Would you pay an extra $750 for antiglare?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by shoebobs, Jan 25, 2011.

  1. shoebobs macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2008
    #1
    I find it annoying that to this point, Apple has not offered the antiglare option on the 13" MBP. If it truly is a "pro" model, it should have antiglare as an option.

    I am wondering, how many of you have decided on the 15" or 17" solely for the reason that you can get the antiglare screen? If you look at the lowest price 13" MBP and compare it to the lowest price 15", with the only upgrade being the antiglare screen, the difference is $750. If Apple were to offer antiglare as an option on the 13" (presumably for the same $150 increase as with the 15"), I would think Apple would make more money than counting on people to upgrade to the 15" and pay an extra $750.

    I am going to get a 13" MBP when the new models come out. The way I look at it, Apple can either get an additional $150 from me by letting me choose antiglare, or they can get $0 extra, as I am not going to pay an extra $750 for the 15"/antiglare.

    Why do you think Apple does not give customers this option? Do you think there's really enough people upgrading to the 15"/antiglare, versus people who would pay a little extra on the 13"?
     
  2. torbjoern macrumors 65816

    torbjoern

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2009
    Location:
    The Black Lodge
    #2
    I was close once. From 1280x800 to 1680x1050 means 72 % extra pixels.
     
  3. christophermdia macrumors 6502a

    christophermdia

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2008
    #3
    I agree with this...the $750 gets you a significant amount of extra real estate on that screen. I opted for a higher model 15" and hi res, giving me an insane amount of real estate which I use to my advantage especially when using large spreadsheets....

     
  4. Mikey7c8 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2009
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    #4
    Yeah, but 1680x is relatively new on the 15, and it's looking like the 13 will go to 1440x which makes that less of a big deal than it once was. :)

    I personally don't find the glossy screen to be that big a deal (having now had a 13" MBP for 18 months, coming from a 15" Matte), though i'd certainly choose a matte one if given the option.
     
  5. shoebobs thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2008
    #5
    I didn't realize the 13" was only 1280x800; that does make quite a difference. And in their current form, the 15" does include a significantly better processor and video card, so the $750 does add some value there too.

    If for some reason the C2D remains for the next refresh, I guess that would be some justification for upgrading to the 15"..decisions, decisions. I really think though all models should offer mostly similar components, with the main distinction being the form factor. Otherwise, don't try to disguise the 13" as a pro and price it at the pro level.

    Apple store is down for me by the way, maybe a surprise update? (Kidding...way too early for the SB updates)
     
  6. zodqyv macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2010
    #6
    I don't care for antiglare, so no. Then again, my home lighting is optimal for glossy.
     
  7. Merkava_4 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2010
    Location:
    California

Share This Page