I can't tell you for sure on the price difference.... Maybe not needing the extra stuff like the SSD housing and whatnot matters? Or maybe it's just arbitrary pricing? Or maybe a way to encourage people to buy retina machines? Who knows, outside Apple.
> I mean that they look crappy because they don't have
> Retina support.
Well, more precisely they look just like they do a non-retina mbp. Which is worse than Safari or Terminal on the retina mbp, of course, but not any worse than you'd deal with if you got the non-retina machine. Or am I missing something?
Yes, they would look the same as on a non-retina MBP. The point is that when placed right next to the Retina apps, the difference would be jarring/distracting.
That's possible. Assuming you use any retina apps, of course. I'm looking at the apps I'm using right now, and none would actually be making full use of the retina display on a retina mbp.
I guess if/when I ran iPhoto it might look jarring. If I weren't running it full-screen on its own desktop, of course.
All of which is to say that it really depends on individual usage patterns.
And when I say unsupported, I mean that they look crappy because they don't have Retina support.