15 I7 MBP Hi res AG or 17 I7 AG?

[lukester]

Why would anyone buy a 15 HI res I7 when it's almost the same price as a 17 I7 AG?

Plus you get higher res with the 17 and a larger screen?

any thoughts?

 

[alust2013]

Personally, I just wouldn't want to carry the 17" around. Those things are huge

 

[lukester]

I mainly use it for photography, a desktop. I have a 30" cinema with a 15 mbp 2.16 ghz now. However I do take it with my on vaca, etc. and occasionally to show a customer some pics.

 

[lcseds]

Looking at them at the Apple store, I was all fired up to buy a 17". But the res is so high, it's harder to read than the 15" Hires. And that isn't all that easy to read either, IMO. If they can find a resolution less than what the 17" has now, I'll buy it in a heartbeat. But since Steve has determined that it's fine, I doubt I'll see one. So, I left with my money.

 

[ShiftClick]

$200 price difference is almost the same price? May come as a shock but $200 can be a big difference for a lot of people. $200 can buy a good 1TB external, or a 4GB ram stick, or a protective case and a carrying bag. While it may be less than a 10% difference, $200 is still $200.

 

[tim100]

when you are spending that much money on a notebook get what you want. $200 one way or another is not that much for such a larger investment and if you plan on keeping it better to get what you want.

 

[dasmb]

For $200 you get:
-A few extra DPI (it's really not an extreme difference from the 15)
-An extra pound
-2" additional diagonal space (both visible and "handrest" space); makes the device more of a desktop replacement and a little less of a "lap thing"
-An ExpressCard slot (but no SD card slot)
-A battery with 15 more Wh (not that you'll ever notice the difference)
-The ability to watch and edit 1080p videos without downscaling, which is the real benefit. Remember: at 16x9, 1080p video means 1920x1080. At 16x10, a 1680x1050p display is 15% smaller.

Ask me it's a no brainer. You're better off with the bigger machine unless you can't carry 6.6 lbs in one hand. But then I love high dpi displays. My dream was a display with the same pitch as a photograph, and in 18 days it comes true. For those who think simply more pixels == more eyestrain, or that 720p is just is good, get the 15" and get on with your life.

 

[Apps]

Personally, I just wouldn't want to carry the 17" around. Those things are huge

Exactly, why else besides the size? The answer to your question is a no brainer, portability is important to some of those who are looking at a portable machine. Anything bigger than 15" wouldn't fit in my backpack.

 

[Bill Gates]

The 15" is smaller and lighter, which are the two most important qualities when determining something's portability. I bought a 15" MBP because I wanted it to be portable and powerful at the same time, and no amount of convincing will make me believe that a 17" works as well.

 

[tim100]

For $200 you get:
-A few extra DPI (it's really not an extreme difference from the 15)
-An extra pound
-2" additional diagonal space (both visible and "handrest" space); makes the device more of a desktop replacement and a little less of a "lap thing"
-An ExpressCard slot (but no SD card slot)
-A battery with 15 more Wh (not that you'll ever notice the difference)
-The ability to watch and edit 1080p videos without downscaling, which is the real benefit. Remember: at 16x9, 1080p video means 1920x1080. At 16x10, a 1680x1050p display is 15% smaller.

Ask me it's a no brainer. You're better off with the bigger machine unless you can't carry 6.6 lbs in one hand. But then I love high dpi displays. My dream was a display with the same pitch as a photograph, and in 18 days it comes true. For those who think simply more pixels == more eyestrain, or that 720p is just is good, get the 15" and get on with your life.

good points