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

15" or 13" MBP, if spec's and price where the same ...

13" or 15" which do you prefer, spec's and price not being a factor....

  • 13"

    Votes: 44 52.4%

  • 15"

    Votes: 40 47.6%
  • Total voters
    84
15" for real estate. You don't gain a significant amount of weight for the extra 2 inches.
 
15" All the Way

I am always clamoring for pixels. 1440x900 is barely large enough, even using Exposé and occasionally spaces. While the 13" form factor is nice for carrying, even offering the ability to play full 720p on the 1280x800 screen, I'm the kind of person would have 1920x1280 on my 15" if I could get it/afford it.

I work on a 30" and a 24" at work, and have a pair or 1600x1200 20" at home.
 
13" with HDMI 1.4 and mini displayport with usb3 if we are wishing on a star. The portable 13" format if you carry around your computer.
 
It's not really about what we "prefer", it's about our required needs in a computer. That being said, I need the 13" because my work is very mobile and even while at home the 15" is just too big and heavy to sit on my lap or lie down and surf with.
 
13" Personally, and I would've loved to buy the higher-spec'd 13" as opposed to the 15" 2.66 I just ordered. But in the case of specs, I needed the graphics card which makes the entire 13" factor obsolete
 
the 15 simply for the added resolution. But it's a tough one. if they had the same resolution I would take the 13. And if the 15 had 1680x1050 I would get the 15 again.
 
Gabriel GR said:
the 15 simply for the added resolution. But it's a tough one. if they had the same resolution I would take the 13. And if the 15 had 1680x1050 I would get the 15 again.
Click to expand...

This. The size and weight difference between the 13" and 15" isn't that massive.
 
13" is 4.5 pounds (2.04 kg) whereas 15" is 5.5 pounds (2.49 kg). Although the 13" is lighter, it is denser because the weight is packed in a much smaller area.
 
I prefer the 13" over the 15"... because it's 13".

It's smaller, easy to carry around, and light. Maybe I'm just used the 13", but when I use my friend's 15" model it feels bulky and clunky.

I like the smaller screen size for games. Low resolutions such as 1024x600 look fine on this monitor, allowing me to play pretty high-end games on the 13" MacBook Pro because it doesn't take as much power to render 1024x600 as it does to render 1280x800 or higher resolutions.
 
I voted for the 13", but only if I can hook it up to a 22"+ screen when I'm at home. I don't need either one for work, but I'd be more inclined to travel with a 13" as opposed to a 15".

</wanting to get an Air, really>
</have an old 4.5 lb VAIO right now>
 
ColinEC said:
...because it doesn't take as much power to render 1024x600 as it does to render 1280x800 or higher resolutions.
Click to expand...

This just sounded strange in my head, because the 13" is 1280x800. I suppose choosing 1024x600 isn't as bad on the 13" as it would be on the 15". I know the exercise is if the specs were the same, but the 13" has the 9400M, where two of the three 15" configurations have a 9600M GT as well.
 
The crappy resolution on the 15" is small enough, I couldnt stand the 13" resolution, it would be like using a netbook screen. I just dont understand why Apple chose new LCD's but didnt go with more popular higher resolution screens found in PC's of the same size, it doesnt make any sense.
 
stainlessliquid said:
The crappy resolution on the 15" is small enough, I couldnt stand the 13" resolution, it would be like using a netbook screen. I just dont understand why Apple chose new LCD's but didnt go with more popular higher resolution screens found in PC's of the same size, it doesnt make any sense.
Click to expand...

I'm bummed at this also :(
But it's because a lot of 'fanboys defend anything  does or doesn't do.
Like overprotective mothers, they isolate it from pressures of reality.

If only we could unite & stop arguing, and give Apple just a little bit of a hard time - they'd listen - they do (FW@13 is most recent case).

Everybody will win (is it a big insult to choose from 1280 or 1440 or even 1680:)). And a lot of us, even zealots would gladly pay 50$ to get matte/HiDef screen.
 
Though my dream form factor is 14" @ 1680x1050 OLED!!!

It can potentially fit in ≈13"MBP case - OLEDs can go side to side!!!

And then ditch DVD, and replace it with dedicated GPU & second fan for me ;)))
(It'll be even lighter ≈ 4lbs)
 
EspressoLove said:
I'm bummed at this also :(
But it's because a lot of 'fanboys defend anything  does or doesn't do.
Like overprotective mothers, they isolate it from pressures of reality.

If only we could unite & stop arguing, and give Apple just a little bit of a hard time - they'd listen - they do (FW@13 is most recent case).

Everybody will win (is it a big insult to choose from 1280 or 1440 or even 1680:)). And a lot of us, even zealots would gladly pay 50$ to get matte/HiDef screen.
Click to expand...

Wow, it's amazing, everything in your posts spells, "agree with me to go against Apple or you're a fanboy". "Uniting" as you call it is just another way of saying, "compromise with US complainers". Just because YOU want a HiDef matte screen and are willing to pay for it doesn't mean the rest of us do, nor should others be graced with name calling such as "fanboy"if what Apple's current lineup offers appeals to someone. :rolleyes:

You also used the word "Reality". Do you know what reality is? It's a an old slow Windows desktop computer with 17" low res LCD with horrible refresh rate. To many people that's a nice computer. To these same people, buying anything new would be heaven. Get with reality dude, when people shop for a new computer they aren't trippin' about the resolution. Only geeks here do that.
 
It really all boils down to personal preference. There's no right or wrong answer. I love the 13" form factor but yet I find the smaller screen too small and cramped. I can in a pinch (while on the road) use PS on my 15" MBP w/o too much hassle. I used to own a MacBook (first gen) and found that PS was much too cramped in the 13" monitor.

The bottom line is that the screen didn't fit my needs, but it will fit a lot of people's.
 
13" i've learned to take advantage of expose and spaces. also, by putting the dock on the left or right (with the option to hide the dock), i can maximize my screen space.
 
Gabriel GR said:
More options = cool. But lets not put the blame on customers when every other notebook retailer offers it.
Click to expand...

Well we've seen the game of blaming Apple - it doesn't work on them, and we alienate ourselves amongst fellow mac users (see the post above ;))))

So putting more uniform & constant pressure on Apple, by discouraging fanboyish attitude is the way to go.
It works : when Apple screws too much (even in legit cases - dropping iPhone2G $200 in sept'07) and it annoys enough people - they budge in!
 
HLdan said:
Wow, it's amazing, everything in your posts spells, "agree with me to go against Apple or you're a fanboy". "Uniting" as you call it is just another way of saying, "compromise with US complainers". Just because YOU want a HiDef matte screen and are willing to pay for it doesn't mean the rest of us do, nor are should others be graced with name calling such as "fanboy"if what Apple's current lineup offers appeals to someone. :rolleyes:

You also used the word "Reality". Do you know what reality is? It's a an old slow Windows desktop computer with 17" low res LCD with horrible refresh rate. To many people that's a nice computer. To these same people, buying anything new would be heaven. Get with reality dude, when people shop for a new computer they aren't trippin' about the resolution. Only geeks here do that.
Click to expand...

Well if you content with less screen estate, that's OK with me (though again YOU have no choice if you want 17" ...)

But I'm sure you have some other issues, you'd like to have more choice or flexibility with.

And what I'm proposing - is not caving in with me(US complainers) - but rather create sustainable attitude (because we are sustainable community of returning customers ;)) which helps to accommodate & promote choice amongst us first, which 'll help to put pressure on Apple - so that THEY cave in for (popular i should add) requests of community - which will benefit all of us.
 
HLdan said:
You also used the word "Reality". Do you know what reality is? It's a an old slow Windows desktop computer with 17" low res LCD with horrible refresh rate. To many people that's a nice computer. To these same people, buying anything new would be heaven. Get with reality dude, when people shop for a new computer they aren't trippin' about the resolution. Only geeks here do that.
Click to expand...

You are right ...
But it doesn't help progress, besides being not really relevant to Mac demographic.

We still have 60's gas guzzlers around - should it stop us to /dream at least/ of Tesla - so it could be affordable one day to me and to you?

Technological progress is a Reality ;)
 
EspressoLove said:
Well if you content with less screen estate, that's OK with me (though again YOU have no choice if you want 17" ...)

But I'm sure you have some other issues, you'd like to have more choice or flexibility with.

And what I'm proposing - is not caving in with me(US complainers) - but rather create sustainable attitude (because we are sustainable community of returning customers ;)) which helps to accommodate & promote choice amongst us first, which 'll help to put pressure on Apple - so that THEY cave in for (popular i should add) requests of community - which will benefit all of us.
Click to expand...

Okay, now your post here, I completely agree with. Yes, we should have choice. I don't always agree with Apple's "One way or the highway" philosophy as I would like more customizable options in OS X so my desktop won't look like another Mac user's desktop.
Sad to tell you that the MR forum represents less than 1/10th of 1% of Apple's user base and geek sites are generally the only ones that "complain" about what's not perfect. The rest of the computing world could care less about the "perfect" 13" with 1600x1050 res screen with the latest dual SLI GPU with Blu-Ray as it's just not the reality of the computing world.
 
HLdan said:
Okay, now your post here, I completely agree with. Yes, we should have choice. I don't always agree with Apple's "One way or the highway" philosophy as I would like more customizable options in OS X so my desktop won't look like another Mac user's desktop.
Sad to tell you that the MR forum represents less than 1/10th of 1% of Apple's user base and geek sites are generally the only ones that "complain" about what's not perfect. The rest of the computing world could care less about the "perfect" 13" with 1600x1050 res screen with the latest dual SLI GPU with Blu-Ray as it's just not the reality of the computing world.
Click to expand...

It's sad if it's true that it's only 0.1% ;(((

But what I'm puzzled with (respective this cause for better screen options) why so many "geeks" here so offended when you bring up say Sony's 13.1 1600x screen for comparison ...
I would understand if those folks were running marketing department for Apple & compensated for performance ...
Or if they'd have a huge stock of Apple shares.

That's the deeper problem I think - attitude that even doubting Apple is a high treason, and all the "Innovation" is only acceptable when SJ hails it.

and small number of geeks here is not a big deal - I'm sure you yourself influence a lot of folks, more than that, they tend to repeat/duplicate what you say :)
 
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
Back