... reasonning that says "people who disagree with my opinion are mostly poseurs" is untrustworthy. ...
I didn't mean that they were poseurs for disagreeing with my opinion. Everyone is free to do that of course (and often does).
I see hundreds of Apple laptops a year in my job, being bought by all kinds of people for all kinds of uses and in my experience, over the long haul, and on average, almost no one buys a 15" or a 17" MacBook Pro, although the 15" is far more popular than the 17". Those that do (again IMO), tend to be show-offs, or concerned with having the "biggest/best" laptop in the room far more than they are concerned with issues connected with actually using the machine.
All the real pros I know are more likely to be using a 13", or maybe a 15" if they need the screen size. I would say the majority of the power users and the majority of users in general have already moved to MacBook Airs. The 17" MacBook Pro is just over the top for almost everyone (only 1.6% of all Mac laptop users have a 17" model by the numbers in the article).
When someone comes into my office with one of these beasts, most of the staff kind of roll their eyes when the person isn't looking as it's usually someone with more money and more pride than they have common sense. It's not nice to hear perhaps, but it's true in my neck of the woods anyway.
I guess me trying to be a creative professional with my 17" is me showing off. Good to know. I guess it has nothing to do with efficiency or personal practicality. I'm glad other people are so helpful and considerate to tell me how I am and what works best for me. Thanks.
IMHO I think this is how it will/ought to shake out.
MacBook Pro - 13", 15" & 17" all Ivy Bridge Quad-core, 13" using Intel HD4000, 15" & 17" using discrete GPU, all capable of 16GB RAM, SSDs from 128GB-512GB, 128GB standard on 13", 256GB standard on 15" & 17". 4GB standard on all. No ODD. All having Mag-safe, Gig ethernet, FW800, Thunderbolt & 2 USB3 capable ports. 17" to retain ExpressCard slot, 13" & 15" to retain SD slot. 17" to have 3 USB3 ports. All to have Retina displays.
MacBook Air - 11", 13" & 15" all Ivy Bridge Dual-core & using Intel HD4000. All with 4GB RAM up to 8GB RAM (BTO). SSDs throughout - 128GB on 11" & 13", 256GB standard on 15". No ODD. All having Mag-safe, Thunderbolt & 2 USB3 capable ports. 13" & 15" to have SD card slot. All using displays similar to today.
So in essence the main differences between the Air & Pro lines will be Quad-core, retina display, max RAM, more port Pro's & Dual-core, standard res, lower max RAM Air's.
Agree or not?
I believe Apple will try to at least maintain if not lower the price points. Will they be able to do that with the specs you have outlined?
First they drop XServe, then Mac Pro, now 17'' MBP. I guess 27'' iMac is next in line as the most powerful mac. Then 15'' MBP. I guess until only 11'' Air, iPad and iPhone are left. After all that's all consumers need right.
Apple should make an ultra-portable Mac. 400 to 600 g. Whatever form factor. The Mac in your pocket, purse or bag. Always.
That's why iDevices exist. People actually don't want tiny computers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mario
First they drop XServe, then Mac Pro, now 17'' MBP. I guess 27'' iMac is next in line as the most powerful mac. Then 15'' MBP. I guess until only 11'' Air, iPad and iPhone are left. After all that's all consumers need right.
Silly argument. It's probably the price that keeps customers from the MBP 17". But, it is a desktop replacement in a laptop form factor. People buy a MBP 13" or "15" when they don't need a desktop at all, or need and have a desktop to 80% of their work -- and that appears to be most folks. But, if you need closer to desktop performance in a portable device, MBP 17" is the only way to go and much more cost effective than buying a smaller MBP plus an external screen or an iMac.
If a person needs real portability with power, it's the iPad plus the MBP 17".
<p> First they drop XServe, then Mac Pro, now 17'' MBP. I guess 27'' iMac is next in line as the most powerful mac. Then 15'' MBP. I guess until only 11'' Air, iPad and iPhone are left. After all that's all consumers need right.<br /> </p>
When did they drop the Mac Pro and 17" MBP? I must have missed that communication from Apple.
Apple will discontinue the 17" model if it sees sales declining. Frankly, I rarely see a 17" MBP when I'm traveling around the country. See plenty of the 13" and 15" models, though.
Two other factors that may have a bearing on the need for this machine: technology to allow easier monitor mirroring and resolution independence. Just think if every new TV made was able to be a Mac monitor with no trouble at all. Also, what if resolution independence made screen size less important, allowing you to zoom in and out at will to suit your needs at any moment?
Silly argument. It's probably the price that keeps customers from the MBP 17". But, it is a desktop replacement in a laptop form factor. People buy a MBP 13" or "15" when they don't need a desktop at all, or need and have a desktop to 80% of their work -- and that appears to be most folks. But, if you need closer to desktop performance in a portable device, MBP 17" is the only way to go and much more cost effective than buying a smaller MBP plus an external screen or an iMac.
If a person needs real portability with power, it's the iPad plus the MBP 17".
Bingo. Or the iPad/iMac combo. And as the iPad's power grows, it's the LOWER-powered laptops that will be feeling the pinch, not the 17".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
When did they drop the Mac Pro and 17" MBP? I must have missed that communication from Apple.
[bleeding sarcasm]Oh, really? The writing has been on the wall for years. I'm surprised it took them this long to admit to their failure…[/bleeding sarcasm]
As hard as this may be for you to hear, you are not everyone. Speak for yourself!
Congrats, you've been successfully trolled...along with a half dozen others.
Regarding the need for the 17" I had one and loved the screen but not so much the weight. It was freaking hard to work on in an airplane if you fly coach. I guess it depends on your use case. If I were still a road warrior I'd probably get a smaller MBP or MBA and wished Samsung had not discontinued their Lapfit monitor line.
I do software development primarily. Honestly programming on a 13'' or 15'' screen, or even single 17'' screen is really constrained. Ideally you want at least 2 21'' screens, but two 30'' is great. 17'' MBP is sort of minimal screen you can do some work on if you have to on the road. I usually have couple of terminal windows, an IDE instance of some kind, etc a browser and it's nice to be able to have all of these side by side so you can quickly read information from each windows without them overlapping.
People who don't do software development don't understand this it seems. I can also see how large screen is useful for image editing. And for HD video editing two 30'' screens are almost a must (if you want to see before/after edits in full resolution).
I don't buy my gear to show off, and honestly never give a **** what people think of me based on what computer I use. Some people assume I'm a technophobic idiot because I use Apple computer to begin with (until I fire up terminal and shame them to death with my Shell Fu), others think it's a fashion accessory. I could not care less. I use them because they currently meet my need.
And I don't work on 17'' laptop while traveling, on the plane etc. 17'' laptop is more a desktop you can carry easily. You take it over to the destination, unpack and work. If you go to a customer site etc. I would not even try to work on 17'' MBP on a plane. That would be ridiculous.
<p> One thing I like Apple for...they know what to cut, and eventually, you'll get over it. I mean what are you gonna do..buy a PC? </p><p> </p><p> The only reason I had a 17" was for the Express Card slot. Now that thunderbolt has hit the market, 17" is extra screen that somewhat defeats portability. I work with a team of 3D modelers, I edit 1080p video, use lots of windows simultaneously, and we do fine with a 13" on the road until we plugin into the cinema displays in the lab. </p>
Buying a PC is exactly what I will do. I need the space because iPad won't do heavy things such as modeling and even if it did, doing them by finger would suck
Was planning on buying a MacBook pro 17 in a year with internship money, if it is discontinued. I will not be switching from PC to Mac.
IMHO I think this is how it will/ought to shake out.
MacBook Pro - 13", 15" & 17" all Ivy Bridge Quad-core, 13" using Intel HD4000, 15" & 17" using discrete GPU, all capable of 16GB RAM, SSDs from 128GB-512GB, 128GB standard on 13", 256GB standard on 15" & 17". 4GB standard on all. No ODD. All having Mag-safe, Gig ethernet, FW800, Thunderbolt & 2 USB3 capable ports. 17" to retain ExpressCard slot, 13" & 15" to retain SD slot. 17" to have 3 USB3 ports. All to have Retina displays.
MacBook Air - 11", 13" & 15" all Ivy Bridge Dual-core & using Intel HD4000. All with 4GB RAM up to 8GB RAM (BTO). SSDs throughout - 128GB on 11" & 13", 256GB standard on 15". No ODD. All having Mag-safe, Thunderbolt & 2 USB3 capable ports. 13" & 15" to have SD card slot. All using displays similar to today.
So in essence the main differences between the Air & Pro lines will be Quad-core, retina display, max RAM, more port Pro's & Dual-core, standard res, lower max RAM Air's.
Agree or not?
Almost. Retina displays? Not yet. Too expensive to manufacture with acceptable yield in the required sizes. And I fear for the ExpressCard slot on the 17".
Silly argument. It's probably the price that keeps customers from the MBP 17". But, it is a desktop replacement in a laptop form factor. People buy a MBP 13" or "15" when they don't need a desktop at all, or need and have a desktop to 80% of their work -- and that appears to be most folks. But, if you need closer to desktop performance in a portable device, MBP 17" is the only way to go and much more cost effective than buying a smaller MBP plus an external screen or an iMac.
If a person needs real portability with power, it's the iPad plus the MBP 17".
The high-end 15" MBP and the 17" MBP internals (CPU, GPU, RAM, HDD) are identical. The only difference is the display and few extra ports. You only need a 17" MBP if you need the 17" display. Performance is the same and this is where your argument falls apart. You don't have to go for $1000 Apple display. There are cheaper options else where.
...almost no one buys a 15" or a 17" MacBook Pro, although the 15" is far more popular than the 17". Those that do (again IMO), tend to be show-offs, or concerned with having the "biggest/best" laptop in the room far more than they are concerned with issues connected with actually using the machine...
Really?!? So now I'm a show-off because I bought a 15" MBP? Way to generalize man. I bought my 15" MBP because, get this, I actually needed a 1680x1050 hi-res display for video editing and photography. I have a cinema display at home, but the extra res really helps on the road. No offense, but the 1280x800 res on the 13" really doesn't cut it.
That said, I had a 17" PowerBook G4 for 4 years and (in my opinion) it was a bit too big. I now have the same res that the PBG4 had in my 15" MBP. I do not, however, want them to discontinue the 17" MBP for those who use them. Obviously, if sales of the 17" model really start to fall off, Apple will give it the axe.
Apple will discontinue the 17" model if it sees sales declining. Frankly, I rarely see a 17" MBP when I'm traveling around the country. See plenty of the 13" and 15" models, though.
Two other factors that may have a bearing on the need for this machine: technology to allow easier monitor mirroring and resolution independence. Just think if every new TV made was able to be a Mac monitor with no trouble at all. Also, what if resolution independence made screen size less important, allowing you to zoom in and out at will to suit your needs at any moment?
Well an aTV + AirParrot can do that for you today for any HDTV. And of course that's a feature for ML. The aTV, like the little AirPort Express would be in my travel bag.
17" is mostly for poseurs and doesn't sell in large numbers.
Very few customers looking for a laptop want big, bulky and heavy. It's a niche part of the portable market for sure.
I am not sure if you're a troll or just uniformed. Expensive things are always lower volume items, yet they often carry higher margins. Calling people poseurs is just silly. They don't have to buy a 17" notebook to check facebook. They're probably using it for work when a desktop + 24-27" display cannot be taken along.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightknight
1- 17 inches is a very expensive machine, one of the reasons I don't have one (other reason is, I got the latest MBA 11 inches with all upgrades I needed, CPU, RAM... and it's perfect, if slightly slow on video games I play. Then again, I'm hardly running the latest games). Hence it explains why it comparatively sells less than machines that cost half its price.
2- Any reasonning that says "people who disagree with my opinion are mostly poseurs" is untrustworthy. Plus, these guys actually disagree with their wallet instead of with an internet messageboard, how annoying for you that they actually put their money where their heart is. Definitely poseurs... heh.
3- WHY does anyone listen to that analyst? Am I mistaken to think he's the one who's said many times the Mac Mini is going away (well, given a long enough timespan he'll end up being correct)? He's also the one saying Apple's going to sell iPad Mini this fall, right?
Well yeah, the guy who said that is simply narrow minded.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mario
First they drop XServe, then Mac Pro, now 17'' MBP. I guess 27'' iMac is next in line as the most powerful mac. Then 15'' MBP. I guess until only 11'' Air, iPad and iPhone are left. After all that's all consumers need right.
Look at what you just wrote. It's the same mindset used to write this article. There isn't any insider information. They just decided to draw a parallel because they can.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightknight
... reasonning that says "people who disagree with my opinion are mostly poseurs" is untrustworthy. ...
I didn't mean that they were poseurs for disagreeing with my opinion. Everyone is free to do that of course (and often does).
I see hundreds of Apple laptops a year in my job, being bought by all kinds of people for all kinds of uses and in my experience, over the long haul, and on average, almost no one buys a 15" or a 17" MacBook Pro, although the 15" is far more popular than the 17". Those that do (again IMO), tend to be show-offs, or concerned with having the "biggest/best" laptop in the room far more than they are concerned with issues connected with actually using the machine.
All the real pros I know are more likely to be using a 13", or maybe a 15" if they need the screen size. I would say the majority of the power users and the majority of users in general have already moved to MacBook Airs. The 17" MacBook Pro is just over the top for almost everyone (only 1.6% of all Mac laptop users have a 17" model by the numbers in the article).
When someone comes into my office with one of these beasts, most of the staff kind of roll their eyes when the person isn't looking as it's usually someone with more money and more pride than they have common sense. It's not nice to hear perhaps, but it's true in my neck of the woods anyway.
Apple should make an ultra-portable Mac. 400 to 600 g. Whatever form factor. The Mac in your pocket, purse or bag. Always.
Quote:
Originally Posted by megadeth7
IMHO I think this is how it will/ought to shake out.
MacBook Pro - 13", 15" & 17" all Ivy Bridge Quad-core, 13" using Intel HD4000, 15" & 17" using discrete GPU, all capable of 16GB RAM, SSDs from 128GB-512GB, 128GB standard on 13", 256GB standard on 15" & 17". 4GB standard on all. No ODD. All having Mag-safe, Gig ethernet, FW800, Thunderbolt & 2 USB3 capable ports. 17" to retain ExpressCard slot, 13" & 15" to retain SD slot. 17" to have 3 USB3 ports. All to have Retina displays.
MacBook Air - 11", 13" & 15" all Ivy Bridge Dual-core & using Intel HD4000. All with 4GB RAM up to 8GB RAM (BTO). SSDs throughout - 128GB on 11" & 13", 256GB standard on 15". No ODD. All having Mag-safe, Thunderbolt & 2 USB3 capable ports. 13" & 15" to have SD card slot. All using displays similar to today.
So in essence the main differences between the Air & Pro lines will be Quad-core, retina display, max RAM, more port Pro's & Dual-core, standard res, lower max RAM Air's.
Agree or not?
I believe Apple will try to at least maintain if not lower the price points. Will they be able to do that with the specs you have outlined?
First they drop XServe, then Mac Pro, now 17'' MBP. I guess 27'' iMac is next in line as the most powerful mac. Then 15'' MBP. I guess until only 11'' Air, iPad and iPhone are left. After all that's all consumers need right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zunx
Apple should make an ultra-portable Mac. 400 to 600 g. Whatever form factor. The Mac in your pocket, purse or bag. Always.
That's why iDevices exist. People actually don't want tiny computers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mario
First they drop XServe, then Mac Pro, now 17'' MBP. I guess 27'' iMac is next in line as the most powerful mac. Then 15'' MBP. I guess until only 11'' Air, iPad and iPhone are left. After all that's all consumers need right.
Give it a rest.
Silly argument. It's probably the price that keeps customers from the MBP 17". But, it is a desktop replacement in a laptop form factor. People buy a MBP 13" or "15" when they don't need a desktop at all, or need and have a desktop to 80% of their work -- and that appears to be most folks. But, if you need closer to desktop performance in a portable device, MBP 17" is the only way to go and much more cost effective than buying a smaller MBP plus an external screen or an iMac.
If a person needs real portability with power, it's the iPad plus the MBP 17".
Apple will discontinue the 17" model if it sees sales declining. Frankly, I rarely see a 17" MBP when I'm traveling around the country. See plenty of the 13" and 15" models, though.
Two other factors that may have a bearing on the need for this machine: technology to allow easier monitor mirroring and resolution independence. Just think if every new TV made was able to be a Mac monitor with no trouble at all. Also, what if resolution independence made screen size less important, allowing you to zoom in and out at will to suit your needs at any moment?
Quote:
Originally Posted by waldobushman
Silly argument. It's probably the price that keeps customers from the MBP 17". But, it is a desktop replacement in a laptop form factor. People buy a MBP 13" or "15" when they don't need a desktop at all, or need and have a desktop to 80% of their work -- and that appears to be most folks. But, if you need closer to desktop performance in a portable device, MBP 17" is the only way to go and much more cost effective than buying a smaller MBP plus an external screen or an iMac.
If a person needs real portability with power, it's the iPad plus the MBP 17".
Bingo. Or the iPad/iMac combo. And as the iPad's power grows, it's the LOWER-powered laptops that will be feeling the pinch, not the 17".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
When did they drop the Mac Pro and 17" MBP? I must have missed that communication from Apple.
[bleeding sarcasm]Oh, really? The writing has been on the wall for years. I'm surprised it took them this long to admit to their failure…[/bleeding sarcasm]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland
I called this.
Right. Back in 2006 I imagine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jims1973
As hard as this may be for you to hear, you are not everyone. Speak for yourself!
Congrats, you've been successfully trolled...along with a half dozen others.
Regarding the need for the 17" I had one and loved the screen but not so much the weight. It was freaking hard to work on in an airplane if you fly coach. I guess it depends on your use case. If I were still a road warrior I'd probably get a smaller MBP or MBA and wished Samsung had not discontinued their Lapfit monitor line.
This would be pretty good if it ever ships and the display quality is half decent: http://www.mmt2.com/monitor2go.html
CES video:
http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/10/mmt-monitor2go-hands-on-video/
They say list price will be under $300.
But if you need the compute power then the 17" MBP is irreplaceable for the OSX road warrior.
I do software development primarily. Honestly programming on a 13'' or 15'' screen, or even single 17'' screen is really constrained. Ideally you want at least 2 21'' screens, but two 30'' is great. 17'' MBP is sort of minimal screen you can do some work on if you have to on the road. I usually have couple of terminal windows, an IDE instance of some kind, etc a browser and it's nice to be able to have all of these side by side so you can quickly read information from each windows without them overlapping.
People who don't do software development don't understand this it seems. I can also see how large screen is useful for image editing. And for HD video editing two 30'' screens are almost a must (if you want to see before/after edits in full resolution).
I don't buy my gear to show off, and honestly never give a **** what people think of me based on what computer I use. Some people assume I'm a technophobic idiot because I use Apple computer to begin with (until I fire up terminal and shame them to death with my Shell Fu), others think it's a fashion accessory. I could not care less. I use them because they currently meet my need.
And I don't work on 17'' laptop while traveling, on the plane etc. 17'' laptop is more a desktop you can carry easily. You take it over to the destination, unpack and work. If you go to a customer site etc. I would not even try to work on 17'' MBP on a plane. That would be ridiculous.
Buying a PC is exactly what I will do. I need the space because iPad won't do heavy things such as modeling and even if it did, doing them by finger would suck
Was planning on buying a MacBook pro 17 in a year with internship money, if it is discontinued. I will not be switching from PC to Mac.
Quote:
Originally Posted by megadeth7
IMHO I think this is how it will/ought to shake out.
MacBook Pro - 13", 15" & 17" all Ivy Bridge Quad-core, 13" using Intel HD4000, 15" & 17" using discrete GPU, all capable of 16GB RAM, SSDs from 128GB-512GB, 128GB standard on 13", 256GB standard on 15" & 17". 4GB standard on all. No ODD. All having Mag-safe, Gig ethernet, FW800, Thunderbolt & 2 USB3 capable ports. 17" to retain ExpressCard slot, 13" & 15" to retain SD slot. 17" to have 3 USB3 ports. All to have Retina displays.
MacBook Air - 11", 13" & 15" all Ivy Bridge Dual-core & using Intel HD4000. All with 4GB RAM up to 8GB RAM (BTO). SSDs throughout - 128GB on 11" & 13", 256GB standard on 15". No ODD. All having Mag-safe, Thunderbolt & 2 USB3 capable ports. 13" & 15" to have SD card slot. All using displays similar to today.
So in essence the main differences between the Air & Pro lines will be Quad-core, retina display, max RAM, more port Pro's & Dual-core, standard res, lower max RAM Air's.
Agree or not?
Almost. Retina displays? Not yet. Too expensive to manufacture with acceptable yield in the required sizes. And I fear for the ExpressCard slot on the 17".
.tsooJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by waldobushman
Silly argument. It's probably the price that keeps customers from the MBP 17". But, it is a desktop replacement in a laptop form factor. People buy a MBP 13" or "15" when they don't need a desktop at all, or need and have a desktop to 80% of their work -- and that appears to be most folks. But, if you need closer to desktop performance in a portable device, MBP 17" is the only way to go and much more cost effective than buying a smaller MBP plus an external screen or an iMac.
If a person needs real portability with power, it's the iPad plus the MBP 17".
The high-end 15" MBP and the 17" MBP internals (CPU, GPU, RAM, HDD) are identical. The only difference is the display and few extra ports. You only need a 17" MBP if you need the 17" display. Performance is the same and this is where your argument falls apart. You don't have to go for $1000 Apple display. There are cheaper options else where.
Maybe something all new...
12" = MacBook
14" = MacBook Air
16" = MacBook Pro
No way! I was fully intent on going with 17" for my next MacBook. I was actually hoping for an even bigger screen MacBook.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
...almost no one buys a 15" or a 17" MacBook Pro, although the 15" is far more popular than the 17". Those that do (again IMO), tend to be show-offs, or concerned with having the "biggest/best" laptop in the room far more than they are concerned with issues connected with actually using the machine...
Really?!? So now I'm a show-off because I bought a 15" MBP? Way to generalize man. I bought my 15" MBP because, get this, I actually needed a 1680x1050 hi-res display for video editing and photography. I have a cinema display at home, but the extra res really helps on the road. No offense, but the 1280x800 res on the 13" really doesn't cut it.
That said, I had a 17" PowerBook G4 for 4 years and (in my opinion) it was a bit too big. I now have the same res that the PBG4 had in my 15" MBP. I do not, however, want them to discontinue the 17" MBP for those who use them. Obviously, if sales of the 17" model really start to fall off, Apple will give it the axe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudson1
Apple will discontinue the 17" model if it sees sales declining. Frankly, I rarely see a 17" MBP when I'm traveling around the country. See plenty of the 13" and 15" models, though.
Two other factors that may have a bearing on the need for this machine: technology to allow easier monitor mirroring and resolution independence. Just think if every new TV made was able to be a Mac monitor with no trouble at all. Also, what if resolution independence made screen size less important, allowing you to zoom in and out at will to suit your needs at any moment?
Well an aTV + AirParrot can do that for you today for any HDTV. And of course that's a feature for ML. The aTV, like the little AirPort Express would be in my travel bag.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
Can't tell if you're being sarcastic, hope so.
13" is the most popular unit they make
and (apologies to those above) but ...
17" is mostly for poseurs and doesn't sell in large numbers.
Very few customers looking for a laptop want big, bulky and heavy. It's a niche part of the portable market for sure.
I am not sure if you're a troll or just uniformed. Expensive things are always lower volume items, yet they often carry higher margins. Calling people poseurs is just silly. They don't have to buy a 17" notebook to check facebook. They're probably using it for work when a desktop + 24-27" display cannot be taken along.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightknight
1- 17 inches is a very expensive machine, one of the reasons I don't have one (other reason is, I got the latest MBA 11 inches with all upgrades I needed, CPU, RAM... and it's perfect, if slightly slow on video games I play. Then again, I'm hardly running the latest games). Hence it explains why it comparatively sells less than machines that cost half its price.
2- Any reasonning that says "people who disagree with my opinion are mostly poseurs" is untrustworthy. Plus, these guys actually disagree with their wallet instead of with an internet messageboard, how annoying for you that they actually put their money where their heart is. Definitely poseurs... heh.
3- WHY does anyone listen to that analyst? Am I mistaken to think he's the one who's said many times the Mac Mini is going away (well, given a long enough timespan he'll end up being correct)? He's also the one saying Apple's going to sell iPad Mini this fall, right?
Well yeah, the guy who said that is simply narrow minded.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mario
First they drop XServe, then Mac Pro, now 17'' MBP. I guess 27'' iMac is next in line as the most powerful mac. Then 15'' MBP. I guess until only 11'' Air, iPad and iPhone are left. After all that's all consumers need right.
Look at what you just wrote. It's the same mindset used to write this article. There isn't any insider information. They just decided to draw a parallel because they can.