Apple's next-gen 17-inch MacBook Pro due in a few months - Page 2

sheesh, does every single thread have to turn into a glossy v matte screen debate now?

The split screen is comparing the old CCFL backlight on the right to the new LED backlight on the left. It's intended to convey how much more the colors "pop" with LED backlighting.

Are there really that many people out there who need a glossy display?

To add to your point:

There is absolutely no reason for 178/178 viewing angle if they screw you with a glare screen. Glare screens offset the color quality lacking in low quality TN Panels. High quality panels with a matte finish are a joy to use at various angles.

Not at all. That's not why that line is there. It's simply a reflection in the screen. Watch the video of it being opened and you'll see that it's organic. They've positions a large diffuser over it specifically to get that effect.

Will all the "Pros" (a euphemism for blow hard) stop high jacking every thread for the glossy vs matte debate. I'm a professional animator. I work in coffee shops with big sunny windows. I have dreaded the idea of a glossy screen even though I've never seen one.

I now have a Samsung Touch of color lcd TV which has the glossiest screen in the industry. It drives the reviewers mad, but consumers love it. And I love it. And that TV is in my sunny room and I play games on it during the day and the reflection is not that bad. Fact is, Matte gets washed out and glossy just reflects. Reflections can be looked past and ignored. Wash can't. So, guys, try the glossy. Its not a boogy man.

Hate to tell you, but I used photoshop to overlay a perspective version of the top shot over the bottom and they match exactly. Thats a 15" mbp in that factory shot. Sorry to burst the bubble.

For those who demand antiglare, don't worry! you'll be able to buy antiglare screen protectors and since they are replaceable it will be a lot better than buying an antiglare screen.

Even if that image posted by juri is a 17" MacBook Pro, that does not mean that that picture is not a prototyping process. I am convinced that the issues Apple may be having is due to the extended size of the notebook which may cause problems with the frame's stiffness and cause pressure points on the DVD player, and too much warping for the extended screen. It is a new process after all.

wow . . . nice job !

Ahh yeah, it would be nice to have a choice and not be blinded by light and the sight of my own face while I try to work. I've been reading forums off and on today and would say that most posts are about the lack of matte screens followed up by angry posts about firewire. It is a big deal to some people who got rid of shiny screens years ago. Just because its shiny and new looking doesnt mean that its awesome OMG. GIVE US MATTE with the new 17"s. I dont care if i have to give up my awesome new glass screen for a piece of plastic, I dont wanna 17" compact mirror to put on my make-up, I want a pro notebook, end of story.

Kthnx
Dave

You have a point there. Nice and clean... The point of the perspective seem to deform a lot more the image, that's why the speaker look so large

I agree. If they were trying to show the difference, they would have split it down the middle and said something about it.

I was also wondering when someone would say something about the glare on the screen. That's what everyone complains about with the glossy screen, and Apple actually put it on there to show it off, not hide it.

It is.

Here's a thought:
What if the Nvidia chipset was only destined for the MacBook, but instead, Apple had to punt and use the Nvidia chipset in the MacBook Pro too? With the rumors about the 17-inch models having "display issues," consider that the MacBook Pro should have a memory cieling of 8GB and Nvidia's chipset limit is 4GB. I think this limiting factor may also have been the reason for the delay of the 17-inch. If you think about it, the invite was pretty late, and Apple might have thought they were going to resolve the problem with the 17-inch in time to meet their deadline. Instead, they missed a deadline for reserving the bigger San Francisco venue and had to squeeze it in on their theater at their corporate headquarters.

I hope they offer a quad core CPU option. I would love to be able to upgrade to Snow Leopard down the road and use the extra power. I need a powerful laptop to use as a desktop replacement. My 2.6GHz MBP 15" can not handle intensive workloads. Give me a mobile flagship.

Dear FuturePastNow & Friends

Why doesn't Apple offer the 3.06GHz chip, at least as an option?

This seems very unlike Apple to me. When I first ordered our dual quad-core 3GHz Mac Pro, non-Apple vendors didn't have access to that same chip until about three months after our machine's introduction.

Maybe the 17" MacBook Pro (January 2009) will have the 3.06GHz processor, at least as an option.

--Jaddie

It uses a bit more power, although I doubt that would be a problem. It's also very expensive. Also not a problem for something optional.

I think that Apple has read the roadmaps and knows that Intel's mobile Core 2 processors are not going to be getting much faster over the next 12 months, before they all get replaced late next year with Nehalem models. So they're saving the fastest processor and the mobile quads for a mid-year update.

No it's not you nutter

It's added glare to convey bling for marketing purposes.

The funny thing is is the surprise you'd get when you realize she doesn't notice it. You're deliberately looking at it, whereas she would see it as; "oh it's that beautiful", i.e. lovely and shiny. That's what the two tone screen is for in this image, to convey a glossy display, it's marketing bling! Yes it's added for extra gloss, in real life it doesn't exist.

(as posted in another thread) I'm betting when it is released, it will be dubbed as MacBook Extreme

So we will have...

13" MacBook
15" MacBook Pro
17" MacBook Extreme

Yes it does exist in real life, ive seen it in the store. Everyone is saying that when the led display is on it wont show any glare or minimal glare. That when its off and black is the only time it looks like a mirror. This simply isnt true, and the people who have seen it in person and say this are quite frankly, lying, and for what reason i dont know. Maybe they just like stirring the turd. I mean just go take a look at the "New Macbook Video" on the apple.com front page. At the end of the video they show the macbook spinning around and opening at the same time in dramatic fashion. As its opening you see the not only the desktop lit up but you also a perfect mirror image of the keyboard. LOL Get owned apple.

Thanks guys, for once I've been able to spark some conversation on here. Makes me feel good. Really, thanks. Yes, they do indeed like show off the glare at Apple. That photo with the line across the screen was a screenshot directly from Apple's new Macbook video. Not to get too philosophical, but I think perhaps this is a good indication of our recent preferences of form over function. I personally think people are much more vain (fashionable, etc) than they once were. And having a pretty, shiny screen, Apple is appealing to vanity.

I've all but given up on Apple for now... until they right the ship and get back to appealing to pros again, not only with screens and ports, but all things in general.

They just seem to not care about the pros who are in the trenches and use their equipment 12 hours a day.

I am actively looking at Ebay for deals on Penryn 17s with matte screens. I figure I might as well get the latest and greatest now, because it looks to be awhile (if ever) for Apple to come back again and offer a pro-level machine that is worth a damn. (This would mean Nehalem at the least, which won't likely be out until this time next year )

Hopefully, they've learned their mistakes with the ports and screen issues by then too!

Apple isn't going to change. Get over it.

I can't give up of the simplicity and efectiveness of Mac OS X, so i can't switch to PC's. But i think we are watching Apple becoming less Apple and more crapy PC style. Producing PRO hardware without taking in consideration, the needs of the pros is to say the least VERY STUPID. I now that the option of anti-glare ad costs because of the logistics, but there are a lot of people like me that won't pay the premium price of a top notebook to get stuck with a lousy glossy display.

The specs of the new macbook pro 17'' should be (hipotetical because price factor):

- Led backlight 1920x1200px (10bits) with GLOSSY OR ANTI-GLARE display

- Quad core 2.8 Ghz L2 12MB (several options)

- Blu ray drive

- 4 or 8 Gb 1066 Mhz DDR3

- SSD Drive 256 GB or Hard Disk 500 GB or 1TB 7200rpm

- Graphic Card based on Nvidia Quadro with 1GB GDDR3

- Slots: 3x USB 3.0 / 2x Firewire 3200 / MiniDisplay / Ethernet 10/100/1000 / Audio IN and OUT / Express Card

- Teclado OLED + Trackpad multitouch

- Airport (802.11 N) + GPS (optional) + Bluetooth 2.1

- Better Sound Speakers

- Battery Ultracapacitor (at least providing 24 Hours of autonomy).

- Less wheight

Hey, if you're not a pro, and you're happy with the way things are going for consumers, then by all means, be happy.

We, who use our machines for a living and need to get things done - demand more. If you want to surf your myspace page all day and write tweets and emails, then buy your glossy, port-less piece of crap with a smile.

Forgive me, but we're not lemmings willing to follow Apple off the cliff of "ooh shiny".

Very well said

By the way, I just put my money where my mouth is:

I refuse to pay Apple for their current offerings - so instead, just 20 minutes ago, I purchased a brand new, sealed-box 2.6ghz 17" Penryn high res MATTE finish on Ebay for $2299.00.

When Apple gets their shit together and comes out with a new machine that is worthy of the "pro" moniker, then I'll be ready to buy that from Apple directly.

Much of the technology you list is either extremely expensive, barley available, or doesn't even yet exist. Would you really pay for this $10,000 machine you want Apple to make?




We know the anti-glare isn't going to happen. Don't waste hope on that.


The current Quad core chipsets can be used in the iMac.
But they use too much energy for the MacBook Pro.



Not going to happen right now.



8GB should be possible when 4GB RAM chips
are available.


You can use any HDD/ SSD you want that can fit the 9" slot.


Requires too much energy.


USB 3 or Firewire 3200 don't yet exist and won't in a couple of months.


Too expensive. What function does a monitor have on the trackpad?


You want more in the case and less weight.

You really feel that comfortable in speaking for millions of other people and having the definitive definition of a "Pro" notebook?

I fail to see where I was speaking for anyone other than "I"?

Like i said most of the components in the comimg new 17'' macbook pro is hipotetical because of the price, but still if you look at Lenovo W700 you cant stop wandering that Apple should make an effort to include more pro components as an option

Options should include besides the starting components (more mainstream and less expensive)

- Anti-glare option (I hope that apple understands that a riot is going to happen if they dont include it)

- Quad Processor 2.53 Ghz.

- Nvidia Quadro FX 3700M 128-core CUDA parallel computing processor 1GB (dedicated).

- Blu ray.

- USB 3.0 is not ready but Firewire 3200 is.

- Integrated wacom tablet and color calibrator.

- The oled keyboard as nothing to do with the trackpad.

The Lenovo notebook you are talking about violates much of Apple's design philosophy. Its big, heavy, with terrible battery life, and very expensive. This machine is for a niche market.

It appeared as though you were making a blanket statement.

I apologize. I might have. However, I was trying to make the point that there are tons of people who feel similar about these issues (I called them pros) and that are upset about lack of options and the general direction that Apple is taking. My point continued in that if you do not feel the same way, then that if fine, but it IS still a valid concern for others.


I would absolutely love it if Apple would classify a new product in the "mobile workstation" category. Something like a 19" or 20" with quad-cores, dual graphics cards, dual HD - raid options, etc... Something along the lines of an x-serve but in a pretty case.

I know lots of people who work in the field or multiple locations that only use laptops so they can use one system in multiple locations, easily. Why not cater to that crowd? That segment of the market would be at least as big as the x-serve market or even the MBA market, I guarantee it.

Ah, one can dream, eh?

No problem. I think we on boards like this begin to think people out in the general world value what we talk about here.

I work in an industry dominated by Macs. A lot of people around me use MBP. Really none of them spend any time or energy pouring over computers specs. They live life and use the computer as it is designed.



I'm sure sales of such a machine would be so low as to not really be worth it.

I agree with you that the Lenovo W700 is a terrible example of Industrial Design, but mainly because of a lack of interest in Design by the majority of PC Hardware makers. You only have to look to a lot of PC's out there with the same components that Apple notebooks have and they still look uglier and bigger (but not heavier due to the wheight of the crappy plastic they use).

- First thing I don't validate using 2 Hard Drives in a notebook because of the size considerations (unless you remove the optical drive to put an extra HD, like the new MacBook Pro allows to do).

- 2th the quad core still ocupies only 1 die, the only thing is that probably needs a better ventilation.

- The graphic chip of Nvidia would have to be redesigned to be acomodated, but is not very complicated because of the size of the 17'' case.

- Putting the Blu ray drive instead of the current optical drive is simple.

- The only thing more complicated to do is to acommodate a A6 wacom tablet in the notebook, but with the allocation of the optical drive in the side of the case it would be possible to do it.

- The Oled keyboard is not very realistic to incorporate in the comming model, but the technology exists (Optimus Keyboard - +-250$) and maybe Apple should start testing it to incorporate it in future models.

- Like I previous had said this top components would be optional. The base model would be a 2.6 Ghz Dual core with a average and afordable top graphic card, superdrive, no wacom tablet and no calibrator (but the number of slots is the ones that I had previous mentioned).

In the terms of the price of this kind of top machine I don´t see a reason to be more than 5000$ unless Apple do like they do with the prices of the memory that they sell, that no one understands why so much greed.

Realistically, is it worth waiting for the MBP 17"?

Will the specs be that much better than what's available on the 15"? Will the new 17" be a worse deal given it'll probably lose FW400 and be no choice glossy screen?

We don't know about FW400 for sure. The 17" of the same overall architecture should support at least one more port than the current 15", but if only one more, then Apple has to decide between two FW and two USB, or one FW and three USB.

Unless Apple is working on a way to make a matte version that didn't make it in time for the introduction, the current model may very well be the end of the line for Apple matte screens.

Maybe one thing you can do is wait until the new version is announced. If you still want the old one, they will probably be available as a clearance item for a while.

I see that Amazon has some pretty good deals on the 17-inch MacBook Pro for
$2,319. Also as far as the glossy/matte display issue, I see no reason Apple couldn't offer a matte display with the current design. The display looks identical in structure to that of the Air. The Air has the old style glossy, and by extension was the same style glossy display finish as the previous MacBook Pro. Therefore the new unibody-style MacBooks and Macbook Pros could be easily offered in a matte version.