I got the 20" and was glad I did. Why settle for the 17" when for a few more $$ you could have the 20".
I'm also a Mac Developer. I opted not to get the DTK because I thought when the lease was up, I'd be left with nothing. I was wrong about that.jsw said:I got the 17" as a result of Apple offering a 17" Intel iMac in exchange for returning the Developer Transition Kits early. I was glad they did that, but disappointed that they didn't give us the option to upgrade and pay the difference. ...
brettbolt said:I'm also a Mac Developer. I opted not to get the DTK because I thought when the lease was up, I'd be left with nothing. I was wrong about that.
If I had gotten the DTK, I would be stuck with a 17" (with regrets). But instead, I bought a 20" on the first day they came out and am very happy with it. I love the extra screen real estate. And in 2 days my Universal Binary will be ready.
Why didn't Apple give developers who bought the DTK an option (at additional cost) to get the 20"? It really makes no sense at all!
They paid $999 for the "gift".macbaseball said:Giving all those people even a 17 inch iMac was a gift. People can't be picky about gifts, because they aren't required. ...
brettbolt said:They paid $999 for the "gift".
My point is that the other developer seems a bit unhappy about not having an upgrade choice and I agree with him 100%.
In my opinion, Apple made a very poor business choice.
1) They could have made more money by offering an extra cost 20" upgrade.
2) Developers would have been happier with a choice (17" or 20") and more likely to sign up for Apple developer programs in the future.
We're not supposed to sell it for a year, IIRC. Still, no biggie. I like the 17".macbaseball said:...if the 17 inch is really that big of a problem for a developer, then they should sell it...
jsw said:We're not supposed to sell it for a year, IIRC. Still, no biggie. I like the 17".