I'm expressing what I like and prefer,and I'm not alone.
But you're alone enough not to matter. Would you feel better if I used "we" instead of "you"? I preferred the 17", myself. But I saw that the desktop is the future of computing and the tablet (in sizes from 10" to 15") is the future of mobile. I got over it.
IBM abandoned the Consumer computer market a few years back,and look what Lenovo has done with it.
Run it straight into the ground.
Supposedly Apple previously chose Form following function,now it seems that it's the exact opposite,such as making the iMac thinner,and getting rid of the optical drive and Ethernet.
No, you're totally wrong, and that doesn't explain why the 17" would be discontinued. We already have an explanation: sales.
The Computer world is big enough,and flexible enough for more than one type of Consumer to be taken care of,even Apple.
That's why they have four models of laptop (and two old models) and four models of desktop (and one old model).
Apple has gone almost entirely toward the Consumer,and has Shitted on their Pro and Pro-Sumer customers!
Then why are hundreds of thousands of professionals perfectly fine with the hardware offered right now?
They admitted it during the last keynote,when Phil Schiler said,"Can't innovate,my Ass".
So you're just trolling now? Go back and watch the keynote. You don't even have an argument.
So go buy a 17" laptop from someone who isn't Apple and just quit complaining. You seem to know what you want, Apple doesn't make it, therefore you can't buy from Apple.
How's that a relevant question?
Buy a Bonobo Extreme 17.3" from System 76 and you'll blow away a Mac Book pro of any size. This machine is a desktop replacement. The users can swap components if they ever want to and it can be customized to the max directly from the factory. Some features: eSATA, USB 3, fourth generation i7 chips, 2 discrete graphics cards, SSDs and HDDs or both, card reader, CD/DVD drive, multicolored back-lit keyboard, and matte screens. This is an American company building computers in the USA.
Unlike Apple, System 76 immediately implements the latest chips in their models. It takes Apple a year or more to catch up sometimes. That was the case at the time I was shopping for a new machine.
Other companies are expanding their 17" lineups. It is totally relevant. It demonstrates that their market research is showing that more people want them. These are desktop replacement machines. I wrote this before. Even if a person doesn't take their 17" machine outside or to work they can still use it around their house. It doesn't need to remain attached to a desk in just one spot the way a tower and monitor do.
Buy a Bonobo Extreme 17.3" from System 76 and you'll blow away a Mac Book pro of any size. This machine is a desktop replacement.
Nine pounds, two inches thick, and the battery lasts a full minute!
Unlike Apple, System 76 immediately implements the latest chips in their models. It takes Apple a year or more to catch up sometimes.
Not with the laptops, at least.
Other companies are expanding their 17" lineups.
Source?
It is totally relevant. It demonstrates that their market research is showing that more people want them. These are desktop replacement machines. I wrote this before. Even if a person doesn't take their 17" machine outside or to work they can still use it around their house. It doesn't need to remain attached to a desk in just one spot the way a tower and monitor do.
And this portion of the market doesn't make enough money to be viable for Apple.
I have one of the uber 17" Dell desktop replacement precisions. They are heavy and the battery doesn't last but an hour or so. I use a generator in the field.
I used to have a 17" MBP too for work travel. But it often didn't fit in hotel room safes and was kinda too big for airplane tray tables when flying coach.
/shrug. At home and work I always had dedicated monitors. In the hotel I'd consider just lugging along a $200 21" 1080p IPS monitor for longer stays and just making do with 15" for short hops.
Frankly if the damn 13" MBP had a GPU I'd do a 13" instead of the 15". They aren't heavy until you're humping the damn thing around poorly laid out airports and insanely tight connections along with all the other imprtant crud you have to carry because you'd be screwed if the airline lost your luggage.
I dunno...the 17" was neither fish nor fowl for me. A little too big to travel, not quite the über desktop replacement laptop.
Nine pounds, two inches thick, and the battery lasts a full minute!
Not with the laptops, at least.
Source?
And this portion of the market doesn't make enough money to be viable for Apple.
You're so full of yourself aren't you. If you want to know about what other manufacturers are doing then visit their sites. I have, and 17" machines are commonplace now. Visit Wal-Mart or Target and see how many 17" machines are on display. A long time ago such a display was a rare thing only used on the high end laptops. It isn't that way now.
I can recall three years where Apple didn't upgrade the chips in their laptops as soon as the new ones were available. They waited at least a year to do it. Maybe they're catching on that people don't like those long waits for newer processors. We still don't know if they'll do that for all of the MBP lineup. It might be a year before they all get the upgrade.
Where is your citation for the Bonobo Extreme battery that lasts a full minute? See, others can do that too.
The Bonobo Extreme is a desktop replacement machine with a large screen that uses a lot of power. It has two hard drives and two discrete graphics chips. That much stuff uses a lot of electricity, even with the Haswell i7. Owners of these report their batteries last 3-4 hours depending upon what they are doing with them. If it just had one hard drive and one discrete graphics chip and a smaller screen the battery life would be much longer.
One benefit of the System 76 machine is that the components can be changed and so can the battery. Apple has decided that it knows best and doesn't give people these choices. That is one reason my desire for their laptop computers is waning. They're doing the same thing with their desktop machines. If they want to make their desktop machines so small without disc drives then they should just make a giant iPad and put a Thunderbolt 2 connector on them. They could tell people to chain external hard drives, keyboards, and hubs for other devices to them that way. I believe that is coming.
One benefit of the System 76 machine is that the components can be changed and so can the battery. Apple has decided that it knows best and doesn't give people these choices. That is one reason my desire for their laptop computers is waning. They're doing the same thing with their desktop machines. If they want to make their desktop machines so small without disc drives then they should just make a giant iPad and put a Thunderbolt 2 connector on them. They could tell people to chain external hard drives, keyboards, and hubs for other devices to them that way. I believe that is coming.
I'm sorry, but you just don't understand Apple's computers, is all.
As soon as Apple releases an updated 17"macBook Pro,their lineup will be complete. It can serve as their Workstation-class,Technology trickle-down,Workhorse,trickle-down"Flagship",Aspirational,Dream Machine,to anchor their Laptop line. Here's hoping,for the Pros and lovers of Big-Screen Real Estate,to finally get what we've been clamoring for,since they made their bad mistake of dis-continuing it. Maybe Apple and Larry Ellison can both be proven wrong at the same time!
I recently saw a smartly dressed woman using a 17" Macbook on the train. I had completely forgotten just how big that thing was. Outside of a few niche reasons why would you need to carry around such a large laptop, why isn't an external monitor enough. I'm just asking here, I really don't know, I've always believed a notebook should be as small and light as possible for the task at hand. Task at hand being the keyword, do video editors travel to offsite locations enough to warrant such a large display, or printing, photo professionals.
I use as capable a computer as I can reasonably manage to carry. Compared to some of the other gear I have to lug around, even a huge computer is comparatively small.
The 17" MBP rides around in exactly the same backpack that carried my 15" before it.
As for external monitors, would YOU want to carry one around with you everywhere you go? Me neither.
Still, MUCH easier to carry around than a computer with separate monitor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
and the battery lasts a full minute!
Yeah, but unlike Apple's, they can be swapped out so all I have to do is carry ten of 'em like I do for the camera and the audio recorder and the mixer...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
And this portion of the market doesn't make enough money to be viable for Apple.
Nonsense. It's an inconvenience and Apple can't be bothered. I'd accept "it's a market Apple doesn't want" but not "it's not viable."
Still, MUCH easier to carry around than a computer with separate monitor.
But not a 15" laptop.
Yeah, but unlike Apple's, they can be swapped out so all I have to do is carry ten of 'em like I do for the camera and the audio recorder and the mixer...
Sounds more like those other products need to have built in batteries with ten hours of life per. That way you wouldn't just have a laptop that doesn't need replacements carried around.
The objective is to get more content on the screen while remaining legible. A smaller screen runs contrary to that objective. A 15" with external monitor works, but it's easier to carry a 17" laptop.
When the 15" and 17" are side-by-side, the 17" doesn't look that much bigger:
And yet in actual use it's obvious that it is. Use one for an hour then switch to a 15" display. It will be obvious how much difference that extra space makes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
I'd say the biggest reason for the 17" at one point was resolution. [...] The rMBP goes up to 1920x1200 now though:
[...] I doubt a Retina 17" would offer higher than 1920x1200 because the UI would get too small.
You're right, 1920 x 1200 on a 17" is about the limit of how small you can make UI elements and still keep it comfortably legible. That's why I'm not particularly excited about that resolution on a 15" screen. It's just too small.
And yet in actual use it's obvious that it is. Use one for an hour then switch to a 15" display. It will be obvious how much difference that extra space makes.
The space would be the same at the same resolution, it's just scaled up a little.
You're right, 1920 x 1200 on a 17" is about the limit of how small you can make UI elements and still keep it comfortably legible. That's why I'm not particularly excited about that resolution on a 15" screen. It's just too small.
I wouldn't say 1920x1200 is comfortable at that size as this eloquent uhm teenage uhm Youtube reviewer uhm points uhm out uhhhhm:
[VIDEO]
At 2:00, what he says is: "if you have bad eyes, I do not recommend that you get this. I actually have glasses and I still think that this is uhm... it's kinda small but it's... I'd get use to it... uhm... yeah I don't really like the smallness".
1920x1200 on the rMBP is just as bad:
[VIDEO]
I find 1080p hard to read on Apple's 21.5" display. I think if they go Retina, they should have 1680x1050 optimal resolution on the lower one so rendered resolution of 3360x2100 and on the 27", have 1920x1080 as optimal with a rendered resolution of 3840x2160. They'd still be able to allow 1080p and 1440p as higher options.
Comments
But you're alone enough not to matter. Would you feel better if I used "we" instead of "you"? I preferred the 17", myself. But I saw that the desktop is the future of computing and the tablet (in sizes from 10" to 15") is the future of mobile. I got over it.
Run it straight into the ground.
No, you're totally wrong, and that doesn't explain why the 17" would be discontinued. We already have an explanation: sales.
That's why they have four models of laptop (and two old models) and four models of desktop (and one old model).
Then why are hundreds of thousands of professionals perfectly fine with the hardware offered right now?
So you're just trolling now? Go back and watch the keynote. You don't even have an argument.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
So go buy a 17" laptop from someone who isn't Apple and just quit complaining. You seem to know what you want, Apple doesn't make it, therefore you can't buy from Apple.
How's that a relevant question?
Buy a Bonobo Extreme 17.3" from System 76 and you'll blow away a Mac Book pro of any size. This machine is a desktop replacement. The users can swap components if they ever want to and it can be customized to the max directly from the factory. Some features: eSATA, USB 3, fourth generation i7 chips, 2 discrete graphics cards, SSDs and HDDs or both, card reader, CD/DVD drive, multicolored back-lit keyboard, and matte screens. This is an American company building computers in the USA.
Unlike Apple, System 76 immediately implements the latest chips in their models. It takes Apple a year or more to catch up sometimes. That was the case at the time I was shopping for a new machine.
https://www.system76.com/laptops/model/bonx7
Other companies are expanding their 17" lineups. It is totally relevant. It demonstrates that their market research is showing that more people want them. These are desktop replacement machines. I wrote this before. Even if a person doesn't take their 17" machine outside or to work they can still use it around their house. It doesn't need to remain attached to a desk in just one spot the way a tower and monitor do.
Nine pounds, two inches thick, and the battery lasts a full minute!
Not with the laptops, at least.
Source?
And this portion of the market doesn't make enough money to be viable for Apple.
I used to have a 17" MBP too for work travel. But it often didn't fit in hotel room safes and was kinda too big for airplane tray tables when flying coach.
/shrug. At home and work I always had dedicated monitors. In the hotel I'd consider just lugging along a $200 21" 1080p IPS monitor for longer stays and just making do with 15" for short hops.
Frankly if the damn 13" MBP had a GPU I'd do a 13" instead of the 15". They aren't heavy until you're humping the damn thing around poorly laid out airports and insanely tight connections along with all the other imprtant crud you have to carry because you'd be screwed if the airline lost your luggage.
I dunno...the 17" was neither fish nor fowl for me. A little too big to travel, not quite the über desktop replacement laptop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Nine pounds, two inches thick, and the battery lasts a full minute!
Not with the laptops, at least.
Source?
And this portion of the market doesn't make enough money to be viable for Apple.
You're so full of yourself aren't you. If you want to know about what other manufacturers are doing then visit their sites. I have, and 17" machines are commonplace now. Visit Wal-Mart or Target and see how many 17" machines are on display. A long time ago such a display was a rare thing only used on the high end laptops. It isn't that way now.
I can recall three years where Apple didn't upgrade the chips in their laptops as soon as the new ones were available. They waited at least a year to do it. Maybe they're catching on that people don't like those long waits for newer processors. We still don't know if they'll do that for all of the MBP lineup. It might be a year before they all get the upgrade.
Where is your citation for the Bonobo Extreme battery that lasts a full minute? See, others can do that too.
The Bonobo Extreme is a desktop replacement machine with a large screen that uses a lot of power. It has two hard drives and two discrete graphics chips. That much stuff uses a lot of electricity, even with the Haswell i7. Owners of these report their batteries last 3-4 hours depending upon what they are doing with them. If it just had one hard drive and one discrete graphics chip and a smaller screen the battery life would be much longer.
One benefit of the System 76 machine is that the components can be changed and so can the battery. Apple has decided that it knows best and doesn't give people these choices. That is one reason my desire for their laptop computers is waning. They're doing the same thing with their desktop machines. If they want to make their desktop machines so small without disc drives then they should just make a giant iPad and put a Thunderbolt 2 connector on them. They could tell people to chain external hard drives, keyboards, and hubs for other devices to them that way. I believe that is coming.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
And you didn't notice 'round about 2008 that you should think about pulling that back?
Just today another municipality I deal with informed me that fire alarm plans must now be delivered not just in hard copy but also on optical disc.
Hard copies take up a lot of space. But still, file cabinets for discs is cheaper than servers and the electricity to run them.
Not everyone in the US has the benefit of huge tax bases for infrastructure and/or broadband yet.
And yes NFPA code requires hard copies of plans on site where the system is installed.
I'm sorry, but you just don't understand Apple's computers, is all.
As soon as Apple releases an updated 17"macBook Pro,their lineup will be complete. It can serve as their Workstation-class,Technology trickle-down,Workhorse,trickle-down"Flagship",Aspirational,Dream Machine,to anchor their Laptop line. Here's hoping,for the Pros and lovers of Big-Screen Real Estate,to finally get what we've been clamoring for,since they made their bad mistake of dis-continuing it. Maybe Apple and Larry Ellison can both be proven wrong at the same time!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic
I recently saw a smartly dressed woman using a 17" Macbook on the train. I had completely forgotten just how big that thing was. Outside of a few niche reasons why would you need to carry around such a large laptop, why isn't an external monitor enough. I'm just asking here, I really don't know, I've always believed a notebook should be as small and light as possible for the task at hand. Task at hand being the keyword, do video editors travel to offsite locations enough to warrant such a large display, or printing, photo professionals.
I use as capable a computer as I can reasonably manage to carry. Compared to some of the other gear I have to lug around, even a huge computer is comparatively small.
The 17" MBP rides around in exactly the same backpack that carried my 15" before it.
As for external monitors, would YOU want to carry one around with you everywhere you go? Me neither.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Nine pounds, two inches thick
Still, MUCH easier to carry around than a computer with separate monitor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
and the battery lasts a full minute!
Yeah, but unlike Apple's, they can be swapped out so all I have to do is carry ten of 'em like I do for the camera and the audio recorder and the mixer...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
And this portion of the market doesn't make enough money to be viable for Apple.
Nonsense. It's an inconvenience and Apple can't be bothered. I'd accept "it's a market Apple doesn't want" but not "it's not viable."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I'm sorry, but you just don't understand Apple's computers, is all.
Agreed. Sometimes I just do not understand Apple AT ALL.
Originally Posted by v5v
Still, MUCH easier to carry around than a computer with separate monitor.
But not a 15" laptop.
Yeah, but unlike Apple's, they can be swapped out so all I have to do is carry ten of 'em like I do for the camera and the audio recorder and the mixer...
Sounds more like those other products need to have built in batteries with ten hours of life per. That way you wouldn't just have a laptop that doesn't need replacements carried around.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
But not a 15" laptop.
The objective is to get more content on the screen while remaining legible. A smaller screen runs contrary to that objective. A 15" with external monitor works, but it's easier to carry a 17" laptop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
When the 15" and 17" are side-by-side, the 17" doesn't look that much bigger:
And yet in actual use it's obvious that it is. Use one for an hour then switch to a 15" display. It will be obvious how much difference that extra space makes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
I'd say the biggest reason for the 17" at one point was resolution. [...] The rMBP goes up to 1920x1200 now though:
[...] I doubt a Retina 17" would offer higher than 1920x1200 because the UI would get too small.
You're right, 1920 x 1200 on a 17" is about the limit of how small you can make UI elements and still keep it comfortably legible. That's why I'm not particularly excited about that resolution on a 15" screen. It's just too small.
The space would be the same at the same resolution, it's just scaled up a little.
I wouldn't say 1920x1200 is comfortable at that size as this eloquent uhm teenage uhm Youtube reviewer uhm points uhm out uhhhhm:
[VIDEO]
At 2:00, what he says is: "if you have bad eyes, I do not recommend that you get this. I actually have glasses and I still think that this is uhm... it's kinda small but it's... I'd get use to it... uhm... yeah I don't really like the smallness".
1920x1200 on the rMBP is just as bad:
[VIDEO]
I find 1080p hard to read on Apple's 21.5" display. I think if they go Retina, they should have 1680x1050 optimal resolution on the lower one so rendered resolution of 3360x2100 and on the 27", have 1920x1080 as optimal with a rendered resolution of 3840x2160. They'd still be able to allow 1080p and 1440p as higher options.