Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
17" MBPRO owners?
- Thread starter AMDGAMER
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
i have the 2010 17" hi res. dont think much has changed in the 2011s , screen and speaker wise.
That said, its incredible. Great real estate, decent sound. Expresscard for those who use it.
Portable too, despite all the girly men who complain about breaking a nail every time they look at the 17".
That said, its incredible. Great real estate, decent sound. Expresscard for those who use it.
Portable too, despite all the girly men who complain about breaking a nail every time they look at the 17".
johnnyturbouk
macrumors 68000
i love my 2011 17" MBP - have to say very impressed!
1920x1200 is breathtaking! and i do not do media or pro photo editing
1920x1200 is breathtaking! and i do not do media or pro photo editing
not to hijack the thread...
To all the designers out there, How's color reproduction on the 17" screen? I'm thinking of trading my iMac for a new 17" MBP and HP ZR22.
To all the designers out there, How's color reproduction on the 17" screen? I'm thinking of trading my iMac for a new 17" MBP and HP ZR22.
johnnyturbouk
macrumors 68000
RAM they can do in-store
HDD/SSD options will require one to order a CTO from the online store
as for the 2.2 vs 2.3ghz - why bother for a meager 5% improvement in rela-life performance - why do you not spend the $$ on a 3rd party SSD or RAM, or both
thats what i did
I don't do much graphic design, but I do output a lot of photos for my friend's business. If color reproduction is important, always calibrate your monitor before outputting. Heck, even if they are IPS based panels, I'd still calibrate before making outputs.
As for the original topic, I think 1920x1200 should be at least optional for both 15 and 17. The only reason I got my 17" was because of the resolution. When all other manufacturers have 1920x1200 screens on their 15" and apple still only offers 1680x1050 as "option" is simply unacceptable.
I use my 17" for graphic design in college. I have the glossy screen - so if anything, don't expect what you see on the screen to turn out in print. Digitally, yes, but print I would suggest sampling before your final.
The color isn't too much off for me to be a problem, but not sure how it would for client work.
Just picked up a 17" base model (2.2, 4g, 750g, glossy) at the apple store yesterday to replace my original 15" unibody.
The only 17" models they have in store are the base model and a model that has the 2.3 cpu and antiglare.
It really kinda sucks, in order to get the antiglare on the 15" or 17" you have to get the 2.3 cpu which is a huge cost and most would consider not worth the money. I had originally decided to go with the 15" antiglare but I really have gotten to like the glossies!
The only 17" models they have in store are the base model and a model that has the 2.3 cpu and antiglare.
It really kinda sucks, in order to get the antiglare on the 15" or 17" you have to get the 2.3 cpu which is a huge cost and most would consider not worth the money. I had originally decided to go with the 15" antiglare but I really have gotten to like the glossies!
Not bad... for a TN panel.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review...-GHz-quad-core-glare-type-screen.50346.0.html
(no notebook on the face of this earth has a IPS panel
)Calibration goodies:
http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/
I have mine new 17 inch from 1 month. Absolutely great. Doing some photography and FCE light editing (full HD). Great performance. Some much space on the screen, can have couple of windows comfortable open. Working with excel - pleasure (if excel can be pleasure at all).
It is heavy but... lighter than my 14 inch widows laptop few year ago.
No regret whatsoever
).It is heavy but... lighter than my 14 inch widows laptop few year ago.
No regret whatsoever
That's my next task.
The screen it sumptuous. 0.44cm/2 black level is good as well, and the contrast ratio of 600:1 is very good for a laptop. And playing a game on the MBP earlier this morning, colors are bright and vivid and there are deep blacks. Movies will likely not disappoint.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review...-GHz-quad-core-glare-type-screen.50346.0.html
(note, my recently-swapped 17" gets up to 88C using Prime95. The model they used goes up to 97C, but they also ran another benchmark test app to torture the GPU at the same time - the combo of both tests at the same time exceeds real world use; even 3D rendering alone won't push the CPU to 97C (my testing revealed one core to get to 93~94x, the other at 92C max). Maybe an individual core on some MBPs can get to 97C but not the overall CPU temp. It's hot, but passable.)
http://www.digitalversus.com/apple-macbook-pro-17-pouces-2011-p479_10873_71.html
(they mention movies are a walk in the park BTW.
)The 17" also has an internal battery putting out 95W. Given Anandtech's benchmarking showed the new high-end MBPs to require up to 93W, that alone makes the 17" model preferable.
And after calibration, the monitor does look good (again, for being TN-based, but color accuracy won't be as good as a proper desktop IPS monitor, of course.
)
One is 1.93 kg heavier than the other.
It can get hot, but the aluminium shell dissipates heat better, and the produced heat has something to do with your CPU activity.
I own a June 2009 17" MBP and it is quite heavy, but only if open, otherwise I hardly recognise it in my backpack when transporting it.