How well is the 17" MBP as a portable laptop?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by AMacbook, Jun 14, 2011.

  1. AMacbook macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2011
  2. ratzzo macrumors 6502a

    ratzzo

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2011
    Location:
    Madrid
    #2
    Well.. it doesn't fit in your average size backpack. I don't precisely have a small backpack and my 15" fits with 2 cm separating it from the zipper. The MBP is no doubt heavier than the Air.. so if you are to carry it from place to place it might not be too much of a comfortable ride
     
  3. simsaladimbamba

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2010
    Location:
    located
    #3
    I travel with it everyday by bike for ten kilometres with a good backpack.
    It is portable for its size and I wouldn't want it any smaller now, just due to its resolution.
     
  4. stefmesman macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2010
    Location:
    Netherlands
    #4
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; nl-nl) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

    Had the same question as you, ended up buying a 17". Compare the size specs on the apple website and you will notice itsnot much bigger then a 15. Buy a good bag andbe happy :)
     
  5. GraceMolloy macrumors regular

    GraceMolloy

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2006
    Location:
    Kentucky
    #5
    I would say a really nice backpack as opposed to a satchel style. You'll be thankful for even weight distribution after a long distance.


    - via iPhone
     
  6. AMacbook thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2011
    #6
    Is the extra 300 bucks worth the 2" of screen real estate?
     
  7. awer25 macrumors 65816

    awer25

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2011
    #7
    That's the real question - size really isn't much different. More important than the 2" of physical size is the higher resolution (1920x1200 IIRC). I took the middle route with the 15" hi-res though (1680x1050) and couldn't be happier :)
     
  8. AMacbook thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2011
    #8
    Are either of the 2 screen resolutions HD?
     
  9. JR1993 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2011
    #9
    None are 1080P. 1080p is 16:9, whereas the MBP is 16:10. The hi-res screens (1920x1200 and 1680x1050) will both play HD at good quality.
     
  10. stefmesman macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2010
    Location:
    Netherlands
    #10
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; nl-nl) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

    To the point: only the 17" wil play full hd at native resolution. The 15" in either normal or hires screen will downscale full hd on fullscreen
     
  11. WestonHarvey1 macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2007
    #11
    I had one and now I have a 15.

    I considered it a portable desktop replacement. It almost never moved, but it was nice that it was possible to do so. Possible, but not convenient or comfortable.

    Now I need to be mobile more often and I'm glad I got the 15.
     
  12. SinisteR-33139 macrumors newbie

    SinisteR-33139

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2011
    Location:
    London UK
    #12
    It's funny me my cousin and his friend all just bought the latest MBP's by no coincidence. I got the 15' my cuz bought the 13' and his mate got the 17' and he really regrets it. He thought he got a good deal because it was the display model and last one so he got it for £500 cheaper, but now he wishes he got the 15" like me. It's just to damn heavy he says and taking it out is just a nightmare. So my opinion is get the 15" and if you have the money just spend it on upgrades on the Apple site.
     
  13. awer25 macrumors 65816

    awer25

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2011
    #13
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

    There's only a pound difference between any model and the adjacent one, I can't imagine it's such a big deal.
     
  14. waynep macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2009
    #14
    I got the 17 and am very happy with it. I need to get a new backpack due to it's size. I also love the screen, both size and resolution so I'll put up with it being a little bigger.
     
  15. Bobby Corwen macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2010
    #15
    Exactly.

    It's very thin and very flat. It's smaller than my dads 15" Toshiba.

    I carry it into the bathroom when I poop and it is very convenient to move it around because of it's sleek solid build. You can carry it with one hand like a tray and walk around using it with one hand, facetiming with people full screen while people watch you in envy like you're from the future.

    Carry it in a bag and it's very light.
     
  16. gakuran hitori macrumors regular

    gakuran hitori

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2008
    #16
    This makes me glad I've never bought a used computer.
     
  17. Virgo macrumors 6502a

    Virgo

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2011
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    #17
    My boyfriend has had his 17" mbp since either late 07 or early 08, and the size is really annoying to him as of late, and he doesn't enjoy taking it out as a portable machine. Then again, his mom did just get a new 13" mbp, so it could just be new mac envy :p. But he also has a beautiful 27" HD desktop, so he doesn't really have a reason for such a large laptop anymore.


    EW^ not to mention all the other things people use their computers for...
     
  18. jupman macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2011
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    #18
    "How well is the 17" MBP as a portable laptop?"

    It is a portable as you make. When I want my laptop my 17" goes, when I want something smaller or not as much horsepower then the ipad goes.
     
  19. Bobby Corwen macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2010
    #19
    I hope you're not implying about people busting a nut on the keyboard?

    But anyway, I have a feeling its just envy because if his is from 07-08, its not quite the same as far as perception. I dunno anyone who would be happy (and not in denial) with any 5 year old technological device.

    When I went from the 13 to the 17, I was worried in my mind beforehand about such thoughts but after I got the 17 I realized it was all perception.
     
  20. entropi macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 20, 2008
    #20
    I love my MBP 17"! The display is so great with all my musicproduction apps - it's great to be able to really stretch out an arrangement over the screen. The size isn't much bigger than the 15" and the weight is nothing, come on - it's even lighter than my old PLASTIC 15" PowerBook G3 (Pismo)! I carry it around where ever I go in a small 20 litre backpack and it moves around in my home too... Perfect for widescreen sofasurfing!
     
  21. Naimfan Suspended

    Naimfan

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2003
    #21
    Like many people here, I've owned all three sizes. As always, the question of which size to get depends on what you're using it for.

    Personally, I think the 17" is a quasi-portable desktop replacement--it's just a bit too big and heavy to carry around as frequently as I have to. I love the 13" for its form factor and how easy it is to carry around, and I think the 15" is the best combination of screen real estate and portability.

    Granted, the 17" is only 1 lb heavier, but it feels like more to me when you're carrying it around a lot. So to answer the thread question, for me it is OK at best.
     
  22. henry2 macrumors regular

    henry2

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2010
    #22
    me i like the 17."inchs sized screen but my laptop does not leave the desk and it acts as the main computer in my place ..so yes it can be protable just find the right sized case
     
  23. Mr. Chewbacca macrumors 6502a

    Mr. Chewbacca

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Location:
    Dallas TX
    #23
    The 17" is awesome! Get a good bag that distributes weight like the black hamptions bag from the apple website and youre golden.

    On the other hand I'm 6"8' so my idea of small and portable may be different than yours. :rolleyes:

    To be honest, if I had to carry my machine around to several places all day every day with limited workspace (like school) I would get a MBA, unless youre doing more computing than 99% of users it would work just fine, infact with the ssd its faster than a stock MBP.

    get both :D I'm going to
     
  24. dagamer34 macrumors 65816

    dagamer34

    Joined:
    May 1, 2007
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #24
    The question isn't really "Is the 17" portable" as there are plenty of people who carry one around. A much more appropriate question is "Am I going to feel more tired of carrying around a 17" laptop compared to the 15" when I'm not gaining performance, only screen size?"

    It's an important fact because if you really needed to move around a 17" laptop, you could, where as you simply can't with a desktop (at least not in your backpack).

    I personally have owned 2 17" laptops at different points of time and had to return them because it was just too much for my back to carry around all day. The 15" suited me much better. I also think that if you're getting the 17" for its resolution, you'd more often than not be better suited with an external display (unless you work in a place with no extra desk space or you need that specific resolution on the go).

    $200 can go a long way towards buying some nifty things like an SSD, some RAM, or even a 27" Apple Cinema Display which will beat the pants off of ANY laptop screen out there (but of course costs $950+).
     
  25. SAVAGE5 macrumors member

    SAVAGE5

    Joined:
    May 23, 2011

Share This Page