Does not make sense

[lastochka]

Why would anyone want to have a 17'' 3 kg not-very-portable with an 8 hours battery. I'd rather get a Sony Z-series ultraportable I can take anywhere. And why FullHD resolution without a FullHD capable drive like BluRay or HDDVD (now deceased)? Do they expect us to download and play mkv from TPB or what?

This just does not make any sense.

 

[iParis]

Because some people want an ultra powerful workstation that is portable.

BTW, wrong section. MacBook Pro, PowerBook

 

[Tallest Skil]

This just does not make any sense.

Because some people want an ultra powerful workstation that is portable.

+1 to iParis. If you don't understand the market, you aren't in a position to question a product's usefulness.

And no, the iPhone nano does not receive protection by my above statement. This thread isn't about it, so I won't explain why.

 

[Cave Man]

Why would anyone want to have a 17'' 3 kg not-very-portable with an 8 hours battery.

What doesn't make sense is why you posted this in the iMac, Mini and eMac forum.

 

[lastochka]

Because some people want an ultra powerful workstation that is portable.

A 17'' 3 kg is anything but portable. And for around 18000 SEK we can get Sony Vaio VGN-AW11Z with BluRay, twice HD space and 18.4'' screen. Why would anyone pay 25495 SEK for less of a computer. That's irrational!

 

[bobfitz14]

though its' (MBP 17") purpose is portability, you cannot assume everyone who buys a MBP will actually use it for portability, i am certain there are people out there who don't take the MBP out of their house.

oh, the thread title and the forum this is put in don't make sense. you didn't have to start a whole new thread to post your opinion how people should buy one product over another, because it is useless.

 

[iParis]

A 17'' 3 kg is anything but portable. And for around 18000 SEK we can get Sony Vaio VGN-AW11Z with BluRay, twice HD space and 18.4'' screen. Why would anyone pay 25495 SEK for less of a computer. That's irrational!

There is a huge difference between a Sony Vaio (bleh) and a MacBook Pro.
Mainly the OS and quality of the hardware.

 

[neiltc13]

There is a huge difference between a Sony Vaio (bleh) and a MacBook Pro.
Mainly the OS and quality of the hardware.

Sony's exterior might be of lower quality, but the innards will be pretty similar to the MacBook's - it will likely use the same series of Intel processor, same kind of RAM, same GPU...etc.

As for the OS, if you want stability, go for the Sony - XP is now (finally) rock solid, which is more than can be said for Leopard, which will crash, hang and sometimes BSOD (known in the Mac world as a "kernel panic") on you.

 

[iParis]

Sony's exterior might be of lower quality, but the innards will be pretty similar to the MacBook's - it will likely use the same series of Intel processor, same kind of RAM, same GPU...etc.

As for the OS, if you want stability, go for the Sony - XP is now (finally) rock solid, which is more than can be said for Leopard, which will crash, hang and sometimes BSOD (known in the Mac world as a "kernel panic") on you.

Well XP is stable but not Vista.
And next month M$ is going to stop supporting XP.

 

[zmttoxics]

Troll alert.

Also, wrong forum section. Perhaps you should complain about the 24" iMac not being very portable - since that is the section you are in.

 

[lastochka]

Why can't you ppl think objectively. Apple didn't update imac nor macmini but instead put out a computer that's inferior to what's on the market today. What is the logic of having to carry around a brick monster that lasts for 7 hours. A machine that weights 1.25 kg and lasts 8 hours with a good screen and removable battery - now that's what we want to see! And LED imacs and upgraded macminis.

And I'm not a troll. I'm a goblin, level 26, with a stick damn it!

 

[Soxy]

Why can't you ppl think objectively. Apple didn't update imac nor macmini but instead put out a computer that's inferior to what's on the market today. What is the logic of having to carry around a brick monster that lasts for 7 hours. A machine that weights 1.25 kg and lasts 8 hours with a good screen and removable battery - now that's what we want to see! And LED imacs and upgraded macminis.

And I'm not a troll. I'm a goblin, level 26, with a stick damn it!

I think the figures for the sales of the last MBP 17" speaks for itself.

"If we build it, they will come."

 

[darngooddesign]

And why FullHD resolution without a FullHD capable drive like BluRay or HDDVD (now deceased)? Do they expect us to download and play mkv from TPB or what?

When making an argument against a professional laptop, you probably shouldn't mention that your main issue is the playing of movies.

Designers and programmers like the high resolution screen. I, for example, don't use BlueRay so I don't care about that missing feature, but I do like that I can see more of my code and project. I certainly don't want to loose my regular DVD drive. Music people care that they can see more of their music tracks and Photoshop people can see more of their image while zoomed in.

 

[MBX]

Why would anyone want to have a 17'' 3 kg not-very-portable with an 8 hours battery. I'd rather get a Sony Z-series ultraportable I can take anywhere. And why FullHD resolution without a FullHD capable drive like BluRay or HDDVD (now deceased)? Do they expect us to download and play mkv from TPB or what?

This just does not make any sense.

Why do we have to limit the universe when there's space for more?

There are many many people who much rather prefer the 17'' with it's higher res screen. Not all people use laptops for watching movies but do some work.

If you don't want it just get yourself the 15'' no big deal.

 

[kwong2006]

A 17'' 3 kg is anything but portable. And for around 18000 SEK we can get Sony Vaio VGN-AW11Z with BluRay, twice HD space and 18.4'' screen. Why would anyone pay 25495 SEK for less of a computer. That's irrational!

I will tell you, lastochka, that I have been using a 17" MBP for almost 2 years now. It is very very portable (after a new backpack, which was what I needed, as my old one was on its last legs), and I have no troubles with its weight, or anything else for that matter.

As for Blu-Ray, if you are looking at watching Blu-Ray, wouldn't it be better to watch it on a 30+ in. HDTV, rather than watching it on a small 17" screen?

As for using Blu-Ray for data storage, go out and buy an ext. drive, and use Toast.

What is irrational here is you, lastochka. You are just flaming.