"Desktop era over - get a laptop and an external monitor instead " - NO! Here's why:

[Atisha]

I've spent many a nights staring at rMBP on the Apple store, never being able to get over the $3.3k price tag for an okay configuration.

My 2007 Mac Pro has a 5935 64-bit Geekbench score, so ultimately a $3.3k rMBP would only be twice as fast.

Can someone help me out with this concept? A rMBP would only render twice as quickly as my (don't get me wrong, it's had a great life) shtty, shtty Mac Pro from 5 years ago? Or is this inaccurate, and these scores are just an abstraction? A comp that takes ~10 minutes to boot up sometimes, can't even browse the web without significantly lagging, takes 3 minutes just to open up Civilization 5, and a rMBP would only cut this in half (I know SSD makes a difference)?

On the other hand, right next to my Mac Pro on the charts is a 17" 2010 MBP. Does this infer that high-end MBPs only have a 2-year life span for any demanding work?

And to relate it directly to the topic, of course a new iMac would run much faster with a $3.3k budget (which I don't have).

 

[tn9design]

To the above poster: Is that the 15" rMBP?

It's a 15" i7 pre-retina (I decided to wait a few months for the next small update before upgrading - I also want to see if they upgrade the Thunderbolt Displays when they update the iMacs)

Why didn't you turn the Magsafe connector the other way around?

I don't think there is a way to explain this without sounding anal... Basically, when the TBD cord splits in 2 (magsafe and thunderbolt) they aren't exactly the same length so when you go to plug it in normally there is extra slack in the magsafe cord that the thunderbolt cord doesn't have. I invert the magsafe connection so that the 2 cords can run parallel and give a more uniform look.

In theory, I would want the magsafe to exit the laptop straight (like the thunderbolt port) instead of to the side so that they could be the same length and look good running side by side. (I know, I have issues.)

 

[noodile]

I dunno if this has been mentioned (too laxy to go through every post), but to solve clutter, you can get the belkin thunderbolt hub thingy.

Hook all your printers, speakers, displays, and ethernet to the dock, and one cable to the mac.

 

[tn9design]

Let's be honest for a second.

Although I don't agree with the vast majority of Mister Bumbo's points when this thread was started I think we are still a while off from leaving the desktop behind (outside of the professional workplace)

An iMac is still going to have the simplest, all in one package that the average consumer is going to want.

Sure, a macbook+thunderbolt display is the right setup for me and my profession. And maybe a MacPro or some super computer PC may be right for you but when it comes to the vast majority of individuals who are going to buy a single computer for their household or family I think the iMac still stands as one of the best choices right now.

 

[iMcLovin]

Don't get me wrong, I think an iMac is a great computer and I say to each his own. As someone who wrestled between an iMac and a Macbook/Display setup I wanted to chime in and let you guys know my thoughts.

Ultimately it came down to what best suited me personally.

Although I can sometimes work with large graphic files I realized early on that a 15" or 17" Macbook pro would have more than enough power than I would ever need. I don't really use my machine to play video games or watch movies; comfort, ease of use and portability were my priorities.

Before this setup, I had tried using a desktop for my work and an ipad for meetings but often I would find myself on the road or at a client's office needing a file or to make a change that just wasn't possible on the ipad. And even though it's a rare occurrence for me to take meetings in person just having the option to have my work computer with me at all times is great.

Having the ability to unplug a single thunderbolt cable (sometimes the power cable) and take my work out the door with me has been a lifesaver. Not to mention, I don't need to worry about power outages while I am working as I know the laptop battery will keep me running through the strongest storms.

The thunderbolt display gives me the size and connection options I would get with an imac but it also gives me the freedom to detach my computer and take it on the road with me if I need to.

I realize that the setup isn't for everyone (especially dual thunderbolt displays) but I spent a lot of time saving up and debating which option would work best for my lifestyle and I can't say enough about it's speed, flexibility and portability.

For those of you arguing about wires, I wanted to share some photos I've taken to show just how minimalistic dual monitors + a laptop can be if you don't mind spending a bit more money and consider cable management a priority like myself.

A view from up above.
Image

Here is a more up-front look. Take note of the absence of visible wires.
Image

You can see here how the few wires I do need tuck neatly into the display's stand and run below the desktop.
Image

Only the thunderbolt is needed to run this setup, however sometimes the laptop needs a charge.
Image

A large clean surface area to work on helps me concentrate.
Image

This shows the wires from the left side
Image

This is the USB DAC that my headphones plug into
Image

Finally, the cable management
Image

Wires? Not bad for dual monitors, speakers, cameras, microphones, DAC, and a small external hard drive tucked under the desk.
Image

Looks good! But I still don't understand the point IF one would never move the computer off the table. Additionally it's the extra cost which then would be for nothing!

 

[tn9design]

Looks good! But I still don't understand the point IF one would never move the computer off the table. Additionally it's the extra cost which then would be for nothing!

I totally agree with you 100% - I only posted this to negate most of Mister Bumbo's original talking points.

I think that the basic idea he was trying to get across is correct however I didn't agree with the vast majority of the points he was making about screen size, speed, peripherals, or wiring.

 

[Swordylove]

I don't think there is a way to explain this without sounding anal... Basically, when the TBD cord splits in 2 (magsafe and thunderbolt) they aren't exactly the same length so when you go to plug it in normally there is extra slack in the magsafe cord that the thunderbolt cord doesn't have. I invert the magsafe connection so that the 2 cords can run parallel and give a more uniform look.

In theory, I would want the magsafe to exit the laptop straight (like the thunderbolt port) instead of to the side so that they could be the same length and look good running side by side. (I know, I have issues.)
ImageImage

Ah... gotcha. No, you don't have issues. Anyone who uses Apple computers is usually particular about this kind of stuff.

I dunno if this has been mentioned (too laxy to go through every post), but to solve clutter, you can get the belkin thunderbolt hub thingy.

Hook all your printers, speakers, displays, and ethernet to the dock, and one cable to the mac.

Image

And that adds how much more to the already costlier solution?

 

[k3roro]

What about those that wants to play games...

Easier to upgrade components as opposed to the whole thing... not to mention a lot of laptops can't run games at maximum settings.

 

[inhalexhale1]

Let's be honest for a second.

Although I don't agree with the vast majority of Mister Bumbo's points when this thread was started I think we are still a while off from leaving the desktop behind (outside of the professional workplace)

An iMac is still going to have the simplest, all in one package that the average consumer is going to want.

Sure, a macbook+thunderbolt display is the right setup for me and my profession. And maybe a MacPro or some super computer PC may be right for you but when it comes to the vast majority of individuals who are going to buy a single computer for their household or family I think the iMac still stands as one of the best choices right now.

I agree, there isn't any reason for people to not want an iMac, especially as a family computer like you said. Unless you really need a portable, the iMac is a better value.

 

[mojothemonkey]

and that Belkin thunderbolt express dock is not a cost effective solution.... on top of the price of the comparatively-underpowered laptop, that thing runs $300...

Price of laptop
+1000 for thunderbolt display
+300 for thunderbolt dock
+40 for thunderbolt cable (need another to get from dock to screen)

I'm pretty sure that what you get for the price of (pick your laptop) + at least $1,340 will get you a monster of an iMac configuration.

and yes, we all already have laptops or ipads to surf on the couch... so enough with how great it is to watch a movie on your lap, like your 2012 retina macbook as so much better at displaying that streaming 720p content from netflix than your old laptop or ipad.

 

[Liquinn]

I own a Powermac G5 and a Mac Mini (two desktops) and I only have one Macbook. So Apple ****

 

[iSayuSay]

I've spent many a nights staring at rMBP on the Apple store, never being able to get over the $3.3k price tag for an okay configuration.

My 2007 Mac Pro has a 5935 64-bit Geekbench score, so ultimately a $3.3k rMBP would only be twice as fast.

Can someone help me out with this concept? A rMBP would only render twice as quickly as my (don't get me wrong, it's had a great life) shtty, shtty Mac Pro from 5 years ago? Or is this inaccurate, and these scores are just an abstraction? A comp that takes ~10 minutes to boot up sometimes, can't even browse the web without significantly lagging, takes 3 minutes just to open up Civilization 5, and a rMBP would only cut this in half (I know SSD makes a difference)?

On the other hand, right next to my Mac Pro on the charts is a 17" 2010 MBP. Does this infer that high-end MBPs only have a 2-year life span for any demanding work?

And to relate it directly to the topic, of course a new iMac would run much faster with a $3.3k budget (which I don't have).

Key point of MacPro would be durability and reliability, not to mention upgradeability (admittedly limited, but still ...). Current MBP could be faster or scores higher in various benchmarks.

But really, who owns a Macbook for 5 years without having one single hiccups/problems/repairs/part replacements? Almost nobody.

Notebooks are simply disposable piece of metal and silicons. Plain and simple.

While MacPro most likely pass 5 years or more without any single problem. It's just the way desktop should be, it has much better engineering, heat dissipation and space tolerance. No need to make things cramped or overly complicated under the hood. So it can works under heavy, long pressure much more reliably.

My next desktop would be a MacPro, a true desktop and the way a computer should be. That of course if they are to be refreshed PROPERLY. Or I'd go with PC route if 2013 MacPro will be all but empty promises.

If I were in your position, I wouldn't trade or sell my MacPro for any rMBP. Get SSD, more RAM and trade in your CPU&GPU for additional performance. There's much more in a MacPro than a mere rMBP and those silly benchmark scores.

 

[Lancer]

If I had a Mac Pro I'd keep it even if I got a MBP or fast iMac. I'm hanging on to my old G5 as a back up and for older software compatibility. I might get a used Pro later when I can afford to replace my G5 tower.

 

[Atisha]

Key point of MacPro would be durability and reliability, not to mention upgradeability (admittedly limited, but still ...). Current MBP could be faster or scores higher in various benchmarks.

But really, who owns a Macbook for 5 years without having one single hiccups/problems/repairs/part replacements? Almost nobody.

Notebooks are simply disposable piece of metal and silicons. Plain and simple.

While MacPro most likely pass 5 years or more without any single problem. It's just the way desktop should be, it has much better engineering, heat dissipation and space tolerance. No need to make things cramped or overly complicated under the hood. So it can works under heavy, long pressure much more reliably.

My next desktop would be a MacPro, a true desktop and the way a computer should be. That of course if they are to be refreshed PROPERLY. Or I'd go with PC route if 2013 MacPro will be all but empty promises.

If I were in your position, I wouldn't trade or sell my MacPro for any rMBP. Get SSD, more RAM and trade in your CPU&GPU for additional performance. There's much more in a MacPro than a mere rMBP and those silly benchmark scores.

Thanks for the reply and info. I did check out a RAM upgrade at Crucial from 4gb to 8gb (that appears to be the max), for $300. Just doesn't seem worth it, never mind checking out CPU and SSD upgrades. I upgraded the video card to a 1gb HD ATI one (not even technically compatible) Nov. 2011 which helped. I'd think it would be a $1k investment to amp up my 1,1 Mac Pro, and I'd rather spend it on a new iMac or possibly rMBP. I'm no hardware expert but I'm aware of unavoidable limitations like bus speed.

It's true that it has lasted 5 years, basically with only a video card problem, but I think this is the limit. As a matter of fact, I wouldn't mind a disposable computer which lasts 3-4 years, as long as my data is okay.

As others have mentioned it seems like Apple is really investing in laptops, and the thought of getting a rMBP is becoming more appealing. My last MBP was around 2002, 13" and really ***** bad, a big aluminum G5 saved me, but maybe things have changed.

 

[iMcLovin]

If you look at it a bit differently and don't separate laptops and desktops on revenue but instead look at each computer as a separate device. Since apple is earning 75% of sale on laptops compared to desktops. And probably 90% of desktop sales are probably iMacs. Then 25% of all computer profits comes from the iMac and 75% on laptops. This means the iMac is pretty much as popular and profitable as a single machine as any of the laptops. In other words its not a low priority machine for apple and it's probably not any direct plans from apple to discontinue it... It's still an important computer in their stable. So I'm not really worried that it's the end of the desktop era.

 

[grapels]

Excuse the old bump. But if you need both a laptop and imac level desktop, why buy both instead of docking the laptop. I'm not sure about other people but I have several extra wireless keyboards and mouses just sitting around. I mean sure if you just have money sitting around go for both, but for many having a laptop that is mounted will be very close to an iMac config. I've gone to a docked laptop solution and tablet for much on the go stuff. I don't really have the need for an uber powerful desktop anymore, though I used to, but laptop performance has caught up. I went through G3, G4, G5 then just went laptop now. Of course if you need Mac Pro type performance, this is a nonpoint, of course go with the Mac Pro...but for many people that need to be mobile and want their desk too... I think laptop docked solution is the way to go to save $.

My setup is similar to tn9design with dual displays.

 

[Hildegerd]

Desktop era gone when the desktop replacer is gone too???