Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Mac book Pro or Air??
- Thread starter AustinH17
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
get the $1000 and stash it in an investment account. Use it later for something you need. Honestly your mac excitement will wear off in about 3-4 days then you will just have a normal computer experience. If you want to buy a mac I would wait for the next line of macs to release.
I have both and I have to say I love both my pro and air. What sold me though on the Pro as my primary computer is the optical drive, as a med student some of my professors burn lectures to CD for and I like to access during the lecture and notate them where possible. If you can spend the extra money they I would recommend the pro, its a great machine and if you want an optical drive (CD drive) you want to buy now as others have said it is likely that the optical drive will be discontinued going forward. Good luck!
You can buy cheap, external self-powered (USB) DVD drives, which easily fit into a laptop carrying bag.
True but its one more thing that you have to carry around with you and hook up. Spend a little extra on the pro and you get it all in one but it really comes down to the OP personal preference really.
True, but it's nowhere near as common as a standard 2.5" HDD or SSD and where you can replace the hard drive on a MacBook Pro without voiding your AppleCare, you can't replace the SSD on a MacBook Air without voiding AppleCare, hence the specialized proprietary screwdriver that is required to get the bottom panel open. Not what I'd call super-upgradable. Though you are right, it can be done.
I wasn't saying he'd transfer the license for his Windows version of Office over to a Mac version of Office; that's not something they'd allow as that's two different products. He can, however transfer his license of the Windows version of Office over to a would-be installation of Windows on his Mac running on either Boot Camp or something like VMware or Parallels, which is what I said. Microsoft does allow this, friendliness or not.
Wasn't an issue for me as I always carry around my bag, but I know what you mean. I just wish this year's refreshes would come out already so I'd know what to expect.
That is always true! I check macrumors at least once a day just to see if anythings been said. Since I reslly wont need it until August, I might just wait. But then again i dont want the new pros or whateevr coming out and they are $1500 instead of the 1100 or whatever. I am very unpatient so idk if waiting is an option lol.
Thanks everyone for your input, I didn't think this topic would get so much talk. It seems that its just going to be my personal preferance. I might have to go to best buy and play around with them more.
Thats not a bad idea. The more you play around with them the better choice you can make. Obviously most of us have slighted opinions since we already made our choice one way or another. Bt it all comes down to what you want and what meets your budget. Good luck to you.
I highly doubt that.
--------------
On topic,
If you really want to buy a Mac, It doesn't sound like you will be doing any graphics heavy work, (Professional photo, or video editing)
Nor does it sound like you'll be using pro applications like ProTools or Logic Studio either.
I'd go with a MacBook Air, Honestly I wish I would have as well, I have a 15inch MacBook Pro and it is overkill for what I need.
I would suggest though, If you are going with a MacBook Air, carry two external hard drives, one as a complete backup of your system (I recommend using the CarbonCopyCloner software) and the other to use as a "Media/Misc" drive, Due to the fact you will have limited space on your MacBook Air, You can keep your photos, videos and iTunes library on the external drive, along with any Microsoft office documents that you want to keep, But that you don't need on your main internal hard drive at any given time.
Get an external CD/DVD drive just incase you have to do something that requires a disk, a Thunderbolt to DVI and Thunderbolt to HDMI adapters incase you want to use an external monitor.
But other than that you should be pretty good.
In all honesty though, If all you are going to be doing is Microsoft Office, and browsing the internet and watching videos. I'd just stick with your Dell, Perhaps look into getting it upgraded with more RAM or a new HD, and you'll be just fine.
I guess you have some magical incantations to hold the ever-increasing amount of data without a hard drive, don't you?
I still doubt the Mac would be a "normal computer experience". As soon as you lay your hands on another PC, you start to know how lucky you are to have a Mac. Or when time comes when you need service.
Didn't knew that. Glad I didn't take the Air.
This is the super-heavy solution. It's unlikely he will be able to get a good Windows experience if it sits in VMWare on an Air.
Am I mistaken, or do you imply that PCs make better platform for professional applications?
And be more heavy and bigger than a properly-equipped MacBook Pro. Backup hard drive doesn't need to be with you all the time, and in fact, it shouldn't.
Have you heard about geographical separation?
Nice, small, portable package. I love it!
Yes and no, I am saying that MacBook Airs may not be that great for professional applications.
They're all just computers. Things can go wrong. Apple is sometimes helpful at the genius bar, but for anything significant they'll have to take it in. Others have mentioned geniuses running hardware tests. They never offered with me. I run a lot of diagnostics wherever possible before taking a computer in unless I'm in a hurry.
They are better supported for some things but nothing that I saw mentioned by the OP. I am going to change my sig to some reference to the day Apple supports 10 bit displayport. Macs are still lacking software and things here and there. Obviously you can get them under bootcamp hardware permitting. Personally I wish Linux would get the last few things I need
.
If the applications you are running are 95% of what you're using the computer for and they are cross-platform applications that are both visually and functionally identical on Windows as they are on Mac OS X (i.e. any Adobe app), then yes, Windows is an all around better platform, both from a cost standpoint and a bang-for-buck standpoint. For the cost of a high-end Mac mini, you can build a tower with more muscle than a high-end 27" iMac; mind you, it won't have that 27" screen going along with it, but honestly, what good is a large screen with a relatively weak machine underneath?
True facts. They're terrible for anything beyond low-demand software.
They do everything in the back after the stores have closed; they do a very minimal amount at the actual bar area. They're not even allowed to have screwdrivers up at the front, which goes to show you how basic anything done at the front actually is. It's primarily for diagnostics and some light fixes. Otherwise everything is taken care of in the back.
Computers can go wrong any time. In the end, it all boils down to how the issue is taken care of. If you have the proper technical knowledge, and enough time (the latter proving the most restrictive), you have little need for Apple's service.
My last visit to the Genius Bar wasn't helpful since they didn't want to perform what I asked them, or didn't have the necessary hardware. Even though, they generally are helpful. Rotten apples can happen anywhere.
Those are pretty specific requirements. For these, other platforms may be better suited, as Macs are better suited to others.I am going to change my sig to some reference to the day Apple supports 10 bit displayport. Macs are still lacking software and things here and there. Obviously you can get them under bootcamp hardware permitting. Personally I wish Linux would get the last few things I need
I think the Mac Mini is more about looking good than having the most flexible machine. The Mac Pro fits the latter. It's true that Adobe apps have the exact same bugs in Windows as on Mac. Yet most media professionals still choose Macs. There must be a reason. Does it boils down to service? When a part in your PC fails, you have to dig for the original bill, isolate the part, send it back at your own expense, wait 2 weeks to get back to work. Of course, all manufacturers will take you through the tedious process of removing anything that may have caused the issue. No such thing at Apple.
If your Windows only does one or two tasks, it should work pretty seamlessly. But don't use it as an all-around OS.
This is why I firmly believe that the iMac, Mac mini, and MacBook Air are all stupid machines. No computer should have "looking good" as a higher priority than "functional flexibility", and that goes doubly so for desktops.
Media professionals chose Macs because they don't all use Adobe apps, things like Logic, Final Cut Pro (7 or X), Motion are all Apple-only. There are a lot of other things that are as well. Otherwise, if you have someone that spends 60% of his time in Photoshop, 35% of his time in Illustrator, and 5% checking e-mail and surfing the internet, that person would be stupid to buy a Mac as the PC he'd get for the same cost would be way more powerful. As for maintenance, most "work machines" aren't serviced by Apple's Genius Bar, they're serviced by an IT department. As for the "pain and hassle" of Windows, if you're careful, it's no less reliable than Mac OS X, but where you don't have to pay attention to things like keeping your anti-virus program up to date or a myriad of patches on the latter, you do on the former. Still though, none of that is hard or even time consuming.
It all depends on what you call "flexibility". If your goal is being able to plug in anything and change any and all component inside at will, you will end up with an Alienware, or a Sager, which are not only unsightly, but very heavy and quite fragile. Laptops are a different category, where being good-looking is often tied to reliable, implying less parts. Inevitably, you lose some flexibility.
Apple is not about ultimate flexibility (although that could be argued looking at the Mac Pro), it's about being flexible "enough". The iMac is OK for most needs, and will be even more so when affordable Thunderbolt expansion enclosure appear. There's almost nothing that people and professionals with common needs can't do on an iMac. Where is your border between flexible enough, and too many compromises to be made to be truly useful, is up to you.
For a desktop, I would accept a Mac Mini only if it has the external ODD (portability isn't important).
For a laptop, I would refuse anything that implies less than 8GB RAM.
In your case, it appears you won't be considering anything less than a 15" Pro and a desktop Mac Pro. It's all relative.
That implies never going on the Internet, never opening any unknown site, even when returned by Google, never install anything that is not signed.
I have an older Win XP computer back into service. I use it as a print server, yet in a few hours of clicking and installing widely recognized "safe" shareware, I ended up with viruses, unworkable wifi dongle, random freezes. Same goes for all Windows versions I could lay my hands on. Same went for PCs I was asked to repair. Windows is simply too high-maintenance for people (Even more for professional) to waste time on them when they could be using a Mac instead. Unattended installation an compatibility isn't Windows speak. Even a small patch will require human assistance to be put in place. There's a reason why they replaced most PCs in the library with thin clients. Maintenance is less expensive to perform when there are only a few server images to keep up to date instead of tens of standalone PCs. The few ones remaining are for some software requiring more power, such as statistical software and database access, and, of course, the common optical media.
Ever heard about TCO? There's a common joke about it stating that a network on 10 Macs and 1 PC, the one PC will require as much maintenance as the 10 Macs. It's no big deal in a home or small office setting, but really is in a large IT department.
HI,
I had the same question/dilemma and bought a 13" MacAir as an in-between laptop so that I could wait for the next generation MacBook Pros. But I am so happy with my Air that I doubt it very much that I will a new Pro anytime soon. The Air is perfect for everything apart from Video compression and hardcore gaming. For video compression I have my trusty MacPro and I don't do those games, so no need for a new Macbook Pro.
I did buy a separate DVD drive, but only use it rarely.
The only thing I do not like about the Air is that battery life is not brilliant. Do a some heavy PDF work or Excel spreadsheets and battery life is below 3 hours.
For what you do, go with the Air. Get one with nice specs and enjoy it for years to come.
I had the same question/dilemma and bought a 13" MacAir as an in-between laptop so that I could wait for the next generation MacBook Pros. But I am so happy with my Air that I doubt it very much that I will a new Pro anytime soon. The Air is perfect for everything apart from Video compression and hardcore gaming. For video compression I have my trusty MacPro and I don't do those games, so no need for a new Macbook Pro.
I did buy a separate DVD drive, but only use it rarely.
The only thing I do not like about the Air is that battery life is not brilliant. Do a some heavy PDF work or Excel spreadsheets and battery life is below 3 hours.
For what you do, go with the Air. Get one with nice specs and enjoy it for years to come.
Alienware machines are only fragile now because Dell owns them and Dell assumed too much of the design and production of those machines upon acquiring them. I've never heard anything bad about Sager laptops, let alone any claims of fragility. As for sightliness, it's a freakin' computer. It's a tool, not a toy. It doesn't have to look good in order to get the job done.
The MacBook Pro is the best exception to that rule that I can think of. For all other non-Ultrabook laptops, I agree, but Apple's unibody design on the unibody MacBook Pros has it so that you can get to every component with the removal of the bottom plate. There aren't fewer parts in a MacBook Pro; they're all there, but they're laid out so that you can easily get at what you need to.
Right, I only make the comparison as if you build a PC tower, you can upgrade it forever in theory, where an iMac can only have its RAM upgraded (you can upgrade the hard drive, and probably the processor and video card too, but it's hell to get in there. From the standpoint of a machine built to run three high-end cross-platform programs, the PC is the better investment as it will last you longer and provide faster performance for the dollar; beyond looks, this is the most practical metric to measure your computer against. Sure, Mac OS X is nicer to use than Windows, I'll agree. But the difference in usability doesn't vary ALL THAT MUCH, especially if the whole point of the machine is to use a cross-platform production app and only 5% is spent using the OS.
Side-note: I use an LG external burner with my Mac mini Server. The drive has a power supply and is the same tray-load form-factor as on desktop PCs; it's faster and way more reliable than Apple's piece of crap external super-drive, but the only Mac I'd accept it as an alternative to an internal is the Mac mini.
It's true a 15"/17" MacBook Pro is the only Mac that I wouldn't personally find egregiously impractical or a rip-off in some fashion. I won't even be considering a Mac Pro as their costs on video card upgrades and the lack of choice therein is obscene; I shouldn't have to flash a hacked EFI firmware for a stock video card that I go out to Fry's or NewEgg to buy for my desktop, whether it's a Mac or a PC.
You can go on the Internet, install unsigned software, and browse the web just fine on a PC. Yes, you have to be more cautious. No, you don't have to be anywhere near THAT cautious.
Actually there are several tools made by Microsoft designed for mass deployment and unattended installations. In fact, in typical Microsoft fashion, there are several of them and they all have long hard-to-remember acronyms followed by arbitrary year numbers.
As for experience with that old XP system, I don't know what to tell you; yes, Windows does require more maintenance than Mac OS X will ever require, but having worked on several PCs, I've never seen it quite so bad unless you didn't have a single service pack in 2012 and you took the thing online. I could see that as being trouble. But that all being said, it's incredibly easy to lock down a Windows machine via global policy editors and administrative tools so that the machine is incapable of installing unsanctioned software and is easily kept up to date by your server. Easier or more elegant than the Mac equivalent, no, doable, absolutely.
Actually, it's very easy to automate update installations and it's as easy to do on Windows as it is to do on Mac OS X. It requires that you set up a server for that purpose, but it's really simple and easy to configure on both platforms.
Large IT departments are predominantly Windows based. I know this because in applying to work for a large IT department, most of them are either 10% Mac, 90% PC, or 100% PC. You can customize and lock down far more on a PC than you ever can on a Mac as PCs are built primarily for corporate environments and Macs are built primarily for home users. IT departments love the customizability of Windows via administration tools and global policy editors and whatnot. Sure, Macs require less maintenance, but PCs don't require much maintenance if your IT department knows what it's doing.
Geez, I wish I had so good an experience with Sager. Mine was very powerful to 2004 standards, but in two years, I had four major failures, each requiring to be sent back to California at my own expense. Plus, they never made any commercial move to excuse such flakiness. Later, I read on a PC-oriented forum that a whopping 25 to 33% of Sager computers tend to fail repeatedly, also known as "lemon". Its during its last trip to California that UPS stole it somewhere along the way, and that I had to sue them to recover part of the cost. From this point, I swore I won't be dealing with Sager again.
As for computer's look.. I agree they don't need to be beautiful to get the job done. However, when you can have both, just do it. A laptop doesn't need to be thin to perform well, but it surely helps when you need to haul it. And, as current human standard, thin is beautiful (lol).
I have to disagree, slightly. If one wants to replace a broken MBP trackpad (remember, it's all glass), they have to take all the computer apart. But having dismembered friend's laptops to help in cleaning them... Macs are simply better built and thought than most PC laptops where you often struggle to find the hidden screw that holds is all.
Plus, you get some hidden benefits in Macs: on the Magsafe corner, there's no practical reason why the connector board would be separated from the main board. Or why is there a large gap between the hard drive and the side. Every corner is somewhat isolated from the main board. If the computer falls, you just end up with a bent corner. Unsightly, but what's inside should be alive and well. Do that on a common PC. The computer is dead. Heck, they even put glass platter hard drives in some laptop PCs, rendering any free-fall detector mostly useless.
I think you can't upgrade the CPU on an iMac, since it may be soldered. Same goes for the video card, unfortunately. I first thought they would be using a low-profile or otherwise standard video card, but unfortunately it's either proprietary or soldered. Therefore, I had to (reluctantly) recommend a PC to my customer willing to run Maya and still fitting its price point.
"Forever" isn't correct. When my desktop PC failed after only 3 years, parts for it weren't commonly available anymore. It was cheaper to rebuild and keep the working parts (storage, ODD).
I still have to disagree. From a hardware standpoint, it's not uncommon to see standard issue Macs still in service at 4, 5, even 6 years without major issue. My gf's iBook G4 could really use one GB RAM, but is still in occasional use. A friend's white McBook (very first issue) has a noticeable yellowing and an itchy battery, but otherwise runs Snow Leopard fine. Another friends BlackBook is 2007 issue, squeaks when opened, but still manages to pull 4 hours out of the battery. I sold my own 2010 MBP to a very kind girl for $700: prominent cosmetic wear is the only issue. A PhD student 2008 MacBook Pro still runs as fast as new: a bit of discoloration on the screen. I negotiated to buy a 4-year used Intel iMac for a customer whose 2 year-old cheap-o-tower failed for some unknown reason.
Whereas another customer's 1 1/2 yr Dell was already requiring a complete overhaul and cleaning. Friend's Acer, Gateway, Dell and an HP all saw their battery completely fail after 6-9 months to the point it doesn't hold even a minute of charge (on the models they had, the battery has a 3-month warranty). My other, university issue ThinkPad T40 ran at a glacial pace, and, as is the habit of many ThinkPads, just a week after the first blinking line on the screen, it was un-bootable. My sister's bf HP had a failed wifi card, of course, just outside warranty. Told him it would be cheaper to buy a new one on eBay than have it repaired. Recently got an older P4 tower, unstable under load despite brand new RAM, down clocking and plenty of cooling.
At least in my experience, I have constantly seen that a PC requires too much maintenance to be worth their otherwise low prices. What's better, a $600 PC lasting two years without issue, or a $1200 Mac that can last four or five years, often more, without needing major repair?
On the software side, it's more about how you know and use your system. If you only use one or two apps and don't use the OS in itself, you won't see the Windows quirks that make it so frustrating to use. Remember I come from many years under Windows, had a long Ubuntu period, then OS X.
I wouldn't use a LG burner, in any case. In my experience building computers for friends and customers, as well as reading about them, at best it's risky to use them in Linux, at worst, they simply fail without explanation. Sure they're cheap, and you get what you pay for.
Otherwise, I also think slot-load isn't as necessary on a desktop as it is on a laptop.
I just watched a friend as he quickly restored his HP PC after a hard drive change. Even getting Windows 7 to install was a pain. He had a valid key, yet Windows refused it. He had to resort to use a loader to get it to install. Then, all the applications, mostly well-known, trusted closed and open source, went in. I don't know where he forgot something, but he doesn't have sound anymore, and antivirus definitions aren't updated. automatically. We checked his configuration and couldn't find the cause.
Registry is Windows weakest point. It's fragile, and if anything goes wrong inside, or an application acts funky, you won't be able to find the source of malfunction. Hence, the fastest solution is to reformat.
Here lies the issue: one would need to be a Microsoft's Certified Technician (or whatever they call it) to understand and properly configure it. In addition, many smaller pieces of software require administrative privileges to run properly, therefore it's simpler to alway run as administrator. I put that under "lack of ergonomics". In a large corporate setting, it's no big deal, although the running joke may be partly true that IT managers try to keep Microsoft as long as possible in the enterprise because it's their breadwinner. But on an individual PC where the creative, manager, and commercial are essentially one person who doesn't have all the necessary knowledge, there's no point in spending time to do maintenance (incorrectly) where they could spend slightly more to get an almost maintenance-free Mac.
Indeed, university's PCs are so locked down that I can't even use my portable software to run the few times I don't have my MacBook Pro. That renders them mostly useless for my needs.
But, they take ages to boot and log in, apparently use scripts to configure software you aren't allowed to use (?!). The only remaining Mac laboratory isn't as locked down, true. Because you can't cause much damage on a Mac running unofficial software than on a PC. I could theoretically leave my MBP logged in my main account (admin powers) yet no one could use it to render the computer unusable, since it would ask for the password to confirm any potentially dangerous action.
Mac OS X may be built for small IT departments, labs, and individuals, but it still makes an excellent server, being UNIX-like. Less administrative tools doesn't imply less ability. Apple already recognized their own potential as a niche, but truly usable server.
6 year old Mac
If you got one that old make sure it's an intel, not a power pc. I was starting to run into a lot of software/web functions that didn't work well on my old PPC ibook, before I got my Macbook Air last summer. The MBAir is a great machine, very fast. As far as size goes, it's an obvious trade-off between portability and display size/built-in optical drive. Portability was more important to me, so I got the 11". I've gotten used to a small display over the years, and I don't use the optical drive very often, but there are times I wish I had a larger display or could play a DVD more easily.
If you're in college and you have to carry a laptop around all the time, I would go for the Macbook Air. If you just use the optical drive to install software or other things you only do occasionally where you can set your laptop up on a desk with the external drive, the Air would be fine. If you want to play DVDs a lot when you're out and about, or sitting on your couch, it's not really convenient with any external drive. If this is something you would want to do a lot and carrying an extra 5 lbs around isn't an issue for you, I would get the Pro.
On the other hand, the regular Macbook, not pro or air, might be just fine for your purposes and cheaper, if the white plastic look is ok with you. It's sturdier than the Macbook Air, but cheaper than the pro, and has a superdrive. A friend of mine is very happy with hers. This model is now discontinued by Apple, so you would have to get it used.
If you got one that old make sure it's an intel, not a power pc. I was starting to run into a lot of software/web functions that didn't work well on my old PPC ibook, before I got my Macbook Air last summer. The MBAir is a great machine, very fast. As far as size goes, it's an obvious trade-off between portability and display size/built-in optical drive. Portability was more important to me, so I got the 11". I've gotten used to a small display over the years, and I don't use the optical drive very often, but there are times I wish I had a larger display or could play a DVD more easily.
If you're in college and you have to carry a laptop around all the time, I would go for the Macbook Air. If you just use the optical drive to install software or other things you only do occasionally where you can set your laptop up on a desk with the external drive, the Air would be fine. If you want to play DVDs a lot when you're out and about, or sitting on your couch, it's not really convenient with any external drive. If this is something you would want to do a lot and carrying an extra 5 lbs around isn't an issue for you, I would get the Pro.
On the other hand, the regular Macbook, not pro or air, might be just fine for your purposes and cheaper, if the white plastic look is ok with you. It's sturdier than the Macbook Air, but cheaper than the pro, and has a superdrive. A friend of mine is very happy with hers. This model is now discontinued by Apple, so you would have to get it used.
Last edited: