Any takers for a MBA 17" at $1499?

[Allen_Wentz]

The 15" Air weighs around 3.3lbs iirc (American here, not gonna do the kg thing sorry lol).
That's 0.6lbs heavier than the 13" -- so let's assume that the 17" would add at least another 0.5lbs.
An "Air" approaching 4lbs. doesn't seem like much of an "Air" to me at that point. I think 15" is the biggest they should go.
A 17/18" Pro would be interesting though. It would be heavy...but there may be a market, especially if it has an option for the Ultra chip.

Yeah a 17/18" MBP would be the one thing that might cause me to trade in my M2 MBP before 2029 or so. No need for Ultra; I would rather see M3/M4/M5 chip improvements bring us larger/thinner lighter.

Today I spent some time with the 15" MBA, and I prefer the MBPs a lot, despite the cost and weight penalties.

 

[CalMin]

A 17" MBA might be thin, but it wouldn't be light. If you watched the MaxTech video disassembly of the 15" MBA you can see that there's a lot of extra metal around the chassis vs. the 13". A 17" would need even more strenthening. Probably too heavy to call it an 'Air'.

Interesting idea though. I probably wouldn't get one because 17" isn't really portable, nor is it big enough to be my main display and offset the need for an external monitor.

 

[DHagan4755]

A 17" MBA might be thin, but it wouldn't be light. If you watched the MaxTech video disassembly of the 15" MBA you can see that there's a lot of extra metal around the chassis vs. the 13". A 17" would need even more strenthening. Probably too heavy to call it an 'Air'.

Interesting idea though. I probably wouldn't get one because 17" isn't really portable, nor is it big enough to be my main display and offset the need for an external monitor.

How about a 17" MacBook Studio? Thicker than the MacBook Airs but thinner than the MacBook Pro with an M3 that has a fan for active cooling. No mini LED but 120Hz. SD card slot & HDMI port.

 

[Makisupa Policeman]

Yeah a 17/18" MBP would be the one thing that might cause me to trade in my M2 MBP before 2029 or so. No need for Ultra; I would rather see M3/M4/M5 chip improvements bring us larger/thinner lighter.

Today I spent some time with the 15" MBA, and I prefer the MBPs a lot, despite the cost and weight penalties.

I love the 14" MBP, and I am tempted to go that route with a refurb being about the same price as a similarly spec'd 15" MBA. But I think if I had the money to buy brand-new tomorrow, I'm still heavily leaning towards the 15" Air.

 

[CalMin]

How about a 17" MacBook Studio? Thicker than the MacBook Airs but thinner than the MacBook Pro with an M3 that has a fan for active cooling. No mini LED but 120Hz. SD card slot & HDMI port.

Again, not for me, but I could see the appeal of such a machine for many. It might step on the toes of the 16 inch MacBook Pro too much to be a real offering by Apple.

 

[DHagan4755]

Again, not for me, but I could see the appeal of such a machine for many. It might step on the toes of the 16 inch MacBook Pro too much to be a real offering by Apple.

Welp you're right. It would have to have the tradeoffs that clearly differentiate it from the 16" MacBook Pro. Perhaps 120Hz is too generous. Maybe it's just a 60Hz LED panel. But in order to keep it as svelte as possible those borders around the display are as thin as the 16" MacBook Pros. But the rigidity would need to be there for a footprint that large so it can't be as thin as the 15" MacBook Air. The slightly thicker frame would accommodate HDMI &/or SD card reader.

 

[chrono1081]

I feel like 16/17 inch laptops are more for people who use it as a desktop replacement and travel on occasion. I used to travel with the 16 inch laptop and it was a beefcake (the old one, not the new, thicker/heavier one). I also had to travel with the old 17 inch MacBook Pro once when carrying it home for a friend and that was even worse.

 

[Allen_Wentz]

I feel like 16/17 inch laptops are more for people who use it as a desktop replacement and travel on occasion. I used to travel with the 16 inch laptop and it was a beefcake (the old one, not the new, thicker/heavier one). I also had to travel with the old 17 inch MacBook Pro once when carrying it home for a friend and that was even worse.

The 2011 17" MBP was 6.6 pounds and I schlepped it all around Cal in a backpack on a daily basis, no problem (but I was accustomed to skiing/climbing all day with a backpack). An M3 or M4 17/18" MBP would be sweet and could weigh less; I would guess under 6 pounds.

 

[Allen_Wentz]

Assume next year a M3 will be released with a 17" display at the same 281 ppi as all Macs.

Would you be inclined to get it at $1499?

The $1499 base model's M chip, RAM and SSD would be the same as the future base 13" & 15" Price diff of the 13" & 15" is $200.

17" is a tad more popular than a 12"... this is why I bring it up.

A 3nm M3 chip will have more raw performance than any/all Intel Macs.

The LG gram, that competes in the same space as the MBA has a 14", 15", 16" & 17" screen sizes.

It would be really, really dumb marketing for Apple to position a lower end laptop as its largest laptop display. And Apple usually avoids dumb marketing. Apple would not want to be forcing $4k+ MBP buyers like me into considering instead spending $2k to get a larger display. IMO we will see a 17"/18" M3 or M4 but it will come to MBP first by at least a year.

 

[Saturn007]

17" is a tad more popular than a 12"... this is why I bring it up.

I'd wager that in the Mac universe, an M3 12” MBA would sell far more than a 17” one.

There's a huge pent-up demand for a very lightweight, commuter, travel laptop, with many people wanting the 11” MBA resurrected — which could now easily be a 12” running Apple silicon with MagSafe and two USB-C ports.