It appears so. Given the new 15" retina job has better stats all round apart from raw screen space...

Keynote video if you want to watch it

Most unimpressed.

Mark

To be honest, I always thought 17" laptops were/are a solution looking for a problem.

Jon

Desktop replacement?

Just read a tweet...

Apple 2005: 2560×1600 res, 30", $3,000, monitor only.
Apple 2012: 2880x1800 res, 15", $2,199—with a computer attached. #progress

In which case a 15" laptop with a 19" monitor will get you more screen space for less money.

Jon

Still no mac pro. Hmm, what to do?

The Mac Pro was updated but not by much.

Apparently 'off the record' word from Apple executives at the show is there's a new format Mac Pro due some time next year. make of that what you will.

Jon

Which is exactly the reason I got one.

Mark

You do that on you lap whilst sat on a settee in front of the TV watching a programme and send me the pic, please?

Mark

What do you do on your lap while sat on the settee in front of the telly watching a programme that you absolutely need a 17" laptop screen for that a 15" screen wouldn't be good enough?

This really is my point. You're either doing serious work - in which case you probably don't want to be doing it while sat in front of the TV half watching a show and you'd actually be much better off sat at a proper desk on an office or study in which case you might as well have a proper monitor - or you're doing relatively frivolous stuff, in which case is the extra screen space worth the extra expense?

This is my arguement - a 17" laptop is neither as useful or good value as a 'portable computer' as a 15" laptop, and it's neither as useful or as good value as 'desktop replacement' as a 15" laptop connected to a decent monitor. And it's more expensive than either. It's a system that's compromised by trying to fulfil both roles thus ending up as the best solution for neither.

It's like those carplanes you see. They're pretty rubbish as a car and pretty rubbish as a plane. But they can do both, so they must be brilliant, right?

The only thing I did like about the 17" laptops is the extra size allows some of them to include a numeric keypad. But that's a big premium to pay for a few more keys.

Jon

I'd miss my 17"... I do have a 23" to link it up to, but to be honest I rarely do as the 17" is usually big enough for a lot of stuff I do, and it means I don;t have to lock myself away in the office of an evening. With my old 15" iMac, I found it near impossible to work as the work area once the palattes were up was tiny.... So I'd have to get the screen or an iMac to accompany it if I upgrade to the new MBP for 'proper' work. Hmm. Can the higher res really compensate for loss of width?

Maybe it'll encourage me to stop being lazy and actually get out in to the office to work instead....

Friend has a 17" that he uses between home, studio and location.
Dragging a monitor around to location isn't going to happen (although I know someone who's son has taken his 21" iMac out on occasion), and the screen estate makes editing on timelines easier than the 15".
Might not be right for you, but it is for some. The 'too big to commute with' argument is a crock too.

A 19" monitor isn't exactly portable


+1

As to whether a 17" laptop represents "value", that's for the purchaser to decide themselves.

If I was going to have a desktop replacement laptop, I think I would want a 17" screen too - I would definitely want the extra screen estate.