Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

xmonkey

macrumors 6502a
Jun 30, 2016
687
932
CA
It's a great machine, no doubt. But if you have any inkling that you're gonna need more than 2 cores or a GPU, the 15" is plenty portable while offering these features. It's the most portable pro-level 15" notebook on the market by a long shot. I don't think anything else out there offers a GTX 960M-equivalent GPU + a quad core skylake and 10-hour battery in four pounds, half an inch of chassis.
This right here.
 

oktane

macrumors newbie
Dec 9, 2016
24
6
How much less functional space does the 13" give you? My understanding is the screen resolution is similar with the 13" giving 2560x1600 and the 15" being 2880x1800.

That means the 13" screen area is 80% of the 15". I don't know how much difference that makes in the real world.
 

sarc

macrumors 6502
Dec 3, 2016
289
335
How much less functional space does the 13" give you? My understanding is the screen resolution is similar with the 13" giving 2560x1600 and the 15" being 2880x1800.

That means the 13" screen area is 80% of the 15". I don't know how much difference that makes in the real world.

While 20% does not sound like much it is. I do video editing and being able to have the space available to me allows me to have my layout different ways. It also gives more space to have safari, mail etc open and visible at once.
 

FrozenDarkness

macrumors 68000
Mar 21, 2009
1,727
968
How much less functional space does the 13" give you? My understanding is the screen resolution is similar with the 13" giving 2560x1600 and the 15" being 2880x1800.

That means the 13" screen area is 80% of the 15". I don't know how much difference that makes in the real world.
depends on the way you do division. it's also going to give you 35% more screen area.
 

Maccotto

macrumors 6502
Oct 6, 2012
301
26
How much less functional space does the 13" give you? My understanding is the screen resolution is similar with the 13" giving 2560x1600 and the 15" being 2880x1800.

That means the 13" screen area is 80% of the 15". I don't know how much difference that makes in the real world.

It's an Apple Joke.
The resolution is retina but the desktop area is different (full HD and more for 15" and 1400-1680 max the 13") .
 

azntaiji

macrumors member
Sep 22, 2014
95
26
It's great, coming from a 2012 13".

2016 15" footprint isn't that much larger - and it's a ton thinner/lighter.
 

Maccotto

macrumors 6502
Oct 6, 2012
301
26
Not a joke. You can run them both at 1680x1050 but which one is going to be easier to read?

I wrote about this problem.
The 13" can work also at fullhd but this is a very problem for read everything . I had 13" retina and i found this problem serious and big , now wait tomorrow for 15" and will see better :)
 

cerberusss

macrumors 6502a
Aug 25, 2013
932
364
The Netherlands
I have a 13" MBA that I'll probably sell, and a new 15" Late 2016 MBP.

I really can't see myself using the 15" on a plane in economy class. The 13", yes. However... I also have a 9.7" iPad. When I last flew, the iPad is so much easier to use than the laptop, and I only used the iPad during flight.

So my question to topic starter would be: do you have a tablet? If so, get the laptop you want, and use the tablet during travel.
 

xraydoc

Contributor
Oct 9, 2005
10,771
5,225
192.168.1.1
I wrote about this problem.
The 13" can work also at fullhd but this is a very problem for read everything . I had 13" retina and i found this problem serious and big , now wait tomorrow for 15" and will see better :)
Wait. What?

It's a problem that things are smaller on the 13" screen compared to the 15" screen?

Uh. Ok.

Perhaps I'm just not following the non-native English.
 

sn0warmy

macrumors 6502a
Mar 26, 2009
630
75
Denver, CO
How on earth would it get in the way? I've been using it since mine came on the first wave of shipments and not once has it gotten "in the way". In the way of what? It hasn't once reacted to my palms, even when resting one hand on it to be near the keyboard while using the trackpad with the other. I have to say I do dislike the force touch trackpad in general - it's just not firm/reactive enough, and the click doesn't react as fast as it would with my Late 2013's standard-click multitouch trackpad when working quickly. Can't do anything about that, though, unless I want to stick with the 2013.

Really, at the end of the day, if you need a quad core CPU and/or a GPU, you're getting a 15-inch model, and it will be plenty portable.

I believe all the reviewer complaints come from those who prefer using the bottom right corner of the trackpad for "right click", rather than two-finger clicking somewhere else on the trackpad. Apparently when this is enabled it reacts to the palms and makes the computer difficult to use. However, the two reviewers I watched both said that switching from using the bottom right corner of the trackpad to two-finger clicking solved the problem. They just had to adjust how they like to use the trackpad.

With that said, the trackpad on the 15" is obnoxiously large. In my limited use, it really felt like I had to actively work around it. I just don't get why they made the trackpad on the 15" larger than the one on the 13". Even the one on the 13" is pretty darn big.
 

BenTrovato

macrumors 68040
Jun 29, 2012
3,035
2,198
Canada
No problems with the trackpad even though my first impression was that it's waaaaay too big. It's actually pretty good. Obviously the 13" is more portable but barely. If the difference is that big of a deal I'd get a MacBook and try to save as much space as possible. The 15" is just so much more powerful that I can't go back to the 13".
 

jackoatmon

macrumors 6502a
Sep 15, 2011
617
655
Super portable. I'm coming from an 11" Macbook Air + 27" iMac setup, and it's not far off the 11" air in terms of portability. I barely notice the difference in weight and size.






[doublepost=1481640519][/doublepost]
How on earth would it get in the way? I've been using it since mine came on the first wave of shipments and not once has it gotten "in the way". In the way of what? It hasn't once reacted to my palms, even when resting one hand on it to be near the keyboard while using the trackpad with the other.

For the record: my trackpad does not, ever, reject my palms with any consistency, and so I have to type in a way where my hands never touch the computer. It might reject 50% of the clicks, but when your palm hits it 3 times per sentence you type, 50% success rate won't cut it by a mile. It's the only feature of the device that made me seriously consider returning it. It's a constant problem, even now as I type. Cursor jumping around, buttons randomly getting clicked by my palms, etc. It is a truly nonstop nuisance.

I think it's fine if your palms are shaped like how they programmed it for, or if they rest the way it''s programmed for, because I can replicate a palm rejection if I'm consciously testing a full, palms-down rest of hands with my wrists twisted to mimic a perfect, straight-on set of hands. But in natural, everyday use, yeah, trackpad is a constant problem. It's just a blatant design flaw in the device. The bigness adds nothing and subtracts soooo much.

And I'm no hater. This is without a doubt the best computer I've ever used by a huuuuge margin. I just wanted to point out that the trackpad issue is definitely real.
 
Last edited:

sn0warmy

macrumors 6502a
Mar 26, 2009
630
75
Denver, CO
No problems with the trackpad even though my first impression was that it's waaaaay too big. It's actually pretty good. Obviously the 13" is more portable but barely. If the difference is that big of a deal I'd get a MacBook and try to save as much space as possible. The 15" is just so much more powerful that I can't go back to the 13".

"Barely"? Give me a break. The footprint of the 13" is exponentially smaller than the 15". If you truly believe the 15" is "barely" less portable than the 13", you clearly haven't compared them side by side.

And this is coming from someone who has owned 3 consecutive 15" MBP's before this 13". As I said before, my mid-2015 15" MBP feels like an absolute behemoth compared to the new 13". And the 2016 15" is only marginally smaller than the 2015 15".

Now, this is not to say that the 15" is not portable, in a general sense. It's still much better than most PC laptops available. But no, it is not "barely" more portable than the 13".
 

jackoatmon

macrumors 6502a
Sep 15, 2011
617
655
And the 2016 15" is only marginally smaller than the 2015 15".

oh goodness not at all

those old 15" are monsters

the new one is so much more portable. i think you just gotta use it for a day or two to see just how massive a difference there is
 

Macalway

macrumors 68040
Aug 7, 2013
3,847
2,364
oh goodness not at all

those old 15" are monsters

the new one is so much more portable. i think you just gotta use it for a day or two to see just how massive a difference there is

It's better. I haven't tried to fly with it yet.

It's going to take time. Subtle things (for me at least)
 

sn0warmy

macrumors 6502a
Mar 26, 2009
630
75
Denver, CO
oh goodness not at all

those old 15" are monsters

the new one is so much more portable. i think you just gotta use it for a day or two to see just how massive a difference there is

The previous generation 15" MacBook Pro is only 25cm taller and 63cm deeper. So, no, the 2016 15" is not that much smaller or more portable.
 

jackoatmon

macrumors 6502a
Sep 15, 2011
617
655
The previous generation 15" MacBook Pro is only 0.10" taller and 0.25" deeper. So, no, the 2016 15" is not that much smaller.

Yes it is. You're just looking at numbers. I'm saying, when you get a chance to use one for a day, you'll be shocked. I'm coming from an 11" air + desktop, man. And I bbaaaarely notice a difference in portability. It's just so thin and light !

Numerical metrics are no indication of real experience.
 

maflynn

macrumors Haswell
May 3, 2009
73,447
43,366
It's better. I haven't tried to fly with it yet.
That was the big difference in moving down to a 13" for me. I gotten used to it flying and its ok, but at least for me, the experience was better with the 13" form factor.
 

wnxgenral

macrumors 6502
Original poster
May 14, 2008
286
16
I have a 13" MBA that I'll probably sell, and a new 15" Late 2016 MBP.

I really can't see myself using the 15" on a plane in economy class. The 13", yes. However... I also have a 9.7" iPad. When I last flew, the iPad is so much easier to use than the laptop, and I only used the iPad during flight.

So my question to topic starter would be: do you have a tablet? If so, get the laptop you want, and use the tablet during travel.

I had a 13" MacBook Pro and a 12.9 iPad Pro... I find myself coming back to the MacBook because the iPad is just a "productivity" device... Yes I am able to use PowerPoint and Box Sync... but it is not as easy to use as my MacBook Pro, with the ability for better multi tasking...

Bottom line, if I am reading books or watching movies, iPad pro every time... even maybe some light email... If I need to crank out real work, MBP... every time.
 

BenTrovato

macrumors 68040
Jun 29, 2012
3,035
2,198
Canada
"Barely"? Give me a break. The footprint of the 13" is exponentially smaller than the 15". If you truly believe the 15" is "barely" less portable than the 13", you clearly haven't compared them side by side.

And this is coming from someone who has owned 3 consecutive 15" MBP's before this 13". As I said before, my mid-2015 15" MBP feels like an absolute behemoth compared to the new 13". And the 2016 15" is only marginally smaller than the 2015 15".

Now, this is not to say that the 15" is not portable, in a general sense. It's still much better than most PC laptops available. But no, it is not "barely" more portable than the 13".

I appreciate that everyone has their own opinions in life, but I'm just going to leave this picture here so others can judge the validity of your posts. This is the 13" on top of the 15" and you wish to say the 13" is exponentially smaller than the 15". I'm left to wonder if you know what the word means or you're just being facetious.
 

Attachments

  • mbp.jpg
    mbp.jpg
    28.3 KB · Views: 84

sn0warmy

macrumors 6502a
Mar 26, 2009
630
75
Denver, CO
I appreciate that everyone has their own opinions in life, but I'm just going to leave this picture here so others can judge the validity of your posts. This is the 13" on top of the 15" and you wish to say the 13" is exponentially smaller than the 15". I'm left to wonder if you know what the word means or you're just being facetious.

Your picture proves the point I was trying to make extremely well. So thanks for that.

Using basic calculations from the published specs for each machine, we can determine with 100% certainty that the overall volume of the 13" is 35% smaller than the 15". Most reasonable people would consider that to be quite a large difference. And while holding both devices simultaneously, it's immediately clear which one is considerably more portable.
 
Last edited:

oktane

macrumors newbie
Dec 9, 2016
24
6
Another thought, is that the 15" is hard to use on your lap. The screen is gorgeous though. Another issue is the larger body makes the touch-bar harder to reach from the trackpad on the 15" vs. 13". There is just more distance for your hand to travel.
 

sn0warmy

macrumors 6502a
Mar 26, 2009
630
75
Denver, CO
Another thought, is that the 15" is hard to use on your lap. The screen is gorgeous though. Another issue is the larger body makes the touch-bar harder to reach from the trackpad on the 15" vs. 13". There is just more distance for your hand to travel.

While sitting on my couch with the MBP on my lap, even my mid-2015 15" is no less comfortable to use than the new 2016 13". It's only when you get into tighter spaces, like on an airplane, that the 15" can get annoying.

I know I keep harping on the 15" vs the 13", in terms of portability. But the 15" is still very portable in a more general sense. And using it at home on the couch should still be very comfortable.
 

Karnicopia

macrumors 6502
Mar 27, 2015
479
496
I ended up going from a 13 to a 15, I really did like the portability of the 13 but I found that the 15 didn't really lose too much portability for me and it had a lot of benefits in real estate and photo comparison. For me I actually really like the 15 on the lap. I think I like it better because it does allow me to have my legs spread a bit more and the screen real estate make a big difference. It's definitely a comfortable machine to use and easy to carry around for my uses.

One area I think there is a difference as someone else pointed out is when you try and one hand the laptop it's noticeably easier with the 13 but I do this so rarely and for such short time periods that I personally don't care about it much. I guess also if you do a lot of tray tables on airplanes maybe you lose a couple inches but it's not like you have room for a mouse or a drink with the 13 either so I'm not sure what you actually lose. Either way I usually do go with an iPad mini on a plane just because I'm usually just reading or listening to music if there's a screaming kid.

I really did like the 13 but I don't feel like you give up too much portability with the 15, I still love using it as a laptop and I'd have no problem bringing it with me. If I did a lot of computing on airplanes I may feel differently but for my uses I really enjoy the 15.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.