MBP 15" or 17"

Discussion in 'Buying Tips and Advice' started by meepm00pmeep, Sep 20, 2006.

  1. meepm00pmeep macrumors 6502

    meepm00pmeep

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2006
    Location:
    Toronto
    #1
    i'm in the market to get a MacBook Pro (with Merom chip) but i want to know if i should get the 17"... i do a lot of web design work so the extra screen space is useful, but i want to save some $ also so the 15" looks tempting...
     
  2. pianoman macrumors 68000

    pianoman

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    #2
    if you need it to be portable, the 17" is really out of the question. while it is, of course, a notebook, it's just too big to be carrying around all the time. if you're only going to be taking it with you to a few places, then it'd be ok.

    i'd go for the 15" and save a little more to get an ACD.
     
  3. meepm00pmeep thread starter macrumors 6502

    meepm00pmeep

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2006
    Location:
    Toronto
    #3
    it will be my primary computer & i won't be moving from place to place often... but i see what you mean by portability
     
  4. wchong macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    Location:
    Miami, Fl
    #4
    well getting an ACD isn't necessarily what you call "portable"

    in all seriousness, i suggest you to wait for the upgrades before making a decision on screen size. who knows what specs are going to be better in the 17" than the 15". what if they release a black MBP only for the 17"?

    just wait, but if you won't be moving around often i think that a 17" will be your best option as of right now.

    a 15" is just so... common :D
     
  5. xfiftyfour macrumors 68030

    xfiftyfour

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Location:
    Clemson, SC
    #5
    porting around a 17" laptop = no fun. personally, i'd go for the 15" and an external monitor (not necessarily an ACD). for the price difference between the lowest MBP and the 17" MBP, you could opt for a 24" widescreen Dell, which is a BUNCH more screen real estate. then you'd have the best of both worlds: lotsa work room AND portability.

    alternatively, you could go smaller, like a 20" dell widescreen for about half that cost... still more workspace.
     
  6. meepm00pmeep thread starter macrumors 6502

    meepm00pmeep

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2006
    Location:
    Toronto
    #6
    thanks guys... yah, i'll just wait until the new MBP come out first... but i'm leaning more towards the 17", but you're reasons about gettting an additional display for the price difference is valid also
     
  7. Reaver macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2006
    Location:
    Columbus, Ohio
    #7
    I also am in the hunt for a MBP I had the same problems you did as deciding which one to get and then I took some advice and went and looked at them side by side and the 17" is a huge notebook. the 15" has enough room on the screen to work when on the go and traveling. but if your going to be using this as your only PC then I would get a external monitor like everyone else said and use that when your home and need the extra space. also invest in some external HDD's
     
  8. YS2003 macrumors 68020

    YS2003

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2004
    Location:
    Finally I have arrived.....
    #8
    It looks both 17" and 15" models look the same size (even though they are not), when I looked at them at Apple stores. Is a 17" model that difficult to tote around? There is not much difference in the weight of both models.
    Extra screen space comes in handy when you are using PhotoShop, Illustrator, or InDesign on the road (or at hotel during traveling). At home, the screen space is a mute point as both model can support the screen up to 30" ACD.
     
  9. ThunderLounge macrumors 6502

    ThunderLounge

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2006
    #9
    First, which machine is going to provide what you need?

    If you're doing web design, I would guess that you'll also have a local copy of apache, php, mysql, etc, running as well.

    The big thing for MBP's is the possibility of an update to the line being announced next week in conjunction with the Photokina event. It may, or may not, be the case. If not, it shouldn't be too long afterwards but could be 6 weeks or so. I don't think it will be that long, but you never know. There's an entire thread devoted to the discussion, if not more.

    If it were me, I'd opt for the 17". It really isn't much different than toting around a 15". The 15" is actually 15.4", and the 17 is like 17.1" or whatever. Check out the size difference on Apple's hardware pages, and think it over. I used to use a regular laptop tote bag for my 15", then switched to a backpack style a little over a year ago. For me, it works. And considering the current 17" weighs less than my older 15", it isn't a huge deal to me.

    However if you don't plan on toting it around, what about an iMac? If you need the portability, for taking a presentation out to a client or whatever, the savings with a decent iMac would allow for you to get a MB as well. Of course, if you're going to be doing editing on the go, then forget the whole iMac deal.

    It sounds like you've got a little bit of time, so take in all the info you can.
     
  10. nicoritschel macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    #10
    I have a 17", and it surprisingly isn't much of an issue to carry around. I'm carrying it around to class all day, with no problems whatsoever. The extra weight is only like a pound or so. It's totally worth it for the extra screen real estate. Well, if you're going to need the extra space, I'd totally go for the 17.
     
  11. tvguru macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2005
    Location:
    Kenora, ON Canada
    #11
    IMO, the 17" is just as easy to carry around. When your walking around are you really going to notice a 1.2 lbs, 1.3" in width or a .8" in depth difference? I know 1.2 lbs is a bigger bulk but unless your walking a marathon with it I doubt an issue would arise. Personally, after having toted around an iBook 12" for years the 17" MBP only seemed big the first time I put it under my arm and walked around. From that point on it just felt normal. Having said that, I think that it would have been the exact same thing the first time if I had bought the 15".

    Bottom line:
    If it's just a money verses screen size / features then really only you can decide wether the jump to the 17" is worth it, as that is a personal preference.
     
  12. fivetoadsloth macrumors 65816

    fivetoadsloth

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    #12
    id go and get a 15" and than a display, youll get he screen space from dual, adn it will be alot more portable and you dont generally need the extra 2" on the run.
     
  13. xparaparafreakx macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2005
    #13
    A 17" is easy to carry. Just as easy as carrying a 15".
     
  14. meepm00pmeep thread starter macrumors 6502

    meepm00pmeep

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2006
    Location:
    Toronto
    #14
    yah, i have no issue about it being a burden to carry around... and the extra screen space would be nice... i'll have to decide once the MBP refresh... but i'm opting for the 17" more
     
  15. tvguru macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2005
    Location:
    Kenora, ON Canada
    #15
    Maybe there will be a 24" :eek: Then we can really talk about portability problems, but man would that look good sitting on my lap. :D
     
  16. ZoomZoomZoom macrumors 6502a

    ZoomZoomZoom

    Joined:
    May 2, 2005
    #16
    In terms of portability, after (luckily) having two friends who own a 15'' and a 17'' and playing around a little bit with both, the 17'' doesn't look much bigger than the 15'' at all. In fact, when I saw the 15'' (I saw the 17'' first) I had to ask my friend if it was a 17'' because I couldn't tell at first glance.

    I'm actually in a similar dilemma in terms of 15'' vs. 17''. I'd like to be able to have two Safaris running at the same time. Or Word + Safari. Two space-eating programs, pretty much. I know the 17'' can do this, but I haven't messed with it yet on the 15''. Anyone do this much and can give some opinion? I can afford either, but if I can get things done on the 15'', I'd rather not pony up the extra cash. Plus bags for 17'' are a bit harder to find -_-
     
  17. saisaij macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2006
    #17
    I am also having the same issue right now... can't decide which combo to go with, either a 15" MBP (merom) or MB + Imac. Portability is a major plus for me, would the MB + Imac be more expensive after all? Also wondering, should i upgrade my rams when i purchase the machine or... get them some where else?
    Thank you for looking into my newbie problem hehe. :p :p
     
  18. hope macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2006
    #18
    Well a MB can be had for about $1000 and an intel iMac can be had for about $1000 as well. That is the base price for a 15" MBP ($2000) and its the first time someone has mentioned this combo. Well thought of and completely reasonable. Add a few options to the MBP and you can get a 20" iMac for $1200 still being completely comparable.

    As for the 15" to 17" MBP debate. 17" has the FW800 and more USB ports. For me thats important so look at your needs. Also, the 15" MBP and 24" monitor combo is not comparable as you can't take the screen realestate of a monitor with you as you can the 17" so eliminate the portability factor. Again, that depends on your needs. Also, the 2in in larger size also mean higher resolution and not just a larger screen. Plus, the 17" has a faster DL disc drive compared to the 4x base Supersrive in the 15".

    Lastly, the new processors coming soon might bring some upgrades to the 15" but thats all unknown. As for now. The 17" wins on screen realestate, resolution, Superdrive specs, and more ports. Oh the speakers are better supposedly on the 17".
     
  19. sierra oscar macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Location:
    South Australia, Australia
    #19
    in this 17" versus 15" MPB - perhaps battery life is something that could also be a factor? I'm not sure what the specs of this are between the two - but they would be different.

    A few ppl I have spoken to have chosen a MB over a MBP for battery life alone.

    Just something else to consider...
     
  20. ZoomZoomZoom macrumors 6502a

    ZoomZoomZoom

    Joined:
    May 2, 2005
    #20
    Yep. Well, not better, since I think they use the same speakers. But the 15'' has two of them while the 17'' has four.
     
  21. meepm00pmeep thread starter macrumors 6502

    meepm00pmeep

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2006
    Location:
    Toronto
    #21
    that's an awesome idea to combo it like that... i'm actually considering it now... but i really only need 1 computer and an extra monitor... who knows, i still have time to decide
     
  22. islandman macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2006
    #22
    I carry around a 8lb Dell Latitude D800 now and I actually got used to it. When I buy my MBP (I'm waiting for Merom), I will most-likely go for the 17" because it is a lot lighter than this BRICK I have here. lol
     
  23. majorp macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Location:
    UK !!!
    #23
    I would go for the 17" purely for the

    Double layer superdrive
    Not so much underclocked GPU
    Firewire 800
    Extra USB
    Better resolution
    Longer battery life
    Bigger or faster HD (i know you are paying for it in the price)
     
  24. meepm00pmeep thread starter macrumors 6502

    meepm00pmeep

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2006
    Location:
    Toronto
    #24
    yah, my mind is made up... i'm going for the 17" one... thanks everybody for your input :D
     
  25. saisaij macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2006
    #25
    enjoy your future 17" MBP... and i think i'll go with the 15" , i am poooooor :eek:
     

Share This Page