Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Though Discontinued, Apple Offering a Plethora of Discounted 17" MacBook Pros

MacRumors

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
63,483
30,719



macbookpro17.jpg


Apple quietly discontinued the 17" MacBook Pro on Monday, the end of the line for a laptop that Apple has been selling in some form for nearly 10 years.

A favorite of road warriors and mobile production gurus, the end of the Apple notebook was upsetting for some, though Apple is still selling almost-new 17" MacBook Pros -- and likely will be for a while.

Apple is currently offering more than a dozen different 17" MacBook Pro configurations on the US Apple Online Store in the Refurbished Mac category. Refurbished Macs carry the same warranty as new machines, come with all the same accessories and the AppleCare Protection Plan can be purchased to extend the warranty and customer support out to three years.

Apple has refurbished 17" machines originally released as far back as April 2010 and as recently as October 2011. Prices range from $1,689 to $2,199.

Article Link: Though Discontinued, Apple Offering a Plethora of Discounted 17" MacBook Pros
 
Article Link
https://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/14/though-discontinued-apple-offering-a-plethora-of-discounted-17-macbook-pros/
Lachlan9383

Lachlan9383

macrumors newbie
May 29, 2010
7
0
Actually they are priced very nicely. But I'm going to be happy with my brand new Retina Macbook Pro... when it finally arrives.
 
W

Westyfield2

macrumors 6502a
Jun 9, 2009
606
0
Bath, UK.
Still selling them in my local Apple Store anyway, as they don't have the Retina MacBook Pro/Updated MacBook Pro/Updated MacBook Air in yet :rolleyes:.
 
pubwvj

pubwvj

macrumors 68000
Oct 1, 2004
1,901
208
Mountains of Vermont
Hmm... Not very good deals. The new MacBook Pro Retina is cheaper when you consider the processing power, storage and memory you get for your dollars. I was tempted by the idea when I saw the head line since I'm in the market and had been considering a 17" but the MBPr is a better deal.
 
S

shurcooL

macrumors 6502a
Jan 24, 2011
938
117
Who's to say they're not going to re-add a 17" MBP with Retina after some time?

They're just discontinuing it for the time being, as far as I can see.
 
KnightWRX

KnightWRX

macrumors Pentium
Jan 28, 2009
15,046
4
Quebec, Canada
shurcooL said:
Who's to say they're not going to re-add a 17" MBP with Retina after some time?

They're just discontinuing it for the time being, as far as I can see.
Click to expand...

Last time, in 2008, they kept on selling the non-refreshed 17" MBP when they introduced the unibodies in october. They didn't remove it to "re-introduce it" in January 2009 when they finally gave it the unibody treatment.

Nope, seems to me this time it's really gone.
 
G

G5isAlive

Contributor
Aug 28, 2003
2,567
4,413
pubwvj said:
Hmm... Not very good deals. The new MacBook Pro Retina is cheaper when you consider the processing power, storage and memory you get for your dollars. I was tempted by the idea when I saw the head line since I'm in the market and had been considering a 17" but the MBPr is a better deal.
Click to expand...

better deal has little to do with it when comparing the 17" and the 15" rmbp...

its about what someone needs. some people really do want those extra inches of screen to have code side by side with a compile window for example. don't get me wrong I am a fan of retina displays but sometimes there just is no replacement for display inches... talking squinting at the screen here regardless of resolution.

reality is one size does not fit all :)
 
KnightWRX

KnightWRX

macrumors Pentium
Jan 28, 2009
15,046
4
Quebec, Canada
G5isAlive said:
its about what someone needs. some people really do want those extra inches of screen to have code side by side with a compile window for example. don't get me wrong I am a fan of retina displays but sometimes there just is no replacement for display inches...
Click to expand...

Code in windows have nothing to do with inches. It's pixel count.

1920 horizontal pixels will display the same amount of code on a 15.4" screen or 17" screen.

A common misconception, rather surprising on a technical blog like Macrumors.
 
U

Undecided

macrumors 6502a
Mar 4, 2005
704
168
California
KnightWRX said:
Code in windows have nothing to do with inches. It's pixel count.

1920 horizontal pixels will display the same amount of code on a 15.4" screen or 17" screen.

A common misconception, rather surprising on a technical blog like Macrumors.
Click to expand...

That's just another way of saying it's font size. Um, OK, but working with tiny fonts is tiring and irritating, and there's only so small you can go.

I think people are saying that at the same font size, you can see more with a 17" screen, which is, of course, true.
 
R

ruan11

macrumors newbie
Jun 14, 2012
1
0
KnightWRX said:
Code in windows have nothing to do with inches. It's pixel count.

1920 horizontal pixels will display the same amount of code on a 15.4" screen or 17" screen.

A common misconception, rather surprising on a technical blog like Macrumors.
Click to expand...

You missed the point of what he was saying, it doesn't matter if the same amount of code is displayed, it will be smaller to look at on a 15.4" screen than on a 17" screen.
 
Pakaku

Pakaku

macrumors 68040
Aug 29, 2009
3,134
4,440
KnightWRX said:
Code in windows have nothing to do with inches. It's pixel count.

1920 horizontal pixels will display the same amount of code on a 15.4" screen or 17" screen.

A common misconception, rather surprising on a technical blog like Macrumors.
Click to expand...

It'll display the same amount, but at a smaller size on a 15". Some people just don't want things smaller.
 
Quu

Quu

macrumors 68040
Apr 2, 2007
3,420
6,792
KnightWRX said:
Code in windows have nothing to do with inches. It's pixel count.

1920 horizontal pixels will display the same amount of code on a 15.4" screen or 17" screen.

A common misconception, rather surprising on a technical blog like Macrumors.
Click to expand...

I think what he is insinuating is that if they do a Retina version of the 17" MacBook Pro that the resolution would be 3840 x 2400 while the current Retina 15" MacBook Pro is 2880 x 1800.

Basically doubling 1920 x 1200 whilst the current Retina 15" doubles the originals 1440x900 resolution.

So what I'm trying to get at is some of us still want a notebook that has a larger display than the 15" with more real estate for apps. At the moment the current Retina 15" offers no extra space for apps compared to the original 15" it just increases the pixel density to have everything look sharper.
 
F

FlameofAnor

macrumors regular
Feb 23, 2011
210
1
ruan11 said:
You missed the point of what he was saying, it doesn't matter if the same amount of code is displayed, it will be smaller to look at on a 15.4" screen than on a 17" screen.
Click to expand...

Except on a retina display, the text will be sharper, even if it's a little smaller. The end result is it shouldn't be harder to read.

Just as web browsing on the new iPad is so much better than the older models. I used to have to zoom in on articles to read them, now I can even read small font sizes without strain. Pixel density does matter to your viewing experience.
 
KnightWRX

KnightWRX

macrumors Pentium
Jan 28, 2009
15,046
4
Quebec, Canada
Pakaku said:
It'll display the same amount, but at a smaller size on a 15". Some people just don't want things smaller.
Click to expand...

Some people need better glasses. I'd argue that it's Bigger size on the 17" and that some people just don't want things bigger.

----------
Quu said:
I think what he is insinuating is that if they do a Retina version of the 17" MacBook Pro that the resolution would be 3840 x 2400 while the current Retina 15" MacBook Pro is 2880 x 1800.

Basically doubling 1920 x 1200 whilst the current Retina 15" doubles the originals 1440x900 resolution.
Click to expand...

The current MBPR has a scaled mode for 1920x1200, rendering your desktop/apps to a 3840x2400 frame buffer and then basically downscaling it to 2880x1800 to give what is essentially, 1920x1200 resolution at the monitor's native 2880x1800 (so you don't get blurring you'd get running a non-native resolution).

----------
FlameofAnor said:
Except on a retina display, the text will be sharper, even if it's a little smaller. The end result is it shouldn't be harder to read.
Click to expand...

133 PPI (old 17" MBP) vs essentially 147 PPI (new MBPR 15.4" running 1920x1200 scaled mode).
 
ohbrilliance

ohbrilliance

macrumors 65816
May 15, 2007
1,010
355
Melbourne, Australia
Quu said:
At the moment the current Retina 15" offers no extra space for apps compared to the original 15" it just increases the pixel density to have everything look sharper.
Click to expand...

The retina Macbook Pro also offers 1680x1050 and 1920x1200 settings: http://www.anandtech.com/show/5998/macbook-pro-retina-display-analysis

These are scaled at uneven ratios, so the performance and quality are still to be seen, though Anandtech says that 1680x1050 on the retina looks a lot better than native 1680x1050 on the non-retina high-res MBP. Sounds promising.
 
M

Mikey7c8

macrumors regular
Sep 15, 2009
185
3
Montreal, Canada
ohbrilliance said:
The retina Macbook Pro also offers 1680x1050 and 1920x1200 settings: http://www.anandtech.com/show/5998/macbook-pro-retina-display-analysis

These are scaled at uneven ratios, so the performance and quality are still to be seen, though Anandtech says that 1680x1050 on the retina looks a lot better than native 1680x1050 on the non-retina high-res MBP. Sounds promising.
Click to expand...

Yep. As close to 'resolution independence' as we've seen so far. Can't wait to get mine and try it out for real.

I do however doubt that we'll see a next-generation 17" retina mbp, though I suppose a version using a retina display in the current enclosure might be possible.

^^ Honestly I don't see them spending the engineering resources to make a next-gen 17.
 
MarkCollette

MarkCollette

macrumors 68000
Mar 6, 2003
1,559
36
Toronto, Canada
KnightWRX said:
Code in windows have nothing to do with inches. It's pixel count.

1920 horizontal pixels will display the same amount of code on a 15.4" screen or 17" screen.

A common misconception, rather surprising on a technical blog like Macrumors.
Click to expand...

Uhh no. Well, technically you're right, that the same number of lines will be displayed, but depending on the viewer's eye sight and age, they will have different degrees of readability. Personally I now read at a higher font size than 5 years ago, given the same screen.

When the iPhone 3GS and 4 were both in my hands, given the same physical size of font, the 4 was more readable. But that doesn't mean that with twice the resolution I could read with half the physical size, even if all the same pixel information is there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom