Macbook or iMac?

[XboxEvolved]

With the forthcoming announcement of a iMac (assuming it will have a quad-core) I am divided about getting a iMac for $1200-1500, or getting a $1600 Macbook (if I got the Macbook I would get the one with the illuminated keyboard that was some bullcrap the lowend has no backlit keyboard).

The fact that the price of the iMac is much less, with a big screen, and more powerful is attractive, especially because I am very frugal, and my current Mac is well..really old. Also, I would finally be able to say "hey I got a Mac that isn't horribly outdated, and in fact just got updated like a month ago"

However, the Macbook is compact, I can change a new desk into a painting/art/computer desk, and I can move about with it, etc. The way I see it, there isn't one program I could use that would make the thing chug, and etiher a Macbook or an iMac would last me a good 5+ years with fully upgraded RAM.

The programs I use are: Adobe Creative Suite, Microsoft Office, iWorks, all of iLife, encoding between different video codecs, Adobe Premiere, various FTP clients and web browsers (dont know if that crap matters), and on Firefox and such I like to use lots of different add-ons. I am also interested in getting into 3D programs since I probably will get a WACOM tablet come tax season also.

So what would you guys suggest?

 

[iBookG4user]

Well it comes down to how much do you really need the portability. If you find that having a mobile computer that is less powerful would be the best bet, then go for it. But if you would like more power then go for the iMac. I've also used laptops with bigger monitors as well, so you can go that route too. I think that portability would be more of a novelty to you from what you described and you should go for the iMac.

 

[Killyp]

Also bear in mind, laptops simply don't last as long as desktops, and aren't as reliable.

Having lived with a MacBook, two MacBook Pros, an original iMac and the current iMac I'm sat in front of, I would say go for the iMac, and get the lower-end MacBook later on. Unless you're looking at doing 'pro stuff' on the move, spending more money on a laptop seems a little pointless, especially when you've got an iMac at home which will last you for much, much longer.

 

[sushi]

You will always get more with a desktop.

Desktops tend to last longer since they aren't moved as much.

The benefit of a laptop is portability. So if that is important to you, then there really is no choice.

Note, you can move the iMac fairly easily with a convenient carrying case. But the iMac was not intended to be moved as such, so there is a higher probability of damaging the iMac.

 

[J&JPolangin]

... get the iMac and a net-book for moving around with - you'd still come out $$ in the bank...

 

[XboxEvolved]

Yeah I figured I would probably just end up getting a netbook eventually or buying a cheap Macbook,ibook on Craigslist or eBay..

 

[kastenbrust]

These Should Help:

http://guides.macrumors.com/Which_Apple_desktop_should_I_buy?

http://guides.macrumors.com/Which_Apple_notebook_should_I_buy?

 

[clyde2801]

You will always get more with a desktop.

Desktops tend to last longer since they aren't moved as much.

The benefit of a laptop is portability. So if that is important to you, then there really is no choice.

Note, you can move the iMac fairly easily with a convenient carrying case. But the iMac was not intended to be moved as such, so there is a higher probability of damaging the iMac.

The old rule about a portable computer was that you got half the performance and features for twice the price. This obviously is not the case anymore, hence Apple's selling portables like hotcakes and desktop sales lagging, but desktops are still a better deal comparitively.

 

[numbersyx]

Definitely a question of whether you need portability. The iMacs are more powerful, come with a bigger screen and a better graphics card. The only thing they can't do is move. If you really need a portable then go with the MB but if you don't the iMac is a no brainer...

 

[gjw4u]

If you want mobility, get a MB ($$) or MBP ($$$).
If you want performance & endurance, get an iMac ($).

 

[sushi]

The old rule about a portable computer was that you got half the performance and features for twice the price. This obviously is not the case anymore, hence Apple's selling portables like hotcakes and desktop sales lagging, but desktops are still a better deal comparitively.

Agree.

BTW, that rule is not that old. In the early days of laptops, it was even worse than the rule that you stated.

FWIW, while performance is important, I believe that the increase in HD storage for laptops has greatly contributed to laptop growth as well.

 

[urkel]

I am divided about getting a iMac for $1200-1500, or getting a $1600 Macbook (if I got the Macbook I would get the one with the illuminated keyboard that was some bullcrap the lowend has no backlit keyboard).

The fact that the price of the iMac is much less, with a big screen, and more powerful is attractive, especially because I am very frugal, and my current Mac is well..really old.

If you are really frugal then why get the $1600 Macbook OR the iMac when you can have both by getting the Macbook ($1300) + 22-24" LCD ($300). For the same price you get portability AND screen real estate. Plus, as a fellow cheap-o then a big reason why I'm not an iMac fan is because if the computer dies then you're throwing away a perfectly good monitor (and vice versa).

As for your reasoning to get the $1600 Macbook, the only difference between the two is the speed and the glowing keyboard.

Speed: If you're coming off a really old mac then you won't notice the difference between 2ghz and 2.4ghz because both will be a huge improvement.

Keyboard: This is a gimmick. Sure, it's cool but if you can touch type then you don't look at the keyboard anyway. And if you must see a key in pitch blackness then the screen is plenty bright to illuminate the keyboard as well as the rest of the room.

Good luck, and make sure you think this one through.