Previous 1 14 15 16 17 18 Next 383 Replies Latest reply: Oct 18, 2014 11:25 AM by Infaustus Go to original post Branched to a new discussion.
  • PuNiTTT Level 1 (0 points)


  • Grant Bennet-Alder Level 9 (56,684 points)

    The 2011 models are still available as pristine "refurbished" at the Apple Store in the US. Same warranty, they just ship in a plain box.

  • tejotajunior Level 1 (0 points)

    I don't think that people should have to buy a "refurbished" model. Apple should never have removed from production at all. It was the best laptop; it was the biggest and therefore it could offer more. I couldn't wait for them to bring back the 17" so I had to settle. That is the thing though: I shouldn't have had to. Apple needs to realize that people want a powerful laptop. Small isn't better—it means you get less. And less is not always more.

  • JamesWells2001 Level 1 (0 points)

    Exactly, and the bigger screen means everything is easier to read, and alter photos etc in PS, hence why I want a powerful laptop as I'm sure many others do too.  Come on apple, you're even making the screens on your Iphone larger for that very reason!!!  Why go larger on one product and smaller on another?!


    Why would I want to buy a refurbished two year old model, when I should be able to buy brand new one!

  • Network 23 Level 6 (11,900 points)

    JamesWells2001 wrote:


    Exactly, and the bigger screen means everything is easier to read, and alter photos etc in PS, hence why I want a powerful laptop as I'm sure many others do too.  Come on apple, you're even making the screens on your Iphone larger for that very reason!!!  Why go larger on one product and smaller on another?!

    It would make sense to them if you think of it as pushing the sizes of both screens closer to the middle. But anyway, the iPhone doesn't really count. It was only lengthened to become a 16:9 aspect ratio, that's all. And if you talk to Android users they will just laugh, because what you call a "larger" iPhone screen is still much smaller than the trending phone screen sizes on Android and Windows phones currently. In the big picture the iPhone screen did not really get larger in any significant way.


    I understand the desire for the 17", one of my relatives uses one for coding. But most of my friends have downsized from 15" to 13" or smaller. That's what the fans of 17" are fighting: the industrywide trend of people wanting to carry smaller, lighter computers. I also know one of those people, a coder who used to work from a 17" and one day got fed up with the size and weight and the next time I saw him he had a MacBook Air.

  • AmirfromEgypt Level 1 (0 points)

    Hi all, Let me put some comments here from me - a big big fan of 17" MBP - my machine is a late 2007 built 17" MBP and guys !! it's still my choice and i WILL NEVER EVER buy a 15" MBP!! to me a 17" is the standard, nothing less than that would really make me feel that i can work with ! i did really upgraded my machine hard disk to the latest SSD ( 256 GB ) from OWC just to avoid changing to a 15" MBP. I will be waiting apple to release a 17" machine. When apple decided to stop the 17" line i was really shocked ! The 17" MBP was apple flag ship machine and it was targeted to a specific customers like us. for me i will continue using my machine for maybe another year or so - waiting apple to make a bold move - and then i will decide.... will i give up on 17" or move completely from apple to another 17" product - outside of apple - which i really don't wanna do. Lets all send those feeds back to apple and let them hear us !! WE WANT BACK THE 17" MBP. Thanks guys.

  • davidhunternyc1 Level 1 (0 points)

    ^^^ X2! We want our 17" MacBook Pro's!

  • NY27 Level 1 (0 points)

    As you imply, there may be many people who don't mind downsizing to a smaller computer because it's more portable. But that does not mean that there are not many people who prefer the larger 17 inch MBP.  I use my laptop as a desktop.  An iMac wouldn't work because I move the computer around on my desk a lot.  Plus the iMac would block my view of a nice lake and be too dominant on my desk.  The 17 inch MBP is perfect because it provides the screen real estate I need to be productive without causing me to feel that I'm staring at a screen all the time, or that it’s staring at me. I can view two documents side by side without having to shrink the document size. 


    Also, I'm used to the fixed, flat keyboard and trackpad arrangement of a laptop.  Switching to a tilted, separate keyboard and trackpad would greatly lower my productivity, as well as be annoying.  It seems that it would be slower to move fingers from the keyboard to the trackpad as I do now. 


    When I travel, the 17 inch is about an inch longer, less than an inch wider and a pound heavier than the 15 inch.  In other words, it's nearly as portable as the 15 inch as long as you have a bag that it fits in. For me, giving up an irrelevant amount of portability to get much better productivity, screen size, speakers and other attributes is hugely worth it. 


    Apple also should consider the status that having the 17 inch MBP provides.  Many people consider a larger laptop to be higher quality, higher status and more prestigious.  I've seen many actors on TV using the 17 inch MBP.  Dr. House on the TV show House used one.  The 17 inch is the executive version of the MBP. Lower level employees often use smaller laptops. The larger laptop conveys status and prestige. Can you imagine Dr. House, a CEO or some other senior executive using a tiny 13 inch MBP?  It would be like they were playing with a child's toy.  It would not convey the status and high quality that goes along with their senior position. 


    I suggest to Apple that every product in their line does not have to be a huge seller.  They probably have other products with substantially lower sales than say the iPhone.  The 17 inch MBP conveys high status. It helps Apple to maintain their reputation as the laptop leader.  Dropping the 17 inch is like abandoning the executive and professional markets.  As the old saying goes, it might be penny wise but pound foolish.  Apple might make a little more money in the short term by dropping the 17 inch (although that can be avoided by raising the price of the 17 inch).  However, as TV actors playing senior executive roles, real senior executives, professionals and other leaders switch to non-Mac 17 inch laptops, Apple’s reputation could suffer, which would hurt sales (i.e. be pound foolish). 

  • NY27 Level 1 (0 points)

    I wasn't able to edit the above post.  I wanted to add the following paragraph:


    Apple might have thought that positioning the 17 inch as the MBP leader was degrading the status of the much higher selling 15 inch.  Maybe they wanted to position the 15 inch as the leader in the MBP line, thinking that this might increase sales.  But it seems that the presence of the 17 inch enhances the status of the 15 inch by making the whole MBP line seem more professional.  As more senior executives and other leaders switch to non-Mac 17 inch laptops, the status of the MBP line will be degraded. People often emulate leaders.  Having many prominent TV actors and actual leaders obviously using the 17 inch MBP probably increased sales of all MBP sizes.  Getting rid of the 17 inch degraded the reputation of the whole MBP line.  As people see more executives, actors and other leaders using non-Mac 17 inch laptops, sales of all MBP’s could decline.  Higher level executives often have larger offices and larger desks.  They also ought to be able to have larger, more prestigious laptops on their more prestigious desks. 

  • Nevering Level 1 (0 points)

    We want our 17 inch MBP back .  It's the only one that makes sense. People that do serious work, and multiple apps running need power and a larger screen. 


    15 and 13 inch is good for school kids and 1 app , browsing facebook.  But for programming needs, the 15/13 don't cut it.

  • davidhunternyc1 Level 1 (0 points)

    I was just watching Fox 5 news where they just showed a leaked photo of yet another new iPad! Even the newscasters rolled their eyes with disdain at this story. Do we really need another iPad? I am sick of Apple the infotainment company and long for Apple the computer company again.

  • jplflyer Level 1 (0 points)

    Is there some reason you believe the two are mutually exclusive? Why the sour grapes towards the iPad? If you don't want one, don't buy one.


    The question shouldn't be about new iPads vs. the version of MacBook we want. The company is perfectly capable of producing both as well as anything else they can dream up. Framing this as if they can only produce one or the other is reinforcing the attitude they should chase the most profitable product line.


    Which is NOT a 17-inch MB.


    So let's just not go there.

  • da bishop Level 1 (0 points)

    davidhunternyc1 wrote:


    I was just watching Fox 5 news where they just showed a leaked photo of yet another new iPad! Even the newscasters rolled their eyes with disdain at this story. Do we really need another iPad? I am sick of Apple the infotainment company and long for Apple the computer company again.


    Absolutely the iPad design can be improved. The current one is too heavy and gets too hot.


    One should never expect things to stand still in the computer industry. For 15 years I wouldn't touch a laptop, too weak for my purposes. I only used top-spec desktop macs. However, past few years I've been able to get the sort of power I need in a laptop, so I'm now able to work in a more mobile fashion, which is great. Very liberating.


    Of course apple should do a proper professional's laptop. I think that they could afford to even go a bit bigger than 17 inches. With a 4k screen and sufficient power to throw around uncompressed video, many people in broadcast and design would consider them essential.


    Of course apple should also do the iPhone and iPad. Lots of people have said that the iPhone 5 was a disappointing update, but I'm fine with mine. Much lighter, and a bit more screen, every time I pick up the v4 it feels really clunky in comparison. No complaints, really.


    Lots of people here forget that apple dropped the 17 inch model when the switch to Intel CPUs happened, but the model came back. Ultimately apple's current unibody manufacturing process involving robotic milling would make life pretty easy for shipping smaller volumes of professional-spec gear.

  • davidhunternyc1 Level 1 (0 points)

    Well, I do wish to go there. Apple is spending so much of its research and development time on iPads and iPhones to the neglect of its computer lines. Meanwhile, Microsoft has come out with an amazing new tablet/computer; the Suface Pro. I hope it crushes Apple. I hope it forces Apple to finally accept Flash as viable software technology (still superior to HTML5 as far as ease of programming or more flexable too). In addition, I hope the competition comes out with 19" HD display laptops that crushes Apple's 15" version. Oh, don't get me wrong, I love Apple. Everything I own is Apple. I just want other companies to light a fire under Apple's butt so that Apple is forced to innovate. Does anyone remember the tagline; think outside the box? 

  • da bishop Level 1 (0 points)

    You probably don't remember how unwieldy Shockwave was to work with before the Flash WYSIWYG environment was launched. I still consider Flash's development environment to be a royal pain in the butt to work with, although it's not as genuinely horrid as Macromedia's versions, it's still pretty nasty.


    Somebody will release an HTML5 WYSIWYG development environment which will make it less code-intensive without losing the flexibility. Adobe have already had a go at it with with Edge, but I don't think they'll be the ones to crack it. Fact is that Adobe are a pretty sausage-factory company these days, and Flash on OSX really doesn't run very well. The majority of the reported crashes of OSX are caused by the Flash Plugin. I get the feeling that if they did a cocoa rewrite of the Flash plugin which took advantage of the Display Postscript engine used in OSX, apple would be perfectly happy to have it run on the iOS platform.


    Same with the Creative Suite, Adobe have only just got round to redoing the thing in Cocoa for CS6, they did CS5 on Metrowerks and TBH the new CS6 pretty buggy for either Windows or OSX.


    Adobe seem to be largely concentrating on selling Acrobat to corporations and governments, that's where their big market is.


    I wouldn't care to speculate on where any company of Apple's size and caliber are spending their R&D resources, but they've got no particular lack of resources. Yes, their suite of Pro apps aren't getting as much focus as I'd like, but I do understand and agree with apple's choice to prioritise the building of really really powerful core libraries which developers can then harness to produce potent software without having to worry about exactly how the data gets munched. Companies such as Adobe aren't taking advantage of the apple technologies properly, because they can't be bothered to develop independent versions of their mainline software, they want to build everything for Windows primarily.


    If I was in charge of Adobe, I'd be inclined to build Display Postscript for Linux, give the library away free, basically Quartz for Linux, let the distros adopt it for general display use, and offer the Creative Suite running in a VMware shell for Windows, and have CS run native for Linux and OSX.


    However, you can certainly see Flash converging with HTML5, AS3 is ECMA script.

Previous 1 14 15 16 17 18 Next