Hacker News Reader

Comment by thoughtsimple | Hacker News Reader

Who cares how thick it is, what matters it what does it weigh? Not seeing that information.

As an alternative point of view (as to say, I'm not calling you wrong at all, just that there are other opinions on the matter): I don't care about weight at all, or how thin the thing is. I want battery life, bigger screen size, and horse power. (Apple about lost me when they killed the 17 MBP). I call my laptops "luggable".

The good thing about bringing back the 17" MBP would be all the objections over battery life and low power GPUs would be moot. Even a thin 17" is going to be huge. The last one looked like 4 cafeteria trays stacked up.

I'm just not sure that there is much of a market for it. It's fun to imagine though. Mobile Xeon, ECC memory, 32 or 64 GB DDR4-2400 RAM, RAID NVMe SSDs. Priced like a Mac Pro :)

> The last one looked like 4 cafeteria trays stacked up.

It's funny you mention that. The nickname for the 17" MBP was 'the lunch tray'.

The 17" allow me to fit a dinner plate, side dish, and drink on top of it (closed), then carry it back to my desk or to the next meeting. The 15" won't fit the side dish anymore. I miss my Silicon Valley Lunch Tray.

My Zbook Studio G3 is the size of my old rMBP and has a Xeon 1545m, 32GB of ECC RAM, a 950 NVMe SSD, and space for another (but m.2, not NVMe, unfortunately).

a new 17" MBP doesn't necessarily need to be a mobile xeon, the low power kaby lake core i7 are capable of 64GB of RAM.

Same here. I have a 15" lenovo W530. It's not thin and it's not light, but it packs enough of a punch and has a large, hot swappable battery. I just wish it came in 17 inches and had a better trackpad.

I loved my Lenovo W700, which was 17 inches. I keep thinking i should actually replace the keyboard and battery and put it back into service as a secondary machine. It was fantastic, but they stopped making the W7xx line several years back. :(

Reply on news.ycombinator.com