I dont really beleive that. I assume your the guy that called apple yesterday and thats what they said?
Thing is they are known for saying things like that before a product actually is available and it changes when it does become available.
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.
Is the 17" MBP really THAT big?
- Thread starter BG-Mac
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Thing is they are known for saying things like that before a product actually is available and it changes when it does become available.
Err, it's 1.1lb, which I agree wouldn't make a difference...if that's all you're carrying.
But if you're carrying other stuff like books or other electronic equipment, then that 1.1lbs makes a large difference.
But in terms of size, I think it's fine. It should still fit in a backpack.
Wow - I'm surprised at the number of reactions in this thread characterizing the 17" as "absolutely huge".
In reality, carrying an extra 2" in size just isn't a noticeable change from a 15"... in either case, you will have a bag with you, and comfortable bags are readily available for either size. The weight, as another mentioned, is only a pound extra. I carried a 17" MBP around with me every day between home, work, and campus for two years without a single issue. I even found it a reasonable size to use regularly on my lap on the couch.
Granted, you'll won't be able to use it in an economy-class airplane seat, but I can't think of any other instance in which the extra 2" or 1 lb makes a noticeable difference in usability.
In reality, carrying an extra 2" in size just isn't a noticeable change from a 15"... in either case, you will have a bag with you, and comfortable bags are readily available for either size. The weight, as another mentioned, is only a pound extra. I carried a 17" MBP around with me every day between home, work, and campus for two years without a single issue. I even found it a reasonable size to use regularly on my lap on the couch.
Granted, you'll won't be able to use it in an economy-class airplane seat, but I can't think of any other instance in which the extra 2" or 1 lb makes a noticeable difference in usability.
You really fail at math... It's more than 2 extra inches. It's like an extra eleven square inches. Which is sort of a lot.
Yeah, if only Apple made a smaller laptop. Like, say, 13". That's be awesome, I'd definitely buy that.
LOL when I sit my new unibody 17" next to all the girls' white plastic MacBooks, the thing is going to look like a beast.
If you really need portability, you'd go my route. Sometimes I even have to work on flights, and a 17" is an absolute no-no for this.
I'm trying to decide between buying the upgraded 15" or the new 17" MBP. Is the 17" really THAT much bigger than the 15"? To those who have owned or own a 17" are they cumbersome to carry with you on a daily basis? Thanks in advance..
It's thin, but large. If you want to carry it around, get a maxed out 15"
That may be the case, i wasn't aware they did that, heres the link to what i read, but i couldnt find it yesterday:
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3371
* Last Modified: January 07, 2009
* Article: HT3371
Summary
The battery in the MacBook Pro (17-inch, Early 2009) should be replaced only by an Apple Authorized Service Provider. Please do not attempt to replace the battery in your MacBook Pro yourself.
Products Affected
MacBook Pro (17-inch, Early 2009)
Battery replacement should be performed only by an Apple Authorized Service Provider or at an Apple retail store. Attempting a battery replacement yourself could damage your equipment and void its warranty.
Additional Information
Read frequently asked questions about replacing the battery in your MacBook Pro (17-inch, Early 2009).
Yes but we were talking about the Hard Drive, which is still easily accessable when you remove that panel.
Edit: Note the black part is the battery and the HDD is not blocked at all
For me, the answer to your question is an emphatic yes, it is MUCH bigger than the 15 inch. I do not own a 17mbp but I do own a 17inch laptop and, even without the weight issue, I would never want to carry that thing around with me anywhere. It's just too big and unwieldy. Two inches may not seem like a lot on paper, but functioally, it's a HUGE difference. Also, the 1lb weight difference may not seem like much but in the real world it's like a night and day difference. It's like comparing the 13inch mb to the 15inch mbp which are 2inches and 1 pound apart. It's a world of differnece btw the two machines. The mb is like a feather compared to the mbp and feel so tiny in your hand and is going to be noticeably easier to carry around than a 15inch mbp. Same goes for the difference btw 15 and 17 inches. So unless you need anything the 17 has to offer then I'd get the 15 over the 17 any day of the week.
My math figured it to be 25.47 cubic inches extra. Ignoring depth, I came out to 21.67 square inches extra. But I also understand the previous poster's idea that it's only an inch longer and wider.
I ignored depth simply because it's so thin I figured it didn't really matter.
(15.47*10.51)-(14.35*9.82)=21.67
Hey! You're right. my mistake. I guess I should use a calculator instead of trying to do it in my head next time.
I've got a 17 inch laptop now that's about 3 years old (replacing it with a MBP 15 inch next week) and it's huge... only good for a 'desktop replacement' and not very portable. I mean sure I took it out with me to LAN parties and such, but I never took it to class or anything like that due to it's size.
IMO 15 is a good size... 13 is too small for anything but web browsing/email... 17 is for desktop replacements.
You could also hook up the 15 to an external monitor when you're home, too.
The thought of going from 17 inch (1920x1200) to 15 inch (1440x900) takes some getting used to for me... but I just don't need the super large laptop anymore. The best bang for my buck just happens to be the base MBP with a 320gb 7200 rpm hdd.
IMO 15 is a good size... 13 is too small for anything but web browsing/email... 17 is for desktop replacements.
You could also hook up the 15 to an external monitor when you're home, too.
The thought of going from 17 inch (1920x1200) to 15 inch (1440x900) takes some getting used to for me... but I just don't need the super large laptop anymore. The best bang for my buck just happens to be the base MBP with a 320gb 7200 rpm hdd.
TuffLuffJimmy said:
Hah. Then you really fail at interpretation.
I'm quite fine at math when I need to be, but my point was that this is not a math problem. Whether you want to quote linear dimensions (me), area (you), or volume (Adokimus), what really matters is the subjective way one feels about the usability of each machine in active use.For me, using my 17" every day on-the-go for two years was an entirely negligible difference over how I had used my 15" Powerbook in the time before that.
And now that I've gone back to a 15" MBP again, I wish I hadn't. I've lost a lot of functionality (pixels!) without a noticeable change in portability.