I need a computer for school ,mainly for Web(HTML) and Graphic Designand noticed that apple upgraded the MB. I will be using it to run Adobe CS3 and wonder if i should just opt for the MBP. I really want the 15in 2.33ghz.,but was wondering if the middle grade MB with 2gb memory should allow me to do want i need??
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.
MB vs. MBP??
- Thread starter b84
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
MB is good enough, the main reason to go pro in your case is the bigger monitor.
The macbooks are great, if you are ok with the 13" screen. It's the main reason I went to MBP. I think it was only a problem because I do most of my graphic/video/coding on a 23" ACD, and trying to use 13 well didn't work. I think 17 would have been best for me but couldn't afford it.
The macbooks are great, if you are ok with the 13" screen. It's the main reason I went to MBP. I think it was only a problem because I do most of my graphic/video/coding on a 23" ACD, and trying to use 13 well didn't work. I think 17 would have been best for me but couldn't afford it.
That doesn't really say anything. If money wasn't an issue, then life would be a lot easier.
If you are going to be using desing apps, I think that the mbp will be worth the investment, assuming you have money for it (and Applecare).
Theoretically yes, a MacBook could handle these operations just fine. In fact, Final Cut Express HD (my video editing program of choice on OS X) states that the MacBook is fit to run the program just fine because it mentions that the MacBook's integrated graphics chipset is fully compatable.
But as i've learned for video editing, screen reality is a major issue especially with more complex projects. I went for the MacBook Pro because of the extra muscle and the extra screen space that it offered me over the 13" MacBook screen.
Benchmarks for the previous version of Final Cut Studio on a MB:
http://creativemac.digitalmedianet.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=43717
Although the machine wasn't officially supported, its performance was excellent.
There's no problem running Dreamweaver, naturally.
http://creativemac.digitalmedianet.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=43717
Although the machine wasn't officially supported, its performance was excellent.
There's no problem running Dreamweaver, naturally.
That article's interesting; I thought the MB couldn't run Motion. Or is that Shake?
Here's another link benchmarking MBs with Shake that you might be interested in - http://creativemac.digitalmedianet.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=53121
Yeah, it's Motion that most people (quite reasonably) thought/think that MBs can't run as the min hardware requirements exclude the MBs.
Go with the MBP if you can. Without much difference in weight (the macbooks are quite heavy, relatively), you get more screen real estate and an offboard graphics card, which wont use up system Ram etc etc.
But if u are tight on cash, then the MB will definately suit your needs.
But if u are tight on cash, then the MB will definately suit your needs.
Hmm, that is interesting. All the more reason to save on a MacBook over a MacBook Pro I s'pose.
