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

Would you buy a new 17" MacBook Pro if Apple made one?


  • Total voters
    233
Absolute resolution isn't the draw, it's the physical canvas being larger (optionally along with more resolution).

Just to make sure I understand correctly: so you are talking about comfort of use? Basically, the 17" won't be able to fit more content on the screen, but it would make the content proportionately larger and thus easier on the eyes? Or is the idea also to proportionately increase the resolution of the display to make it fit more content?

It’s a happy medium for many people; between a laptop and dedicated desktop computer. The screen is not too small and it’s not too big. It’s an equilibrium.

How do you know that its what many people would prefer? The fact is that there are virtually no 17" laptops left on the market tight now. Clearly, if those were the preferred option, companies would probably not stop selling them. I'm also not sure what you mean by equilibrium, since there are no opposing forces to balance here. If you mean that 17" displays are an optimal compromise, I'd have to disagree. Again, its way to large for a mobile machine and not nearly large enough for a desk setup. And again, this is clearly reflected in the devices available on the market right now. Customers prefer smaller (but not to small of course) screens in mobile machines (13-15 has established itself as golden standard) and 22"+ displays for desktops. Which kind of makes sense when you think about visual acuity of an average person and a typical working distance in a laptop/desktop scenario.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RandomDSdevel
Basically, the 17" won't be able to fit more content on the screen, but it would make the content proportionately larger and thus easier on the eyes? Or is the idea also to proportionately increase the resolution of the display to make it fit more content?

Possibly both - It just depends upon usage.
I work in video and most people I know were really irritated when the 17" went away as it was very popular.

One could envision how great and even higher resolution a modern designed 17" could be if offered.

My point is get 2 or more machines, a portable for portableness and a desktop for real work.

I guess I'm not being clear enough. Some people (I was one of them) had a use case where the largest screen in an easily moveable/battery powered workstation was super nice. A desktop was not an option due to the work environments. (not to mention, a huge PITA to move around safely)


In any case, why are we even all arguing about it guys?
They aren't going to make one so this is just fun discussion.
Let's all get along.
 
Just to make sure I understand correctly: so you are talking about comfort of use? Basically, the 17" won't be able to fit more content on the screen, but it would make the content proportionately larger and thus easier on the eyes? Or is the idea also to proportionately increase the resolution of the display to make it fit more content?



How do you know that its what many people would prefer? The fact is that there are virtually no 17" laptops left on the market tight now. Clearly, if those were the preferred option, companies would probably not stop selling them. I'm also not sure what you mean by equilibrium, since there are no opposing forces to balance here. If you mean that 17" displays are an optimal compromise, I'd have to disagree. Again, its way to large for a mobile machine and not nearly large enough for a desk setup. And again, this is clearly reflected in the devices available on the market right now. Customers prefer smaller (but not to small of course) screens in mobile machines (13-15 has established itself as golden standard) and 22"+ displays for desktops. Which kind of makes sense when you think about visual acuity of an average person and a typical working distance in a laptop/desktop scenario.

“Many” is subjective, “equilibrium” is subjective. We will never agree on things we like. Over analyzing it is a waste of my time. Take it for it is and move on.
If you want to have a debate, buy me a dinner.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RandomDSdevel
Possibly both - It just depends upon usage.
I work in video and most people I know were really irritated when the 17" went away as it was very popular.

....

Some people (I was one of them) had a use case where the largest screen in an easily moveable/battery powered workstation was super nice.

Ah, ok, I see. I was just curious, since I have worked with a 15" (exclusively) for years now, and I never had a urge to have a larger display. Since recently, I also have an external 4K monitor and I barely use it since it doesn't seem to add anything to my workflow (mostly a lot of text documents + databases + terminal windows). But I can understand that in your field of work the situation is different.

In that case, its a shame that you don't have the option. But I'm sure that within not too long time we'll have ultra-thin foldable displays, which would allow one to make a very compact laptop with larger screens. Something like this: https://www.cnet.com/news/lg-rolls-up-oled-tv-smokes-my-mind-hands-on/
 
@leman

More portable USB-C powered displays certainly feel like the likely step, no question...
That, paired with a 15", would make for a wonderful mobile capture/editing station.

Although the extra screen has it's own uses, that still is clunkier than a single larger screen depending upon who you are/what you're doing, etc.

Oh well - Is what it is
 
“equilibrium” is subjective

I'd say that "equilibrium" is a misuse of a technical term :p And what are the forums good for when not having a debate. But I get what you are saying. Well, the technology is constantly shifting and new stuff is coming up. Just in 2010 an idea of a HiDPI screen on a personal computer seems preposterous, now all laptops come with it by default. 10-15 yers from now we might be using some sort of projectors that can make a crisp image in thin air. Or it'll all be virtual reality glasses anyway...
[doublepost=1510537292][/doublepost]
More portable USB-C powered displays certainly feel like the likely step, no question...
That, paired with a 15", would make for a wonderful mobile capture/editing station.

No, what I mean is a laptop that can unfold its screen, making the final display physically larger then a laptop itself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RandomDSdevel
I'd say that "equilibrium" is a misuse of a technical term :p And what are the forums good for when not having a debate. But I get what you are saying. Well, the technology is constantly shifting and new stuff is coming up. Just in 2010 an idea of a HiDPI screen on a personal computer seems preposterous, now all laptops come with it by default. 10-15 yers from now we might be using some sort of projectors that can make a crisp image in thin air. Or it'll all be virtual reality glasses anyway...
[doublepost=1510537292][/doublepost]

No, what I mean is a laptop that can unfold its screen, making the final display physically larger then a laptop itself.

Word “Equilibrium”, has been around for many years. It’s not a technical word.

It comes from a Latin word from 17th century. ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: RandomDSdevel
I had a 17" unibody MBP as a work laptop, and it was glorious (still have this machine in use today). I would absolutely get another 17" for my work machine, with whatever maxed out CPU/GPU/RAM configuration that is available.

I use my 15" in 1920x1200 equivalent scaled resolution when doing work (software dev). In a 17" I'd want higher scaled resolution. I spend most of my time connected to an external monitor/keyboard/mouse, but when I'm not, it's sitting on a table and I would benefit from a larger screen. Weight/size of the 17" unibody was fine for my usage patterns, a 17" smaller than that would be fantastic.

I don't think we'll see a 17", though (they just never sold in high enough quantities). I'd love to be proven wrong.
 
Last edited:
I have the 2010 17" (since it doesn't have the logic board failures of the 2011).

I really like the screen size at 17" 16:10. Going back to a 13-15", especially 16:9, is pretty tough.

The previous 17" MBP is certainly rather heavy, and all the PC 17" machines are giant bricks. I don't think anyone actually makes a 17" "ultrabook" class laptop -- they just don't exist.

If Apple could trim it right down to how the 15" is today, with a slightly larger footprint, I think it'd be perfectly fine to transport around. The size and weight of the 2010 don't bother me too much as-is since I only ever deploy it to a table/desk and carry it in a backpack.

I do agree with others who have pointed out that the new keyboard (and lack of ports that I actually use) would be a major drawback to any new MBP. I'm not even considering one for my next computer at this time because of that and the price. The base 15" now starts at CAD $3200 (was CAD $2000 only a couple of years ago).
 
If a new 17" MBP came out with proportionally beefed-up hardware (3840x2400 resolution screen, 32GB RAM, more powerful GPU, larger battery, more ports) and a revamped keyboard, I'd buy a maxed-out version in a heartbeat, even though Apple would certainly ask an arm and a leg for it.

Realistically, though, I have long given up on any of this happening, and I'll be a happy camper when Apple finally releases a 6-core, 32GB 15" with a reliable keyboard. Until then, my 2009 17" MBP will remain by far the best machine I have ever owned.
 
Nope. We just donated our last 17" MBP ( we literally purchased it right before Apple stopped selling them ). That thing was huge. I truly prefer my current 2016 MBPr 15" for portability. I use my 27" iMac when more desktop space is desired.

PS: I did read a note up there by someone that if they spec'd it out with some serious hardware... it would certainly fit the needs of more than a few.
 
It certainly would be nice if there was a true desktop replacement option for some professionals and other high end users

I'm sure there are many disappointed Pro's out there that just cant bring themselves to use a garish gaming laptop design in thier work environment as there are very few other alternatives with the grunt etc

Given that it's reported that whilst PC's/laptops sales have declined and have been replaced by tablets/2 in 1's and gaming laptops that have increased and mac's are used by low 15% of professionals

There certainly seems a niche demand for a professional looking high end luggable vs the slim MBP laptops that are 85% mainly used by normal users

Additionally with such a powerful 17" luggable I'm sure many other macOS users who want the best spec in that format for other uses :)

What better way to get Pro's back to Apple and give greater options to many.

It's not like Apple are adverse to fulfilling the needs of niche markets at a price. Even at $4k I doubt it would be of little concern for the Pro's

Happy daydreaming to all :)
 
Last edited:
I used to own the last 17" before Apple discontinued it. Great machine for my needs, nice large display that works as a secondary monitor to my Dell 2711. I could easily fit it into my backpack if I needed it somewhere but 75% it sat at my desk.
i'd still use it if it wasn't stolen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RandomDSdevel
Ironically, if the 2016 and 2017 keyboard is a genuine ongoing issue for Apple then one way out of this, without faffing around trying to improve the keyboard inside the existing case, is to go with the much mooted 14" and 16" iterations that were rumoured a couple of years ago before we got the 2016 and 2017 models that we are now familiar with.

As before, we'd see a refresh of the 12" MacBooks but alongside that would be the 4 core 14" model and 6 core 16" model with beefed up display resolution. The 16" model could come with 4k screen and yes, would need bigger battery to drive such a screen. The 14" model would have a resolution close to the existing 15".

More importantly, Apple could then fix the keyboard issue without having to draw attention to it.

Apple don't then have to introduce a top 17" model which would have to cost a fortune. They just increase the price slightly on the 14" and 16" models and perhaps we get older base 2017 models hanging around a bit for people on a budget much like the 2015 is doing at the moment.
 
I would buy one in an instant. I'm still using the last 17" MBP (late 2011) maxed out with 8GB RAM and 512GB SSD. I find it useful to be able to look at two pages of a document side by side at a reasonable size, to work with HTML, external style sheet CSS and WSYWIG views of Web pages at the same time, and other things like that. For me, it also eliminates the need for a separate larger monitor when I use my computer at my desk.

I carry it everywhere, including five continents so far. Have used it in economy airline seats - a bit cramped, perhaps, but not unworkable, and I spend a LOT of time on airplanes. Its weight has not been a problem for me, but in all fairness I'm one of those weirdos who puts more weight than that on their back, walks up big hills in the woods, and calls it fun. There are a few new software features it doesn't support, but so far nothing I really need. At some point that will happen and I'll probably have to downsize. I'll survive, but I won't be happy about it.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.