What does "Pro" mean?

[Astroboy907]

I think you have it reversed. 3 years is a typical full computer depreciation term.

Yes, it is. 3 years is a lifetime in "computer years". But what I am saying is that many companies (esp. small businesses) simply don't need to replace equipment until it falls apart. I've seen many small businesses running 5-10 year old equipment and computers. Sure, if they could they would probably get brand new equipment, but available cash is generally the issue. If it aint broke, don't fix it.

Of course, then you have the other side of that where many businesses can replace equipment on shorter time scales, and absolutely need top of the line, "latest and greatest" computing power. I guess it just depends! flat five explained it quite well in the last post IMO.

 

[Icaras]

TBH I hate internet arguing. I mean, seriously, how many peoples opinions/beliefs are actually changed due to some random guys comments? Maybe 1%? Nice to see someone who doesn't blow up at other people at the slightest sign of an argument! Shall we agree to agree?
Its cool too because I've made this argument for a while now, I just didn't understand the other side of it very well until now. Thanks for the perspective!

Me too. People can get too heated around here and it's pretty pointless to keep going back and forth at some point, but thank you for the friendly debate. It was a good discussion and it also made me understand the various screen size configurations and their respective audiences a little bit more.

 

[Heyref]

Professional
Productivity


not

"Gamer"
Power user

For me, "Professional Productivity" requires a number pad keyboard.

 

[cube]

Yes, it is. 3 years is a lifetime in "computer years". But what I am saying is that many companies (esp. small businesses) simply don't need to replace equipment until it falls apart. I've seen many small businesses running 5-10 year old equipment and computers. Sure, if they could they would probably get brand new equipment, but available cash is generally the issue. If it aint broke, don't fix it.

Of course, then you have the other side of that where many businesses can replace equipment on shorter time scales, and absolutely need top of the line, "latest and greatest" computing power. I guess it just depends! flat five explained it quite well in the last post IMO.

Well, I am thinking more about corporations, not tiny businesses.

 

[Astroboy907]

Well, I am thinking more about corporations, not tiny businesses.

Ah. Enjoy your 3 year update cycle!! you lucky....
So what do you think "pro" means if it is not lifetime/upgradability of the computer? Not to argue, just want to hear your opinion

 

[cube]

Ah. Enjoy your 3 year update cycle!! you lucky....
So what do you think "pro" means if it is not lifetime/upgradability of the computer? Not to argue, just want to hear your opinion

Upgradeability is a normal feature, not pro.

Non-upgradeable is crap.

 

[throAU]

For me, "Professional Productivity" requires a number pad keyboard.

Which apple sell, and that I am typing this on.... and it's only really necessary if you're a bean counter or do a lot of number crunching. I don't.

I don't need to carry one around with my MBP.

 

[maflynn]

For me, "Professional Productivity" requires a number pad keyboard.

Sure for you, but for photographers, I don't think a number pad means a lot

----------

Upgradeability is a normal feature, not pro.

Non-upgradeable is crap.

Most laptops have some level of non-upgradedness (is that even a word )

I will say that the rMBP is pretty much locked in, I wouldn't say that makes its non-pro machine but rather a business decision that impacts the buyer.

 

[josh995]

I'd just like to point out that sales of the 17" were very, very low relative to 13" and 15".

With them introducing the retinas, I think the 17" just wasn't worth further development because of the low sales. Also the price would conflict with the retinas.

 

[Idefix]

The definition of "Pro" in baseball or basketball or football is exactly what you'd think it would be. These guys are specialists and are achieving at levels way beyond high-school or college or school playgrounds.

Elsewhere, the definition of "Pro" is completely variable, essentially useless, what's known as "marketing-speak."

For Apple, "Air" means "our smallest, lightest laptop." And for Apple, "Pro" means "our next level up."

Does anyone really think that the 13" Macbook Pro is actually "Pro" in the dictionary sense of the word?

 

[Astroboy907]

I'd just like to point out that sales of the 17" were very, very low relative to 13" and 15".

With them introducing the retinas, I think the 17" just wasn't worth further development because of the low sales. Also the price would conflict with the retinas.

I'm hoping they just keep it on the back burner for a while and see if they can bring it back later. I think getting a "retina" 17" screen would cost lots of $$ now. What I think they did was develop the 13 and 15 retina, realized nothing "retina" existed at a decent price for the 17", and just gave up.

So maybe once 4k 17" screens get cheap enough... they might bring it back. I know it had really low sales, but there was a pretty decent market for it. Plus, think of what apple could do with all the extra space in terms of storage, RAM, CPU, and graphics. It could be a killer machine. But it doesn't exist... I'm still hoping.

 

[flat five]

I'm hoping they just keep it on the back burner for a while and see if they can bring it back later. I think getting a "retina" 17" screen would cost lots of $$ now. What I think they did was develop the 13 and 15 retina, realized nothing "retina" existed at a decent price for the 17", and just gave up.

So maybe once 4k 17" screens get cheap enough... they might bring it back. I know it had really low sales, but there was a pretty decent market for it. Plus, think of what apple could do with all the extra space in terms of storage, RAM, CPU, and graphics. It could be a killer machine. But it doesn't exist... I'm still hoping.

dunno.. 17" screen is still too small for a lot of work and it's not really that advantageous over 15".. i think most people who need more screen from their laptops are using a separate display..

now a 24" mbp? that would be awesome (though sort of ridiculous and not very practical )

[fwiw, i have owned a 17" laptop before.. a powerbook.. the idea being that it would replace my desktop but it didn't really work out that way.. i still found myself hooking it up to another display -or- still using the desktop.. eventually went to 15" mbp which, to me, is better]

 

[Astroboy907]

dunno.. 17" screen is still too small for a lot of work and it's not really that advantageous over 15".. i think most people who need more screen from their laptops are using a separate display..

now a 24" mbp? that would be awesome (though sort of ridiculous and not very practical )

[fwiw, i have owned a 17" laptop before.. a powerbook.. the idea being that it would replace my desktop but it didn't really work out that way.. i still found myself hooking it up to another display -or- still using the desktop.. eventually went to 15" mbp which, to me, is better]

I bet they could put a 20" screen in a "decent sized" mbp (with little or no bezel), and have it be near the same size as a standard 17" notebook. Not like this has any practicality, but what the hey, it would be pretty cool!

 

[flat five]

I bet they could put a 20" screen in a "decent sized" mbp (with little or no bezel), and have it be near the same size as a standard 17" notebook. Not like this has any practicality, but what the hey, it would be pretty cool!

ha.. yeah. i think that would be cool too.

 

[cube]

dunno.. 17" screen is still too small for a lot of work and it's not really that advantageous over 15".. i think most people who need more screen from their laptops are using a separate display..

now a 24" mbp? that would be awesome (though sort of ridiculous and not very practical )

[fwiw, i have owned a 17" laptop before.. a powerbook.. the idea being that it would replace my desktop but it didn't really work out that way.. i still found myself hooking it up to another display -or- still using the desktop.. eventually went to 15" mbp which, to me, is better]

Of course 17" is advantageous with respect to 15". It's possible to work comfortably on 17", while 15" is cramped.

To have something better than 17", you need one of the good 27" monitors at least.

On the move, a separate display is not an option.

 

[flat five]

Of course 17" is advantageous with respect to 15". It's possible to work comfortably on 17", while 15" is cramped.

i guess that depends on what you're doing.. when i went from 17 to 15, i felt equally cramped.. 17" is not what i'd describe as 'comfortable'..
there's not a big difference at all (for me)

 

[josh995]

I'm not sure if this has been posted yet, but I feel like the Pro had more meaning when the regular "MacBook" computers existed.

The MacBook Pro was a more powerful and shinier/prettier MacBook.

I think today, the Pro designation just exists as a tradition (not sure if that's the right word, but best way I can explain it) of sorts.

Of course 17" is advantageous with respect to 15". It's possible to work comfortably on 17", while 15" is cramped.

I went from a 17" laptop to a 13" MacBook Pro and it was the best decision ever! I now have a 21" iMac and 15" MacBook Pro but I'm thinking of selling it and going back to a 13" because I personally find even 15" just too big. And I do work on my computers.

I think it's just pure preference, it's only better if it works for you. But may not work for someone else, so for them, it's not better.

 

[Badrottie]

Macbook Pro is for people who are professional of anything. If you think or feel that you are not a professional then have no fear…There is MacBook Air for novice/newbie.