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?
Quote:
Looks like you've already decided to buy a PC, so have at it.
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.
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?
He's not entirely wrong, though. From my own experience with Adobe products over the years, they've never been known for resource-sipping code. It wasn't very helpful, but there's also not much to do about it, save getting new hardware or going to a different suite of applications.
My hope was that others who share my disappointment may have already identified viable alternatives.
Buying a 15" and a 27" display? Or the 15" RMBP and using a utility to keep it at 2880x1800?
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.
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 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.
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.
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?
Motion (and plenty still use Shake, too).
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?
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.
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?
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.
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?
Not because I don't care but because it's not a good option and clearly not enough people were buying them. $2499 for a 17" laptop is not good value for money.
Why on Earth would anyone take issue with my preferring a larger display on my portable computer?
I don't think anyone has an issue with your preference but what replies are you expecting? This is an Apple forum, you're not likely to get recommendations for a Windows PC.
Apple has removed the 17" laptop so if you feel the need to move to a 17" Windows laptop instead of setting up a proper working environment for software that requires a big screen, so be it. Jump over to newegg.com, click the laptops section, 17", order by rating and there's your next computer.
Either that or you decide that you don't want to move away from the Mac platform in which case, you will have to accept that 15" is all you get and an external display is your only option (and is in fact a better option).
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.
For anyone who likes value for money. They were charging $300 for the following:
Sure you might get an extra toolbar down the side and an extra layer or two vertically but it's hardly worth the premium.
With the Retina model, you at least get a high-res screen, a colour-accurate screen, one with significantly less glare and a very fast SSD and it's still $300 cheaper than the 17".
I expected there would be people who use both or recently switched who could share their experience but I guess not.
There might be people who have switched because of this, just like there might be people who have switched because of the Mac Pro but most of us know what a Windows experience is like. There's a reason you don't hear so much about people switching to Windows.
What I want isn't what Apple offers so there's obviously something wrong with me.
Apple's business decisions don't imply anything about their customers but they mean you either have to compromise or buy an alternative.
They might bring the 17" back once the technology in the Retina model drops in price and leaves a space at that higher price point but they'd have to manufacture the panel at a higher resolution. I don't see that happening for quite a while.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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):
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.
As a cameraman editor it really is disappointing that I can no longer buy a 17" Macbook Pro as the larger screen really is a must for video editing in the field... Don't even get me started on FCPX!
As a cameraman editor it really is disappointing that I can no longer buy a 17" Macbook Pro as the larger screen really is a must for video editing in the field... Don't even get me started on FCPX!
Okay. We won't get you started on your inability to see quality when it's presented to you.
I can't fault Apple for putting their money into resources that produce the greatest profit. They are a business. It is just disappointing to see a company that makes above average products not continue to make a 17" or larger laptop computer. Such a machine is a desktop replacement not necessarily only used for traveling. Some people want something big yet very portable, if not for going to the office then perhaps for moving it around their home. I'm in that boat now but I can maintain a desk with an external screen for now. Next year my plans include moving around a lot and I won't be taking my external monitor with me.
My roommate has a 17" Dell that gets moved from room to room and never leaves the house. It is an entertainment device. It isn't used for any work ever. The machine does the job of having a big pretty screen that serves video and games quickly. Look at what is most popular from the other manufacturers. They are adding more 15" and 17" models even with low end processors. There is a market of people who want large screen machines. Whether they want to use them for 100% work or 100% entertainment doesn't matter. They buy the large screen models over the small ones. I think Apple pulled out of this market too soon.
My next machine will be a 15" model laptop. It will be loaded with features I need for work. If I were a wealthy guy I would buy a 17" with dual SSDs and discrete graphics cards. Such a machine only has a two and a half hour battery life with games being played, even with the SSDs. It is definitely a desktop replacement machine instead of a work all day portable machine.
Comments
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?
Quote:
Looks like you've already decided to buy a PC, so have at it.
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.
He's not entirely wrong, though. From my own experience with Adobe products over the years, they've never been known for resource-sipping code. It wasn't very helpful, but there's also not much to do about it, save getting new hardware or going to a different suite of applications.
Buying a 15" and a 27" display? Or the 15" RMBP and using a utility to keep it at 2880x1800?
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.
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.
Motion (and plenty still use Shake, too).
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.
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.
Not because I don't care but because it's not a good option and clearly not enough people were buying them. $2499 for a 17" laptop is not good value for money.
I don't think anyone has an issue with your preference but what replies are you expecting? This is an Apple forum, you're not likely to get recommendations for a Windows PC.
Apple has removed the 17" laptop so if you feel the need to move to a 17" Windows laptop instead of setting up a proper working environment for software that requires a big screen, so be it. Jump over to newegg.com, click the laptops section, 17", order by rating and there's your next computer.
Either that or you decide that you don't want to move away from the Mac platform in which case, you will have to accept that 15" is all you get and an external display is your only option (and is in fact a better option).
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.
For anyone who likes value for money. They were charging $300 for the following:
Sure you might get an extra toolbar down the side and an extra layer or two vertically but it's hardly worth the premium.
With the Retina model, you at least get a high-res screen, a colour-accurate screen, one with significantly less glare and a very fast SSD and it's still $300 cheaper than the 17".
There might be people who have switched because of this, just like there might be people who have switched because of the Mac Pro but most of us know what a Windows experience is like. There's a reason you don't hear so much about people switching to Windows.
Apple's business decisions don't imply anything about their customers but they mean you either have to compromise or buy an alternative.
They might bring the 17" back once the technology in the Retina model drops in price and leaves a space at that higher price point but they'd have to manufacture the panel at a higher resolution. I don't see that happening for quite a while.
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.
I assume this works better with the iPad 3....your wifi and lag may vary.
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?
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.
As a cameraman editor it really is disappointing that I can no longer buy a 17" Macbook Pro as the larger screen really is a must for video editing in the field... Don't even get me started on FCPX!
Okay. We won't get you started on your inability to see quality when it's presented to you.
P { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }
I can't fault Apple for putting their money into resources that produce the greatest profit. They are a business. It is just disappointing to see a company that makes above average products not continue to make a 17" or larger laptop computer. Such a machine is a desktop replacement not necessarily only used for traveling. Some people want something big yet very portable, if not for going to the office then perhaps for moving it around their home. I'm in that boat now but I can maintain a desk with an external screen for now. Next year my plans include moving around a lot and I won't be taking my external monitor with me.
My roommate has a 17" Dell that gets moved from room to room and never leaves the house. It is an entertainment device. It isn't used for any work ever. The machine does the job of having a big pretty screen that serves video and games quickly. Look at what is most popular from the other manufacturers. They are adding more 15" and 17" models even with low end processors. There is a market of people who want large screen machines. Whether they want to use them for 100% work or 100% entertainment doesn't matter. They buy the large screen models over the small ones. I think Apple pulled out of this market too soon.
My next machine will be a 15" model laptop. It will be loaded with features I need for work. If I were a wealthy guy I would buy a 17" with dual SSDs and discrete graphics cards. Such a machine only has a two and a half hour battery life with games being played, even with the SSDs. It is definitely a desktop replacement machine instead of a work all day portable machine.