low res, anti-glare 15" MBP?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by llee87, Apr 19, 2010.

  1. llee87 macrumors newbie

    May 26, 2009
    Does anyone know if low-res, anti-glare 15" MBP might be released? From my understanding, this option was available (for like $50 extra, as opposed to the $150) with the previous line of MBP's... but so far I only see a high-res option if I want the anti-glare screen with the new MBP's. I know the extra $100 for the high-resolution isn't much in the grand scheme of a MBP purchase that will cost me over $2000, but in terms of grocery shopping for the month, it makes a significant difference :p and I could really care less for the high resolution... any ideas?

    on an unrelated note, I was not gonna buy Apple Care, again, because with my entry-level salary, I really need to skimp... I am buying this MBP mainly for home-usage (and I plan to leave my current mac at work all the time). If I don't plan on carrying my new MBP around very much, and I'll only be using it for light work (browsing, movie-watching, some MS office work, etc.), would it still be too much gambling to not purchase Apple Care under these circumstances?
  2. m85476585 macrumors 65816

    Feb 26, 2008
    Apple wants fewer options when customizing a computer, not more. More options just confuses people and costs Apple money since they have to produce computers with more combinations of options.

    Matte was brought back due to vocal demands, and I think Apple recognizes that there are the same kind of demands for high res. The average buyer might not care, but there is a minority that has a very strong preference for matte or high res. Apple is betting that the high-res group mostly overlaps with the matte group.

    I think the high-res displays are an experiment. If it is successful (enough people buying high-res displays), we might see the low-res option dropped in the future without increasing the base prices. The problem is that the high res option may reduce the demand for the 17", which is bad for Apple because they make more money off the 17". This trend is the opposite of what people want, though, since the ideal balance (in my opinion) is the smallest computer possible with a higher resolution display, not a larger computer.

    Unfortunately Apple is kind of neglecting the 13" because they don't make as much money off it. However, I would gladly pay $2000 or more for a 13" if it had the same specs as a larger MBP but in a smaller package. Apple's excuse for not upgrading the 13" (to i5 processors or discrete graphics or giving it an expresscard slot) is that they can't fit everything in and maintain the battery life. The solution is to ditch the optical drive since it is becoming less relevant every day. For as often as I use it, I'd rather buy an external and use the space in the computer for something else. If they could fit discrete graphics, an i5, an expresscard slot (or alternatively USB3, eSATA, or LightPeak), 2 hard drives, and a high res matte display (1440x900 or 1680x1050 or more), that would be the ideal computer for me, and I would gladly pay a lot of money for one.

    Apple needs to stop watering down their products to sell to more people, and focus on what real "pro" users want. The macbook is their consumer line.


    You have up to a year after you buy the computer to buy Apple Care, so it probably makes sense to wait.
  3. MBHockey macrumors 68040


    Oct 4, 2003
    New York
    Totally agree about the 13". Ditch the optical drive (seriously, who uses these things enough to warrant it taking up this much space in a 13" laptop?), put in a discrete graphics card, higher res screen, and a matte option and I would pay $1800 for it. Granted, we're not typical consumers.

Share This Page