Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I still believe the 17 will be back and here is why:
- Thread starter Bobby Corwen
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Mine's been around the world with me a few times. How far has your smaller laptop travelled
Well it's 2% and what I said is merely reasoning WHY it's not a closed case.
There are two potential scenarios.
You are acting like there is only one.
The information I offered is support for the scenario I am hoping it is and could still potentially be.
People think because they didn't update the old MBP with a 17 that that is an indicator that it's dead but then I offered a potential scenario why it could just be that an Ivy Bridge is not worth developing in 17 when they are phasing the placeholder optical MBPs just for the transition and the new Retina Pro is the future and they definately haven't had time to make a 17 and a 13 yet.
It's not like they would still sell the old 2011 17 that would be tacky.
It's not like they would work harder to develop a premium 17 for the dying optical MBP when, like we are saying, it only sells 2%.
It's not like they had time to make a 13 and 17 retina due to further challenges in engineering.
So that is why this time could be different from that time they had the 17 be upgraded later. But still similar in that the 17 still comes out at a later date.
I
iFanboy
Guest
None of those are flagship products with low sales numbers. Try again.
Clearly. Thats why we have the iPad in multiple sizes and the ability to install apps outside the app store.
Didn't need to. BC has had an inflated sense of worth and entitlement from his first post.
I
iFanboy
Guest
You think thats both a flagship product and that noone is buying it?
Its a marginalised product that is being ignored in favour of the iPod touch.
Were talking about the macbook pro lineup here. Apples flagship, and them discontinuing one single varient for poor sales.
17" and 18.4" machines can be used as hard-core gaming machines. MBP 17" is an under-powered weakling compared to a modern MSi or Clevo laptop. Gamers have more than TWICE the performance at HALF the cost. the MBP has been under-powered for a long time.
1080P resolution has been available on 15.4" windows machines for years but apple refused to increase the pixel count on MBP 15" because the only selling aspect of the MBP 17" is the larger pixel count. apple has been playing this boulsheet marketing agenda for years.
Once I match up the hardware drivers for OSX, I'm done with apple.
apple is moving towards being a 'toy' and 'gadget' company.
so far
17.3" at 1080P 90%NTSC
nVidia 680M with 4Gb of DDR5
i7-3720M
32Gb of DDR3
cost $2229
1080P resolution has been available on 15.4" windows machines for years but apple refused to increase the pixel count on MBP 15" because the only selling aspect of the MBP 17" is the larger pixel count. apple has been playing this boulsheet marketing agenda for years.
Once I match up the hardware drivers for OSX, I'm done with apple.
apple is moving towards being a 'toy' and 'gadget' company.
so far
17.3" at 1080P 90%NTSC
nVidia 680M with 4Gb of DDR5
i7-3720M
32Gb of DDR3
cost $2229
Last edited:
I don't think I've ever walked into someone's house and they had a Mac Pro in years. I haven't seen one in years.
But besides that, it's not about your question, it's about te principle of having good products instead of just satisfying the most popular markets and screwing niche markets. They are about having wonderful products more than anything so low sales percentage should not be an indicator.
The most I can think of for your argument in the marketing philosophy is that, now, owners of the 15 won't feel less superior like, there is something better out there, which could fuel the halo effect and influence people to complete their halo more and to have the best product in every category. The 15 will seem more ultimate now.
But this is in the face of many people who though the 17 was the best laptop on earth and adored the screen real estate. Now I feel like I am spending 17 inch Level money on a 15 inch.
If by LTD you mean the American R&B/funk band best known for their 1977 hit single "Every Time I Turn Around," -then no.
They're still selling the 2010 Mac Pro. They gave it an extremely minor processor update and changed the prices. That's it. No Thunderbolt, no USB 3.0. But they did it because they're keeping the line alive for an update in 2013.
Why wouldn't they do the same thing if they were planning on keeping the 17" MBP around? OP, I understand that it's something that you really want. And you can keep the hope alive. But you're going to end up being very disappointed.
Steve is dead and doesn't have any ideas for only you to understand more than anybody else.
Sorry.
Great specs for $900 less than the 17" MPB
That might explain why the 17" MPB is only 1% of Apple Laptop sales.
Actually, it's 1.7%
Dude, I could buy into your reasoning (which may make sense to some) but you're forgetting the path Apple is taking with the new 15" retina pro machine. At WWDC we didn't see them tinker with Garageband, iMovie or iPhoto. It was all about pro apps.
Eventually, the 15" will stand in a class all by itself as the only true "Pro" machine you'll need. (Or so Apple hopes). Can't brag about it if there is a more powerful big 17" brother which nobody buys that just sits there diminishing the power of its smaller sibling.
And let's not forget the price hike of the new 15". Apply that scenario to the 17" and even that 2% pro market will squawk and dwindle fast.
It just ain't worth it for Apple. The writing's on the wall
They could have just as easily released a updated 17" with 650 and USB 3.0 the components are exactly the same as the 15". They're killing off the 17". It sucks but it makes sense. Not enough people buy it and it prolly doesn't even sell enough to justify the r&d as someone earlier mentioned.
Who needs 17-inch when the Retina 15-inch can display the same resolution as the 17-inch?
15-inch is a sweet size
15-inch is a sweet size
Yes, the Retina MBP can give you more screen real estate than the previous 15" MBP, including a setting that gives you as much real estate as the old 17", just squeezed into a 15.4" display.
There are five settings, ranging from "Larger Text" to "More Space" in the display preferences panel. The middle setting makes things the same size as the old 15" 1440x900 resolution. The two "More Space" settings give you the equivalent real estate of 1680x1050 and 1920x1200 respectively:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5998/macbook-pro-retina-display-analysis
Last edited:
It's 2%
Actually, it's 1.7%
Dude, I could buy into your reasoning (which may make sense to some) but you're forgetting the path Apple is taking with the new 15" retina pro machine. At WWDC we didn't see them tinker with Garageband, iMovie or iPhoto. It was all about pro apps.
Eventually, the 15" will stand in a class all by itself as the only true "Pro" machine you'll need. (Or so Apple hopes). Can't brag about it if there is a more powerful big 17" brother which nobody buys that just sits there diminishing the power of its smaller sibling.
And let's not forget the price hike of the new 15". Apply that scenario to the 17" and even that 2% pro market will squawk and dwindle fast.
It just ain't worth it for Apple. The writing's on the wall
1.7 rounds up to 2 anyway.
----------
Good luck clicking buttons in say, Logic Pro, with that resolution in such a small space. Even on the 17 I had to make the resolution bigger so I could use the buttons. I doubt it's useable in 1900 mode.
Overall Mac Laptop sales
The Retina models are drastically different then the previous gen. Sure, most of the R&D is already done in the 15" RMBP and they only have to scale it up. But still, it might not be worth it to them.
For most people sure, but I have a very bad back and that 1 pound is like 20 pounds. My statement about weight is ONLY related to my personal problems with using a 17". I carry my machine back and forth everyday and I don't drive. (Live in a city, don't need to)
Besides weight, I really like the size of them.
sales of macbook 17 inch are 1%. Apple will not spend Millions on design just to satisfy 1%
Let me rephrase that:
NO COMPANY will spend millions on design just to satisfy 1% of customers.
Let me rephrase that:
NO COMPANY will spend millions on design just to satisfy 1% of customers.
They did exactly that with the early-2008 non-unibody 17" Macbook Pro when the late-2008 unibody 13" and 15" models were introduced.