Apple Predicted to Discontinue 17-Inch MacBook Pro

[KnightWRX]

And I meant in the sense that the MBA won't read email or make facebook posts any faster than the Atom. Tasks like these are what most people do most of the time.

Content creators will want more power, and people running heavyweight apps and clients - the Core series is good for them.

What about people like me who enjoy the occasionnal game of Civilization that runs just acceptably on the power of the MBA, wouldn't on a Netbook. However, getting a MBP or other computer would be overpowered with for my needs.

Face it, the netbook is not enough computer for plenty of people and the MBP is too much. The ultrabook trend packs just the right amount of power, and comes with the portability increase over traditionnal full power laptops.

That is why they are popular.

 

[slumpey326]

because of Apple's WWDC 2012 being announced today for June 11-15, I have a feeling that's when the new macbook pros will come out.

 

[Digital Skunk]

I work with web developers and system administrators and they all do a lot of work on laptops with smaller displays. None of them carry around a 17" laptop. Only one guy I know has a 15" MBP. I know an independent developer who writes code on a 11" MacBook Air as his sole machine. The only people who really need a larger display are the graphic designers. And even then, the option exists to plug your laptop into a 27" Apple Cinema Display.

I own an ageing 17" MacBook Pro. I will never buy another one. It's just too big and heavy to be used as a laptop. These 17" behemoths are the past. They are history.

The 13" MacBook Air is the best laptop I've ever owned. I highly recommend them to everyone. These are the laptops consumers want.

It's good to know that your co-workers spend money on laptops then hook them up to $1000 displays and then go NO WHERE with them.

But I will reiterate my early comments, since NO ONE seems to think people actually work away from a desk.

Users that want as much screen as possible, not just PPI but SCREEN, love the 17" laptops. Most of them aren't taking an iMac or a 27" ACD with them in the field. They need to work without power, or in cramped locations and still need a large screen to see what they are doing, or to have multiple people looking at the same screen and so forth.

Not everyone works across the street from a Starbucks, some of us are doing things that span from the street to some pretty remote locations.

What about people like me who enjoy the occasionnal game of Civilization that runs just acceptably on the power of the MBA, wouldn't on a Netbook. However, getting a MBP or other computer would be overpowered with for my needs.

Face it, the netbook is not enough computer for plenty of people and the MBP is too much. The ultrabook trend packs just the right amount of power, and comes with the portability increase over traditionnal full power laptops.

That is why they are popular.

I would agree 100%, and it's a trend that anyone can see when you take a look at the popularity of the tablets as well as the ultrabooks. Like AidenShaw said, Facebook only requires so much effort to run. Niche markets like gaming and power hungry end users will spend more money on a machine, but most users don't need much more than an Air.

In saying that, I am not saying the 17" and 15" MBPs are overkill at all. Just not machines that even I personally see everyone getting.

I don't know where some people are getting their advice, but I would NEVER recommend anything less than a 17" to a content creator that's in the field. Content consumers that want a large screen can get very decent 17" machines for $1000 less (at 4lb heavier though) and everyone else that thinks a 13" MBP is just enough . . . . . GOOD FOR YOU!

 

[Zendokan]

Of course the 17" sells badly because its way too frecking expenisve!

Start prices here
13" 1149 Euro
15" 1749 Euro
17" 2499 Euro

You mean

13" 1199 Euro
13" 1499 Euro
15" 1749 Euro
15" 2199 Euro
17" 2499 Euro

to be more correct.

I haven't owned a 17" notebook under the 3100 Euro (work pays for them) and to be honest the MBP 17" in the same config would be 2899 Euro. (a bargain ;-p ).

 

[Zendokan]

BTW, people are so into PPI here and saying that retina 13" and 15" can replace the 'old' 17" when they become available.

So according to some people it's against the physics of nature that a 17" retina screen can be made.
I HOPE that a few months after the new 13" and 15" there will be a new 17", but I'm SURE that than it will also have a retina screen...and a 15" retina screen can never replace a 17" retina screen.

 

[n300]

You mean

13" 1199 Euro
13" 1499 Euro
15" 1749 Euro
15" 2199 Euro
17" 2499 Euro

to be more correct.

I haven't owned a 17" notebook under the 3100 Euro (work pays for them) and to be honest the MBP 17" in the same config would be 2899 Euro. (a bargain ;-p ).

No the prices I said were correct for my country. But my point was why link size to hardware and price. If they would offer the hardware of the 13inch in the 17inch model they could sell it for 1149 and put the 17ich models hardware in the 13inch can sell it for 2449.

 

[KnightWRX]

BTW, people are so into PPI here and saying that retina 13" and 15" can replace the 'old' 17" when they become available.

Retina does not add real-estate. It cannot replace the 17". However, if Apple were to ship a 15" with 1920x1200 screen resolution, I would consider that a very solid 17" replacement myself.

 

[Zendokan]

Retina does not add real-estate. It cannot replace the 17". However, if Apple were to ship a 15" with 1920x1200 screen resolution, I would consider that a very solid 17" replacement myself.

...and what about a 17" retina. I haven't read anything that Apple won't make one.

To be honest the only thing that I've read is that Apple Inc will release the 13" and 15" together at first.
Later can/could follow a 17", like they did with all the previous MBP releases.

The only difference is now that 1 analyst is guessing that, maybe there won't be a new 17" MBP. So until Apple Inc gives a statement that the 17" is discontinued, I still believe that a 17" retina model will appear after the release of the 13" and 15" (like it always has happend before).

----------

No the prices I said were correct for my country. But my point was why link size to hardware and price. If they would offer the hardware of the 13inch in the 17inch model they could sell it for 1149 and put the 17ich models hardware in the 13inch can sell it for 2449.

between these two models, the only difference is the form factor (here in Belgium):

15" 2199 Euro
17" 2499 Euro

Not really an unbridgable difference, if I say so myself.

Why put a dual-core into a 17"? I'm not a COBOL Developer

 

[KnightWRX]

...and what about a 17" retina. I haven't read anything that Apple won't make one.

What about it ? If they are going to discontinue de 17", why even bother discussing a 17" retina display ?

 

[KevinAGI]

So Wrong

This is another effort to further alienate the content creators who kept apple alive for so many years. The reason the 17" laptop sales are slow is because apple underpowered the graphics processor in the latest version. Many of us found with out the Nvidia graphics there was no compelling reason to upgrade. Even with more horsepower our the graphic response was sluggish, so we waited...and waited... No new tower to sit by my desk, and now no new 17"

Kevin

 

[tigress666]

This is true, but we don't know how many 17 inch pros Apple sells. Are they actually losing money on it, or are they just not making as much as they'd like? A niche product though it may be, if it's profitable, it's profitable.

Well, here's the thing, even if they are making some money on it, they may feel that they could better spend the resources they are using on it on a more profitable venture.

Sometimes with a business it's not if it is making money at all but if it is making enough money to be worth it or are your resources better off spent somewhere else?

 

[DesertNomad]

Not everyone works across the street from a Starbucks, some of us are doing things that span from the street to some pretty remote locations.

I have used my MBP from atop a sand dune in Sudan (inside the truck to keep the sand out), more than 100 miles from the nearest lightbulb. Amazingly, Sudan's mobile network allowed me to connect to the internet from there. Also used it in Iran, Albania and taking it to Mozambique next month.

 

[linux2mac]

Looks like Linus Torvalds won't mind that the 17" MBP will be discontinued.

Linus Torvalds LOVES His MacBook Air
http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-04-23/tech/31384571_1_macbook-air-apple-guts

"I have to admit being a bit baffled by how nobody else seems to have done what Apple did with the Macbook Air – even several years after the first release, the other notebook vendors continue to push those ugly and 'clunky' things. Yes, there are vendors that have tried to emulate it, but usually pretty badly."

 

[dcone]

Your logic is sound except u fail to realise that if the 17" is discontinued it will save them money not manufacturing them.

That coupled with the fact that many who want/need/buy the 17" currently will settle for the 15" so they will slightly reduce their profit but definitely not lose a who profit line.

Yeah, the 50 lines of G-code required to make an extra few inches of aluminum must really kill apple. Along, with squeezing in a few extra batteries. And buying 17" screens on demand. What was I thinking?

 

[Renzatic]

Think of it like this, every other computer company offers up a huge massive almost ridiculous selection of laptops that they sell at a much lower profit margin than Apple. They have a choice that covers every need out there and then some. Going to the Dell website is an almost overwhelming experience if you don't know exactly what you're looking for. Apple, on the other hand, basically sells 5 laptops. You've got the two Airs, and the three Pros.

Do they really need to simplify their already streamlined selection? I can understand wanting to keep things simple, but paring down their already spartan selection would be taking things to ridiculous extremes. And why are they doing it? Certainly not due to monetary issues. If Dell can offer 50,000 laptop models that sell at a fraction of Apple's usual profit margins, certainly Apple can support their Pro line with that one extra model. It's not exactly like they're hemorrhaging money by offering the 17 inch. It isn't like they absolutely need to divert the funds used in producing said model elsewhere. Hell, the company is awash in cash. They can do whatever they want, the least of which is give people a slightly expanded selection of computers to cover every potential usage scenario.

 

[loon3y]

lol, this is ridiculous, might as well take out the 15 inch mbp also right?


i hardly see 17" and i hardly see 15", majority of the MBP I've seen are all 13"

I've seen one person have a 17" and one person have 15"

im not basing my experience to some official ratio, but i travel a lot, a lot of customer sites.


i said before i "heard" from other developers that if ur developing and comparing codes that they needed a 17", just to clarify the thought that all the developers i've met had a 17". but damn sure no developer i've met uses 13" or smaller (not a noobie developer like me)


if they make profit, keep the option, as apple gets more and more popular, some of the guys that get 17" pc laptops would switch sides to apple.


the way some of you guys are talking, its might as well have apple only have one size.

that'll just make them lose consumers, and to the guy that said they'll get rid of the mac pros, i guess dell will basically own the server market (because i don't see anyone getting a mac pro just for a "desktop" use, rather build my own computer, hell get a prebuilt like an alienware or genesis for that price)

 

[loon3y]

Think of it like this, every other computer company offers up a huge massive almost ridiculous selection of laptops that they sell at a much lower profit margin than Apple. They have a choice that covers every need out there and then some. Going to the Dell website is an almost overwhelming experience if you don't know exactly what you're looking for. Apple, on the other hand, basically sells 5 laptops. You've got the two Airs, and the three Pros.

Do they really need to simplify their already streamlined selection? I can understand wanting to keep things simple, but paring down their already spartan selection would be taking things to ridiculous extremes. And why are they doing it? Certainly not due to monetary issues. If Dell can offer 50,000 laptop models that sell at a fraction of Apple's usual profit margins, certainly Apple can support their Pro line with that one extra model. It's not exactly like they're hemorrhaging money by offering the 17 inch. It isn't like they absolutely need to divert the funds used in producing said model elsewhere. Hell, the company is awash in cash. They can do whatever they want, the least of which is give people a slightly expanded selection of computers to cover every potential usage scenario.

this,



honestly how can people think 17 inch is waste of money/profitless, people will buy it whether 300,000 or 50,000. and there are only 5 selections anyways like the poster above said.


i mean if u think a 17inch a waste of money, look at appleTV ( i have one only because my pops has it, jail breaking btw so after i jailbreak it might have another opinion on it, but for now) its not hard to see why steve jobs disapproved the apple TV.


it has the same concept as net flicks but a little more features, and i have cable, and i have on demand channels, so it kidna of cancels out. plus i have an unactivated netflix app on my ps3.


what is the point of an appleTV? i certainly don't want to pay money and subscribe or pay for on demand (when clearly cable on demand is much faster)

i rather much have a mac mini and slap it on the back of an HDTV and have much more features, webcam conference, streaming from any site, being able to go on face book, emails, etc etc, hell even some games.




jobs clearly saw a use/market for the 17inch thus not discontinuing it.

 

[3282868]

this,



honestly how can people think 17 inch is waste of money/profitless, people will buy it whether 300,000 or 50,000. and there are only 5 selections anyways like the poster above said.


i mean if u think a 17inch a waste of money, look at appleTV ( i have one only because my pops has it, jail breaking btw so after i jailbreak it might have another opinion on it, but for now) its not hard to see why steve jobs disapproved the apple TV.


it has the same concept as net flicks but a little more features, and i have cable, and i have on demand channels, so it kidna of cancels out. plus i have an unactivated netflix app on my ps3.


what is the point of an appleTV? i certainly don't want to pay money and subscribe or pay for on demand (when clearly cable on demand is much faster)

i rather much have a mac mini and slap it on the back of an HDTV and have much more features, webcam conference, streaming from any site, being able to go on face book, emails, etc etc, hell even some games.




jobs clearly saw a use/market for the 17inch thus not discontinuing it.

Exactly. This can be applied to the pro line in general. Apple made their money with PowerMac's and displays before iDevices and iOS, that money went into R&D for the iPad, iPhone, etc. There is a market for power systems, the argument that Apple is making bank of iPhones and MacBook's and that workstations and displays are irrelevant in the "post-PC" era is ludicrous. There are plenty of professionals and businesses who need workstations/towers/displays. I was shocked when Apple discontinued their 3 ACD CCFL LCD's, the 30" was stunning and highly regarded. Now they offer a 27" iMac panel, and mostly for notebooks. Working in film, you need screen real estate, most have at least 2 displays and an attached monitor for work; graphic designers also need high end displays such as EIZO. The 30" ACD was one of the best.

Apple may be making billions on Joe-sumer's/fashionista's, but neglecting professionals is costing them more profit. Many businesses have switched platforms, using Avid Media Center or Adobe systems, due to Apple's pro-line neglect. That isn't chump change. There is no reason Apple can focus on both consumers and [real] professionals; stating MacBook Pro's and iMac's are powerful enough is ignorant. My 12-Core Mac Pro with 16GB's RAM and a SSD takes hours for many of my projects. I could not IMAGINE doing my work on a MacBook Pro or a top iMac. Time=money.

 

[loon3y]

Exactly. This can be applied to the pro line in general. Apple made their money with PowerMac's and displays before iDevices and iOS, that money went into R&D for the iPad, iPhone, etc. There is a market for power systems, the argument that Apple is making bank of iPhones and MacBook's and that workstations and displays are irrelevant in the "post-PC" era is ludicrous. There are plenty of professionals and businesses who need workstations/towers/displays. I was shocked when Apple discontinued their 3 ACD CCFL LCD's, the 30" was stunning and highly regarded. Now they offer a 27" iMac panel, and mostly for notebooks. Working in film, you need screen real estate, most have at least 2 displays and an attached monitor for work; graphic designers also need high end displays such as EIZO. The 30" ACD was one of the best.

Apple may be making billions on Joe-sumer's/fashionista's, but neglecting professionals is costing them more profit. Many businesses have switched platforms, using Avid Media Center or Adobe systems, due to Apple's pro-line neglect. That isn't chump change. There is no reason Apple can focus on both consumers and [real] professionals; stating MacBook Pro's and iMac's are powerful enough is ignorant. My 12-Core Mac Pro with 16GB's RAM and a SSD takes hours for many of my projects. I could not IMAGINE doing my work on a MacBook Pro or a top iMac. Time=money.

yea, the would end up losing even more professionals to windows, which windows/Microsoft completely dominates. it'll just give them a setback of really being relevant in the work world, in terms of having a whole business/company/corporation running on Macs.

 

[Eric S.]

I work with web developers and system administrators and they all do a lot of work on laptops with smaller displays. None of them carry around a 17" laptop. Only one guy I know has a 15" MBP. I know an independent developer who writes code on a 11" MacBook Air as his sole machine. The only people who really need a larger display are the graphic designers. And even then, the option exists to plug your laptop into a 27" Apple Cinema Display.

I own an ageing 17" MacBook Pro. I will never buy another one. It's just too big and heavy to be used as a laptop. These 17" behemoths are the past. They are history.

The 13" MacBook Air is the best laptop I've ever owned. I highly recommend them to everyone. These are the laptops consumers want.

It's an amazing fact of nature that one person's experience can be generalized to the whole of humanity.

... Do they really need to simplify their already streamlined selection? I can understand wanting to keep things simple, but paring down their already spartan selection would be taking things to ridiculous extremes. And why are they doing it? Certainly not due to monetary issues. If Dell can offer 50,000 laptop models that sell at a fraction of Apple's usual profit margins, certainly Apple can support their Pro line with that one extra model. It's not exactly like they're hemorrhaging money by offering the 17 inch. It isn't like they absolutely need to divert the funds used in producing said model elsewhere. Hell, the company is awash in cash. They can do whatever they want, the least of which is give people a slightly expanded selection of computers to cover every potential usage scenario.

It used to be called the Steve Jobs Doctrine: Don't Confuse Your Customers with Choices. And I used to hope that a post-Jobs Apple would again expand the product lines, especially in the computer end of things. It's beginning to look like things may just get worse ...

 

[loon3y]

no way you can develop using an 11" mac book especially if u need to compare coding, and if ur implementing other programs together to communicate so you don't have to manually update each program.




thats absurd. u'd have to switch desktops, click on window after window, alt tab, absolutely not.



i have a 13" i love it, i don't mind coding in it, but goddamn i get so annoyed when i can't see the whole code, or theres not enough space. its just so bothersome. i can hardly compare code. i still do a lot of tedious window switching esp implementing APIs, etc etc.

and plus running virtual machines, u cannot run virtual machines on that 11", i mean my 13" mac book pro lags when i turn on parallel desktop and i have 8 gig of ram.


i don't want to make assumptions, but i think that poster is lying no way, unless that "developer" is making a hello world app.

 

[Zendokan]

What about it ? If they are going to discontinue de 17", why even bother discussing a 17" retina display ?

In the previous refresh cycles the 17" came 3 to 4 months after the release of the 13" and 15" models.

At this moment we don't even know when the new 13" and 15" models will be released, so until 4 months have passed after their release date without any news of a 17" model, I will consider a 17" retina MBP as a still to come model.

Not you or 1 analyst that pulls his figures out of thin air will change my mind about that.

 

[thekev]

I was reading Anandtech.com yesterday, doing a preview on an Ivy Bridge laptop, and came away with a few things:

1. the Intel GPU still isn't anything to write home about.
2. the new chips are about 10% faster tops... nothing spectacular
3. power concerns
4. pricier.

The next MacBook Pro IF it switched to IvyBridge in a new slimmer package would be more expensive, and I'd predict much worse battery life, and nothing compelling other than USB3 and perhaps a HiDef screen to distinguish it.

I'm thinking we will see the new designed cases with the 'tock' next year.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5772/mobile-ivy-bridge-and-asus-n56vm-preview

I don't expect a big redesign. I know it's the popular opinion, but assuming comparable features, it could be a lot of effort to shave a few mm. I see a lot of hopes for a smaller discrete gpu in the 13" or a quad cpu, but they (most likely) wouldn't want to lower battery life or their margins.

Well, here's the thing, even if they are making some money on it, they may feel that they could better spend the resources they are using on it on a more profitable venture.

Sometimes with a business it's not if it is making money at all but if it is making enough money to be worth it or are your resources better off spent somewhere else?

This is a popular opinion, but it's just ignorance. You don't know if they need these resources somewhere else. You don't know if it's holding them back from doing something else. You don't really know anything. I don't think they're killing a lot of design time on these machines. It's mostly the same hardware as the 15" with more room to spread things out. I have to wonder if this is actually tying them up at any level. You are just parroting the bloggers and analysts rather than citing information in your conclusions. Apple has been trending toward slimmer designs, and this rumor basically speculates on top of the redesign rumor. He's suggesting that assuming a redesign goes through, they'll cut this one rather than allocate the design time needed to update it.

This is another effort to further alienate the content creators who kept apple alive for so many years. The reason the 17" laptop sales are slow is because apple underpowered the graphics processor in the latest version. Many of us found with out the Nvidia graphics there was no compelling reason to upgrade. Even with more horsepower our the graphic response was sluggish, so we waited...and waited... No new tower to sit by my desk, and now no new 17"

Kevin

That sounds bad. On the towers, I don't remember anything that interesting that's come out since 2010 or so in cpus or gpus. Hopefully we'll see a new mac pro soon given that everything they might use is basically available at this point.

It's good to know that your co-workers spend money on laptops then hook them up to $1000 displays and then go NO WHERE with them.

I figured long ago that things would go that direction if laptops were fast enough for these guys to own a single computer, but I wonder how much of the time they buy the machine for portability yet never take it off their desks. I wouldn't buy the Apple display anyway. Out of everything Apple designs, they do the worst job on displays. I mean they look pretty as a piece of furniture, but beyond that they've never been very good (or reliable).

 

[entatlrg]

What about it ? If they are going to discontinue de 17", why even bother discussing a 17" retina display ?

You gotta understand we don't all know as much as you Knightwrx, but we're trying to keep up!

The condescending, debate everything, needling posts are a great help, we should know better, thank you

 

[Ice Dragon]

Nothing is still confirmed so let's take a wait and see attitude.