The description you gave is only true if the application is resolution independent. If you take an excel spreadsheet, for example that was developed on a system with 13" 1024x768 screen and display it on a 13" 2048x1536 screen, everything will be 1/4 the size. Since we're talking about laptops, the icons are not automatically quadrupled in size. If you have your desktop set up on a Mac with current screen resolutions and then migrate everything to a display of the same size with twice the linear (4 times the area) resolution, everything will be 1/4 the size.
Applications don't handle resolution independence. Operating system does.
So you accept everything you read? How in the world would this analyst know Apple's sales by product to within 0.1%?
You can trace the source of this rumor. Some time ago, an analyst stated that Apple sold 30 13" MBPs for every 17" unit sold and that the 13" accounted for 50% of sales. There was no evidence to back their claim and no methodology - yet everyone seems to have accepted it even though the results just don't look plausible:
13" 50%
15" 48.3%
17" 1.7%
That distribution doesn't sound plausible - since the price differential between the 13" and 15" is close to the same as the differential between the 15" and 17".
I'll believe it when I see it.
I don't know what Apple's sales numbers are but the purchasing department in the institution where I work (for a staff of about 800-900) buys and distributes 2 or 3 laptops a week on average, and over the last ten years or so I would say I've only seen a small handful of 15" MacBooks go by and only one or perhaps 2 17" ones. Out of thousands and thousands of Mac laptops over a ten year period all the way back to the days where the logo was upside down.
Obviously there are probably different industries that might favour this model like movie people perhaps but it is true that very few people want to carry around a 17" laptop of any description. If anyone here is one of those people and they are honest with themselves they must know that they are a small and unique group. And it's not like the 17" has suddenly dropped in popularity or anything. It's pretty much always been that way.
Also, in the last year, MacBook Air is the most popular model by far. People who always got the Pros have been replacing them with Airs in record numbers. Definitely a trend to let go of the giant heavy laptops.
Why are you posting here, Waterloo? Isn't there enough pain and suffering in your neck of the woods (RIM) to keep you amused up there? 263 posts? WHY? Do you just "love" being insulted in sites like these? Isn't there enough S&M in your province to keep you humiliated in the Great White North? Trolling a site that is antithetical to your beliefs and value system seems silly to me, but then again, each to his own.
Why are you posting here, Waterloo? Isn't there enough pain and suffering in your neck of the woods (RIM) to keep you amused up there? 263 posts? WHY? Do you just "love" being insulted in sites like these? Isn't there enough S&M in your province to keep you humiliated in the Great White North? Trolling a site that is antithetical to your beliefs and value system seems silly to me, but then again, each to his own.
Because I'm a software developer and someone who invested over $100,000 in Apple hardware over the years. I loved Apple when they catered to people like me, I promoted them and recommended them to everyone. But it looks like Apple has profoundly changed in the last couple of years with the mobile success and shift to that market almost completely. They really don't want anything to do with anyone who makes stuff and cater to people who consume only and pay through the nose for the experience.
Waterloo is just fine by the way. We have plenty of things going here without RIM which was dead or dying the last 5 years. We all wish they would go away already so we can snatch a few talented people they stifle.
Apple will lose my laptop business if they do this. I work in development and infrastructure and every bit of screen space is needed. Simply cramming more data into a smaller screen due to a higher pixel density is useless if you can't see what's there.
You just have to trust Apple to make the best decisions for consumers. I am a 17" MacBook Pro owner and I love the product. But if Apple discontinues the 17" model this year, then I'll support their decision and reward their bravery by purchasing the 15" model. You can't walk away from this Apple family just because you don't get everything you want all the time. Apple is wonderful company, they deserve our ongoing support by buying the amazing products they continue to unleash upon us.
<p style="margin-top:0px;margin-right:0px;margin-bottom:0px;margin-left:0px;padding-top:0px;padding-right:0px;padding-bottom:0px;padding-left:0px;">You just have to trust Apple to make the best decisions for consumers. I am a 17" MacBook Pro owner and I love the product. But if Apple discontinues the 17" model this year, then I'll support their decision and reward their bravery by purchasing the 15" model. You can't walk away from this Apple family just because you don't get everything you want all the time. Apple is wonderful company, they deserve our ongoing support by buying the amazing products they continue to unleash upon us.</p>
That depends. If Apple doesn't meet your needs then "well, they did their best in choosing what's best for the average consumer" is not an argument. If your needs aren't being met, then the rational move is to change to a different product.
If, OTOH, the larger size isn't truly a 'need', but is rather a preference, then you balance it. Is it better to give up your preference for screen size or to give up your preference for OS? The answer won't always be clear - particularly since Microsoft has finally managed to release a Windows that isn't horrible.
Suggesting that you should buy Apple products no matter what is foolish and short-sighted.
As a current 17" MBP user I would go for a 16" (no less) and the many people that have that i talk to that have a 13" would like more power but dont really want a 15". and the current 15" user can go lighter or more power.
This would be a wise move for apple as a Pro user is looking for power and a Student/ entry customer might care more about the legacy options (ODD and basic CPU) at a lower price point
I think they will keep the current unibody design as a a entry model with a sub $1000 price. even the current 15" Would be nice to have around for about $1299. Dumbed down of course.
Just look at how apple is keeping legacy product at lower price points. (ipad 2 at $399 and 3gs $0 and iphone 4 $99) and also notice how they dumbed down the iphone4 from 16Gb to 8gb to help reduce price.
I think this is the trend for apple to make it affordable help drive new consumers in.
Line up should be like this
MBA (Ultra-book) 11" 13" --at current price $999-$1299--
Macbook (Student/Entry) 13" ... a 15" later on"? --New price $999-$1299--
MBP (Professional Notebook) 14" 16" --$1799-$2499-- All Quad, All Retina, (would like) All Dedicated GPU's
Furthermore, even if you were correct that apps had nothing to do with it, your original statement was wrong.
I think we are both in agreement here and saying the same thing. In short the original post that claimed having 15'' screen with higher resolution will allow you to see more on screen than 17'' screen is wrong if proper resolution independent rendering is in place in the OS.
Even in Windows today you can change your screen DPI in the display properties to make things less tiny on high res screen. Of course this doesn't work for every app, because of absolute layouts and because images don't just automatically scale to higher res and look equally good.
We are a Mac family...have been for like forever. I've lost count of the number of desktop Macs we've owned.
Currently, I use a 24 inch iMac with a 17 inch external display.
But more to the point, my wife is on her third laptop...and guess what? It's a 17 inch MacBook Pro which she dearly loves. Her eyesight is not too good, so the extra real estate is a godsend for her. I marvel at her skills at managing multiple windows of Quicken/Excel when doing our financial work. She's also a bank trust officer/stock analyst...bringing her work home constantly, nights and weekends.
For the time being, she's OK with her 17 inch MBP. But if she had to replace it with something smaller...she would not be a happy camper!
Even in Windows today you can change your screen DPI in the display properties to make things less tiny on high res screen. Of course this doesn't work for every app, because of absolute layouts and because images don't just automatically scale to higher res and look equally good.
LCD screens have a physical optimal resolution even if the OS can change the display properties. Making the system resolution larger or smaller than the designed resolution will only serve make the image, especially text, less sharp.
LCD screens have a physical optimal resolution even if the OS can change the display properties. Making the system resolution larger or smaller than the designed resolution will only serve make the image, especially text, less sharp.
Exactly, that's why it's a huge compromise between looking at tiny text or looking at big fuzzy text .
Apple should just discontinue all computers and sell iPhone and iPad appliances. This year marks the last dollar I will ever spend on Apple ecosystem. Enough is enough.
People say this crap all the time...and guess what...they end up buying Apple products anyways. People always find a reason or a way to make them work, mostly because of Mac OS X and its applications.
I firmly believe the 17" will be dropped. Does it suck for some people, yes. I do believe the numbers of the 17"...I don't believe its a huge seller compared to the 13 and 15" models. For a lot of people its too big and cumbersome. Where I work, we've disposed of our 17" laptops for 15" models for this reason. Nobody wanted to lug around a heavy 17" laptop. I'm sure where were people who bought it. There are always people who buy certain products no matter what because it fits their needs, but if it doesn't fit the needs of the majority then unfortunately you're getting left out. Its the way it works. They can't keep products going for a niche market. I don't think the market for this size is as large as it seems...they're just being louder about this issue so it seems like its a large market. I doubt Apple would drop a product that was successful.
Apple is a different company than it used to be. It caters itself to a different set of people. It can't be everything to everyone. If the market changes, they need to adapt and sometimes people get left out, even people that used to buy their products. They have to keep moving forward.
Do you not understand what a retina display will do? It's pixel quadrupling. For every one pixel before, there will be four pixels now. It's clarity, not extra screen space.
Do you not understand that not everyone has 20-year old eyes? The pixels keep getting smaller yet everyone (but new users)'s eyes keep getting older. Mine have gotten to the point where I can't tell between a retina and and a non-retina iPhone anymore. So all the talk of retina displays falls completely flat on me.
Now, that's not to say I'm a 17" MBP user; I have an 11" Air and plan to buy whatever 13" offering they announce Monday. But if it's retina, I'll just bump up all the system and browser font sizes so they're more than 1/16" high.
Do you not understand that not everyone has 20-year old eyes? The pixels keep getting smaller yet everyone (but new users)'s eyes keep getting older. Mine have gotten to the point where I can't tell between a retina and and a non-retina iPhone anymore. So all the talk of retina displays falls completely flat on me.
17" is critical. It is an absurd argument that resolution makes up for lack of screen real estate. In workplaces now, professionals have multiple monitors for a reason.
Laptop users, like me, who need the real estate can't carry an extra monitor.
I would expect a major limiting factor in a 17" laptop is weight and the expense of a 17" retina display. Bring the weight down, especially, and 17" laptops would sell much better. No DVD, and more efficient components, and smaller and lighter battery will go a long way in making the 17" a more attractive machine.
If I were Apple, I would try adjusting the price of the 17" MacBook Pro first to see if that improves sales rather than throwing in the towel. The question is do people purchase the smaller models because of size or price? I am thinking the 17" is unpopular because of cost, not size. It starts at $2,499 which is a tad pricey for the average Joe.
Go fall off a cliff please. WE PROFESSIONALS like what we use, pay for and need. It's our world don't fick with it … please.
You do what you want, and let the other do what they want. Don't like big, don't buy it, but please don't tell us (The Professionals) go somewhere else,
we like you are entitled to have what we want, to want what we want, and to hope to get what we want.
For me, here's hoping they don't drop the 17" PRO (I have 4), and I (and MANY others) hope they do in fact update the Pro line of desktops. Because as PROS, we need them (or at least think we do).
Skip
Just to play devil's advocate ... having a big screen doesn't in and of itself make you a professional though. Whether or not you are a professional in one particular field or another is a completely separate thing from whether or not you need or use a giant laptop of course. One is either professional or not, and one uses whatever one needs to use to get the job done in whatever field one is in.
Everyone where I work is a professional for example and most carry laptops. However the person in my field that has a 17" one is more likely to be the *least* professional of the bunch because they just aren't necessary. In my professional field the dilettantes and poseurs are the ones with the 17" screen because if you don't need the size, then to buy one is to be a sort of show-off.
My only point being that "professional" doesn't always equal "giant computer" (and vice versa).
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
The description you gave is only true if the application is resolution independent. If you take an excel spreadsheet, for example that was developed on a system with 13" 1024x768 screen and display it on a 13" 2048x1536 screen, everything will be 1/4 the size. Since we're talking about laptops, the icons are not automatically quadrupled in size. If you have your desktop set up on a Mac with current screen resolutions and then migrate everything to a display of the same size with twice the linear (4 times the area) resolution, everything will be 1/4 the size.
Applications don't handle resolution independence. Operating system does.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
So you accept everything you read? How in the world would this analyst know Apple's sales by product to within 0.1%?
You can trace the source of this rumor. Some time ago, an analyst stated that Apple sold 30 13" MBPs for every 17" unit sold and that the 13" accounted for 50% of sales. There was no evidence to back their claim and no methodology - yet everyone seems to have accepted it even though the results just don't look plausible:
13" 50%
15" 48.3%
17" 1.7%
That distribution doesn't sound plausible - since the price differential between the 13" and 15" is close to the same as the differential between the 15" and 17".
I'll believe it when I see it.
I don't know what Apple's sales numbers are but the purchasing department in the institution where I work (for a staff of about 800-900) buys and distributes 2 or 3 laptops a week on average, and over the last ten years or so I would say I've only seen a small handful of 15" MacBooks go by and only one or perhaps 2 17" ones. Out of thousands and thousands of Mac laptops over a ten year period all the way back to the days where the logo was upside down.
Obviously there are probably different industries that might favour this model like movie people perhaps but it is true that very few people want to carry around a 17" laptop of any description. If anyone here is one of those people and they are honest with themselves they must know that they are a small and unique group. And it's not like the 17" has suddenly dropped in popularity or anything. It's pretty much always been that way.
Also, in the last year, MacBook Air is the most popular model by far. People who always got the Pros have been replacing them with Airs in record numbers. Definitely a trend to let go of the giant heavy laptops.
Why are you posting here, Waterloo? Isn't there enough pain and suffering in your neck of the woods (RIM) to keep you amused up there? 263 posts? WHY? Do you just "love" being insulted in sites like these? Isn't there enough S&M in your province to keep you humiliated in the Great White North? Trolling a site that is antithetical to your beliefs and value system seems silly to me, but then again, each to his own.
Quote:
Originally Posted by VinitaBoy
Why are you posting here, Waterloo? Isn't there enough pain and suffering in your neck of the woods (RIM) to keep you amused up there? 263 posts? WHY? Do you just "love" being insulted in sites like these? Isn't there enough S&M in your province to keep you humiliated in the Great White North? Trolling a site that is antithetical to your beliefs and value system seems silly to me, but then again, each to his own.
Because I'm a software developer and someone who invested over $100,000 in Apple hardware over the years. I loved Apple when they catered to people like me, I promoted them and recommended them to everyone. But it looks like Apple has profoundly changed in the last couple of years with the mobile success and shift to that market almost completely. They really don't want anything to do with anyone who makes stuff and cater to people who consume only and pay through the nose for the experience.
Waterloo is just fine by the way. We have plenty of things going here without RIM which was dead or dying the last 5 years. We all wish they would go away already so we can snatch a few talented people they stifle.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy
Apple will lose my laptop business if they do this. I work in development and infrastructure and every bit of screen space is needed. Simply cramming more data into a smaller screen due to a higher pixel density is useless if you can't see what's there.
You just have to trust Apple to make the best decisions for consumers. I am a 17" MacBook Pro owner and I love the product. But if Apple discontinues the 17" model this year, then I'll support their decision and reward their bravery by purchasing the 15" model. You can't walk away from this Apple family just because you don't get everything you want all the time. Apple is wonderful company, they deserve our ongoing support by buying the amazing products they continue to unleash upon us.
They both do. See my example above.
Furthermore, even if you were correct that apps had nothing to do with it, your original statement was wrong.
That depends. If Apple doesn't meet your needs then "well, they did their best in choosing what's best for the average consumer" is not an argument. If your needs aren't being met, then the rational move is to change to a different product.
If, OTOH, the larger size isn't truly a 'need', but is rather a preference, then you balance it. Is it better to give up your preference for screen size or to give up your preference for OS? The answer won't always be clear - particularly since Microsoft has finally managed to release a Windows that isn't horrible.
Suggesting that you should buy Apple products no matter what is foolish and short-sighted.
As a current 17" MBP user I would go for a 16" (no less) and the many people that have that i talk to that have a 13" would like more power but dont really want a 15". and the current 15" user can go lighter or more power.
This would be a wise move for apple as a Pro user is looking for power and a Student/ entry customer might care more about the legacy options (ODD and basic CPU) at a lower price point
I think they will keep the current unibody design as a a entry model with a sub $1000 price. even the current 15" Would be nice to have around for about $1299. Dumbed down of course.
Just look at how apple is keeping legacy product at lower price points. (ipad 2 at $399 and 3gs $0 and iphone 4 $99) and also notice how they dumbed down the iphone4 from 16Gb to 8gb to help reduce price.
I think this is the trend for apple to make it affordable help drive new consumers in.
Line up should be like this
MBA (Ultra-book) 11" 13" --at current price $999-$1299--
Macbook (Student/Entry) 13" ... a 15" later on"? --New price $999-$1299--
MBP (Professional Notebook) 14" 16" --$1799-$2499-- All Quad, All Retina, (would like) All Dedicated GPU's
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
They both do. See my example above.
Furthermore, even if you were correct that apps had nothing to do with it, your original statement was wrong.
I think we are both in agreement here and saying the same thing. In short the original post that claimed having 15'' screen with higher resolution will allow you to see more on screen than 17'' screen is wrong if proper resolution independent rendering is in place in the OS.
Even in Windows today you can change your screen DPI in the display properties to make things less tiny on high res screen. Of course this doesn't work for every app, because of absolute layouts and because images don't just automatically scale to higher res and look equally good.
We are a Mac family...have been for like forever. I've lost count of the number of desktop Macs we've owned.
Currently, I use a 24 inch iMac with a 17 inch external display.
But more to the point, my wife is on her third laptop...and guess what? It's a 17 inch MacBook Pro which she dearly loves. Her eyesight is not too good, so the extra real estate is a godsend for her. I marvel at her skills at managing multiple windows of Quicken/Excel when doing our financial work. She's also a bank trust officer/stock analyst...bringing her work home constantly, nights and weekends.
For the time being, she's OK with her 17 inch MBP. But if she had to replace it with something smaller...she would not be a happy camper!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK
Doesn't make any sense to me.
Why not just unify all the different models into one new design under one brand name available in 12", 14", 16"
Plus an all new design iMac available in 20" 24", 28".
I think they should switch to millimeters or else they will be sued for false advertising since the inch dimensions are just a rough approximations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mario
Even in Windows today you can change your screen DPI in the display properties to make things less tiny on high res screen. Of course this doesn't work for every app, because of absolute layouts and because images don't just automatically scale to higher res and look equally good.
LCD screens have a physical optimal resolution even if the OS can change the display properties. Making the system resolution larger or smaller than the designed resolution will only serve make the image, especially text, less sharp.
If the 17" makes a profit, no need to kill it. And at the prices they sell for, it makes a nice profit.
(typing this on a 17"er!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
LCD screens have a physical optimal resolution even if the OS can change the display properties. Making the system resolution larger or smaller than the designed resolution will only serve make the image, especially text, less sharp.
Exactly, that's why it's a huge compromise between looking at tiny text or looking at big fuzzy text
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mario
Apple should just discontinue all computers and sell iPhone and iPad appliances. This year marks the last dollar I will ever spend on Apple ecosystem. Enough is enough.
People say this crap all the time...and guess what...they end up buying Apple products anyways. People always find a reason or a way to make them work, mostly because of Mac OS X and its applications.
I firmly believe the 17" will be dropped. Does it suck for some people, yes. I do believe the numbers of the 17"...I don't believe its a huge seller compared to the 13 and 15" models. For a lot of people its too big and cumbersome. Where I work, we've disposed of our 17" laptops for 15" models for this reason. Nobody wanted to lug around a heavy 17" laptop. I'm sure where were people who bought it. There are always people who buy certain products no matter what because it fits their needs, but if it doesn't fit the needs of the majority then unfortunately you're getting left out. Its the way it works. They can't keep products going for a niche market. I don't think the market for this size is as large as it seems...they're just being louder about this issue so it seems like its a large market. I doubt Apple would drop a product that was successful.
Apple is a different company than it used to be. It caters itself to a different set of people. It can't be everything to everyone. If the market changes, they need to adapt and sometimes people get left out, even people that used to buy their products. They have to keep moving forward.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Do you not understand what a retina display will do? It's pixel quadrupling. For every one pixel before, there will be four pixels now. It's clarity, not extra screen space.
Do you not understand that not everyone has 20-year old eyes? The pixels keep getting smaller yet everyone (but new users)'s eyes keep getting older. Mine have gotten to the point where I can't tell between a retina and and a non-retina iPhone anymore. So all the talk of retina displays falls completely flat on me.
Now, that's not to say I'm a 17" MBP user; I have an 11" Air and plan to buy whatever 13" offering they announce Monday. But if it's retina, I'll just bump up all the system and browser font sizes so they're more than 1/16" high.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ktappe
Do you not understand that not everyone has 20-year old eyes? The pixels keep getting smaller yet everyone (but new users)'s eyes keep getting older. Mine have gotten to the point where I can't tell between a retina and and a non-retina iPhone anymore. So all the talk of retina displays falls completely flat on me.
Yep, you don't get this.
Laptop users, like me, who need the real estate can't carry an extra monitor.
I would expect a major limiting factor in a 17" laptop is weight and the expense of a 17" retina display. Bring the weight down, especially, and 17" laptops would sell much better. No DVD, and more efficient components, and smaller and lighter battery will go a long way in making the 17" a more attractive machine.
If I were Apple, I would try adjusting the price of the 17" MacBook Pro first to see if that improves sales rather than throwing in the towel. The question is do people purchase the smaller models because of size or price? I am thinking the 17" is unpopular because of cost, not size. It starts at $2,499 which is a tad pricey for the average Joe.
Silly. If your argument were true, then 6 pt font printed at 2400 dpi would be as easily read as a 12 pt font at 300 dpi. Beg to differ.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ncee
Go fall off a cliff please. WE PROFESSIONALS like what we use, pay for and need. It's our world don't fick with it … please.
You do what you want, and let the other do what they want. Don't like big, don't buy it, but please don't tell us (The Professionals) go somewhere else,
we like you are entitled to have what we want, to want what we want, and to hope to get what we want.
For me, here's hoping they don't drop the 17" PRO (I have 4), and I (and MANY others) hope they do in fact update the Pro line of desktops. Because as PROS, we need them (or at least think we do).
Skip
Just to play devil's advocate ... having a big screen doesn't in and of itself make you a professional though. Whether or not you are a professional in one particular field or another is a completely separate thing from whether or not you need or use a giant laptop of course. One is either professional or not, and one uses whatever one needs to use to get the job done in whatever field one is in.
Everyone where I work is a professional for example and most carry laptops. However the person in my field that has a 17" one is more likely to be the *least* professional of the bunch because they just aren't necessary. In my professional field the dilettantes and poseurs are the ones with the 17" screen because if you don't need the size, then to buy one is to be a sort of show-off.
My only point being that "professional" doesn't always equal "giant computer" (and vice versa).