Apple Quietly Discontinues MacBook Pro 17"

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
47,536
9,363






Apple appears to have quietly discontinued the 17" MacBook Pro today amid the flurry of updates and announcements at WWDC today. Apple's newly updated MacBook Pro product page mentions the new Retina Display-equipped 15" Pro, as well as the new 13" and 15" Pro's, but is silent on the 17".

The 17" PowerBook G4 was first released in January of 2003 and has received a number of updates over the years, including transitions to the Intel-equipped 17" MacBook Pro and receiving an update to the current unibody construction as well. Research analyst Ming-Chi Kuo said in April that the 17" MacBook Pro would soon be discontinued due to weak sales.

Article Link: Apple Quietly Discontinues MacBook Pro 17"
 

CylonGlitch

macrumors 68030
Jul 7, 2009
2,929
113
SoCal
This seems to make sense to me. The positive point of the 17" was the higher resolution display. Now the 15.4 Retina MBP blows it out of the water; thus the right move. I never wanted a 17" because it was just too big; but I WANT this new 15 inch.
 

macnerd93

macrumors 6502a
Nov 28, 2009
678
93
United Kingdom
its understandable, most people I know bought the 13'' and 15'' models, I don't think I knew anyone apart from my old college which actually owned a 17'' MBP. The retina MBP has more than enough resolution anyways :)

I used a 17'' of the old style (PowerBook looking) MBP's for a couple of days and although it was awesome on a desk it was rather clunky, heavy and awkward when moving around. I can imagine it being a pain to use as well on stuff like aircraft tray tables and what not lol.
 

Eriden

macrumors regular
Sep 5, 2006
163
0
Totally makes sense from a sales perspective, but sucks for the pros who used the 17" MBP as a primary workhorse.
 

Chase R

macrumors 65816
May 8, 2008
1,279
81
PDX
Not surprising. And I don't think too many people will miss it now with the new 15" Retina MBP.
 

zapnyc

macrumors member
Mar 10, 2011
67
39
New York
bah.
I'm usually the guy who opposes the "Apple-is-abandoning-pros" talk.

But the 17" provides vital screen real estate for video and audio editing away from your normal desk locations. I don't want to carry a second monitor around for that.

At least the new powerful MBPs can handle an external monitor if I go that way...
 

CylonGlitch

macrumors 68030
Jul 7, 2009
2,929
113
SoCal
Totally makes sense from a sales perspective, but sucks for the pros who used the 17" MBP as a primary workhorse.
For on the go, the 17" was just too big. On the desktop, plug in an external display and kick butt. I think that's the key here. This has more resolution than most external displays and thus on the go isn't lack luster at all.
 

macnerd93

macrumors 6502a
Nov 28, 2009
678
93
United Kingdom
bah.
I'm usually the guy who opposes the "Apple-is-abandoning-pros" talk.

But the 17" provides vital screen real estate for video and audio editing away from your normal desk locations. I don't want to carry a second monitor around for that.

At least the new powerful MBPs can handle an external monitor if I go that way...
But who other than a few high end videographers and hipster kids with rich parents, who think they are a pro photographers because they can make a photo black and white in iPhoto actually bought them? It was a very niche market, due to the high cost.

Clearly I'm kidding but you get the point. Pretty obvious a certain minority have no sense of humour on here.

The 15'' retina appears way more powerful size is about perfect for a laptop. Not too big or too small, I know you lose the express card slot though :(

Although back in 2003 I'd have been laughing if someone said to me 9 years from now Apple are gonna drop the 17'' model from their lineup and focus on 13'' and 15'' models from now on as i'd have thought they'd have focused on going slightly larger like 19'' heck even 20'' it was 2003 lol
 
Last edited:

BluePhoenixRa

macrumors regular
May 19, 2012
216
3
What's weird is that they didn't say a word about removing the 17" from their line up.

I guess they were too embarrassed to say an Apple product didn't sell as much as they hoped and so they are discontinuing it. But, atleast they should've said something.
 

CylonGlitch

macrumors 68030
Jul 7, 2009
2,929
113
SoCal
But the 17" provides vital screen real estate for video and audio editing away from your normal desk locations. I don't want to carry a second monitor around for that.
That space is based on the resolution of the display, not on the size of the screen. The new 15" will give MORE screen real estate than the old 17".
 

Enigmafan420

macrumors 6502a
Apr 18, 2008
894
0
Puget Sound, U.S.A.
I disagree with most of you saying too big or too expensive or whatever.

I LOVE MINE. The matte screen option makes it a portable media center. Yeah-it's heavy. But not more so than many Windows machines.

And when I am traveling and want to watch a movie in the hotel, it almost always provides better picture and lower cost (DVDs brought with or Netflix streaming) than any pay per view at the hotel.

A great unit-it will be missed, at least by me :)
 

zapnyc

macrumors member
Mar 10, 2011
67
39
New York
bah.
the 17" provides vital screen real estate for video and audio editing away from your normal desk locations. I don't want to carry a second monitor around for that.

I take it back....I'll just us the newest iPad as a secondary high-rez monitor!

voila...
 

laurim

macrumors 68000
Sep 19, 2003
1,915
846
Minnesota USA
For on the go, the 17" was just too big. On the desktop, plug in an external display and kick butt. I think that's the key here. This has more resolution than most external displays and thus on the go isn't lack luster at all.
I usually carry TWO 17" MacBookPros and a bag full of adapters, two external hard drives and a bunch of other stuff in a rolling computer bag. I heave that thing into the overhead bin on the airplane and I'm a 47 year old woman. I'm going to miss having that real estate to create/edit/present motion graphics but I'll go to the Apple store and see how tiny pallets need to get for me to use After Effects and Motion on a 15" retina display.
 

zapnyc

macrumors member
Mar 10, 2011
67
39
New York
That space is based on the resolution of the display, not on the size of the screen. The new 15" will give MORE screen real estate than the old 17".
No.

You misunderstand. Squinting at a 15" display is not the same. It's the meat, not the motion.

But whatever. I'll hook up a new hd iPad as a 2nd display.
 

laurim

macrumors 68000
Sep 19, 2003
1,915
846
Minnesota USA
That space is based on the resolution of the display, not on the size of the screen. The new 15" will give MORE screen real estate than the old 17".
But how tiny will the text in all the After Effects pallets be to get them on the screen the same way as a 17"? THAT I would have to see, or not see as it might be.
 

Shotgun OS

macrumors 6502a
Dec 18, 2006
504
0
Ohio
Been looking to get a 17", and I guess now is the time. Hopefully I can grab one at a discount price somewhere.
 

nutmac

macrumors 601
Mar 30, 2004
4,419
2,393
They quietly upgraded it. Look at the apple store.
Upgrade is really pushing it. Mac Pro joins iPod classic in surviving the lineup just because it fills needs not served by other Macs and because it makes enough money to justify keeping it.

As for 17", although those few that needed a bit of extra real estate space, as well as ExpressCard would like to protest, they were obviously not enough to justify being in the lineup.
 

psingh01

macrumors 65816
Apr 19, 2004
1,408
403
I used my 17" as a desktop replacement. I mainly went for it because of the resolution which probably won't be the problem with the new retina Pro. Still, the size was nice :D
 

D216

macrumors newbie
Jun 11, 2012
2
0
Apple, you really need to show the PRO some love and give it an update!!!
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.