Which one of these is really a better deal? The non-retina has a 750GB hard drive but its not SSD like the retina one but that only has 256GB. Also I would need to get an $80 optical drive and a $30 Ethernet thunderbolt converter too for the retina and not for the non-retina because it has those things. I really love the retina display vs regular, but the non retina is seemingly better in some ways. I am getting this for college so I need to know which one to get. Also, doesn't the retina display make it lag more?
I can think of few circumstances where the Retina model would be worth the money - and of course, it will only be useful for apps that are optimized for it, which are few and far between at the moment. To add insult to injury, if you don't want to get yourself a heck of a pair of reading glasses, you'll need to blow up the non-Retina apps, which will mean that they'll appear fuzzy. Then, considering that it can't really be upgraded (aside from the SSD... potentially) and that the battery is apparently epoxied to the case, it's essentially designed to be disposable.
The standard MacBook Pro is slightly thicker and heavier. It can be easily upgraded in terms of memory and hard disk/SSD. It will accommodate standard-sized drives, is very serviceable just by removing the bottom panel, and will likely prove to be more durable as the design wasn't compromised to put thinness above all other priorities.
Simply put, aside from the aesthetic qualities, I can see no good reason to buy a Retina MacBook Pro.
