Originally Posted by duffhonduras
Is there a big difference between the 1900x1200 17 inch and the 1680x1050 15 inch?
Define different? I looked at the 17" and put it in a resolution comparable to the 1680x1050 15" (the 17" doesn't support that exact resolution, but I was able to find something close) and compared it to its native 19x12 resolution and did find it appealing. But then I picked up and held the 17" and found that extra pound surprisingly significant in terms of portability.
I do have some regrets: I wish I had the ExpressCard slot (I'm one of those 10% who used it on my old 15") and I do know there will come a time when I'll wish I had that third USB port. But I'm hoping the need for ExpressCard will be mitigated by the Thunderbolt port (hopefully someone will come out with a eSATA adapter until native drives are readily available), and I can always carry a hub if I need the extra USB...
As for the extra real estate, I've begun using Spaces (along with a great utility called Hyperspaces that came in a bundle I bought last year but never until now used) and I'm finding that goes a long way and gives me a handy little way to logically partition my tasks into virtual screens.