Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Did you buy the 15" over the 17" just to save $$?

I could have afforded the 17" but I honestly think it's too big. Went for the bottom end 15" - wanted discrete graphics and portability, but didn't see the point in paying so much extra for 256MB of VRAM and a slightly faster processor. So now I've got enough cash in the bank for when they update the iPad next year.
 
ozreth said:
the 17" just feels and looks too big to me, even though its not really much bigger. 15" feels good in my hands.
Click to expand...

QFT
For some reason, the keyboard on the 17 just doesn't look right to me...it looks to small for all that space...for my eyes, I liked the look of the 15"...
There was also the portability factor...the 15" just seemed the sweet-spot to me...it perfectly fits both my needs (some travel) and the aesthetics I was looking for...:D
 
Ronnoco said:
QFT
For some reason, the keyboard on the 17 just doesn't look right to me...it looks to small for all that space...for my eyes, I liked the look of the 15"...
There was also the portability factor...the 15" just seemed the sweet-spot to me...it perfectly fits both my needs (some travel) and the aesthetics I was looking for...:D
Click to expand...

I think the 17's in pics look a bit disproportionate with the keyboard but in person they look perfect (at least to me). :)
 
I've owned all 3 sizes over the years and I think the loss of dedicated graphics on the 13" is too much while the 15" isn't really much bigger; however the 17" is a lot bigger (despite not looking like it), and does not offer much more than the 15" apart from an additional USB port, bigger display, and slightly better sound (only slightly, not much more). Only for the late models does the 17" have the coveted ExpressCard slot.

So I bought the 15" because I wanted a dicrete GPU option, higher resolution display compared to the 13" while not approaching the larger machine of the 17".
 
For me the 13" display is too small to work with and not just the resolution, but the size mainly. 17" is not portable anymore. Packing it in a backpack is difficult. The 15" is the best for me. I would prefer something slightly smaller. Like a 15" with a very thin screen bezel. I want maximum screen size in relation to the whole notebook size.
I also think that 14.1" 16:10 displays are quite neat. Not too small and still fits every bag.
I don't care about weight, only size. I don't see how so many people complain about weight. You go to the gym lifting weights but if the notebook weighs half a pound more it is unbearable.

If I really need a bigger screen I have at home my external display and the 17" is not faster than the 15" it just doesn't fit into many bags.
 
I'm considering the 17 over the 15 because I'll be watching movies, etc. on it. Portability isn't too much of a concern for me. By the time I upgrade to 500gb harddrive and the high resolution display on the 15, the 17 only comes in at about $300 more.

To answer the question of using a notebook as a desktop - I've given up on getting an iMac that has no display issues, so I've resorted to a large macbook instead. Financially irresponsible, yes, but so be it.
 
dusk007 said:
For me the 13" display is too small to work with and not just the resolution, but the size mainly. 17" is not portable anymore. Packing it in a backpack is difficult. The 15" is the best for me. I would prefer something slightly smaller. Like a 15" with a very thin screen bezel. I want maximum screen size in relation to the whole notebook size.
I also think that 14.1" 16:10 displays are quite neat. Not too small and still fits every bag.
I don't care about weight, only size. I don't see how so many people complain about weight. You go to the gym lifting weights but if the notebook weighs half a pound more it is unbearable.

If I really need a bigger screen I have at home my external display and the 17" is not faster than the 15" it just doesn't fit into many bags.
Click to expand...
I gree about the "weight" issue...half a pound to a pound difference seems negligible to me...I suppose if I were a student that had to carry my MBP around all day, perhaps even a small amount of added weight could add up...I guess...:confused:
 
lcseds said:
I see many folks here debating the Hi Res or Non Hi Res displays on the 15" MBP. For those looking for the Hi Res option, few are interested in the 17". Is this purely a cost factor? It does not appear the 17" has that much larger a chassis and would not be all that more cumbersome to carry. Yet the display would be easier on the eyes a bit over the Hi-Res 15". I am wanting a new MBP (2007 15.4" 2.4 C2D here), but I am leaning to the 17". So I was just curious why so many pass on the 17" in favor of the 15"
Click to expand...

yes, I bought the 15 inch to save a few quid.
But it has gone horribly wrong. I love my mac but the screen's size is making me unhappy, so I am going to sell my MBP and get a 17 inch one (I must admit though that my 6 weeks old mac's C2D processor is part of my decision to upgrade).

As I said to a lady earlier think carefully before buying a mac with a small screen.

Also, why on apples website isn't an i7 17 inch a standard option? Why must I choose to add an i7 to my machines spec? I don't get it.
 
For me it had nothing to do with price, it had to do with size and resolution.
If there was a 17" with a 1680x1050 screen, I would have been much more tempted. I'd still be concerned about size, though. I had a 1st generation 17" Powerbook G4, so I've owned a 17" mac before and it was a little too big. I think the 15" size is just right.
 
doktordoris said:
Also, why on apples website isn't an i7 17 inch a standard option? Why must I choose to add an i7 to my machines spec? I don't get it.
Click to expand...

I imagine this is just marketing on Apple's behalf. This revision has brought the 17" closer in price to the 15" as it's ever been, and putting an i5 processor in the stock 17" makes the price gap seem even smaller. All things told, my 17" i7 AG was exactly $200 more than a 15" high-res AG which felt like a no-brainer for me.

As for the portability factor, the 17" actually fits my old 15" laptop bag just fine. It might be huge compared to a 13", but it's really not much bigger than the 15". And while I initially also thought it looked a bit funny with that "small keyboard floating in a sea of brushed aluminum" effect, that went away once I took it home and started using it. It just looks very proper to me now ;)
 
banalelectric said:
I imagine this is just marketing on Apple's behalf. This revision has brought the 17" closer in price to the 15" as it's ever been, and putting an i5 processor in the stock 17" makes the price gap seem even smaller. All things told, my 17" i7 AG was exactly $200 more than a 15" high-res AG which felt like a no-brainer for me.

As for the portability factor, the 17" actually fits my old 15" laptop bag just fine. It might be huge compared to a 13", but it's really not much bigger than the 15". And while I initially also thought it looked a bit funny with that "small keyboard floating in a sea of brushed aluminum" effect, that went away once I took it home and started using it. It just looks very proper to me now ;)
Click to expand...

Thankyou. That makes sense, but I wonder if anyone spending such a large amount of money on a 17 inch mbp would not upgrade to an i7?

It seems a bit odd to not include that option on the main pricing page, rather than forcing buyers to go through the adding bits process to find a price for their machine.

Thanks

doris
 
nope. I choose the 15" so I can take it with me when I travel. The 17" isn't usable in an airplane unless you travel 1st class or business class which I never travel. Since I fly out of my own pocket I never travel business class or 1st class. The difference in ticket price can buy me a mac or something. Look I'm not rich but I could've afford me a 17" but the 15" is just the sweet spot between power and mobility. Just my 2 cents...
 
tim100 said:
2) they are students and 17 is too big. I ran a poll re age in the past on here and there is a larger amount of college students
Click to expand...

Exactly 2 for me. 17 is a bit too big and the desks at school aren't that large. My 13 inch had some trouble staying on the dinky desks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back