Apple officially axes 17-inch MacBook Pro from notebook lineup - Page 3

This is bone-headed, but predictable. Apple has become the fisher price of computer companies. 

The Xserve fiasco. The FCP fiasco. The Mac "Pro" using a 2-yr old architecture fiasco.  Now this. 

Apple, you need an enterprise division...a 'pro' division if you will. Apple could make major bank by NOT shafting pro users. I mean, NeXT used to do really well in enterprise, and Apple used to own the professional video editing market. Why did you even bother to buy Shake?

One would think Apple is a big enough company to provide an equivalent to the EliteBook 8740w. Oh, HP is so nice they provide an IPS screen as an option. Suck on that, Apple, or should I say, Apple users.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeffreytgilbert 

It has to be supported by the OS. I can't see windows 8 suddenly adopting this out of the blue, but i can see them trying to clone it in windows 9.

The fundamental technologies required to achieve stated goal of a retina display (namely, making a visual interface element take up exactly the same number of square inches on a 300+ dpi monitor as it would on a 96 dpi monitor) are already fully deployed on the Windows side of the rift.  They have been since at least Windows Vista.

However, Microsoft's implementation of resolution independence is not as comprehensive as Apple's, and Apple has patented its implementation.  Many of Microsoft's native display elements (such as True Type fonts, buttons, window decorations, etc) are rendered as vectors rather than raster images and will be displayed with maximum smoothness on super high resolution displays.  Other display elements, including but not limited to developer-supplied graphics, may be raster images which would simply be scaled up by default; unless the developer goes out of his way to smooth out these display elements as the they are scaled, they will suffer from visible artifacts when used on ultra high resolution displays.

Apple announced that the Xserve was EOL...but not that the 17" MBP was EOL'd.  A lot of this reminds me of the wailing going on regarding Apple dropping firewire because it was missing on MacBooks...then again they dropped the white macbook without any fanfare.  

Still I think that the 17" would have been worth an official mention in passing by someone.  Given we can fully expect a 13" retina MBP at some point (something else Apple didn't mention) I think we can hope for a retina 17" MBP still.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SSquirrel 

Quote:

 

They didn't, it's 16*10.  2880*1800.  1800/10=180. 180*16=2880.

2880x1800 would be 16x10. But 2800x1800, which the original post states (well, "2,800 by 1.800"), is 14x9.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeffreytgilbert 

It has to be supported by the OS. I can't see windows 8 suddenly adopting this out of the blue, but i can see them trying to clone it in windows 9.

Resolutions aren't supported by the OS anyway. They're supported by the hardware and driver. There are displays that support 2560x1600 available, but they use the extra pixels for screen space, not image quality.

Most video cards can run two of these displays as a single desktop, so horsepower driving the pixels isn't the problem - it's lack of offerings by manufacturers, presumably due to a historic lack of demand. People complain (here for example) that  the text is too small at high resolutions, but of course, that is OS dependent. Mac OS auto-adjusts text size based on the display size and resolution to keep the text to the correct scale, which allows Retina displays to work without any special support needed. Text sizes are adjustable in Windows, though this does require a little more work on the part of the user; Windows would probably do something similar to the Mac OS, had Apple not patented the idea.

As much as I love my MBP 17”early 2009, I can’t think of leaving it soon. Though Apple has not officially said that they have discontinued 17”, my fingers are crossed.

I just can’t think of any legitimate excuse why the heck they would discontinue 17" MPBs. As graphic designer as well as a photographer, I need a big screen so I could do my job when I am on road or at least do some real touch ups. How about those musicians and composers who use their MBP 17”on recordings in studios as well as live in concerts. Will they be able to read it well enough standing 2-3 feet away on live shows? I am 45 and already tired by zooming  all the time just to read the text and now with 15” I don’t know what am I gonna do.

Where is audio line in on Retina 15 incher? How do I record my 180/200 gram LPs?

It will be so damaging to me not to get 17” anymore as far as I am concerned. I am not a casual user of computers to use it only for browsing, emails, chatting, and other fun stuff. My 17” pays my bills.

My company normally buys new computers on a three year cycle.  We just bought 17 inch macbook pro's one year ago.  If they do release the 17 inch retina macbook pro's we will purchase those immediately. If not, will continue on our 3 year purchase cycle.  A 17 inch workspace is more important than a smaller workspace with a retina display.  in our office environment we hook to external monitors for dual monitor use, but on the road, we just have the macbook pro,s and the monitors stay behind.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tommy tomkins 

My company normally buys new computers on a three year cycle.  We just bought 17 inch macbook pro's one year ago.  If they do release the 17 inch retina macbook pro's we will purchase those immediately. If not, will continue on our 3 year purchase cycle.  A 17 inch workspace is more important than a smaller workspace with a retina display.  in our office environment we hook to external monitors for dual monitor use, but on the road, we just have the macbook pro,s and the monitors stay behind.

I found the 17" to be a PITA on the road.  Fear of it being crushed on the tray table, didn't fit into hotel safes, more limited selection of bags that would hold the thing, etc.

If I still did a lot of travel I'd go with a 15" MBP Retina, an Airport Express, an aTV, an iPad running AirDisplay or DisplayPad and a mouse.

• Use the iPad as a second monitor for tools and other stuff.  As an offboard display it's more space than the difference between the MBP 17" and MBP 15".  Also handy to use you need to show someone something in the next room or space over.  Just mirror the desktop and hand it to them.
• Pair it using the Airport Express if no wireless network is available or it sucks which it often did...so Airport to ethernet vs hotel wireless or in bridge mode.
• The aTV is something of a luxury and optional but it's not that big.  But it's handy to connect to projectors and HDTVs on the customer site when your mDP to HDMI cable wont reach.

/shrug

If a 17" contiguous display is all that critical then yeah, it's critical.  For most road warriors, not so much now that iPads can be used as secondary displays.

If you are interested in getting a 17 inch macbook pro with retina display, I would encourage you to give that feedback to Apple. You may do so by visiting the following website:

http://www.apple.com/feedback/macbookpro.html

Thanks for the tip on iPad running AirDisplay or DisplayPad.  I do take my iPad as well as my 17 inch pro on trips.  I often use them independent, writing apps and books and then test on the iPad, or facetimeing on the iPad while co-ordinating work on the pro with co-workers, but I will give AirDisplay a try.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tommy tomkins 

If you are interested in getting a 17 inch macbook pro with retina display, I would encourage you to give that feedback to Apple. You may do so by visiting the following website:

 

http://www.apple.com/feedback/macbookpro.html

I am and I did.

I did purchase AirDisplay.  It works to increase work space but the text is so small it is hard to read. I would much rather have the 17 inch retina display.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tommy tomkins 

I did purchase AirDisplay.  It works to increase work space but the text is so small it is hard to read. I would much rather have the 17 inch retina display.

Ah...if you have the iPad 3 make sure you have HiDPI 1024x768 turned on in Lion...or yah everything is tiny.  Or force it into 1024x768 vs the native resolution in System Preferences.

If it's STILL too tiny...ah...I have no idea.  I still have an older iPad.

There are other limitations too...it's a software display so anything that uses hardware rendering doesn't work right.  But for tool palettes it works well enough.

What are you trying to use with it?

All I can say is I'm impressed with all you Mac users with such good vision. 

Enjoy it, I'm happy for you!!!!  My vision, not so good..I wouldn't be able to see the difference at a standard desk distance! :(

WE WANT THE 17 inch BACK... Some of us have vision that is not what it once was, and the 17 inch was just right.  Going smaller is not an option.

The 17 pro needs a retina display and it may be the top of your line.

Today I spent some time working on an After Effects project.  My three-year-old MacBook Pro felt like a tortoise.  Apparently CS6 expects more than a 3GHz C2D with 8GB RAM, so I guess it's time to upgrade. But to what?  That After Effects screen has my 17" display bursting at the seams.  Looking at it today I tried to imagine working on the same project but with an even smaller screen.  Forget it.

So what options exist these days?  I need the machine to be portable so a desktop is out, but I'd like it to be as close to a desktop replacement as possible.  It doesn't need to be so slim I can slip it between the pages of a magazine that I'm too tech kewl to carry because paper publications are so 2009, nor does it need to be so light I can hang it on my lanyard with my security pass.  It needs to be as BIG as is practical within the confines of what can be reasonably carried from place to place.  In other words, I seem to want an AntiApple.  Instead of wanting to explore how small a device can be made before it becomes useless, I want to see how big we can make it before I just can't carry it anymore.

Suggestions?

Quote:

Originally Posted by v5v 

Today I spent some time working on an After Effects project.  My three-year-old MacBook Pro felt like a tortoise.  Apparently CS6 expects more than a 3GHz C2D with 8GB RAM, so I guess it's time to upgrade. But to what?  That After Effects screen has my 17" display bursting at the seams.  Looking at it today I tried to imagine working on the same project but with an even smaller screen.  Forget it.

 

It sounds like the problem, in your case, is After Effects, not the computer.  Adobe writes sloppy code.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chadbag 

 

It sounds like the problem, in your case, is After Effects, not the computer.  Adobe writes sloppy code.

DAMN man, you just blew my mind!  The computer is an entity unto itself, with intrinsic value completely unrelated to the software it was designed to run!  It doesn't matter if I can't get any work done, the computer is still AWESOME, right?!

Thanks dude!  I'm gonna quit using After Effects immediately.  Then my "problem" will be solved.  Oh wait, no it won't, since I still won't be getting any fucking WORK done, will I?

So anyway, that now takes care of the fanboy non-sequiturs, does anyone have any actual useful suggestions?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 


Not with that attitude, we don't.

Aw c'mon Tallest, I was just screwing around, but seriously, you can't honestly expect a straight answer to what chadbag wrote.  (S)He completely sidesteps THE POINT and fires off a missive as laughably unhelpful as it is absurd!  The problem is Adobe?  How DO you respond to that?
 

Uh, yeah, that's sorta the point, innit?  The industry standard tools used to create media in 2012 are screen hungry, and Apple has decided not to serve that market.  That kinda precludes buying a Mac.  My hope was that others who share my disappointment may have already identified viable alternatives.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 

there's also not much to do about it, save getting new hardware...

...aaaaand, here we are.  That's what I asked about in the first place.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 

...or going to a different suite of applications.

Which, if served with a suggestion of viable alternative, would be really helpful.  So, what are people using as an alternative to After Effects these days?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 


Buying a 15" and a 27" display?

Given the choice between carrying both a computer and a separate display or just buying a different brand of computer, which seems more practical and logical?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 


Or the 15" RMBP and using a utility to keep it at 2880x1800?

I'd actually be excited about that if the screen were large enough that I could still read the text and identify icons at that resolution.  Of course, if the screen were larger we wouldn't have this problem in the first place.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marvin 

You can even go for the entry 15" MBP, get the 27" screen and still save $400, which you can use to buy an iPhone so you can call someone who cares about Apple dropping the 17" from the lineup.

So because YOU don't care, no one else should, huh?  You don't perceive just a hint of what others might call arrogance in that statement?

Why on Earth would anyone take issue with my preferring a larger display on my portable computer?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil 

Like I said, it seems like you already made up your mind in your first post, so I'm curious why you bothered asking at all.

Because I'd still like to know what others may choose to use.  This being a discussion of Apple dropping the 17" form factor, I thought, perhaps erroneously, that there would be others like me who are looking at alternatives in the absence of a larger offering from Apple and might have suggestions.  Like, maybe a computer that isn't even made by Apple.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marvin 

Not because I don't care but because it's not a good option

Not a good option FOR WHOM?  You?  Fine.  But why would you presume to tell others what constitutes a good option for them?  The arrogance you exhibit is astounding.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marvin 

This is an Apple forum, you're not likely to get recommendations for a Windows PC.

Apparently.  I expected there would be people who use both or recently switched who could share their experience but I guess not.  Sorry.

What I want isn't what Apple offers so there's obviously something wrong with me.  I'll let it go.  If anyone else is thinking about switching and would like to know how it's gone for my wife and me changing back and forth, lemme know.

Quote:

Originally Posted by v5v 

 

DAMN man, you just blew my mind!  The computer is an entity unto itself, with intrinsic value completely unrelated to the software it was designed to run!  It doesn't matter if I can't get any work done, the computer is still AWESOME, right?!

 

Thanks dude!  I'm gonna quit using After Effects immediately.  Then my "problem" will be solved.  Oh wait, no it won't, since I still won't be getting any fucking WORK done, will I?

 

So anyway, that now takes care of the fanboy non-sequiturs, does anyone have any actual useful suggestions?

I think you totally missed the point.  You said "Apparently CS6 expects more than a 3GHz C2D with 8GB RAM, ".   That is a ridiculous requirement, if it is indeed true that your problems are the HW and not something else making things slow.  I don't think the competition requires the same, though, admittedly I don't play with this sort of software.  So, I stand by my comment, and not out of any fanboy-ism, as I don't blindly support whatever Apple does, when such support has no firm technical, business, or other valid background.  However, I am not an Adobe apologist and fanboy either...  Adobe does not right the best code and let's HW-creep play a big role in their products.

Quote:

Originally Posted by v5v 

 

Aw c'mon Tallest, I was just screwing around, but seriously, you can't honestly expect a straight answer to what chadbag wrote.  (S)He completely sidesteps THE POINT and fires off a missive as laughably unhelpful as it is absurd!  The problem is Adobe?  How DO you respond to that?
 

I did not sidestep the point.  I called out Adobe for sloppy apps that force people to buy new computers all the time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marvin 

Sure you might get an extra toolbar down the side and an extra layer or two vertically but it's hardly worth the premium.

Thankfully, you don't get to decide what is or is not worth the premium to me.  That extra toolbar you blithely dismiss could conservatively represent an extra 100-150 window drag operations per hour.  Over the 2-3 years I'll own that machine the price difference is a trivial amount to eliminate that inconvenience.

But then, according to your profile, aren't you running a six or seven year old machine with 1GB or RAM?  Perhaps before acting as the self-appointed arbiter of what constitutes good value for everyone else on the planet you should think about whether you're really in a position to assess how some more expensive features figure into a money-making workflow.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chadbag 

 

I did not sidestep the point.  I called out Adobe for sloppy apps that force people to buy new computers all the time.

Sorry, my response was supposed to be tongue-in-cheek, jab-in-the-ribs funny, but I see now that it comes across as rude.  I didn't mean for it to and I apologize for that.

Your response really wasn't very helpful though.  You say Adobe writes sloppy code.  So?  How does saying that do anything to speed up my work?  Are you saying I should use some other vendor's software?  If so, whose?  If you don't have a suggestion, what DOES that comment accomplish?  Whether true or false it's irrelevant because it's beyond my control.  That's all I meant.

RMBP + iPad should make losing the 17" viable.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQPPzlOZkNc&feature=related

http://vimeo.com/25682920

I assume this works better with the iPad 3....your wifi and lag may vary.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chadbag 

 

It sounds like the problem, in your case, is After Effects, not the computer.  Adobe writes sloppy code.

Adobe has its faults, but they also take a lot of flack for Apple problems. Their forums see a lot of requests for Windows features which are not well supported under OSX at the OS level rather than the application level. Depending on your concerns, the fault may not be unilateral.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marvin 


You can buy the $2199 15" retina MBP and the money you save vs the $2499 17" can be used for a large display for tasks that neither a 15" nor 17" display are suitable for.
You can buy a 27" display for $250 (2.5x the size of the 17" screen - in addition to the 15" screen, which is IPS and higher quality than both):
http://www.amazon.com/Viewsonics-VA2703-27-Inch-Widescreen-Monitor/dp/B005ZT5C2M/
You can even go for the entry 15" MBP, get the 27" screen and still save $400, which you can use to buy an iPhone so you can call someone who cares about Apple dropping the 17" from the lineup.

The 27" ips displays in that price range are not very good. It's a mistake to only pay attention to IPS kool-aid. You need to make sure that uniformity is good too. Most of the really cheap ones remain 1920x1080, which is pretty close to the old 17" mbp, but it's not ideal at 27". While they have fallen in price, the upper models remain a better idea. What I don't understand is why anyone would subject themselves to after effects on a macbook pro. You can complain about it being a resource hog, but that application scales ridiculously well with core count and ram. The CUDA benefit could be noted on the macbook pro even though it's not officially supported as of yet (barefeats used a hack). It's important to remember that only a limited number of functions benefit from this. Most of the CUDA and OpenCL code has been allocated to functions that are either very new to Adobe (raytracing) or those that historically took an obnoxious amount of time. I really don't see why anyone would have to run After Effects on a laptop given the typical exotic storage solution required for larger projects and the extreme benefits from screen real estate, ram, and many cpu cores with that application. It even scales well with the oldest 8 core models.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marvin 


So get a bigger external display and you could conservatively save 200-300 window drags an hour. AE has a single-window interface so it doesn't really make a difference.
Well, Apple doesn't sell it any more so I guess more than just me decided it didn't constitute good value. Of course you think they made a mistake, which would suggest you wish to appoint yourself as arbiter over the options that should be available to everyone. Hopefully Apple will see sense, pull the Retina MBP and replace it with a $2499 17" model with the same spec as the 2.6GHz 15", then the sales should just shoot up.
You keep going on about how important the big screen is and yet don't comment on the benefit of having an external 27" display, which is much bigger than the 17" screen. A 17" display is a small display for any workflow, which is why they stopped shipping desktops with them back in 2006. You can't take the screen with you but what workflow requires you to work on the go where the added bulk of the 17" isn't detrimental?

 
If I had to work a lot while traveling, people would laugh at me for checking something like this as luggage. You may think I'm kidding. You would be mistaken. Actually some of the older versions were better for this, but you can't buy a quality sub 24" display anymore. The older 21" 1600x1200 format that was equivalent in height to the 1920x1200 24" displays was my favorite size (although higher resolution would have been excellent). They're no longer made, so I use a 24". The issue with the 27" is that it maps weird even with a large graphics tablet, so I'd end up wasting a lot of that real estate anyway.