Here are two examples of what might be construed as self-centered opinion. What's good for them must be good for all. Can't decide if this is funny or dumb.
Quote:
Originally Posted by s4mb4
hope its not true. the 17" is the best Mac Book Pro available.
That cannot possibly be true. Just because it suits your needs does not make it the best available.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eksodos
I hope this news is true. The 17" MacBook Pro annoys me. These are supposed to be portable machines ffs. Consumers don't want to carry these huge laptops around with them. 15" should be the maximum.
So you decide what other people should or shouldn't use? Where do you get off saying consumers don't want to carry huge laptops when there are many who do. Did someone put a gun to the head of, for example, S4MB4?
Actually, unless they make it thicker, anything larger than about 15" in the MBA form factor will be very fragile, or at least, subject to warping unless made of a very tough material.
Chances are, the new MB Pros will feature a much higher resolution (Retina?) display so even a 13 or 15" machine will effectively offer the same or better workspace than a 17" using lower res display.
Even the iPad has a high res than a current gen 17"!
I didn't mean that they were poseurs for disagreeing with my opinion. Everyone is free to do that of course (and often does).
I see hundreds of Apple laptops a year in my job, being bought by all kinds of people for all kinds of uses and in my experience, over the long haul, and on average, almost no one buys a 15" or a 17" MacBook Pro, although the 15" is far more popular than the 17". Those that do (again IMO), tend to be show-offs, or concerned with having the "biggest/best" laptop in the room far more than they are concerned with issues connected with actually using the machine.
All the real pros I know are more likely to be using a 13", or maybe a 15" if they need the screen size. I would say the majority of the power users and the majority of users in general have already moved to MacBook Airs. The 17" MacBook Pro is just over the top for almost everyone (only 1.6% of all Mac laptop users have a 17" model by the numbers in the article).
When someone comes into my office with one of these beasts, most of the staff kind of roll their eyes when the person isn't looking as it's usually someone with more money and more pride than they have common sense. It's not nice to hear perhaps, but it's true in my neck of the woods anyway.
Another narrow minded poster that likes insulting folks that disagree with their asinine opinion.
Pretty much all the "pros" around here have 15" MBPs. The 13" MBPs only come with the GMA 3000 and for many if not most "pros" that's simply not good enough for rendering, development, graphics, etc.
The only poser around here is you since you clearly don't know many pros or why they select the 15" or 17" MBP.
Buying a PC is exactly what I will do. I need the space because iPad won't do heavy things such as modeling and even if it did, doing them by finger would suck
Was planning on buying a MacBook pro 17 in a year with internship money, if it is discontinued. I will not be switching from PC to Mac.
I can't blame you.
As you have stated previously, every member in your family have and love their Dells.
Pretty hard to share their software if you were to switch. And to have to buy Mac Apps, in particular for modelling, it would probably cost you a prohibitive penny, as well as the time to deprogram your PC upbringing.
That said, I don't know why you even bother to comment on what Apple, or what other say, may intend to do. It seems obvious you never really intend to go Mac.
Long ago when I had only owned a desktop computer, I wished I had a large laptop. My desk monitor was 15" 1024 X 768. When I bought my Mac Book 13" in 2008 I liked having the computer on my lap for watching movies. It was on a small pad that kept the heat off my legs. When I purchases a 23" 1920 X1080 monitor and plugged it into the Mac Book I realized that the external monitor was far better than having a bigger screen on a laptop.
For me, having a powerful small laptop computer with an external monitor is the best of both worlds. When the computer needs to travel it is small and light. When at home it plugs into a large screen. My external keyboard and trackball do the job of interfacing with it.
Killing the 17" MBP makes sense. The smaller Mac Book Pros are now powerful enough to power big monitors and do all the work the 17" could do. Only the people who must have a huge screen at various locations will be left out. In five years we'll be able to purchase giant monitors that roll up into cylinders like posters. Those will be very portable and will fit anywhere.
Lots of different opinions here, just want to add mine, in case Apple reads these forums. The 17" size was just too big for me to lug around, and I never realy need that much portable desktop space. Same story for the 15", now I'm down to the 13" MBP, and waiting for a good excuse to get the 11" MBA. But what would really be attractive would be an iPad-sized industrial-strength MBA, with fully-functional keyboard (I could easily manage something smaller than the usual norm) and enough I/O ports - a non-glare screen would be desirable, too (though that may not jibe with retina-display quality). Something light and portable like this would be just perfect. And I bet the masses would love it, too.
What they'll do is drop the 17" MBP and release a 15" MBP with a retina display that has a much higher resolution than the outgoing 17" MBP, thus saying you won't need a 17" laptop anymore.
I do agree with them also dropping the 13". I know its the best selling laptop, but they already have a 13" MBA which will essentially be the same thing. I see them merging these two laptop lines together. Basically you'l have 11, 13, 15" all with retina displays, USB 3, Thunderbolt, no optical drive, and backlit keyboards.
I hope this rumor is untrue. I've been waiting for a refresh to purchase a new 17" MacBook Pro to replace my old 2009 model. I use a 17" MBP since I do a lot of work from home and on-the-go.
Killing the 17" MBP makes sense. The smaller Mac Book Pros are now powerful enough to power big monitors and do all the work the 17" could do.
*coughactualgraphicscough*
Quote:
In twenty-five years we'll be able to purchase giant monitors that roll up into cylinders like posters. Those will be very portable and will fit anywhere.
I was thinking along the same lines, just a little more than what you were thinking, but a lot less than they have now.
11 - MacAir
13 - MacAir
14 - MacPro
16 - MacPro
Only difference between Air and Pro besides size would be upgradeable/replaceable memory.
I had a 13 MacPro, and it was quite small (I gave it to my daughter). I believe the screen real estate in the 13 MacAir is more. My wife had the 15, but I got her the 17 (she loves the big high res screen), so I took over her 15. The 13 was too small for me and the 15 is a bit big, but a 14 high res would be perfect, for my wife a 16 would be perfect. Also, why would Apple carry so many SKU's? As margins may fall for them, they could reduce cost by shrinking the line-up. The internals of the 15 and 17 are the same, so no performance differences.
They'll probably change the name of the product rather than discontinue it. That is usually used by the professional crowd that's into audio/video/graphics/photographers/gamers.
I can understand that for the average power user doesn't want to carry around the 17 inch model, but if they are going to remove the optical drive and make it slimmer, that might make it more attractive.
Personally, for me, I would be looking at a Mac Mini to use as a dedicated media server, either a 15 inch laptop and an iPad. The 17 inch is great, but it is just a little too much for me to carry around. But then again, I don't need the large amount of screen real estate for mobile computing. I wish they would put their best processor (whatever the Ivy Bridge is going to be called) in the Mac Mini along with the ability to throw 16G of memory in it. To me, having that along with a Thunderbolt display and connecting it to a nice 50 inch TV is all I would need for the home. They would probably have to make the motherboard a little bigger, but it would still be small.
Well an aTV + AirParrot can do that for you today for any HDTV. And of course that's a feature for ML. The aTV, like the little AirPort Express would be in my travel bag.
But what will make it really useful are higher resolutions TVs which I think we'll see at some point even if broadcast stays at 720P/1080i. What's an "ML" (I'm bad at acronyms)?
<p> I hope this news is true. The 17" MacBook Pro annoys me. These are supposed to be portable machines ffs. Consumers don't want to carry these huge laptops around with them. 15" should be the maximum.</p>
I do. I need the space to do 3D modeling etc.
If this is true( I doubt it), I will be disappointed in apple and they will lose any shot of ever having my business for computers.
Here is a scale image of the 17" and 15" next to a 24" monitor:
The 15" and 17" aren't all that different in size. You get 30% more viewing area (130sqi vs 100 sqi) for $300 and it's still a TN panel. For that same $300, you can get a 24" IPS display with 276sqi of viewing area - more than double the 17" display and a high quality panel for colour accuracy.
The 17" does have the high resolution of 1920 x 1200 but even if they ship the 15" with the high-res option by default (1680 x 1050), that's the same pixel density. If they sort out resolution independence, they can get 1920 x 1200 on it.
I think it actually makes the least sense to discontinue the 17" now that it's becoming more portable but Apple has to think about shipping volumes and manufacturing costs. They have to mill the chassis differently so cutting it out of the lineup will save them money. As usual, this is just what an analyst thinks will happen. The only difference between him and us is he gets paid for it. If they did decide to cut it out due to low demand though, now would be the time to do it.
I hope this rumor is untrue. I've been waiting for a refresh to purchase a new 17" MacBook Pro to replace my old 2009 model. I use a 17" MBP since I do a lot of work from home and on-the-go.
There's some really good deals on the 17" Sandy Bridge line up now (30% off) - delivered (no tax, free overnight shipping) for just over $1700, almost $800 off.
Comments
Here are two examples of what might be construed as self-centered opinion. What's good for them must be good for all. Can't decide if this is funny or dumb.
Quote:
Originally Posted by s4mb4
hope its not true. the 17" is the best Mac Book Pro available.
That cannot possibly be true. Just because it suits your needs does not make it the best available.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eksodos
I hope this news is true. The 17" MacBook Pro annoys me. These are supposed to be portable machines ffs. Consumers don't want to carry these huge laptops around with them. 15" should be the maximum.
So you decide what other people should or shouldn't use? Where do you get off saying consumers don't want to carry huge laptops when there are many who do. Did someone put a gun to the head of, for example, S4MB4?
Think before opining, people.
Actually, unless they make it thicker, anything larger than about 15" in the MBA form factor will be very fragile, or at least, subject to warping unless made of a very tough material.
Chances are, the new MB Pros will feature a much higher resolution (Retina?) display so even a 13 or 15" machine will effectively offer the same or better workspace than a 17" using lower res display.
Even the iPad has a high res than a current gen 17"!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
I didn't mean that they were poseurs for disagreeing with my opinion. Everyone is free to do that of course (and often does).
I see hundreds of Apple laptops a year in my job, being bought by all kinds of people for all kinds of uses and in my experience, over the long haul, and on average, almost no one buys a 15" or a 17" MacBook Pro, although the 15" is far more popular than the 17". Those that do (again IMO), tend to be show-offs, or concerned with having the "biggest/best" laptop in the room far more than they are concerned with issues connected with actually using the machine.
All the real pros I know are more likely to be using a 13", or maybe a 15" if they need the screen size. I would say the majority of the power users and the majority of users in general have already moved to MacBook Airs. The 17" MacBook Pro is just over the top for almost everyone (only 1.6% of all Mac laptop users have a 17" model by the numbers in the article).
When someone comes into my office with one of these beasts, most of the staff kind of roll their eyes when the person isn't looking as it's usually someone with more money and more pride than they have common sense. It's not nice to hear perhaps, but it's true in my neck of the woods anyway.
Another narrow minded poster that likes insulting folks that disagree with their asinine opinion.
Pretty much all the "pros" around here have 15" MBPs. The 13" MBPs only come with the GMA 3000 and for many if not most "pros" that's simply not good enough for rendering, development, graphics, etc.
The only poser around here is you since you clearly don't know many pros or why they select the 15" or 17" MBP.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seankill
Buying a PC is exactly what I will do. I need the space because iPad won't do heavy things such as modeling and even if it did, doing them by finger would suck
Was planning on buying a MacBook pro 17 in a year with internship money, if it is discontinued. I will not be switching from PC to Mac.
I can't blame you.
As you have stated previously, every member in your family have and love their Dells.
Pretty hard to share their software if you were to switch. And to have to buy Mac Apps, in particular for modelling, it would probably cost you a prohibitive penny, as well as the time to deprogram your PC upbringing.
That said, I don't know why you even bother to comment on what Apple, or what other say, may intend to do. It seems obvious you never really intend to go Mac.
I wouldn't be surprised if the new 13" MacBook Pro with Retina Displays has a higher resolution screen than todays 17" MacBook Pro.
I also wouldn't be surprised If Apple expanded its lineup of CinemaDisplays with new Retina Display Models.
These two factors along with the minuscule sales of the 17" MacBook Pro make it obsolete in Apple's eyes.
Long ago when I had only owned a desktop computer, I wished I had a large laptop. My desk monitor was 15" 1024 X 768. When I bought my Mac Book 13" in 2008 I liked having the computer on my lap for watching movies. It was on a small pad that kept the heat off my legs. When I purchases a 23" 1920 X1080 monitor and plugged it into the Mac Book I realized that the external monitor was far better than having a bigger screen on a laptop.
For me, having a powerful small laptop computer with an external monitor is the best of both worlds. When the computer needs to travel it is small and light. When at home it plugs into a large screen. My external keyboard and trackball do the job of interfacing with it.
Killing the 17" MBP makes sense. The smaller Mac Book Pros are now powerful enough to power big monitors and do all the work the 17" could do. Only the people who must have a huge screen at various locations will be left out. In five years we'll be able to purchase giant monitors that roll up into cylinders like posters. Those will be very portable and will fit anywhere.
Lots of different opinions here, just want to add mine, in case Apple reads these forums. The 17" size was just too big for me to lug around, and I never realy need that much portable desktop space. Same story for the 15", now I'm down to the 13" MBP, and waiting for a good excuse to get the 11" MBA. But what would really be attractive would be an iPad-sized industrial-strength MBA, with fully-functional keyboard (I could easily manage something smaller than the usual norm) and enough I/O ports - a non-glare screen would be desirable, too (though that may not jibe with retina-display quality). Something light and portable like this would be just perfect. And I bet the masses would love it, too.
What they'll do is drop the 17" MBP and release a 15" MBP with a retina display that has a much higher resolution than the outgoing 17" MBP, thus saying you won't need a 17" laptop anymore.
I do agree with them also dropping the 13". I know its the best selling laptop, but they already have a 13" MBA which will essentially be the same thing. I see them merging these two laptop lines together. Basically you'l have 11, 13, 15" all with retina displays, USB 3, Thunderbolt, no optical drive, and backlit keyboards.
I hope this rumor is untrue. I've been waiting for a refresh to purchase a new 17" MacBook Pro to replace my old 2009 model. I use a 17" MBP since I do a lot of work from home and on-the-go.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smallwheels
Killing the 17" MBP makes sense. The smaller Mac Book Pros are now powerful enough to power big monitors and do all the work the 17" could do.
*coughactualgraphicscough*
Quote:
In twenty-five years we'll be able to purchase giant monitors that roll up into cylinders like posters. Those will be very portable and will fit anywhere.
Fixed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun, UK
Maybe something all new...
12" = MacBook
14" = MacBook Air
16" = MacBook Pro
I was thinking along the same lines, just a little more than what you were thinking, but a lot less than they have now.
11 - MacAir
13 - MacAir
14 - MacPro
16 - MacPro
Only difference between Air and Pro besides size would be upgradeable/replaceable memory.
I had a 13 MacPro, and it was quite small (I gave it to my daughter). I believe the screen real estate in the 13 MacAir is more. My wife had the 15, but I got her the 17 (she loves the big high res screen), so I took over her 15. The 13 was too small for me and the 15 is a bit big, but a 14 high res would be perfect, for my wife a 16 would be perfect. Also, why would Apple carry so many SKU's? As margins may fall for them, they could reduce cost by shrinking the line-up. The internals of the 15 and 17 are the same, so no performance differences.
They'll probably change the name of the product rather than discontinue it. That is usually used by the professional crowd that's into audio/video/graphics/photographers/gamers.
I can understand that for the average power user doesn't want to carry around the 17 inch model, but if they are going to remove the optical drive and make it slimmer, that might make it more attractive.
Personally, for me, I would be looking at a Mac Mini to use as a dedicated media server, either a 15 inch laptop and an iPad. The 17 inch is great, but it is just a little too much for me to carry around. But then again, I don't need the large amount of screen real estate for mobile computing. I wish they would put their best processor (whatever the Ivy Bridge is going to be called) in the Mac Mini along with the ability to throw 16G of memory in it. To me, having that along with a Thunderbolt display and connecting it to a nice 50 inch TV is all I would need for the home. They would probably have to make the motherboard a little bigger, but it would still be small.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht
Well an aTV + AirParrot can do that for you today for any HDTV. And of course that's a feature for ML. The aTV, like the little AirPort Express would be in my travel bag.
But what will make it really useful are higher resolutions TVs which I think we'll see at some point even if broadcast stays at 720P/1080i. What's an "ML" (I'm bad at acronyms)?
They might not be able to get a "retina" display in a 17 or bigger just yet. They might be limited on the 17inch model.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudson1
What's an "ML" (I'm bad at acronyms)?
Mountan Lion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank
They might not be able to get a "retina" display in a 17 or bigger just yet. They might be limited on the 17inch model.
They're not going to put retina displays on any of them… Next year at the earliest.
Here is a scale image of the 17" and 15" next to a 24" monitor:
The 15" and 17" aren't all that different in size. You get 30% more viewing area (130sqi vs 100 sqi) for $300 and it's still a TN panel. For that same $300, you can get a 24" IPS display with 276sqi of viewing area - more than double the 17" display and a high quality panel for colour accuracy.
The 17" does have the high resolution of 1920 x 1200 but even if they ship the 15" with the high-res option by default (1680 x 1050), that's the same pixel density. If they sort out resolution independence, they can get 1920 x 1200 on it.
I think it actually makes the least sense to discontinue the 17" now that it's becoming more portable but Apple has to think about shipping volumes and manufacturing costs. They have to mill the chassis differently so cutting it out of the lineup will save them money. As usual, this is just what an analyst thinks will happen. The only difference between him and us is he gets paid for it. If they did decide to cut it out due to low demand though, now would be the time to do it.
never mind...it didn't quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Negafox
I hope this rumor is untrue. I've been waiting for a refresh to purchase a new 17" MacBook Pro to replace my old 2009 model. I use a 17" MBP since I do a lot of work from home and on-the-go.
There's some really good deals on the 17" Sandy Bridge line up now (30% off) - delivered (no tax, free overnight shipping) for just over $1700, almost $800 off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht
Right. Back in 2006 I imagine.
Har har.