Apple predicted to discontinue 17-inch MacBook Pro - Page 3

 

 

You called that a rumor about 17" MBPs would be reported in AI?

You're simply amazing!

 

 

In all seriousness though, I really doubt Apple would do this. I love m7 17" and the expansive screen is vital for so many power users.

The 17" is not so much a "laptop" as a "portable and very compact desktop/laptop workstation." You don't pop it open on the airplane (use your iPad or iPhone.) Essentially, when you get to your destination, you open up your high powered work space.

I always find statements like this (particularly considering the current MBP's, including the 17" model are FAR lighter and sleeker than ANY of their PC counterparts) to be illogical, if not amusing. "Too bulky to be portable in today's world"... are you serious? Did the world suddenly shrink to the size of a broom closet? Have we suddenly been forced to operate within zones that are only as large as our own bodies? No? Good, just checking. So, let's just get to the heart of the matter: when it comes to portability, it really comes down to personal choice. Just because your individual preference is to have something smaller does not mean that others desire or need the same. As others have posted in this thread, while "smaller, lighter, faster" are the en vogue buzzwords for electronic devices, that is not always the way to go, depending on your needs. For a lot of on-the-go activities - checking e-mail, paying a bill, a quick view of a photo, etc. - yes, having an iPhone (or any other smartphone) or an iPad is fine. But, when it's time to get down to work and, I'm going to be spending a lot of time away from my dedicated work space, staring at a screen the size of wallet or a notepad causes a tremendous amount of strain on the eyes and is COMPLETELY impractical, and that's before you get to the issue of overall processing and system capabilities. So, yes, there is still a market for the 17" MBP, regardless of "general" consumer tastes and sales figures, and it has little to do with the "issue" of portability.

You couldn't be more wrong. I am waiting for the day to switch to mac and just install windows along side it. My brother plans to do the same I'm sure. I am happy with my dell but will say macs are better in a heart beat. Having an iPhone and and iPad, it makes sense that I prefer apple products. Mainly cause they work. However, I do want a 17inch screen, it may not be all the much bigger but it's a selling point for me.

The 13" MBP is their cheapest 13" product ( a size most people consider a minimum for a laptop). If you consider disk size, it es even far cheaper.

You see, the thing is I need to be monitor free. I currently have an old LCD monitor hooked up to my 15.4 inch laptop. However, there are some 4-10 hours a day where I am not at my desk in my room. However , I continue to use my PC outside of my room (iPad has helped cut down on it some). Weight isn't an issue. I already have a book bag with a book or two that'll always weigh more than a laptop.
So I don't want to have to carry around a monitor to have a big screen. Nor do I need a new one.
However, I understand why apple may be cutting it to save money. But I'll be hesitant to go Mac if they cut it.
I always plan to buy laptops every 6-7 years. So putting 2000-3500 down on a laptop isn't all that bad. As long as school and soon work don't require me to upgrade more often then the high price makes sense. And I'll probably never own another desktop again.

 

That makes lots of sense. I guess I'll just buy a 15" MBP and a 24" IPS display to carry with me when I travel. I'm really going to have a lot of success using that configuration in an airline seat. 

 

 

For many people, that's going to be the way to go. When I bought my last MBP (5 years ago), I wanted the top end version for longevity. At the time, software demands were still growing.

Today, though, even my 5 year old computer works just fine for the things I do - which mimic the majority of people traveling with their laptops. Email, web browsing, word processing, spreadsheets, presentations, some light photo editing, etc. Since my Core 2 Duo (2.33 GHz) system with 3 GB of RAM is working just fine and doesn't really slow me down noticeably, even last year's Sandy Bridge model would be more than enough. The savings would probably allow me to upgrade to SSD - which is going to be far more important than the slightly improved CPU. And for people who need heavy GPU performance, they're going to be relying on the discrete GPU, so the better Ivy Bridge performance won't matter much.

You can argue that MacPro's are not needed any more because thunderbolt allows you to attach powerful extension boxes to iMacs and MacMinis.

You can also argue that even small MacBook Pros are capable of connecting to powerful extension boxes and big thunderbolt displays.

BUT: a lot of filmmakers, photographers are taking their MacBook Pros with them into the field. A 17" MBP is a powerful desktop replacement when your'e out there somewhere on location. It's got a beautiful large screen for editing, motions graphis and photography work. A 17" MBP fits in a bag easily. A 17" MBP can travel with you in a backpack. It's the ultimate tool for professional mobility.

 

When you have to bring an extra display to do your work, the entire mobile scenario doesn't work any more - not for professional users.

Ironically, when you look at Apple's own website for Final Cut Pro X - it's a 17" MPB they're showing: http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/

 

Apple - please don't kill your professional market. Editors in particular need the extra screen real estate a 17" MBP offers when editing on the road!!!!!!!!

 

 

1920 x 1200 is nice to have when you're trying to do development on the road.  I assume the same for heavy duty photoshop users as well.  I have the hi-res 15" MBP and it's not quite as nice as my old 17" from that perspective.  But it sure is a lot more portable.  Another downside to the 17" is that it didn't fit into hotel safes.

 

If the 13" MBP had a dedicated GPU I'd have gone for that instead of the 15" MBP.   Dropping the DVD drive in favor of a GPU and 2 TB ports would make that a much nicer pro machine.  I can live with the smaller monitor and if I can't I can lug along that monitor2go for long trips.  

 

Heck, for long trips I'd hit the local best buy or other big electronics store and get the LG 23" IPS235V IPS monitor for $199 and expense it.  Or have one FedEx'd to the hotel from the office the next trip.  1920x1080 is good enough for even a month long gig.

 

Now with Thunderbolt it's a lot more viable to drop the 17" IMHO for expansion.  I only hauled along a eSATA RAID once with my 17" MBP but it was required for that job.  The expresscard slot was a must to do that.  Today, not so much.  Folks that really really need one today can grab something like this:

 

http://www.sonnettech.com/product/echoexpresscard34thunderbolt.html

 

 

I can tell you that the 17", outside of business class, was annoying.  The 15" is much better.  YMMV.

I love the 17" MBP, but I can also see using a 15" MBP as long as it now has a Thunderbolt port.  The 17" has a slot for an Express 34 card, which the smaller models do not. I need that Express card for my SATA drives.  However, Thunderbolt is faster than SATA and that is included in the 15"  Macs.  That 15" MBP hooked up to a 27" LCD Apple display would be a nice combo for video editing.

Thunderbolt adaptation to currently common ports is sloooowwwly getting there. 

But, I would say, not there yet.

I will bet I am not in the minority of people who opted for the 17 inch MacBook Pro for the expansion port. 

Discontinuing that option in the 15 was certainly disappointing to me. 

The screen on the 17 is pretty awesome, but I have definitely left my laptop home to avoid lugging it around. 

I look forward to Thunderbolt becoming a real option, if it ever does. 

Cost held FireWire adoption back over the inferior USB, and the same may happen with Thunderbolt.

$50 cables and $200+ adapters will not get us there.

For me, the Thunderbolt port is just a Display Port for my 23-inch Cinema Display.

 

 

 

I think he's a financial analyst with an IT specialty who is based in Taipei, Taiwan and called the discontinuation of the polycarb MB.

Which is to say: his expertise is self proclaimed and imaginary (financial analyst), he probably knows little about Apple computers anyway (Financial analyst AND an IT specialty,) he's far removed from any reliable source of information about Apple product strategy (he's not Tim Cook,) and one of his predictions panned out (polycarb MB.)

 

I find it pointless owning a laptop if you won't take it anywhere. The external display solution can work well, but it will not help you on the road or away from your desk. I really have no idea how many users buy 17" laptops these days, but I doubt that was ever their top seller. There is one thing i'd like to mention, $300 IPS displays are not necessarily the best available, and IPS does not automatically mean perfect color, especially when coupled with the use of led backlighting. In fact the cheapest thing I'd look at if I wanted a close color reference would be something like a PA241w and those are are around $1200 with hood + colorimeter+software. TN isn't perfect, but it's improved quite a lot. The problem remains that led has too many profiling issues regardless of panel type, and that is your real problem. 

 

He may get paid for his opinions, but that doesn't make them any better. Most of these articles contain very little supporting information. I knew one on the future of the 17" would come up. I knew the one about a thinner 15" "effectively killing the pro" would come up as everyone remembered the Air cited as "the future". Sometimes it seems like these require something to comment on, so they make up speculations whether they believe them or not. 

 

For anything visual a laptop screen always feels small once you subtract the space required for ui elements. Thunderbolt is still not really a perfect solution. I wish they hadn't coupled it to the display output. If I recall correctly, the TB chip used in the macbook pros is the same one the 27" imac uses with two ports assigned. The Air uses a lighter chip.

I read elsewhere that Kuo estimates that Apple sold 1.5 million 13" MB Pros, 500k 15" MB Pros, and only 50k 17" MB Pros in Q1 2012.  Out of 3.1 million MacBooks of all types, including 1.1 million MB Airs evenly split between the 11" and 13" models.  Interesting numbers, and rather disappointing for fans of the 17" MB Pro (if Kuo's numbers are in the ballpark.)

 

 

I would expect to see a lot more apps using the iPad as a secondary display/input device.  When that happens the 15" might work out pretty well for your workflow.  

 

Here's one guy using his ipad with FCPX: http://vimeo.com/25682920

 

Viable only for events right now but I can see the potential.

 

And of course there's this:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Qa_Er5ae33w

 

But if you need the 17" you need the 17".  I'd still lug along the iPad though.

 

I can see where some would need/want a 17" portable workstation and for them I hope apple not only keeps it around but gives it a thinner lighter design. Although for me, I had a 17" laptop at one time and kept it only about a year and went back to a 15" because it was just too much to haul around for my needs. Since then my idea of a "portable" computer/device for my needs changed drastically after buying my iPad2. I do all my serious work in my office where I would much rather have a large monitor and more capable machine to work with rather than trying to use one machine for both office and travel which, while the 17" works well for this (aside from lugging it around) for travel; it was quite limited compared to a desktop machine when I get back to the office. I learned this lesson after trying to use the 17" for both for a while. Oh the times they are a changin.... for me anyway :-) 

 

Can't wait to see what Apple is going to come out with in the next few _?___ so I can get my new Mac! I am the type of person that; when I decide to do something I just do it, and because of that I had almost give in to my impulses and thought about going ahead and buying what is out now. But my better sense has gotten hold of me now and it's just too close to some kind of announcement to not wait. It'll probably be the new iMac unless.... there happens to be a totally awesome redesigned Mac Pro, well I just couldn't resist that :-)

 

 

I guess you never read any of the Mac Pro or FCP threads.  This attitude is pretty common around here.

 

So where're these threads written about consumers that HOPE the Mac Pro is discontinued? I seem to have missed them. And also missed why consumers should be listened to about that.

 

 

Using $1199 for the 13" MBP, $1799 for the 15" MBP and $2499 for the 17" MBP = $1.8B for the 13", $900M for the 15" and $125M for the 17".

 

That's revenue of course.  I'm going to guess that the margins on the 15" and 17" are better than the 13".  If not, I'd be mildly surprised.  

 

Still, if they only sell 200K 17" MBP in a year that's half a billion in revenue and overall higher ASPs.  I'm figuring anyone that doesn't need the 17" display is already getting the top end 15" MBP.

 

 

 

Have you considered that maybe those with higher end machines tend to know how to use/repair them without your amazing assistance? 

 

 

 

 

Usage depends upon what your job actually is.   If all you do with a computer is check email, surf the web, write small Word documents and simple spreadsheets, than a 13" might be good enough and a 15" is more than good enough.   In fact, for those people, a Pad might be good enough, especially if you get the external keyboard.     What I think we're starting to see when people talk about the post-PC era, is really a split between people who consume content and those who create (serious) content.    For many people, a full-fledged computer is overboard, because they don't actually do much with it.

 

But if you do the kind of work where you have many apps open at the same time, do serious Photoshop or Illustrator work (or their equivalents), writing code where the code is in one window and the page results are in another and especially if doing things like video editing, you need the larger screen.    If you want to argue that you can use a small laptop with an external display, fine, but that kind of kills part of the idea of a laptop.

 

I don't know why everyone thinks this needs to be an either/or situation.  Apple needs to support all kinds of users and as I've written before, even if you don't sell a lot of units at the top, what you sell as top-of-the-line is what gives the product line its reputation.     And you definitely want to keep your most critical users who want the high-end machines because those tend to be the users with the most influence.     

 

At the office, I actually now work with two large monitors.   It's the only way for me to work efficiently when I'm constantly moving between spreadsheets, a Word document, design tools and an older version of an app for which I'm writing the specs for an update.    

 

Some people might "roll their eyes" when I go to events with my camera case that includes four lenses, but it's what I need to get the job done.    The same is true for the computer. The other issue is that we're constantly increasing "resolution" on ever smaller screen sizes.     This might be fine for a 22-year-old, but for us baby-boomers, our eyes aren't what they used to be and I can't read the equivalent of 4 pt type.    So even though I regularly use my 15" pro, I want to see the 17" pro stay in the lineup.     The only reason I didn't buy the 17" when I last upgraded was because of the cost.   

 

So if someone walks in with a top-of-the-line 17" and all they do is surf the web, post to Facebook, check email and respond with 2-sentences, then I definitely agree that the "eye-roll" is in order.    But if it's someone who does real, complex work with professional-level applications, then the 17" just might be the right tool for the right job.      Today we would consider a 17" external monitor to be too small, so why is it too large for a laptop?

 

 

You hit the important point.  Several people here have declared the 17" MBP to be a valuable machine because it fits their needs the best.  That's largely irrelevant as it's the number sold that really matters.  We could have the same argument for the MacPro but rumors are that it, too, could be cut because not enough are sold now.  That doesn't mean it's not the perfect computer for someone... just not the perfect computer for enough people.

 

 

Actually, I think you misunderstood me.  People who use 15-inchers are rare, but I didn't say anything against them.  The people who buy the 17" are the ones I would say were primarily "show-offs" (again only based on my experience, but .... I have a LOT of experience with these machines). 

I've had 17s since there have been 17s. I carried a 17-inch PowerBook for thousands of miles all over Europe on a one month trip. Worked perfectly.

 

I need the screen real estate, when I am not at home with my external monitor.

 

Period.

 

This wouldn't surprise me at all if this happens.  Obviously some will be upset but in the grand scheme of things if it's not selling well then it's probably in their best interest to cut it.  I would think if they bump up the resolution on the 15" then that would compensate for a good portion of the 17" buyers.  For those that need screen real estate, you can always plug in an external monitor.  Honestly, I've been seeing a lot less of these big laptops in the stores in general so it's not like Apple is the only one seeing a trend towards the smaller laptops.

 

 

Where do you get off making a personal attack against me?  I said that in my (informed) experience that people who use 17" macBooks are often "poseurs" which is not exactly a compliment, but hardly a gigantic insult.  

 

Based on that I'm some kind of narrow-minded idiot?  You realise that you are insulting me here far more than anything I've said to you (or anyone for that matter), right?  You are so quick to go personal.  

 

I've probably worked with more Pros than you'll ever see and while those that need it use the 15", almost none use the 17".  

The numbers are right in the source link.  Less than 2% of sales. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah, well I think we are kind of on the same page anyway.  I've already taken a lot of abuse over the remarks so maybe they should just die after this, but this description above exactly matches almost anyone I've seen with a 17" MacBook Pro for the last three or four years anyway.  

It would be sad to see the 17" go away, as I had needed mine back when the first Intel machines came out in 2006. I used it for CAD when living on an island in the tropics, commuting back and forth to the US. I couldn't have used a desktop machine, and a second monitor wouldn't solve the issue with unreliable local power.

But, when I moved back to the US it didn't take long for the machine to become a pain-- to heavy to lug around everywhere, bad ergonomics, and an aging battery.

So, I replaced it with a 27" iMac for the office and a 13" Air for home and travel. I can't do CAD outside of the office, which is a pain at times. But unless I move back to my little island and live in a small bungalow, I would never buy another 17" laptop unless it was under 6 pounds.

I can see why Apple would discontinue it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 LOL.  You guys are hilarious.  A "necessity?"  You "can't work" on one?  I highly doubt both of these.  I've been using 15" MBs and PBs for more than a decade. I've done everything from video and audio editing to Excel, Word, e-mail, browsing, photo editing, etc.  There is absolutely no reason you can't work on a 15". In fact, right now I'm using a 14" PC laptop without the widescreen ratio of my MBP.  The fact is you simply prefer the larger screen, which is fine.  If they discontinue it, then I guess you'll go buy a PC.  Have fun with that.  :)  

 

 

 

 

Oh boy, we're either trolling or just back to this stupid argument from 2009.  

 

I hope not!

 

 

Well, I apologize for being a bit harsh then. It just felt this way, but definitely Internet Forums allow misunderstandings ^^

 

 

So get a high-res 15" and you'll have the same screen real-estate. I'm assuming Apple is going to put some kind of very high res 15" panel in the new 15" MBP or whatever they call it. Just because its a 17" doesn't mean you have more space to do things. 

Good. I see dozens of people with Macbooks every day, and don't even remember the last time I saw a 17inch in the wild. If that figure of 50,000 is true, it's pretty abysmal, especially for an Apple product. So yes, I believe they should discontinue it. Before some of you start shrikeing predictably about why I would want something discontinued that I don't use and that others might, I'm looking at the bigger picture and can understand that it doesn't make sense for Apple to engineer, support, market, etc a product that is such a small percentage of its sales. Is there a very small niche for whom the 17inch is an ideal machine? Sure. Does that justify the continued existence the product, which takes up valuable real estate in Apple stores and valuable engineering and support resources? No, I don't think it does. Apple got to where it is by trimming the fat and by streamlining its products, and I believe this is a prime example where it makes sense to do so. I think the high resolution BTO for the 15", or an iMac are both viable options for those that want a 17". The market for that machine is simply tiny, and it's not in Apple DNA to support such a device. Not only does it add an extra model thereby adding a bit more confusion for consumers, the high price it commands also feeds the notion of 'overpriced' Apple products. Not to mention the fact that it's always updated later than the other models, because the size requires re-engineering of all the internals. I think Apple would gain more than it would lose by simplifying its line and dropping it.  There's other options that are quite capable of replacing the usage scenario of the 17in, and I very much doubt any real percentage of its users would jump ship to a PC laptop if its discontinued. IMO the ideal scenario is dropping the 13 Pro, and rebranding their entire line as Macbook 11,13, and 15, all in the Air form factor. 3 sizes with varying levels of horsepower would satisfy most everyone's needs. 

 

 

Yep, sure does make you a narrow minded poster because you can't think outside your "experience" where your "real pros" largely use the 13" MBP.  This is an indicator right off the bat that you aren't working with sufficient pros (or at a minimum, variety of pros) to make any assessment that 17" MBP users are "often poseurs".  Which is more of an insult than "narrow minded". 

 

It's bullshit that "almost no one" is buying the 15" and 17" MBP if there are 500K/qtr 15" MBP sales.  And pros aren't getting the larger MBPs only "if they need the screen size" but because they have also often have greater CPU or GPU needs than available on the 13" MBP.  Something that if you're working in some kind of tech support capacity for "real pros" should already know.  

 

You posed as some kind of expert that "works with more Pros than you'll ever see" to give weight to your dubious opinion that "17" is mostly for poseurs" and you got called on it.  The fact is, if you aren't seeing a lot of 15" MBPs then you aren't working with the kind of pros that would need the 17" MBP either so stating what you wrote is both narrow minded and asinine. 

Seems to me that the 'only my use case makes sense for anyone else' attitude is rampant on all sides of this thread.
 

 

 

I've never seen one ever.    All I ever see are 11, 13 and 15 inch MacBooks.

 

So from that I conclude

The article is somewhat cleverly misleading. "Apple predicted to" as oppose to "Some analyst who doesn't know Apple's plan thinks he does..."

I think it's FUD. There is a market for high margin 17" laptops. And Apple rules that roost. Whatever the analysts say.

Why is MBP 17" not a big seller? Not because consumers would not find it useful or they find the laptop too heavy. But because consumers tend not the buy top-of-the-line. I certainly don't. I've never bought the top-of-the-line car, or refrigerator, or stove, watch, or iPhone, or iPad, or iPodTouch, 

 

One commenter opined those people he's dealt with who had MBP 17" were arrogant or show off's or spendthrifts. I think that attitude is both ridiculous but also part of our consumer culture, that while we gluttonize, we need the psychological palliative that we aren't the gluttons we really are by backing off purchasing top-of-the-line as though to show, to ourselves and others, that we have some will-power. No gilded roach clips for us!

 

I think it takes a lot of guts to purchase top-of-the-line with all the psychological burdens that it causes -- and most people don't have the backbone. That said, an MBP 17" is a necessity for me, and I don't care what everyone else thinks. 

The current 17" is 1920 by 1200. They're moving everything to Retina, right?

 

How much would a pixel-doubled 17" portable display cost? Prohibitive, I'd guess. It's almost the same resolution as a 4K TV! 

 

Plus, as other people pointed out, the sales numbers of 17-inchers are just low, low, low.

 

Not for a year or so.

 

How do you know?