 13" rMBP was actually thicker than 15" rMBP (something I found quite odd when it first happened).
(Mid 2012, Early 2013, Late 2013) 15" rMBP - 0.71 in high
(Late 2012, Early 2013) 13" rMBP - 0.75 in high
(Late 2013) 13" rMBP - 0.71 in high
So that entire paragraph is making an argument based on an incorrect statement.