Contrary to others, I'd tend to agree. A 17" MBP is a portable workstation. The new one is more than a bit hobbled as a workstation, and the screen is too small for serious work. Yes, I could get an external monitor, but if I do that why get a laptop in the first place?
I'm certainly sympathetic with your preference for a 17" display, and I do shed a tear for its disappearance from the Macbook Pro line.
That being said, I'd like to suggest you try this before you knock it. I just bought it - I was lucky enough to find a stray unit at the Apple Store - and the display is absolutely stunning. It's so sharp and detailed you can read even the tiniest of type. I've learned I can use substantially smaller type sizes and therefore actually get more on the screen than the old 17". Also, clever use of Spaces and the various control key sequences to switch between them can produce a surprisingly productive working environment. If you insist on a full HD-style display you can get it - the type is really small but perfectly sharp. It would be extremely readable if I were about ten years younger .
I have two 27" iMacs on my desk and I love the big screens, but I love the Retina Display even more. I think if you keep an open mind you'll find this machine to be a surprisingly congenial companion.
Oh, and there's one more thing. In every previous laptop I've owned, performance was lacking. This thing is faster than my 27" iMac! Unless you need oodles of disk space I think you'll be really happy with this machine.
So, this is 'pricey' compared to..what? When something is pricey, doesn't that mean it is priced higher than similar or competing products with the same feature sets and value? Can someone point me out to which laptop they're comparing this too, which just happens to have the same insane display, build quality, industrial design, battery life, all flash storage, 2 thunderbolt ports, thinnes/lightness, etc etc? This product is currently in a class of its own, and simply defining it as 'pricey' by comparing apples and oranges is such an intellectually lazy argument. I'd like to challenge ANY other company to produce this thing at a lower price. It wasn't long ago than people were saying a retina class screen was an impossibility on a laptop. This product is unprecented, there's simply nothing like it on the market, and claiming it is 'too pricey' without really justifying that by pointing to cheaper and similar alternatives is idiotic and assinine.
Cook stated that the 15" retina is now Apple's flagship computer. I don't know how you can be clearer than that.
As for losing business, you're speculating. In reality, people who would have otherwise bought the 17" MBP have to decide whether the size or the OS is more important to them. I would have otherwise bought a 17" this fall, but I'll buy the15" retina MBP instead. The size will be less of a sacrifice than switching to Windows.
So what makes you so certain that I'm in the minority?
Trajan Long is in the minority and is trying to find some company. Pay him no mind he has his belly button to keep him distracted.
Just wanted to further emphasize what Entropys has brought up. Whenever I hear people complain about the cost of the retina MBP I can't help but think about the first computer I bought used for $2600 in 1996. Or my Thinkpad 600E which was introduced in 1999 with models ranging in price from $2800 to $4200. Adjust those prices to current dollars and how much do you think it will be? The inflation calculator says that $2800 in 1999 is over $3600 in 2010 dollars. Now tell me, is the retina MBP really that expensive?
The reviewer cited in this article seemed to do a pretty decent job. Seems like the ONLY downside was the price. By definition, that is simply a well-designed highly desirable product.
Most reviewers because they can't do must criticize the efforts of those who can.
Not in recent years. Just look at how other companies have struggled to match the price points of iPad and MacBook Air.
The fact of the matter is that, too many people look at the Windows/MacOS split and conclude Apple to have remained a minor player in PC industry. But they are amongst top 5 (top 3) as an individual PC maker, which gives them significant economy of scale. Furthermore, they are buying flash RAM chips in such significant volume (for the iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad) that they are able to add SSDs at a cost that others cannot. This might be a halo effect no one anticipated.
All to say, "very pretty and very competitively priced" is Apple's new motto.
I have two 27" iMacs on my desk and I love the big screens, but I love the Retina Display even more. I think if you keep an open mind you'll find this machine to be a surprisingly congenial companion.
Oh, and there's one more thing. In every previous laptop I've owned, performance was lacking. This thing is faster than my 27" iMac! Unless you need oodles of disk space I think you'll be really happy with this machine.
D
Congenial companion? Maybe if they add Siri.
As for oodles of disk space, 768 GB is plenty, if you're willing to pay for it.
Contrary to others, I'd tend to agree. A 17" MBP is a portable workstation. The new one is more than a bit hobbled as a workstation, and the screen is too small for serious work. Yes, I could get an external monitor, but if I do that why get a laptop in the first place?
While I wouldn't be interested in a Windows box I'd look at used 17" machines, 2nd party upgrades, and Hackintosh laptop possibilities. For me a 17" MBP is a necessity, not a luxury. I won't be spending thousands on a laptop I have to squint at. Even with my current 17" MBP I have to use computer glasses. I won't be going back down to a 15" screen, much less a tiny 13 incher.
And how much will an ethernet to thunderbolt dongle cost me? $100+? I find it hard to believe adding ethernet and firewire ports would add more thant $25 to the cost of the machine. Meanwhile there's not a lot of Thunderbolt stuff out there yet.
Don't get me wrong, these are nice laptops with some great features, but as usual, Apple is getting ahead of themselves, as they have many times in the past. These machine look like intermediate steps to a better laptop.
Every machine is an intermediate step to something. But, whatever the final destination is, I doubt we will see many ports added. Look at MacBook Air - 4 years after its intro, there is still no built-in Ethernet. Apple simply has the guts to leave legacy as legacy.
15" is NOT too small for serious work. There are tens of millions of people who use that or smaller laptops as their primary computer. Not long ago, 15" was the dominant monitor size for offices. So, the evidence is against the notion that 15" screens or smaller are too small for serious work. If you have to squint at a 15" screen, you need better glasses rather than a large screen. The market has spoken - Apple would not suspend (or drop?) the 17" model if there was significant demand.
Every machine is an intermediate step to something. But, whatever the final destination is, I doubt we will see many ports added. Look at MacBook Air - 4 years after its intro, there is still no built-in Ethernet. Apple simply has the guts to leave legacy as legacy.
. . .
The MBA is supposed to be especially small and light. Fewer ports is the trade off. The MBP is supposed to be full featured, hence the Pro suffix.
Apple's history demo states that they have the guts to abandon legacy tech and boldly move to the next logical step. But it also shows that they have often jumped the gun and left their users orphaned from the existing tech while waiting for reasonably functional and priced tech to arrive. To me the lack of a firewire and ethernet port are minimum standard connections are a good example. Cheap, ubiquitous, essential, and currently without reasonable substitutes. Am I supposed to use WiFi to migrate files from my old laptop or to transfer video? Do I immediately have to go out and spend several hundred dollars to connect to existing peripherals? It just seems silly. The optical drive is less of a problem. The screen will be an annoyance for anyone over 50 and a big problem for people with vision problems. I don't think my Mom (a who is 79, but looking to replace her MBP and her iMac) will be able to use such small screen. Sure the screen clarity will improve, but the text and icon size is important for her. Until OS X is truly resolution independent, she will have difficulties. Everyone sees the hip Apple commercials and assumes Apple users are all 18 to 25. The fact is Apple's demographics for their computer customers (compared to other companies) is incredibly broad and skewed more to older customers. Usability makes products broadly appealing.
Anyway, they are nice laptops and I do lust after them. But the trade offs will be a big problem for many people.
I don't see what the big deal is about admitting that the Retina MBP is pricey. $2400 is pricey, but who didn't expect a retina display MBP to be pricey? This is a pricey Apple product that lives up to it's price, with singularly innovative technology. It is configured reasonably well for the price with plenty of RAM and an SSD. I have a problem with the soldered RAM, but that would bother me at about any price at which Apple would conceivably offer this laptop.
The thing to remember is that most people, reviewers included, typically buy a $1000 laptop and it's good enough for their needs. I also suspect that most people don't appreciate how just how profound an improvement the Retina display is. Soon after the Retina iPad was released, I was at a Verizon store and the sales droids there either didn't know what it was or told me it was "just a higher resolution" and that the real improvement was the 4G capability. But for someone like a professional or hobbiest photographer, the IPS Retina display on this new MBP is going to be well worth the price and all the reason many Windows users need to finally switch.
I really hope that Apple releases a 17" Retina laptop. I've been buying used Macs for a long time but such a model would finally induce me to buy new. There is so much potential in a 17" laptop, it's a shame to see Apple sh!tcan the product rather than improve it.
The MBA is supposed to be especially small and light. Fewer ports is the trade off. The MBP is supposed to be full featured, hence the Pro suffix.
Apple's history demo states that they have the guts to abandon legacy tech and boldly move to the next logical step. But it also shows that they have often jumped the gun and left their users orphaned from the existing tech while waiting for reasonably functional and priced tech to arrive. To me the lack of a firewire and ethernet port are minimum standard connections are a good example. Cheap, ubiquitous, essential, and currently without reasonable substitutes. Am I supposed to use WiFi to migrate files from my old laptop or to transfer video? Do I immediately have to go out and spend several hundred dollars to connect to existing peripherals? It just seems silly. The optical drive is less of a problem. The screen will be an annoyance for anyone over 50 and a big problem for people with vision problems. I don't think my Mom (a who is 79, but looking to replace her MBP and her iMac) will be able to use such small screen. Sure the screen clarity will improve, but the text and icon size is important for her. Until OS X is truly resolution independent, she will have difficulties. Everyone sees the hip Apple commercials and assumes Apple users are all 18 to 25. The fact is Apple's demographics for their computer customers (compared to other companies) is incredibly broad and skewed more to older customers. Usability makes products broadly appealing.
Anyway, they are nice laptops and I do lust after them. But the trade offs will be a big problem for many people.
Are you suggesting the vision-challenged demographic is currently all using 17" MBP?
"Reviewers ... remain put off by the $2,200 entry price."
Apparently the Reviewers are the only ones who are "put off", Apple can't seem to make them fast enough as shops times have slipped to 3-4 weeks.
Sheesh, I wonder what they said back in '09 when the 17" cost me A$4K (I took the 7200rpm hdd option). The MBPR is A$1500 (A$800 for the top model) cheaper - you'd have to maxx out the ram and ssd on the higher end model to reach that price.
And the reviewers seem to forget that when the Air first came out it was priced at a premium, and came down over time. (edit: and as others have pointed out, it's not expensive for what you get)
I'm certainly sympathetic with your preference for a 17" display, and I do shed a tear for its disappearance from the Macbook Pro line.
That being said, I'd like to suggest you try this before you knock it. I just bought it - I was lucky enough to find a stray unit at the Apple Store - and the display is absolutely stunning. It's so sharp and detailed you can read even the tiniest of type. I've learned I can use substantially smaller type sizes and therefore actually get more on the screen than the old 17". Also, clever use of Spaces and the various control key sequences to switch between them can produce a surprisingly productive working environment. If you insist on a full HD-style display you can get it - the type is really small but perfectly sharp. It would be extremely readable if I were about ten years younger .
I have two 27" iMacs on my desk and I love the big screens, but I love the Retina Display even more. I think if you keep an open mind you'll find this machine to be a surprisingly congenial companion.
Oh, and there's one more thing. In every previous laptop I've owned, performance was lacking. This thing is faster than my 27" iMac! Unless you need oodles of disk space I think you'll be really happy with this machine.
D
I appreciate your response. The new MBPs look great and are lust worthy.
I have not seen them in person yet, but I'm sure I will like the added resolution and I will hold my judgement until I actually get to use one.
My concern though, is not really the amount of stuff on the screen, but the size of the stuff on the screen. My concern is also for my Mom who is an avid traveler, photographer, and computer user at 79 (but hey, I just hit my 52nd year and I'm not getting any younger.) Her 17" MBP has really changed her life (she'd get a 19" MBPif they made one.) It usually sits on her breakfast table. NYT in the morning, email, crosswords, web, iPhoto, etc. She moves it around with her to the through the day and stows it when guest come. The iMac with the big screen is in her basement office and only gets used for serious work and financial stuff (she keeps it near her files, printer, scanner, etc. A big screen will not work for her upstairs.
Spaces, mission control, etc. are very useful, but no substitute for suitably sized text and UI elements (plus although she does use them, the can be a bit confusing for her.)
Apple needs to get moving on a truly resolution independent OS X so users can just dial in their preferred size for UI elements and text and still get the benefits of the high res screens.
Can anyone comment on the screen? How reflective is that? In the video they said that glass was no longer required to hold the screen, does that mean they are using some other material to cover up the screen?
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by DESuserIGN
Contrary to others, I'd tend to agree. A 17" MBP is a portable workstation. The new one is more than a bit hobbled as a workstation, and the screen is too small for serious work. Yes, I could get an external monitor, but if I do that why get a laptop in the first place?
I'm certainly sympathetic with your preference for a 17" display, and I do shed a tear for its disappearance from the Macbook Pro line.
That being said, I'd like to suggest you try this before you knock it. I just bought it - I was lucky enough to find a stray unit at the Apple Store
I have two 27" iMacs on my desk and I love the big screens, but I love the Retina Display even more. I think if you keep an open mind you'll find this machine to be a surprisingly congenial companion.
Oh, and there's one more thing. In every previous laptop I've owned, performance was lacking. This thing is faster than my 27" iMac! Unless you need oodles of disk space I think you'll be really happy with this machine.
D
So, this is 'pricey' compared to..what? When something is pricey, doesn't that mean it is priced higher than similar or competing products with the same feature sets and value? Can someone point me out to which laptop they're comparing this too, which just happens to have the same insane display, build quality, industrial design, battery life, all flash storage, 2 thunderbolt ports, thinnes/lightness, etc etc? This product is currently in a class of its own, and simply defining it as 'pricey' by comparing apples and oranges is such an intellectually lazy argument. I'd like to challenge ANY other company to produce this thing at a lower price. It wasn't long ago than people were saying a retina class screen was an impossibility on a laptop. This product is unprecented, there's simply nothing like it on the market, and claiming it is 'too pricey' without really justifying that by pointing to cheaper and similar alternatives is idiotic and assinine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Cook stated that the 15" retina is now Apple's flagship computer. I don't know how you can be clearer than that.
As for losing business, you're speculating. In reality, people who would have otherwise bought the 17" MBP have to decide whether the size or the OS is more important to them. I would have otherwise bought a 17" this fall, but I'll buy the15" retina MBP instead. The size will be less of a sacrifice than switching to Windows.
So what makes you so certain that I'm in the minority?
Trajan Long is in the minority and is trying to find some company. Pay him no mind he has his belly button to keep him distracted.
Just wanted to further emphasize what Entropys has brought up. Whenever I hear people complain about the cost of the retina MBP I can't help but think about the first computer I bought used for $2600 in 1996. Or my Thinkpad 600E which was introduced in 1999 with models ranging in price from $2800 to $4200. Adjust those prices to current dollars and how much do you think it will be? The inflation calculator says that $2800 in 1999 is over $3600 in 2010 dollars. Now tell me, is the retina MBP really that expensive?
Apple discards old tech with new MacBook Pro, full of new tech.
Reviewers say "Pretty but pricey. We miss the old stuff."
Wtf?
MacBook Pro 15" (classic) w 512GB SSD = $ 3.099
MacBook Pro 15" (retina) w 512GB SSD = $ 2.799
MacBook Pro 15" (retina) w 512GB SSD, 16GB RAM = $2.999
Which is the pricey again?
I don't think it's that pricey, not for what you get. Those are some big SSDs in there. And it's cutting edge tech, so you will be current for longer.
The reviewer cited in this article seemed to do a pretty decent job. Seems like the ONLY downside was the price. By definition, that is simply a well-designed highly desirable product.
Most reviewers because they can't do must criticize the efforts of those who can.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OllieWallieWhiskers
"Pretty but pricey" isn't that Apple's motto?
Not in recent years. Just look at how other companies have struggled to match the price points of iPad and MacBook Air.
The fact of the matter is that, too many people look at the Windows/MacOS split and conclude Apple to have remained a minor player in PC industry. But they are amongst top 5 (top 3) as an individual PC maker, which gives them significant economy of scale. Furthermore, they are buying flash RAM chips in such significant volume (for the iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad) that they are able to add SSDs at a cost that others cannot. This might be a halo effect no one anticipated.
All to say, "very pretty and very competitively priced" is Apple's new motto.
Quote:
Originally Posted by palegolas
Apple discards old tech with new MacBook Pro, full of new tech.
Reviewers say "Pretty but pricey. We miss the old stuff."
Wtf?
MacBook Pro 15" (classic) w 512GB SSD = $ 3.099
MacBook Pro 15" (retina) w 512GB SSD = $ 2.799
MacBook Pro 15" (retina) w 512GB SSD, 16GB RAM = $2.999
Which is the pricey again?
It is odd that, with SSD, the RetinaDisplay version is cheaper.
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Dennis
I have two 27" iMacs on my desk and I love the big screens, but I love the Retina Display even more. I think if you keep an open mind you'll find this machine to be a surprisingly congenial companion.
Oh, and there's one more thing. In every previous laptop I've owned, performance was lacking. This thing is faster than my 27" iMac! Unless you need oodles of disk space I think you'll be really happy with this machine.
D
Congenial companion? Maybe if they add Siri.
As for oodles of disk space, 768 GB is plenty, if you're willing to pay for it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DESuserIGN
Contrary to others, I'd tend to agree. A 17" MBP is a portable workstation. The new one is more than a bit hobbled as a workstation, and the screen is too small for serious work. Yes, I could get an external monitor, but if I do that why get a laptop in the first place?
While I wouldn't be interested in a Windows box I'd look at used 17" machines, 2nd party upgrades, and Hackintosh laptop possibilities. For me a 17" MBP is a necessity, not a luxury. I won't be spending thousands on a laptop I have to squint at. Even with my current 17" MBP I have to use computer glasses. I won't be going back down to a 15" screen, much less a tiny 13 incher.
And how much will an ethernet to thunderbolt dongle cost me? $100+? I find it hard to believe adding ethernet and firewire ports would add more thant $25 to the cost of the machine. Meanwhile there's not a lot of Thunderbolt stuff out there yet.
Don't get me wrong, these are nice laptops with some great features, but as usual, Apple is getting ahead of themselves, as they have many times in the past. These machine look like intermediate steps to a better laptop.
Every machine is an intermediate step to something. But, whatever the final destination is, I doubt we will see many ports added. Look at MacBook Air - 4 years after its intro, there is still no built-in Ethernet. Apple simply has the guts to leave legacy as legacy.
15" is NOT too small for serious work. There are tens of millions of people who use that or smaller laptops as their primary computer. Not long ago, 15" was the dominant monitor size for offices. So, the evidence is against the notion that 15" screens or smaller are too small for serious work. If you have to squint at a 15" screen, you need better glasses rather than a large screen. The market has spoken - Apple would not suspend (or drop?) the 17" model if there was significant demand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OllieWallieWhiskers
"Pretty but pricey" isn't that Apple's motto?
I can't understand how professional reviewers are unfamiliar with the Apple tax. Pretty but pricy indeed...
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater
Every machine is an intermediate step to something. But, whatever the final destination is, I doubt we will see many ports added. Look at MacBook Air - 4 years after its intro, there is still no built-in Ethernet. Apple simply has the guts to leave legacy as legacy.
. . .
The MBA is supposed to be especially small and light. Fewer ports is the trade off. The MBP is supposed to be full featured, hence the Pro suffix.
Apple's history demo states that they have the guts to abandon legacy tech and boldly move to the next logical step. But it also shows that they have often jumped the gun and left their users orphaned from the existing tech while waiting for reasonably functional and priced tech to arrive. To me the lack of a firewire and ethernet port are minimum standard connections are a good example. Cheap, ubiquitous, essential, and currently without reasonable substitutes. Am I supposed to use WiFi to migrate files from my old laptop or to transfer video? Do I immediately have to go out and spend several hundred dollars to connect to existing peripherals? It just seems silly. The optical drive is less of a problem. The screen will be an annoyance for anyone over 50 and a big problem for people with vision problems. I don't think my Mom (a who is 79, but looking to replace her MBP and her iMac) will be able to use such small screen. Sure the screen clarity will improve, but the text and icon size is important for her. Until OS X is truly resolution independent, she will have difficulties. Everyone sees the hip Apple commercials and assumes Apple users are all 18 to 25. The fact is Apple's demographics for their computer customers (compared to other companies) is incredibly broad and skewed more to older customers. Usability makes products broadly appealing.
Anyway, they are nice laptops and I do lust after them. But the trade offs will be a big problem for many people.
I don't see what the big deal is about admitting that the Retina MBP is pricey. $2400 is pricey, but who didn't expect a retina display MBP to be pricey? This is a pricey Apple product that lives up to it's price, with singularly innovative technology. It is configured reasonably well for the price with plenty of RAM and an SSD. I have a problem with the soldered RAM, but that would bother me at about any price at which Apple would conceivably offer this laptop.
The thing to remember is that most people, reviewers included, typically buy a $1000 laptop and it's good enough for their needs. I also suspect that most people don't appreciate how just how profound an improvement the Retina display is. Soon after the Retina iPad was released, I was at a Verizon store and the sales droids there either didn't know what it was or told me it was "just a higher resolution" and that the real improvement was the 4G capability. But for someone like a professional or hobbiest photographer, the IPS Retina display on this new MBP is going to be well worth the price and all the reason many Windows users need to finally switch.
I really hope that Apple releases a 17" Retina laptop. I've been buying used Macs for a long time but such a model would finally induce me to buy new. There is so much potential in a 17" laptop, it's a shame to see Apple sh!tcan the product rather than improve it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DESuserIGN
The MBA is supposed to be especially small and light. Fewer ports is the trade off. The MBP is supposed to be full featured, hence the Pro suffix.
Apple's history demo states that they have the guts to abandon legacy tech and boldly move to the next logical step. But it also shows that they have often jumped the gun and left their users orphaned from the existing tech while waiting for reasonably functional and priced tech to arrive. To me the lack of a firewire and ethernet port are minimum standard connections are a good example. Cheap, ubiquitous, essential, and currently without reasonable substitutes. Am I supposed to use WiFi to migrate files from my old laptop or to transfer video? Do I immediately have to go out and spend several hundred dollars to connect to existing peripherals? It just seems silly. The optical drive is less of a problem. The screen will be an annoyance for anyone over 50 and a big problem for people with vision problems. I don't think my Mom (a who is 79, but looking to replace her MBP and her iMac) will be able to use such small screen. Sure the screen clarity will improve, but the text and icon size is important for her. Until OS X is truly resolution independent, she will have difficulties. Everyone sees the hip Apple commercials and assumes Apple users are all 18 to 25. The fact is Apple's demographics for their computer customers (compared to other companies) is incredibly broad and skewed more to older customers. Usability makes products broadly appealing.
Anyway, they are nice laptops and I do lust after them. But the trade offs will be a big problem for many people.
Are you suggesting the vision-challenged demographic is currently all using 17" MBP?
Quote:
Originally Posted by russgriz
"Reviewers ... remain put off by the $2,200 entry price."
Apparently the Reviewers are the only ones who are "put off", Apple can't seem to make them fast enough as shops times have slipped to 3-4 weeks.
Sheesh, I wonder what they said back in '09 when the 17" cost me A$4K (I took the 7200rpm hdd option). The MBPR is A$1500 (A$800 for the top model) cheaper - you'd have to maxx out the ram and ssd on the higher end model to reach that price.
And the reviewers seem to forget that when the Air first came out it was priced at a premium, and came down over time. (edit: and as others have pointed out, it's not expensive for what you get)
Apple tax? All you have to do is show me a comparable system that costs less. Please do so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Dennis
I'm certainly sympathetic with your preference for a 17" display, and I do shed a tear for its disappearance from the Macbook Pro line.
That being said, I'd like to suggest you try this before you knock it. I just bought it - I was lucky enough to find a stray unit at the Apple Store
I have two 27" iMacs on my desk and I love the big screens, but I love the Retina Display even more. I think if you keep an open mind you'll find this machine to be a surprisingly congenial companion.
Oh, and there's one more thing. In every previous laptop I've owned, performance was lacking. This thing is faster than my 27" iMac! Unless you need oodles of disk space I think you'll be really happy with this machine.
D
I appreciate your response. The new MBPs look great and are lust worthy.
I have not seen them in person yet, but I'm sure I will like the added resolution and I will hold my judgement until I actually get to use one.
My concern though, is not really the amount of stuff on the screen, but the size of the stuff on the screen. My concern is also for my Mom who is an avid traveler, photographer, and computer user at 79 (but hey, I just hit my 52nd year and I'm not getting any younger.) Her 17" MBP has really changed her life (she'd get a 19" MBPif they made one.) It usually sits on her breakfast table. NYT in the morning, email, crosswords, web, iPhoto, etc. She moves it around with her to the through the day and stows it when guest come. The iMac with the big screen is in her basement office and only gets used for serious work and financial stuff (she keeps it near her files, printer, scanner, etc. A big screen will not work for her upstairs.
Spaces, mission control, etc. are very useful, but no substitute for suitably sized text and UI elements (plus although she does use them, the can be a bit confusing for her.)
Apple needs to get moving on a truly resolution independent OS X so users can just dial in their preferred size for UI elements and text and still get the benefits of the high res screens.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater
Are you suggesting the vision-challenged demographic is currently all using 17" MBP?
Um, . . . No.
Are you suggesting that as a reasonable inference from my post?
The fact is, nearly everyone will be visually challenged at some point in their lives. Most people by the time they are 40.
There's plenty of snark out there, so why add to it?