17 inch mbp too big

17 inch notebook too big

  • yes

    Votes: 170 52.6%
  • no

    Votes: 153 47.4%

  • Total voters
    323

tim100

macrumors 65816
Original poster
May 25, 2009
1,368
0
is the 17inch mbp just too big? is smaller better in a portable?
 

vant

macrumors 65816
Jul 1, 2009
1,231
1
Depends on what you are doing. If you plan to go to class, this laptop is retarded in terms of portability. You will have to bring a large backpack, and find a desk that is large enough to accommodate it.

My MBP13 doesn't even fit on some of the desks!
 

Husker

macrumors newbie
Mar 9, 2009
23
0
Depends on who you are. I ride my bike around the city with my 17" every day. I'm 6'3" 200 lbs....not too big for me. Nothing like looking at 1920x1200 resolution on your lap.
 

dscuber9000

macrumors 6502a
Sep 16, 2007
665
1
Indiana, US
I personally think it is. I love my 13" MacBook Pro. 15" would be ideal for me, though. Past 15" it really starts losing portability in my opinion.
 

prodigee

macrumors 6502a
Sep 23, 2009
621
10
Brooklyn, NY
If you are willing to drop the change on a 17" get it. I mean it all really is about what you need, if you need the screen real estate get the 17" if you need a more portable machine get the high end 15" pretty much the same spec wise, the only difference is the screen at that point really.
 

erratikmind

macrumors 6502a
Apr 2, 2009
771
1
S.F./Las Vegas
I carry mine to work 3 to 4 days a week in a timbuk2 messenger style bag without any issues. My wife, a petite 5'-1" asian gal, occasionally does the same with hers without issues, as well. LOL . . . If I need something with a smaller footprint (not necessarily lighter) , I pack up the company Dell. :p
 

gianly1985

macrumors 6502a
May 30, 2008
798
0
My 2005 Acer 15" laptop weighs 3kg and is thicker.

The MBP 17" is slimmer and weighs only 2.99kg (a record for a 17", even nowadays), and still has an impressive battery life.

My point is...it's the slimmest and lightest 17" laptop in the world.....its measures and weight were considered normal on a 15" just 4-5 years ago....so, IF you need the real estate of a 17" screen, don't think about it twice....you're getting the most portable 17" on the market, maybe more portable than some 15".....

If you don't need that screen, go 15". (+ refurbished Apple Cinema Display LED at home)
 

Little Endian

macrumors 6502a
Apr 9, 2003
678
31
Honolulu
I must admit that the prospect of having a portable 1920x1200 resolution screen made me think about getting the 17" MBP. The real estate space is awesome but at that resolution on a 17" monitor things can be awfully tiny at times. I opted for the 15" as portability in the end mattered more for me, go to an Apple store and compare the 17" and 15" side by side. While the dimensions and weight on paper don't seem that great, the extra centimeters and pound make a difference. Especially when you add the weight of a case, power adapter and accessories.

I would be much happier if Apple had offered the MBP 15" with a 1680x1050 resolution on a 15.4 or 15.6 screen. I think that ratio would be a nice balance of screen size and resolution while still maintaining a better degree of portability. Get the 17" if you absolutely need the space other than that wait for a revised MBP as the 15" is long overdue for improvement in resolution.
 

Consultant

macrumors G5
Jun 27, 2007
13,292
20
17" MBP works great for me. I move mine almost every day.

It's no way big, considering most PC 15" laptops are the same size and same weight as MBP 17".

A good bag helps a lot.
 

roblin

macrumors regular
Apr 5, 2007
203
20
i had a 17" for 2years. now i have i 12". next will be a 17" again :)

depend on your needs, if you need screen estate buy it, if you dont, dont buy it. its not to big, it fits perfect in my backpack for 15.4" laptops. it not that heavy and it looks gorgeous!
 

tim100

macrumors 65816
Original poster
May 25, 2009
1,368
0
just want to get everyones thoughts here. not a buying advice post. 17 inch is tuff to use on a couch. check out the sony store the smaller notebooks are the more expensive and sleeker ones. the macbooks all sizes are great. keep voting.
 

maflynn

Moderator
Staff member
May 3, 2009
66,400
33,049
Boston
Yep, I think the beast is too big. It may be ok for a desktop replacement but then you can easily hook up a larger monitor to a 13" or 15" MBP.

I find the 15" to be on the upper end of portability. The 13" is really a mobile device but the lack of screen real estate hinders this for lightroom/photoshop. The 15" offers a good mixture of portability and screen size to make this baby a winner.

I've seen people trying to use a 17" laptop in various locations, airports, airplanes, cafes etc and all of them had to contort their positions to get them to open up and use them.

Besides, you're paying a premium for the size.
 

jetjaguar

macrumors 68040
Apr 6, 2009
3,055
1,130
somewhere
the screen on the 17 is absolutely beautiful .. it really isnt to big to carry around .. my brothers 15 inch dell is a brick compared to this
 

lilskaterpunk

macrumors regular
Jan 12, 2008
177
0
I think the 17'' is a beautiful MacBook and it really depends on what your gonna use it for if u need that large of screen, cost too!
I prefer 13.3'' as I like to have portability and do not do video,photo,etc. editing which works fine on other MacBook but larger is easier.
 

Warcraft Tauren

macrumors member
Oct 15, 2009
36
0
yeah 17 inch is too big. I have a 13 inch which I really love, but you may find it too small, and in that case go with the 15 inch.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.