Macbook pro 17" vs 15"

[Oxonian3]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)

This is not a matter of screen resolution, this is a matter of personal preference.
Choose the laptop that feels good in your hands. If you think the 17" is too big, then get a 15". They both should ave the same hardware if you get the high-end 15".

The other thing to note is that the 17" is very heavy. You don't gain anything over the 15" other than screen size and ExpressCard/34. In fact, the 17" is ever so slightly thicker than the other screen sizes.

Hey, OP! Don't want to sound like a jerk bag, but ignore the quoted aspect of the debate. I hate to sound like a broken record (since all my posts are about this, it seems) but the 17" is only 1 pound heaver and an inch bigger in every dimension. I used to have a 15" MBP and upgraded to the 17" with no problem -and I also walk around with my laptop all the time (university student). If you wrangle yourself a 17" laptop bag you will not notice the extra 1 pound or increased dimensions. Once you get used to such a large/HD screen, you will literally be forced to laugh directly in the faces of everyone with a 15" MBP -Hi Res or not.

Wow thanks a million man,I had an early '08 15" but now I want a nice 17" portable screen.I'm going with the 17

 

[Zwhaler]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)



Wow thanks a million man,I had an early '08 15" but now I want a nice 17" portable screen.I'm going with the 17

The 17" will provide the ultimate laptop as we all know, but don't discount the 15" hi-res I use one and it is really great and portable too.

 

[Oxonian3]

Really portability is not an issue,it's just I think It would be better if I had a 17" home most times for the occassional probably once a week travel vs the 15"

 

[randomrazr]

ur buying a macbook as a portable computter, not a desktop replacement. 17ich makes no sense intat.

get 15

 

[Macsavvytech]

What about 15" Hi Res Glossy?

 

[DWBurke811]

ur buying a macbook as a portable computter, not a desktop replacement. 17ich makes no sense intat.

get 15

Couldn't the same be said about the 13" and 15"? The size differences versed the 13 and 15, and, 15 and 17 are more or less the same.

IMO, I would only go with the 13 or 17. 13 if you want portability, 17 if you want performance.

 

[Oxonian3]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)

I had a 15",but I think that the HD 17" screen+the 2011 improved Gpu would be great.If people have reasons for a 17" over the 15 or vice versa please post

 

[randomrazr]

Couldn't the same be said about the 13" and 15"? The size differences versed the 13 and 15, and, 15 and 17 are more or less the same.

IMO, I would only go with the 13 or 17. 13 if you want portability, 17 if you want performance.

17 and 15 have same specs!!!

 

[RetepNamenots]

I went from a glossy 17" to antiglare 15", and couldn't be happier.

 

[randomrazr]

I went from a glossy 17" to antiglare 15", and couldn't be happier.

is it worth the anti glare?

 

[Eddyisgreat]

I have the 17" Hi res anti glare and the 13" glossy. Not going to lie- I dig the gloss on the 13" and it matches my cinema display.

HOWEVER the 17" allows me to simply do more and get more done. Yes , If i need to work on a presentation in an airplane or a in the trunk of some serial killers car then sure the size is fine. But for the 99.9% of the rest of my computing time, i'm not limited by size. The 17" wins.

 

[Oxonian3]

Yes,Eddyisgreat...Maybe I can just save up for a $400 Early '08 Macbook pro just for IDK portability purposes or a free "hand-me-down".If the 17" is 17.3 inches and the 15" is 15.4 then there's a difference of 1.9 inches which is approximately A WHOPPING 5CM DIAGONAL DIFFERENCE.I know I will enjoy my flight sims on a 17"

 

[Oxonian3]

And I save $300 buying the 17" off my source

 

[DWBurke811]

17 and 15 have same specs!!!

The 17" has a 1920x1200 screen.

 

[Oxonian3]

Full hd!

 

[Glockcubed]

Hey, guys and gals, I do not understand
all of this discussion about the 15' vs the 17' MBP. I have a Sony VAIO 15" that is hevior, and is more bulkier than than to
he 17" MBP. Granted I am 6'3 and 250 lb, but the difference is fr___ miniscle. Please clue me in!

 

[Glockcubed]

The 17" is a no brainer in My opinion. I have read this s__t for several months. The 17" MBP is a great deal if it is in your budget. You have to be "size impaired" person not to like it.

 

[317342]

I liked the 15" with glossy....the anti-glare made the screen/colors look dead to me. The 17" is nice but way too big to be portable.

 

[VMMan]

If you really are going to be needing a mobile device, then neither a MBP 15 or 17 IMHO is the way to go.

If I were a college student again, then I would get a MacBook Air 11" for a truly mobile device and hook up an external display and Thunderbolt hard drive for extra storage.

As of now, I use a 2011 MBP 17" and think this is the ultimate PORTABLE, but not mobile device.

I have a 2011 MBA 11" on order, which I am hoping will be the ultimate MOBILE device.

If I were to have bought a 2011 MBA 13", then that might compete somewhat inadequately with the MBP 17" but also fail somewhat in comparison to a MBA 11" for mobility.

A MBP 15" is IMHO still a great PORTABLE machine, but no longer a decent mobile device (thanks to the new MBAs).

 

[Jeepman88]

and if chicks see the 17" they immediately have embarassing silent orgasms,gotta love :d

fact

 

[Oxonian3]

fact

And they thought we didn't know

 

[Oxonian3]

But yes,the 17" would be a good powerful portable desktop replacement.

 

[diannao]

I have a 2011 MBA 11" on order, which I am hoping will be the ultimate MOBILE device.

I've repeatedly tried out the 11" and 13" MBAs in a store. While the size of the 11" is very impressive, I found the screen too small and felt I had to bend my neck too much to use it.

The 13" is very appealing, but Apple would have to add an 8gb option before I would want to buy it. Otherwise, it is a nice compromise of size, power, and screen resolution.

I still say the 17" antiglare is the way to go for most folks -- it's a portable and a Full HD monitor in one.

 

[Bobby Corwen]

A lot of people who voted in this thread need to learn about investment opportunities and grow their financial portfolios because that is the only excuse that a cheaper, less capable laptop with a smaller screen would win the votes?

How is a lower resolution machine, with less USB ports, that gets hotter, but is practically the same size, a better choice if money is no object???

 

[Oxonian3]

And the 17" for me is cheaper than the 15"