or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple predicted to discontinue 17-inch MacBook Pro
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple predicted to discontinue 17-inch MacBook Pro - Page 5

post #161 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post
What I'm taking issue with is that some people are claiming they "can't work" on a 15" machine and they "need" a 17". 

 

Do you make the same statement about the Mac Pro?

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #162 of 196

Dumbest thing I've ever read. I prefer 17" by far. End of story.

post #163 of 196
You need to be a little more open minded.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DESuserIGN View Post


Since your point is so incredibly cogent and you are so correct, surely you will admit that you don't **need** any MBP at all, and that you only want one. Surely you will admit you could get along just as well with an 8 GB iPod touch instead?

 

I'm sure that was clever in your mind, but now that it's written down, it really just makes you look silly, hmmm?  

It is better to be silly than to be completely assinine. Your position on screen size seems to completely dismiss anything but your own experience as valid.
Quote:

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fake_William_Shatner View Post

 

 

Then you've got an "issue" with anyone who does 3D, Video, and high end graphics. I'm even sure spreadsheet users like larger screens. And then there are people who LIKE larger screens because they have large eyes I suppose.

 

I have to wonder at people who project only their own sense of what is important on the world without considering the "needs" of others. YES, we can all "get by" with a 15" -- but there are people on the fence and if they can't get a larger monitor, they might get a PC. Heck, I might be curious about creating a Hackintosh laptop if there is no 17".

 

 

I'm not projecting any sense of what it is important.  I'm sure having a 17" is highly preferable to some people.  What I'm taking issue with is that some people are claiming they "can't work" on a 15" machine and they "need" a 17".

I'm an owner of a 15" machine and I can see where that would be an issue. I get around that by use of a large screen connected to my MBP on the desktop. It can be a productivity negative at times working with a small screen, so yeah I can see people needing one.

Remember these are people actually "working" with their laptops, that is putting bread and butter on the table.
Quote:
  We heard the same comments when they redesigned the MBP in 2009.  OMG! They took away ports!  How will I function!  Screw Apple!  
So? For some the lost of ports on the 15" MBP pushed them to the 17" MBP. At the time Thunderbolt didn't exist thus there was no way to connect up in a productive way. Your problem is that you only see life through rose colored glasses tuned to your needs. Step into somebody else's shoes for a bit and see how a 17" machine might actually be put to use.

As to the 17" machines fate, well Apple can do anything. They might even say screw it and drop both the 15" and 17" machines and replace them with a 16" machine. Anything is possible but most are unlikely. Some people have expressed the thought that any limited roll out may be due to the lack of hardware, I suspect there is a real possibility here that that is an issue. All we really can do is wait and see.
post #164 of 196

I want a 20" MacBook Pro…!!! ;^p

Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
post #165 of 196

The 17" is the ONLY MBP with enough resolution - never mind pixel density (Retina). WSXGA+ (1680x1050) is the highest you can get on the 15", but it necessitates that you buy the most expensive 15" and then upgrade to the high resolution display. In other words, you might as well get a 17" UXGA (1920x1200) for LESS than the SXGA+ because all 17" models come with the high resolution display out of the box and the weight difference is only 1lb.

 

Apple has always been a slickster with its pricing on its products. The same is true for the iMac. You can't get the lower-priced 27" and upgrade the CPU to an i7. You have to buy the highest model, which is still only an i5 and then you need to cough up yet another couple of hundred bucks for a true unencumbered i7. Intel uses mostly the same strategy, just not as blatantly obvious.

 

Having said that, I enjoy my 6-month "old" 17" MBP, but I will upgrade to the new 15" Pro or Air or whatever, if the following conditions are met: Any Air must be quad-core and any Pro that's not 17" must have Retina-like pixel density and IPS technology or the option to add one! If I am to upgrade to an Ivy Bridge MBP let's say, I'll be going from the most tricked-out, one step from the Extreme Edition to the ENTRY level and have basically the SAME specs, except Intel's HD 4000 graphics, PCIe 3.0 and maybe USB 3.0. Checl it out for yourself: My current "highest-end Sandy Bridge CPU": Core i7-2860QM 2.5GHz/3.6GHz max. Turbo; "Entry-level" Ivy Bridge Core i7-3720QM 2.6GHz/3.6GHz max. Turbo (same Turbo and only 100MHz difference on base clock frequency). There will be a Core i7-3860QM w/ 2.9GHz and 3.9GHz max. Turbo this Q4 2012. It'll take a little while to prove it.

(Mid-2012) 15.4" MacBook Pro w/ IPS Retina Display | Quad Core i7-3720QM 2.6GHz / 3.6GHz Max. Turbo | 16GB DDR3-1600MHz RAM | 256GB Samsung 830 SSD-based NAND Flash ETA 9/5

Reply

(Mid-2012) 15.4" MacBook Pro w/ IPS Retina Display | Quad Core i7-3720QM 2.6GHz / 3.6GHz Max. Turbo | 16GB DDR3-1600MHz RAM | 256GB Samsung 830 SSD-based NAND Flash ETA 9/5

Reply
post #166 of 196

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

You need to be a little more open minded.
So? For some the lost of ports on the 15" MBP pushed them to the 17" MBP. At the time Thunderbolt didn't exist thus there was no way to connect up in a productive way. Your problem is that you only see life through rose colored glasses tuned to your needs. Step into somebody else's shoes for a bit and see how a 17" machine might actually be put to use.
As to the 17" machines fate, well Apple can do anything. They might even say screw it and drop both the 15" and 17" machines and replace them with a 16" machine. Anything is possible but most are unlikely. Some people have expressed the thought that any limited roll out may be due to the lack of hardware, I suspect there is a real possibility here that that is an issue. All we really can do is wait and see.

 

Yep they left the express slot on it. Prior to thunderbolt it was the fastest port, and even now we're still seriously lacking on thunderbolt peripherals. It was also cheap. You could get a really good eSATA card for $100 or so with much better performance than firewire 800. People on here accept the blogger/rumor site narratives far too often, and there's some seriously weird behavior at times. People actually say they wish X product was cancelled because they feel it's holding back their stock value or something of that sort with the justification that it's starving resources needed for another product. Prior to this article, the typical speculation was that they'd remove the 13" macbook pro in favor of pushing the air. There was one that they'd switch to NVidia, then another that they were considering this but backed off. The mac pro cancellation rumors have been going on for a while. If you recall there was one with an unnamed source saying Apple was questioning its future. I don't doubt internal discussion. I just doubt that the rumors came from any kind of credible source. The other thing that amuses me is the idea that one thing or another is holding Apple back from greater success. It's weird when the discussion trends away from what people would like Apple to make toward what they wish would be dropped. If they're using the comparison of one thing dwarfing another, that pretty much applies to the entire Mac line relative to the iphone and ipad, and yet a company like Apple would prefer to sell more than one device per consumer whenever possible. Beside that it's more likely that production would be held up by component supplies rather than at Foxconn's level. 

post #167 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post
…even now we're still seriously lacking on thunderbolt peripherals.


And that just ticks me off like you wouldn't believe. TAKE A FRICKING HIT on the price of the devices you sell now and get the dang port adopted. It'll be around for another decade or TWO, so you have all the time in the world to make that money back.

 

I realize it's not that simple. lol.gif

 

And EVERY FREAKING TIME I go to edit my posts, I hit the Quote button. It's just subconsciously wired that the Edit button is supposed to be over there… 

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #168 of 196

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Do you make the same statement about the Mac Pro?

 

Not a valid comparison.  The Mac Pro is available with much greater power and expandability than, say, the iMac.  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajan Long View Post

Dumbest thing I've ever read. I prefer 17" by far. End of story.

 

Fine...you prefer.  Several people do, apparently.  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

You need to be a little more open minded.
So? For some the lost of ports on the 15" MBP pushed them to the 17" MBP. At the time Thunderbolt didn't exist thus there was no way to connect up in a productive way. Your problem is that you only see life through rose colored glasses tuned to your needs. Step into somebody else's shoes for a bit and see how a 17" machine might actually be put to use.
As to the 17" machines fate, well Apple can do anything. They might even say screw it and drop both the 15" and 17" machines and replace them with a 16" machine. Anything is possible but most are unlikely. Some people have expressed the thought that any limited roll out may be due to the lack of hardware, I suspect there is a real possibility here that that is an issue. All we really can do is wait and see.

 

and

Quote:

It is better to be silly than to be completely assinine. Your position on screen size seems to completely dismiss anything but your own experience as valid.

 

 

You are projecting.  I am fully aware that others use their MBP differently.  But the outrage over ports and screen size is ridiculous.  The 15" works for the vast majority of buyers, which is why Apple went the way it did.  And I've still not read a convincing argument why someone NEEDS a 17" screen.  

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crunch View Post

The 17" is the ONLY MBP with enough resolution - never mind pixel density (Retina). WSXGA+ (1680x1050) is the highest you can get on the 15", but it necessitates that you buy the most expensive 15" and then upgrade to the high resolution display. In other words, you might as well get a 17" UXGA (1920x1200) for LESS than the SXGA+ because all 17" models come with the high resolution display out of the box and the weight difference is only 1lb.

 

Apple has always been a slickster with its pricing on its products. The same is true for the iMac. You can't get the lower-priced 27" and upgrade the CPU to an i7. You have to buy the highest model, which is still only an i5 and then you need to cough up yet another couple of hundred bucks for a true unencumbered i7. Intel uses mostly the same strategy, just not as blatantly obvious.

 

Having said that, I enjoy my 6-month "old" 17" MBP, but I will upgrade to the new 15" Pro or Air or whatever, if the following conditions are met: Any Air must be quad-core and any Pro that's not 17" must have Retina-like pixel density and IPS technology or the option to add one! If I am to upgrade to an Ivy Bridge MBP let's say, I'll be going from the most tricked-out, one step from the Extreme Edition to the ENTRY level and have basically the SAME specs, except Intel's HD 4000 graphics, PCIe 3.0 and maybe USB 3.0. Checl it out for yourself: My current "highest-end Sandy Bridge CPU": Core i7-2860QM 2.5GHz/3.6GHz max. Turbo; "Entry-level" Ivy Bridge Core i7-3720QM 2.6GHz/3.6GHz max. Turbo (same Turbo and only 100MHz difference on base clock frequency). There will be a Core i7-3860QM w/ 2.9GHz and 3.9GHz max. Turbo this Q4 2012. It'll take a little while to prove it.

 

What do you mean by "enough?"  What do you use your machine for?  

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

 

 

Yep they left the express slot on it. Prior to thunderbolt it was the fastest port, and even now we're still seriously lacking on thunderbolt peripherals. It was also cheap. You could get a really good eSATA card for $100 or so with much better performance than firewire 800. People on here accept the blogger/rumor site narratives far too often, and there's some seriously weird behavior at times. People actually say they wish X product was cancelled because they feel it's holding back their stock value or something of that sort with the justification that it's starving resources needed for another product. Prior to this article, the typical speculation was that they'd remove the 13" macbook pro in favor of pushing the air. There was one that they'd switch to NVidia, then another that they were considering this but backed off. The mac pro cancellation rumors have been going on for a while. If you recall there was one with an unnamed source saying Apple was questioning its future. I don't doubt internal discussion. I just doubt that the rumors came from any kind of credible source. The other thing that amuses me is the idea that one thing or another is holding Apple back from greater success. It's weird when the discussion trends away from what people would like Apple to make toward what they wish would be dropped. If they're using the comparison of one thing dwarfing another, that pretty much applies to the entire Mac line relative to the iphone and ipad, and yet a company like Apple would prefer to sell more than one device per consumer whenever possible. Beside that it's more likely that production would be held up by component supplies rather than at Foxconn's level. 

 

Did you use eSATA?  I know some people when bonkers.  Then again, I never met a single person that ever use the slot.  Apparently my experience was similar to Apple's research.  

 

 

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #169 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post
Not a valid comparison.  The Mac Pro is available with much greater power and expandability than, say, the iMac.  


But we're talking about the MacBook Pro… And I don't understand why it's not valid.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #170 of 196

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

 

 

Did you use eSATA?  I know some people when bonkers.  Then again, I never met a single person that ever use the slot.  Apparently my experience was similar to Apple's research.  

 

 

 

Yes. It had a couple other potential uses as well. It is like I said, if you required anything beyond firewire, you migrated to a 17". I just didn't bother updating as I don't use a laptop that much.

post #171 of 196

EOLing the Lapzilla would be a stupid decision.  Some people need a "portable desktop" and the 17" Macbook fits the bill.  So what if Apple doesn't ship as many as other models?  By that reasoning, Apple would soon be down to selling a single model for each type of computer, and after that they would start axing the iMac and Mini because they don't shift as many units as the Macbook, then they would ax the macbook because it doesn't sell as well as the iPhone and iPad, then they would ax the iPod, then the iPad, and finally they would only make an iPhone and sales on that would dwindle since Apple slaughtered it's own user base.  

 

If the 17" MacBook isn't selling as well, maybe that's a sign that the design needs some tweaking for more features or value.  Apple is a successful company, they should be judiciously expanding their options instead of neutering consumer choices.

post #172 of 196

Perfectly said. A company will not remain great if they abandon their most loyal high end users.

post #173 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Junkyard Dawg View Post

 So what if Apple doesn't ship as many as other models?  By that reasoning, Apple would soon be down to selling a single model for each type of computer, and after that they would start axing the iMac and Mini because they don't shift as many units as the Macbook, then they would ax the macbook because it doesn't sell as well as the iPhone and iPad, then they would ax the iPod, then the iPad, and finally they would only make an iPhone and sales on that would dwindle since Apple slaughtered it's own user base.  

 

I do find it weird when the discussion shifts away from what they might make and people suggest what they think or hope will be cancelled while lacking any insider knowledge on the subject.

post #174 of 196

for those saying they need a 17" Because they need to do 3D work.... STFU and don't buy a Portable... buy a mac then.. not a macbook... seriously... if you use a portable to do 3D work.. why not use an more Stable horse?..
portables aint that good... buy a mac an place it on the floor where ever you want the (not portable computer/mac) they pull more.. !

post #175 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleFanBoy713 View Post
for those saying they need a 17" Because they need to do 3D work.... STFU and don't buy a Portable...

 

Why should laptops be any less capable of performing those tasks? Why should people be limited in their choices when it's quite evident such a limitation would be artificial?

 

 buy a mac then.. not a macbook... seriously...

 

A MacBook is a Mac. Seriously.

 

Quote:
 if you use a portable to do 3D work.. why not use an more Stable horse?..

 

I'd love to hear your explanation of this. Do laptops crash more than desktops? Do applications not work on them? Is there anything inherently different about their presentation?

 

Quote:

portables aint that good... buy a mac an place it on the floor where ever you want the (not portable computer/mac) they pull more.

 

I wish I knew what this was saying.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #176 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Junkyard Dawg View Post

EOLing the Lapzilla would be a stupid decision.  Some people need a "portable desktop" and the 17" Macbook fits the bill.  So what if Apple doesn't ship as many as other models?  By that reasoning, Apple would soon be down to selling a single model for each type of computer, and after that they would start axing the iMac and Mini because they don't shift as many units as the Macbook, then they would ax the macbook because it doesn't sell as well as the iPhone and iPad, then they would ax the iPod, then the iPad, and finally they would only make an iPhone and sales on that would dwindle since Apple slaughtered it's own user base.  
Isn't this pretty much what Apple is doing with the iPods, that is slaughtering the user base?

One of the reasons I advocate for the XMac is to expand the user base. This requires a smart selection of models to avoid the product line bloat of the past, but done wisely allows for far more satisfied customers.

So while I think dropping the 17" MBP or for that matter making the MBPs to AIR like is stupid I can see Apple doing just that. Eventually if customers start to fell to hemmed in they will look for solutions outside of Apple.
Quote:

If the 17" MacBook isn't selling as well, maybe that's a sign that the design needs some tweaking for more features or value.  Apple is a successful company, they should be judiciously expanding their options instead of neutering consumer choices.

Personally I have no desire for a 17" laptop but I'm equally distressed about what might happen to the 15" MBP. Frankly if Apple can't manage a decent desktop I may be forced to go the MBP route again. The problem is if that machine is a major regression in capability why would I want such a MBP.

In a nut shell I tend to agree that Apple needs to expand options available to consummers. They need to do that wisely of course but that isn't a big deal. Apple also needs to closely watch the value equation for its machines. There is little reason for the high prices seen on its laptoPs considering the often very modest enclosed hardware.

In any event -yeah axing the 17" without a replacement would be stupid beyond belief. Even Ford realizes the value of the F350 over the mainstream F150.
post #177 of 196
Apple is not in the business of making trucks :-) I just hope they don't consider the 17 a truck.

I was hoping the 17 would hang on a little longer as the last full feature portable. It's really nice for editing video especially when you need 1920.
post #178 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Why should laptops be any less capable of performing those tasks? Why should people be limited in their choices when it's quite evident such a limitation would be artificial?

 

 

 

Some 3D work need quadros.  You aren't getting one of those in an iMac either but even when considering the gaming GPUs the iMac is sporting the Radeon HD 6970M with 2GB DDR5 while the 17" MBP is running a Radeon HD 6770M with 1GB DDR5.

 

Laptops are less capable than desktops.  Just like a Mac Pro is less mobile.  The limitation isn't artificial so much as driven by design goals.

 

 

Quote:

I'd love to hear your explanation of this. Do laptops crash more than desktops? Do applications not work on them? Is there anything inherently different about their presentation?

 

 

Yes actually.  At least compared to Mac Pros.  The quadros are designed for extended render times vs gaming times with better heat management which leads to longer life and fewer crashes.  I don't think there's much controversy in claiming a Mac Pro more stable than either the MBP or the iMac.  At least when you are getting kernel panics from crappy nVidia drivers.

 

Also the MBP has only two slots for RAM while the iMac 4.  IMHO the real limitation for the 17" to be a real desktop replacement is RAM.  32GB on the iMac > 16GB on the MBP.

 

A revamped 17" MBP should IMHO come with the option for the best mobile GPU and the same number of ram slots as the top iMac.  Battery life is secondary IMHO for the top end fully spec'd 17".  You don't need or want desktop parts but for the 17" MBP minimizing the gap as much as possible is probably the way to go even at the expense of price and internal battery run time (that's what external batteries are for).

 

Quote:
I wish I knew what this was saying.

 

It means if I was doing a lot of Maya work I'd have a Mac Pro today vs a 15" MBP.  Since I'm doing nothing more taxing than JOGL I'm good with the MBP.

post #179 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajan Long View Post

Perfectly said. A company will not remain great if they abandon their most loyal high end users.

What do you mean? How would Apple cease being "great" (if you accept they currently are) if they stopped shipping a 17" laptop?
post #180 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by jouster View Post


What do you mean? How would Apple cease being "great" (if you accept they currently are) if they stopped shipping a 17" laptop?

Profitability and stock price ≠ greatness

post #181 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conrail View Post

Profitability and stock price ≠ greatness

But a 17" laptop does?
post #182 of 196

happy.gif

 

According to a new report by research analyst Ming-Chi Kuo, Apple is expected to discontinue and replace its current 17-inch MacBook Pro with a newer more compact model. The cause of the predicted discontinuation stems from low sales for the first quarter of 2012, where the company sold roughly 50,000 MacBook Pro 17-inch variants out of a total of 3.1 million notebooks sold. Kuo predicts the company's solution will be to replace the 17-inch MacBook Pro with a new model in the third quarter of this year.

“We also predict Apple will roll out a fully new MacBook model in early 3Q12, boasting strong performance and easy carryability by combining the advantages of MacBook Air and MacBook Pro,” said research analyst Ming-Chi Kuo. “While adding new products, Apple is likely to stop making the 17-inch MacBook Pro this year due to falling shipments, in order to maintain a lean product line strategy.”

This could be unfortunate news for 17-inch MacBook Pro lovers, who may lose some screen real estate from the model re-design.
 

post #183 of 196

Link to the actual story? A more compact 17"? Or the 15" we already know about?

post #184 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post
Link to the actual story? A more compact 17"? Or the 15" we already know about?

 

It's from April.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #185 of 196

The guy is full of crap. mac store managers continuously report high sales of 17" model. It's not going anywhere.

post #186 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajan Long View Post
mac store managers continuously report high sales of 17" model.


Do you have a source for that?

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #187 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

It's from April.

 

I should have known better. It's basically a spam post from a bot probably.

post #188 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post
I should have known better. It's basically a spam post from a bot probably.


That's what I thought, too, but there's not even a link out anywhere.

 

Apparently the spambots are so stupid they don't even do their jobs anymore. lol.gif

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #189 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajan Long View Post

The guy is full of crap. mac store managers continuously report high sales of 17" model. It's not going anywhere.

Which managers and what store? Frankly if the 17" MBP was selling well we would see a lot more of them around. Except for niche uses that isn't the case. For a laptop even the 15" MBP is a bit big to carry around.
post #190 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


Which managers and what store? Frankly if the 17" MBP was selling well we would see a lot more of them around. Except for niche uses that isn't the case. For a laptop even the 15" MBP is a bit big to carry around.

I still see plenty of them around. The 15" doesn't seem that bad to me. Most of these devices aren't transported bare. I'd end up damaging one that way. Anyway if the mac pro was priced out of my range, like if it started where the 12 core is today (and if I was going to spend that much, I'd go Windows for some configuration options that aren't available under OSX), and I was looking at the imac or the macbook pro, I'd go macbook pro. The reason would be to drop to one device. In many cases that's how these models are used in spite of some of the ergonomic flaws of laptops and computers in general (I can illustrate freehand much easier on paper than with a wacom tablet, it's still doable, but it takes a lot of practice to get a steady stroke that way). 

post #191 of 196

The 17" was attractive to me because of the ExpressCard slot, but thanks to Thunderbolt, that is now a moot point.

 

The biggest deal to me, however, is still the resolution, i.e. what you can fit on the desktop. I wouldn't mind a 15" WUXGA (1920x1200) MacBook Pro, but unfortunately, Apple not only makes it super inconvenient and expensive to get the native resolution of what the 13" MacBook Air's resolution, i.e. 1400x900, which is a joke, but the highest you can buy your way into is SXGA+ (1680x1050), which just barely cuts it for me. I have a ThinkPad with a 15" display (4:3 aspect ratio) and UXGA (1600x1200) and I LOVED it, so for me, text certainly never was too small at that high a resolution.

 

Having said all of that, I'm still super excited about the prospect of a 15" MBP w/ Retina display, but I wonder if there will be an option to take the higher 1680x1050 resolution to Retina as well instead of just the standard res (1440x900 --> 2880x1800)...If I can get 3360x2100 on a 15" Retina, I'm sold and I'll "deal" with the smaller real estate of the screen, seeing that it would be jaw-droppingly gorgeous and an event every day for a year for me. lol...

(Mid-2012) 15.4" MacBook Pro w/ IPS Retina Display | Quad Core i7-3720QM 2.6GHz / 3.6GHz Max. Turbo | 16GB DDR3-1600MHz RAM | 256GB Samsung 830 SSD-based NAND Flash ETA 9/5

Reply

(Mid-2012) 15.4" MacBook Pro w/ IPS Retina Display | Quad Core i7-3720QM 2.6GHz / 3.6GHz Max. Turbo | 16GB DDR3-1600MHz RAM | 256GB Samsung 830 SSD-based NAND Flash ETA 9/5

Reply
post #192 of 196

While I am 100% for the removal of the optical drive, I am 100% not for the removal of the 17". I still think there is a place for it although perhaps make it online only much like the Mac Pro idea I have where it's all BTO.

 

If Apple does it remove it, oh well. Perhaps it will be brought back later.

post #193 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crunch View Post

The 17" was attractive to me because of the ExpressCard slot, but thanks to Thunderbolt, that is now a moot point.

 

The biggest deal to me, however, is still the resolution, i.e. what you can fit on the desktop. I wouldn't mind a 15" WUXGA (1920x1200) MacBook Pro, but unfortunately, Apple not only makes it super inconvenient and expensive to get the native resolution of what the 13" MacBook Air's resolution, i.e. 1400x900, which is a joke, but the highest you can buy your way into is SXGA+ (1680x1050), which just barely cuts it for me. I have a ThinkPad with a 15" display (4:3 aspect ratio) and UXGA (1600x1200) and I LOVED it, so for me, text certainly never was too small at that high a resolution.

 

Having said all of that, I'm still super excited about the prospect of a 15" MBP w/ Retina display, but I wonder if there will be an option to take the higher 1680x1050 resolution to Retina as well instead of just the standard res (1440x900 --> 2880x1800)...If I can get 3360x2100 on a 15" Retina, I'm sold and I'll "deal" with the smaller real estate of the screen, seeing that it would be jaw-droppingly gorgeous and an event every day for a year for me. lol...

Thunderbolt doesn't yet have the same range of stuff that can be obtained for the express slot, and you've got a single port there without many peripherals actually proven in a daisy chain configuration. The use of the word retina is really overdone all over these forums, but I wish we'd see something similar to the HP elitebook dreamcolor option that they have on their laptops. I'm not a big fan of HP for many reasons, but they do have nice IPS display options. They cost more, but they are extremely nice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post

While I am 100% for the removal of the optical drive, I am 100% not for the removal of the 17". I still think there is a place for it although perhaps make it online only much like the Mac Pro idea I have where it's all BTO.

 

If Apple does it remove it, oh well. Perhaps it will be brought back later.


I think the author just wanted page hits. Remember that it was a spec article based on estimated sales figures. The 17" most likely carries an excellent margin, so it's unlikely that they have to sell as many for it to remain profitable. Both the mac pro and macbook pro are sold in both the Apple Stores near me, and I think a couple of the third party retailers keep them. If sales slowed on the current model this may no longer be the case at the third party shops. In terms of retail stores in larger markets, it depends if they want the space for other stuff. They keep it pretty well spaced out so that you can mess with the gadgets without being elbow to elbow with others.


Edited by hmm - 5/23/12 at 4:03pm
post #194 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

Thunderbolt doesn't yet have the same range of stuff that can be obtained for the express slot, and you've got a single port there without many peripherals actually proven in a daisy chain configuration. The use of the word retina is really overdone all over these forums, but I wish we'd see something similar to the HP elitebook dreamcolor option that they have on their laptops. I'm not a big fan of HP for many reasons, but they do have nice IPS display options. They cost more, but they are extremely nice.

 

 

 

Agreed. On the HP EliteBook series with the 10-bit IPS panels that is. They are awesome but I, too, have similar reservations about getting an HP laptop. For 11 years, I was in love with the IBM/Lenovo ThinkPad's for their fantastic IPS "Flexview" displays until they discontinued them altogether, except for the X (ultra portable) series. I've had nothing but Macs since going on 2 years ago and I have strong reservations about getting any Windows-based computers anymore, so I'm kind of stuck with the Apple brand. Happily so I might add. ;-)
 
As far as Thunderbolt goes, I am simply blown away not just by the speed of external storage drives, but perhaps more so by how incredibly consistent and silky smooth the experience of daisy-chaining PCIe and DisplayPort devices is. If you have any of the external drive solutions that Apple sells, you're limited to FireWire 800, even though they usually all have a much faster eSATA port, so something like the eSATA hub from LaCie opens up eSATA to all Thunderbolt Macs, which carries a tremendous speed increase with it. You can even benefit from that particular solution on a 17" MBP, the only MBP since 2009 to retain the ExpressCard/34 slot, as it is limited to 2.5Gbps. If you need an ExpressCard slot for something other than speedy data management, there is a company called Sonnet that recently released the 2nd generation of their popular Thunderbolt-to-ExpressCard/34 adapter, which gives you 5Gbps of bandwidth. And now that Thunderbolt is being implemented on PC's, we can expect an abundance of gadgetry that takes advantage of Thunderbolt tech and prices will come down sooner or later as well.

(Mid-2012) 15.4" MacBook Pro w/ IPS Retina Display | Quad Core i7-3720QM 2.6GHz / 3.6GHz Max. Turbo | 16GB DDR3-1600MHz RAM | 256GB Samsung 830 SSD-based NAND Flash ETA 9/5

Reply

(Mid-2012) 15.4" MacBook Pro w/ IPS Retina Display | Quad Core i7-3720QM 2.6GHz / 3.6GHz Max. Turbo | 16GB DDR3-1600MHz RAM | 256GB Samsung 830 SSD-based NAND Flash ETA 9/5

Reply
post #195 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I've still not read a convincing argument why someone NEEDS a 17" screen.

 

Who needs a laptop when for the vast majority an iPad would do most of the things the majority of users need? Who needs a Mac at all when a Dell would do the job for the majority for less money?

 

Pretty much no one but Pro users needs half the stuff they have on their computers. As far as Pro or Prosumer users go they are likely to find the extra screen real-estate very valuable for the applications they use, for others it may just be a more pleasurable experience.

post #196 of 196

So, and while the WWDC dust is still settling, it seems that the 17-inch MBP was forgotten in the ongoing discussions.

 

It is nowhere to be seen anymore in the updated online store. So Apple was right, very few cared about it.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple predicted to discontinue 17-inch MacBook Pro