2.0GHz MB (White, 2/2009) vs. 2.0 GHz uMB (10/2008)

Discussion in 'MacBook' started by skijake1, Aug 13, 2009.

  1. skijake1 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    #1
    My local campus authorized dealer is offering both of these computers with a free iPod Touch. I'm going to sell it to help defray the overall cost of the computer. I intend to own one of the two for 11 months whereupon I will sell it with 1 months remaining on the AppleCare & buy a new one. I want to balance 2 things: value & resale value in 1 year.

    Here's my math:

    2.0GHz MB (White, 2/2009) 2GB memory, 120GB HD, etc.: $849 + 229 + tax (on both) - 229 - 200 (average sale price of iPod Touch on eBay) = $716.38

    2.0 GHz uMB (10/2008) 2GB memory, 160GB HD, etc.: $999 + 229 + tax - 229 - 200 = $875.75

    Is the uMB $159.37 better value than the 2.0 Wht? In 11 months when I want to resell one, will the gap widen or narrow?

    These are the questions I'm sorting through. There may be others I have not anticipated but of which you, expert Macrumors contributors, may be aware.

    I'm a relatively poor grad student replacing my old PowerBook. This is a major purchase for me in a down economy. I want to make the right purchase with the most value. Any help any of you can provide to make the most logical/rational decision would be greatly appreciated.

    Thank you in advance.
     
  2. NewMacbookPlz macrumors 68040

    NewMacbookPlz

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2008
    #2
    From a hardware/speed standpoint, they're within 5% of each other or so (UMB being a tad faster from the RAM).

    If you need FW400, you'll have to go with the WhiteBook. If the UMB really is from October, it'll have one of the older, lower quality screens, but about the same as the WhiteBook's screen.

    Really depends what you want from the computer in terms of style I suppose. Performance= virtually the same. I'd wager though that assuming FW400 doesn't make a huge comeback in the near future (which it shouldn't as USB 3.0 and FW1600/3200 are coming up), the UMB will hold resale value better.
     
  3. skijake1 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    #3
    Thank you

    Do you or anyone else know when they changed the screen? Was it before the 2.26 refresh (meaning, are there 2.0GHz uMBs out there with the superior screens)?
     
  4. NewMacbookPlz macrumors 68040

    NewMacbookPlz

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2008
    #4
    It seems they updated the screens in the Unibody 2.0/2.4ghz models around April 2009. It was a silent update, the way to check is 2-fold:

    1) Improved black reproduction, pretty obvious when I saw it.
    2) In the color profile (System Preferences-->Display-->Color-->Open Profile), check out field 13, if it's 9C89 or 9C8C it's an original screen, if it's 9CA5 or 6, 7, 8 it's an updated screen.
     
  5. ecking macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2007
    #5
    If you really care about money get the white one, if you care about style get the aluminum one. There are plenty of good fw400 decives on the market, especially drives and they don't clog up your limited number of usb ports when using them. And since 400 is backward compatible with 800 in 11 months you'll still be able to use them with your new mac. I have a unibody macbook and I'm selling it to get the 13" mbp. I didn't realize just how hard it is for me to let go of firewire, in hindsight I wish I had gotten the white one, but I'm a gear slut and now I'm spoiled by the design so it's 13" mbp for me.
     
  6. skijake1 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    #6
    Thanks, everybody, for your analysis & replies to my questions. As I could not guarantee that the 2GHz uMB had the newer screens, I went with value & bought the 2GHz White MB with the iPod Touch which I will sell & some Canon printer which I will also sell to bring down the total cost.
     

Share This Page