Options
macbook vs mb pro vs pc?
mrfizzed
Registered Users Posts: 622 Major grins
can anyone who knows (but is not estimating) weigh in on the difference between a macbook and a macbook pro, especially when it comes to lightroom. ive read conflicting reviews that say you need the pro and some that say it doesnt make a difference. obviously the pro has a dedicated graphics card, but does this really hel? here is why i am asking, i have been a pc user foreever. i bought a macbook and didnt notice any difference over my pc. everyone i know swears by macs and convinved me to take the plunge. i did but didnt see the point. i use 3rd party software such as lightroom and PS which can be had for pc as easily as they can for a mac. but, but but can a pro help me and will it be better than the plain old macbook? id appreciate your insight if you can help as i really would like to go out and get another macbook (pro) but not sure if i want tot if it really wont help me out.
ps i will say that there are times that when i use lightroom on my pc is seems slow (i dont hve a graphics card ill admit but do have 4gb ram, 320gb hd, and core 2 duo)
--
ps i will say that there are times that when i use lightroom on my pc is seems slow (i dont hve a graphics card ill admit but do have 4gb ram, 320gb hd, and core 2 duo)
--
0
Comments
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
http://slinky0390.smugmug.com
Gene
I was in the same boat last year when I decided to purchase the Macbook over the Pro. I don't regret my decision for the money saved.
CPU wise, it's obviously faster... but PS is fast enough for most anything on any modern hardware. The software? It works the same on either OS.
My experience with Macs has been that they're a somewhat different experience than PCs. Not necessarily better. But, I don't buy crap from a company that sells crap, I just put mine together myself. While I refuse to buy garbage, I also refuse to pay too much money for it. You can get a lot of PC for the same price as a Mac. The experience of using it is worth the money for some, but it's not a panacea, Macs have issues too (hardware failure rate is about the same as PCs, XP/Vista/OSX are all quite reliable OSes, all of which I've seen crash, the days of frequent, spectacular crashes have gone with Win98 and OS8/9 the way of the dodo). They each have their quirks and ways of doing things. If you like one, the other may frustrate you in some aspects. If you're indifferent to something, you might like something else more, or remain indifferent.
If you've not used a good PC laptop (IE Dell Inspiron/HP/Compaq/Sony consumer trash), you've not used an IBM/Lenovo. They cost a bit more, but are still far cheaper than Apples run, are built better (My experience has been that all the Apple laptops are built better than consumer laptops but aren't as durable as the better business designs).
You can always run Windows on a Mac now, but at the cost of a potential hole in your wallet, and you'll never be able to run OSX on a Windows box... (not - you can! look up hackintosh on google).
A quick look at a couple of models:
Macbook:
Now more expensive, but with discrete graphics. $1300 gets you a solid system that'll be fine for PS, though the included hard disk is kind of gimpy at 160GB, if you've got an external and a backup system, you're in good shape. IMO, you don't need more than this much computer unless you have a very heavy workload or need to work quickly with large RAW files. Be aware that the displayport is not HDCP compliant if you plan on using it for anything it is necessary for. Oh. The LCD on these isn't so good, at least the previous generation. The viewing angle was poor even for a TN display, though it is only 13.3", so if you're working on it, it won't be much of an issue as it's right in front. 1280x800 is... inadequate resolution in my book... but then again I'm running 3520x1200 on my desktop and 1920x1200 on my laptop, so I'm pretty biased here. IMO, if you get a Macbook, a decent external monitor is essentially mandatory for serious photo editing if you plan on using it as your main machine.
$1300
13.3" 1280x800 glossy
2Ghz C2D
2GB ram
160GB hard disk
GF9400M
4.5lbs
From the base configuration, there is nothing worth upgrading. $150 for 2GB RAM is highway robbery (It should be $40-50 max) so is best done after purchase and self installed. As is $100 to get 70GB more of HDD space. The SSD at $700 isn't a good value for function, per se, but isn't as much of a ripoff as the memory or HDD upgrade.
$1600
13.3" 1280x800 glossy
C2D 2.4Ghz
250GB HDD
2GB RAM
4.5lbs
$300 for a small CPU and HDD upgrade? No. That's absurd. 2->2.4Ghz CPU difference will barely be noticeable under the most strenuous conditions, and under normal ones it'll be plenty fast.
MBP:
Again, it's plenty of computer. The faster video may help a little bit with CS4, otherwise they won't do much of anything for you unless you play games (And if you're playing games, you don't have many options without going to Windows, and the 9600M GT is pretty slow for gaming.). Faster CPU is expected but not a big deal. Display is bigger, still modest resolution without going to the 17" model.
$2000
15.4"
2GB
250GB HDD
9600M GT
5.5lbs
What does this get you over the $1300 MB? A better screen, a slightly faster CPU, a slightly bigger hard disk, a better video chip, and it's 1lb heavier. The only big difference for a non gamer here is the display, and if you want it, you want it. IMO, it's very expensive for what it offers. The $500 upgrade to 320GB HDD, 4GB RAM, and 5% faster CPU? I don't even need to go there. RAM is nice, but isn't worth $500, and you can add some after you buy it for $30-40. The upgrade to 2.8Ghz isn't worth $300. Intel's top end CPU is never worth the price.
So, as a note of comparison, with <6lbs targetted for the MBP comparison and <5lbs for the MB one...
Lenovo T400
14.1" 1280x800 w/camera*
2.26Ghz C2D
2GB RAM
160GB HDD**
HD3470 video (faster than 8400GS, slower than 9600M)
Vista Basic
Mobile broadband (stock with AT&T, Verizon for $120, subtract $30 if you don't want)
6 cell battery (choice of 4, 6, 9, battery life similar to macbook with the 6)
~5lbs, .5lbs more than MB
$1084 as configured
*Choice of 1280x800, 1440x900, 1440x900 w/LED backlight, all with/without camera ($30 option). Chose 1280x800 w/camera to compare with Macbook pricewise.
** Many choices including SSDs and 7200RPM.
T500
15.4" (again, options. Let's just put the 1680x1050 display in, can also do 1440x900 LED display for $25 less)
2.53Ghz C2D
2GB RAM
320GB HDD (Again, some options here, 128GB SSD is +$404 over 320GB)
HD3650 - Similar to 8600MGT
Vista Business
Mobile broadband (same. -30 if you don't want, +120 for verizon)
6/9 cell battery - using 9 cell here.
5.5lbs, same as MBP
$1633
Just for silliness:
Dell Vostro - These are decent little systems. Not sexy or pretty, but very well built for the price... you do have to spend 30 minutes deleting the crap Dell installs on them, but I think there's less if you order through the business part of the site.
1.83Ghz C2D ($125 for 2Ghz, $325 for 2.53, neither are worth it)
Vista Basic
15.4" 1920x1200 ($150 less for 1280x800, $100 less for 1680x1050)
3GB RAM
Integrated video (can do 8400M GS for $150, not worth it at that price)
250GB HDD
6 cell battery
Probably a bit over 6lbs
Next business day *on site* service for 1 year
$749
They've got a lot more options, a significantly lower price tag, a couple potential niceities, but they won't run OSX if that's what you want. Again, any of these is plenty of computing power unless you're doing some very heavy work, and most of that can be remedied with some RAM and a faster hard disk.
IMO, a mandatory addition to whatever you get would be a calibration device of some sort (Spyder 2 express, 3 Pro, Huey, or something else), and a strong consideration of a decent external display if you don't have one yet... this means a non TN LCD or a good CRT.