MacBookPro 15 v 17

CocoPops

CocoPops

CocoPops

Soldato
Joined
6 Nov 2002
Posts
3,071
Location
Thatcham, UK
Looking for some feedback on 15inch MBP v the 17 MBP.

It's gonna be used 80% of the time as a lap based machine.

The xtra screen res appeals, but the xtra size/weight doesn't.

Cost isn't an issue really, but I don't want to buy it and then later regret not getting the other one etc.

Any thoughts...
Anyone gone from a 15 to a 17, or vice versa? For what reasons...

I've currently got a 13ich Macbook, so both will be an "upgrade"

Thanks,

Lee.
 
Im in the same position but don't have a MB atm :p

Im currently swaying between 15 inch 2.2 and 2.4 (knowing full well that the 2.2 is enough for what I want from it) but the 2.4 and 17 inch 2.4 is still stopping me from buying lol.

Oh and with the release of 10.5 end of october, probs order then! :D
 
I'd take the 2.4 simply because of the 256mb gfx compared to the 128mb in the 2.2 15"

Hence the choice between the 15 and 17 (both 2.4, both 256mb gfx etc).

The "downside" of the 17 is that it doesn't use the new LED backlight for the screen iirc.
 
CocoPops said:
I'd take the 2.4 simply because of the 256mb gfx compared to the 128mb in the 2.2 15"

Hence the choice between the 15 and 17 (both 2.4, both 256mb gfx etc).

The "downside" of the 17 is that it doesn't use the new LED backlight for the screen iirc.
Click to expand...


Well, as im going to be connecting the thing to a 2407 anyway while at home and the extra size away will just annoy me. Its between the 15 inch 2.2 and 2.4..


PROBABLY be, 2.4, 2Gb, 200Gb 7200 (if they update it :rolleyes:)... £1300-1400 IIRC
 
I made the same choice recently, I picked the 17" simply because it would fit in my camera bag perfectly...

I went into the Apple store and tried one for size before buying... probably the best thing for you to do, go into a shop and ask to handle the machines side by side, rather than just use it tethered to the desks... Im sure, if they think theyll get a sale they will be more than willing to let you.
 
If i was going to get a 17" I'd get the extra high res version, thats about the only reason in my opinion. If you're working with photos a lot you'll likely appreciate the extra res, if you're travelling a lot you probably won't on the other hand.

That said, even the 15" isn't tiny or featherweight but it's probably hte best compromise unless you have a need for the extra res...
 
CocoPops said:
My initial thought is to go for the 2.4 15" version.... but... would I regret not buying the 17... and not getting the decent screen res.
Click to expand...


Well my reasoning is.

I don't need 1920x1200 while im out and about cos I won't be doing that much work.

However when I get home ill have a 2407 there with 1920x1200....

IMO you should get the 15 and a 2407 :p
 
CocoPops said:
I'd take the 2.4 simply because of the 256mb gfx compared to the 128mb in the 2.2 15"

Hence the choice between the 15 and 17 (both 2.4, both 256mb gfx etc).

The "downside" of the 17 is that it doesn't use the new LED backlight for the screen iirc.
Click to expand...

17" gfx is clocked higher - something apple doesn't publicise..
 
It's weird.. the 17" actually has a 14% battery improvement over the last gen MBPs, where the 15" has a 17% improvement :)

Something I've noticed, and certainly doesn't mean the LED should be a deal breaker in terms of battery life (like I thought it might).
 
wush said:
I think they lumber the 15" with the poor 1440x900 resolution for this very reason :)
Click to expand...

Hardly Poor! Most 15" Laptops seem to come with 1280x800 that I've seen. I've got the 15" and I would say it's perfect, very portable yet big screen and nice keyboard. The only advantage of the 17" is the extra screen res/size really. Most of the time I use my 15" MBP in clamshell mode on a 20" 1680x1050 LCD and tbh I don't need the extra space over that MBP's panel, yeah it's handy but not essential.
 
But this is supposed to be a class-leading "Pro" notebook, not a standard one :)

Don't get me wrong, I think it's a great machine. But the 15.4" should be 1650x1080 and the 17" 1920x1080 base spec!
 
I've pretty much decided on the 2.2 one as Ill have a quad core rig here with a gigabit NAS so I can edit photos on my Quad if needs be.

But ill have a MBP on my way to me in 6 weeks time :D
 
wush said:
But this is supposed to be a class-leading "Pro" notebook, not a standard one :)

Don't get me wrong, I think it's a great machine. But the 15.4" should be 1650x1080 and the 17" 1920x1080 base spec!
Click to expand...

I don't think they have access to LED backlit panels as large as 1650x1080 yet, otherwise they'd have had the 17" with LED.

I do agree though.. 1900x1200 is a very nice spec, and would certainly raise it that much more above the 15" :)
 
I managed to bodge up writing both resolutions. Wayhay!

The real reason they need higher resolution - so many dummkopf Mac users have their Dock at the bottom and non-hidden on a widescreen display :D
 
wush said:
I managed to bodge up writing both resolutions. Wayhay!

The real reason they need higher resolution - so many dummkopf Mac users have their Dock at the bottom and non-hidden on a widescreen display :D
Click to expand...
What's wrong with that ;)
 
Vertical resolution is the one thing you're short of on all but the highest-res widescreen displays. Why wave goodbye to a chunk of it for the Dock when there's plenty of room at the side? :)
 
Indeed ! Particularly as there is room enough for the dock in the free space between the rightmost side of your desktop and the default position of your boot drive's icon.. it does take a bit of getting used to but I wouldn't go back to a horizontal dock now :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom