Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

(2008) 17" MBP vs (2009) 17" UBMBP... $700 difference.. Which should I choose??

Which should I purchase?

  • 17" UBMBP (2009)

    Votes: 26 66.7%

  • 17" MBP (2008) with 2.6Ghz Processor Model

    Votes: 6 15.4%

  • 17" MBP (2008) with 2.5Ghz Processor Model

    Votes: 6 15.4%

  • Don't buy anything.. Just wait..

    Votes: 1 2.6%
  • Total voters
    39
YahonMaizosz

YahonMaizosz

macrumors regular
Original poster
Nov 28, 2007
233
101
I manage to find these 2 items @ eBay and together with Live.com cashback I can get them for $1700 (2008) and $2400 (2009).

Here is the specs of the 2008 17" MBP:

2.6Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo
2GB 667Mhz RAM
200GB 7200 RPM
8600M GT with 512MB GDDR3
1920 x 1200 Resolution (I am not sure if this is already the LED version)

Here is the specs of the 2009 17" UBMBP:

2.66Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo
4GB 1067Mhz RAM
320GB 5400 RPM
9600M GT with 512MB GDDR3 + 9400M
1920 x 1200 Resolution

I had also found another (2008) 17" MBP but with the 2.5Ghz processor model for $1800 and here is its specs:

2.5GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
4GB 667Mhz RAM
320GB 5400 RPM
1920 x 1200 Resolution LED backlit Glossy Display

My questions to you people are:
1. Is the 2.6Ghz (2008) version already has LED backlit display?
2. Is it worth to buy the (2008) 17" MBP and save about $600 - $700 when compared to the (2009) version?

My Reasons why I wanted to avoid the (2009) version:
1. Its display is very dark and dim. I had seen it at Apple store and it is so dark that it is turning me off. (This is the most important reason. What's the point of spending $2400 for a laptop and has its display to be very unpleasant to even look at)
2. Huge price difference
3. Added costs to purchase the mini displayport adapter to use my 30" display (not very important but still one of my reasons)

My Reasons why I wanted to avoid the (2008) version:
1. Slower processor than the (2009) version.
2. (2009) version had better graphics and chipset (RAM)
3. Its display does not have a wide color gamut

Actually, I am ready to buy this laptop anytime.. I already has the budget. However, I still want to know your opinions and reasons..

I am giving this thread time up to 2 weeks before I make my decision.
 
Go 4 2009

The 2009 model for me was worth it. You can feel much better about leaving behind the graphic problems of 2008 and the screen is better not to mention the uni-body design. It's much better than the 2008 model. I sold my 2008 and I'm glad i did.
 
If you can afford it get the newer one. Unibody, better screen, more RAM, bigger HD. No brainer.
 
Is it? I don't have that issue with mine. Nice bright calibrated screen. I cant even look at the screen at full brightness, it hurts my eyes.
 
Kronie said:
Is it? I don't have that issue with mine. Nice bright calibrated screen. I cant even look at the screen at full brightness, it hurts my eyes.
Click to expand...

That's what I had been hearing from people in this forum.. But after looking at the real model in Apple store itself, I started to doubt them...

Seeing is believing... The only explanation would be perhaps these 17" UBMBP in stores are "programmed" to only a certain maximum brightness...
 
YahonMaizosz said:
That's what I had been hearing from people in this forum.. But after looking at the real model in Apple store itself, I started to doubt them...

Seeing is believing... The only explanation would be perhaps these 17" UBMBP in stores are "programmed" to only a certain maximum brightness...
Click to expand...

Many stores had the wrong build deployed - see this KB article: http://support.apple.com/kb/TS2659

The correct shipping build for the UB is 9G2141. If the normal 10.5.6 (9G55) is installed, the calibration will be way off - it's also responsible for the reports of "blue" displays.

Bottom line: my 17" display is BRIGHT, and stock calibration is fine (same as my 2.33 17", as far as color balance. No comparison on brightness).
 
gr8tfly said:
Many stores had the wrong build deployed - see this KB article: http://support.apple.com/kb/TS2659

The correct shipping build for the UB is 9G2141. If the normal 10.5.6 (9G55) is installed, the calibration will be way off - it's also responsible for the reports of "blue" displays.

Bottom line: my 17" display is BRIGHT, and stock calibration is fine (same as my 2.33 17", as far as color balance. No comparison on brightness).
Click to expand...

Does this mean that the "Dark" display in 17" UBMBP in Apple stores are actually due to faulty Operating System??

If this is true, then I would surely take the (2009) 17" UBMBP...
 
YahonMaizosz said:
Does this mean that the "Dark" display in 17" UBMBP in Apple stores are actually due to faulty Operating System??

If this is true, then I would surely take the (2009) 17" UBMBP...
Click to expand...

Not quite, basically lots of stores set them up wrong before putting them on display, ones people buy are perfectly fine, i can testify to that. Unless you enjoy broken graphics cards, cheap plastic cases and lower quality screens then get the 2009 one.
 
kastenbrust said:
Not quite, basically lots of stores set them up wrong before putting them on display, ones people buy are perfectly fine, i can testify to that. Unless you enjoy broken graphics cards, cheap plastic cases and lower quality screens then get the 2009 one.
Click to expand...

I guess if I were to be unhappy with the screen I would blame you people then.. :D:D
(I am just kidding ofcourse)...

I'll let this thread go on with the poll just to see what people are thinking..
 
YahonMaizosz said:
Does this mean that the "Dark" display in 17" UBMBP in Apple stores are actually due to faulty Operating System??

If this is true, then I would surely take the (2009) 17" UBMBP...
Click to expand...

It's not "faulty", it was apparently just a configuration issue with some store's "standard" image deployment.

It's standard practice to ship new machines with a different build than the public version - that ends up with essentially 2 versions of 10.5.6. If you boot a UB 17" off of a standard 10.5.6 (9G55 build), the wrong display calibration will be used (also, the Energy Saver panel is missing the GPU selection).

I know all this from experience :). I spent more time than I should have figuring out what was wrong with my display - I had booted off my "standard" 10.5.6, during the migration to the new machine (note: that's not normally necessary - I wanted to do some verification on the new HD before migrating.) During all this, I had heard some reports from in-store machines not looking right. Shortly thereafter, Apple released the above KB article.

So, if you're looking at one in-store, and it doesn't appear normal, look at the build number in "About This Mac...." (click on the version number to get build). It should be "9G2141 or later".

There are a lot of advantages to the UB, aside from the faster bus, more ram, long battery life, etc. The physical design feels more solid than any other Apple portable (I've owned 'em back to PB 100). The glass trackpad is AWESOME. No matter how dry my finger tips are (or aren't), it always feels silky smooth. I also believe this to run cooler (outside case temps) than the Al version.

If you can afford it, IMHO you should go for the UB.
 
I'm 100% sure that the 2.6 GHz model you listed there has an LED-backlit screen, because no 2.6 GHz 17" MBP ever came with a 512 MB 8600M GT graphics card except the Early 2008 model, which has an LED-backlight 1920 x 1200 display. The older 2.6 GHz 17" MBP with high-res display did NOT have an LED-backlit display, but it also had a 256 MB 8600M GT graphics card. The one you're looking at has a 512 MB graphics card, so it should be LED-backlit. It was the model released in Early 2008, and was upgraded to the 2.6 GHz processor (default was 2.5 GHz).

The 2.5 GHz model you have listed also has an LED-backlight and high-res screen. There's also a good chance that this system is a newer model, since it comes with the 320 GB harddisk, and this combination of specs was only available on the Late 2008 17" MBP released in October.


If you can get the 2.5 GHz model for $1700, I think it's a steal. :) For the additional money, you get a slightly faster video card (no significant technical difference except slightly higher clock speeds and smaller die on the 9600M GT), a better battery, and higher colour gamut screen. The colour gamut issue isn't as big as people make it out to be for most people.

If you need mobility, then get the new one. If you don't, then I'd save $700 and get the older model.
 
Abstract said:
I'm 100% sure that the 2.6 GHz model you listed there has an LED-backlit screen, because no 2.6 GHz 17" MBP ever came with a 512 MB 8600M GT graphics card except the Early 2008 model, which has an LED-backlight 1920 x 1200 display. The older 2.6 GHz 17" MBP with high-res display did NOT have an LED-backlit display, but it also had a 256 MB 8600M GT graphics card. The one you're looking at has a 512 MB graphics card, so it should be LED-backlit. It was the model released in Early 2008, and was upgraded to the 2.6 GHz processor (default was 2.5 GHz).

The 2.5 GHz model you have listed also has an LED-backlight and high-res screen. There's also a good chance that this system is a newer model, since it comes with the 320 GB harddisk, and this combination of specs was only available on the Late 2008 17" MBP released in October.


If you can get the 2.5 GHz model for $1700, I think it's a steal. :) For the additional money, you get a slightly faster video card (no significant technical difference except slightly higher clock speeds and smaller die on the 9600M GT), a better battery, and higher colour gamut screen. The colour gamut issue isn't as big as people make it out to be for most people.

If you need mobility, then get the new one. If you don't, then I'd save $700 and get the older model.
Click to expand...

That's what I have in mind when I discovered this deal.. $700 is a lot of money..
However, there are problems with the 8600M GT chip inside the old (2008) MBP.. I am afraid that one day this problem will outweigh the price benefit of $700..
 
Glass Trackpad Resistance

Apologies for detracting from the OP's query.

I'm also looking at getting a new 17" UBMBP.

Is there more click resistance on the glass trackpad on the new UBMBP then the previous generation.

I currently have the early '08 17" MBP. I had the use of a new 15" UBMBP for a couple days recently and the pressure on the new glass trackpad required a bit more effort then on my 17" MBP.


Thanks
 
kastenbrust said:
Not quite, basically lots of stores set them up wrong before putting them on display, ones people buy are perfectly fine, i can testify to that. Unless you enjoy broken graphics cards, cheap plastic cases and lower quality screens then get the 2009 one.
Click to expand...

So does what you are saying mean that Apple makes crap products and the MBP of the past few years (prior to the unibody) was crap?
 
kretek said:
Apologies for detracting from the OP's query.

I'm also looking at getting a new 17" UBMBP.

Is there more click resistance on the glass trackpad on the new UBMBP then the previous generation.

I currently have the early '08 17" MBP. I had the use of a new 15" UBMBP for a couple days recently and the pressure on the new glass trackpad required a bit more effort then on my 17" MBP.


Thanks
Click to expand...

it could also be that it was new and the button was not as broken in as your early '08 model.
 
bbadalucco said:
So does what you are saying mean that Apple makes crap products and the MBP of the past few years (prior to the unibody) was crap?
Click to expand...

What he was saying was that with the advent of the unibody models, Apple has made improvements to the case that many feel are very much worth the more expensive price. The unibody models are sturdier and as a result of not having the 8600m, don't have the potential graphics cards issues that older models do. Overall, Apple upgraded the components in the new models which make them feel much sturdier than the previous design.
 
I wonder if everyone that has voted to buy the (2009) 17" UBMBP already consider the fact that it is $700 more expensive than the (2008) model..
 
kretek said:
Apologies for detracting from the OP's query.

I'm also looking at getting a new 17" UBMBP.

Is there more click resistance on the glass trackpad on the new UBMBP then the previous generation.

I currently have the early '08 17" MBP. I had the use of a new 15" UBMBP for a couple days recently and the pressure on the new glass trackpad required a bit more effort then on my 17" MBP.


Thanks
Click to expand...

I do find the "button" on the new glass trackpad to be a little stiffer (than my 2.33 17"), but most of the time I'm tap clicking. The new glass surface MORE than outweighs that difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back