Low-end, Mid-range or High-end 15" UMPB?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Cpt. Ahab, Jun 10, 2009.

  1. Cpt. Ahab macrumors newbie

    May 30, 2009
    I'm really thrilled about the specs being bumped and the new battery, the expresscard-slot loss isn't anything I'm worrying about, but it was a good expandable slot which the SD-card isn't.

    Anyhow! I'm going to buy one of the new uMBP's. And I'm looking for some advice on which one I should get. I know I want the 15" because I work a lot with Aperture and Photoshop and the screen will be the ONLY screen I can afford. Tasks I will use the macbook for is; Aperture, Lightroom, Photoshop, Audiomulch, Logic Express, Final Cut Express, maybe some CoD 4, a lot of internet browsing, and text editing!

    Now the problem is I live in sweden, and therefore I don't have the same prices to choose between. Here is a list of the swedish price in USD

    Low End $2 355 (18 000 SEK)
    Mid-rage $2 620 (20 000SEK)
    High End $3 010 (23 000SEK)

    Now you are probably frightened by the prices! And that's because our free health-care and universities and all that socialist stuff!

    So which model should I go with? Is the price justifying the computers potential?
  2. Cpt. Ahab thread starter macrumors newbie

    May 30, 2009
  3. ghettochild macrumors regular

    Jun 12, 2007
    Bay Area, CA
    Love the reference to your "socialist" country. As for the version, you'll be able to run all the apps you mentioned just fine on the base model.

    It really depends on how much money you can shell out. For example, if you take the base model you probably have enough dough to buy a display which will be more beneficial than just having the high-end model.
  4. DirkBreeuwer macrumors member

    Oct 22, 2008
    Beneficial is a relative term there.

    For me it would be more beneficial to buy the midrange MBP, because the 9600GT card is much better than the 9400 card to enjoy games.
  5. Cpt. Ahab thread starter macrumors newbie

    May 30, 2009
    But the 256mb vs. 512mb isn't such a big deal?
  6. DirkBreeuwer macrumors member

    Oct 22, 2008
  7. t0mat0 macrumors 603


    Aug 29, 2006
    We await benchmarks of differences in performance on Snow Leopard. So between now and August. I'd imagine at some point, the 256 vs 512MB would make a difference to the
    Aperture, Lightroom, Photoshop, Audiomulch, Logic Express, Final Cut Express type programs, but this is more for versions that make use of the Snow Leopard technology.

    You can increase RAM later, you can't really do that to your CPU, screen size, or your 256MB GPU. Skimping on RAM, HD, software, then get HD and RAM later 3rd party, and get Software as you need it via HE discounts / trials/other seems a decent plan.
  8. Cpt. Ahab thread starter macrumors newbie

    May 30, 2009
    Smart! I can upgrade to SolidStateDrive when I have the money later on, and software I'll get through all the students discounts! Right now I'm thinking of buying the High-End, I have the money necessary and sooner or later I'll regret not getting the better CPU and GPU.

    Thanks for the advice!
  9. eVolcre macrumors 68000


    Jan 7, 2003
    If you can afford the high end 15" then spend the extra 200 bucks and get the 17". It's not that much larger. I posted this in another thread but it applies here as well ....

    I just got back from the Apple store to help me make the same decision. My current laptop is also a 17" 1st Gen MBP. I love it but like you, it sometimes gets too large to carry around. But, I have traveled all around the world with it over the last 3 years and HAVE taken it to work every day for a year. It's large, but doable. Before I saw them in person I had convinced myself to get the 15" because it seemed more portable. To be honest, the difference isn't that great between the 15" and 17". If I could take the 15" around I can take the 17".

    The other aspect was screen real estate. I've gotten used to having two Safari windows open next to each other or a browser and a Word document. I do a lot of research and writing and this helps me be more efficient. You can't do that on the 15". This is tough to describe without pics but ..

    17": A full browser and a Word document fit next to each other with a little room to spare.

    15": 25% of the browser was hidden behind the document

    13" 40% of the browser was hidden behind the document.

    This is a completely unscientific and subjective approach but it helped me compare.

    My conclusion ... the 15" doesn't cut it for me. It's so close in size to the larger one that its not truly portable. The screen resolution is also too low. If my browser is going to be hidden anyway and I'll be using Expose/Spaces for my workflow, then I may as well drop down to the 13" or the MacBook Air.

    The final aspect is completely subjective. The 'lust factor'. I've realized I don't like the current designs. The black keys and border are generic and don't give me the same 'I wanna buy it' feeling that the old ones did. Keeping that in mind, the 15" is just too blah. Not sexy and portable, not thin and large. The 17" does have some lust factor. Its the thinnest 'large' laptop on the market and the screen is something else! On the other end - I don't like the 13" MBP either. The MBA is something that is unique.

    That's my opinion. Keep in mind that my main consideration is the screen resolution. I haven't decided which way to go yet. All I know is that the 15" is out of consideration. It's either the 17" or one of the smaller ones. The 17" compared to my machine has an incredible screen that does make me want it. I might even keep my current machine. It's being overhauled by Apple and meets my needs. I like the old design. I also couldn't get used to the glass trackpad. It was too hard to push it!

    It's not worth it. The slight difference in size and weight doesn't make it any more portable than the 17". It's going to feel cramped. You're going to have to get used to it and if that's the case, may as well go fully portable and get the 13" Others can chime in on the graphics card etc.



Share This Page