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.
...because it doesn't take as much power to render 1024x600 as it does to render 1280x800 or higher resolutions.
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.
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.
More options = cool. But lets not put the blame on customers when every other notebook retailer offers it.
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. 🙄
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.
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.
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.
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.