Programming Setup; MacBook Pro or iMac Pro

[hanspetter123]

Hi,

I currently have the 2016 MacBook Pro 13' touch bar base model + 16Gb ram model that i use as my main computer. However, it feels "sluggish" when using some Ide's, and when connecting to a second monitor.
The keyboard is also horrific, and i'm currently on my 3rd, after 2 others have had their keyboards broken. (This one does as well, but not bad enough that i bother exchanging it. I might also add that 1 of the replacements is probably because the MacBook overheated when a process was running at 100% for to long in the background, without my knowledge.)

I Think it's time for an update, but i don't know if i should:
1.
Go for a specced out 15' MacBook Pro + 3 monitors, using the MacBook "as a desktop" and bringing it with me only if i really can't use the 13'.

2.
Get a base iMac Pro (maybe 64Gb ram) + 3 monitors

I plan on switching out the iMac Pro/MacBook Pro with a Mac Pro if/when it comes out, and just sell / use the iMac/MacBook somewhere else
I don't like having different sized/shaped monitors on the same computer, as it disrupts the workflow, so i will definitely change it out.
- digression; Anyone know what i can expect selling a 1-2 yr old iMac Pro base model vs. 1-2 yr old specced out MacBook Pro? i wouldn't be surprised if they redesigned the MacBook Pro by that time as well..

Use-case is mostly just WebStrom, PyCharm, Intellij etc. No video editing, and i use cloud servers for heavy workloads.
Can i expect the "sluggishness" of using an Ide compared to a text editor to disappear completely, or will it always be there no matter what i do?

regards,
Hans

 

[mariogt]

Go for the MacBook Pro 15 TB 2017 - full specs - if you need right now a very nice and capable machine (& portable), a iMac Pro / Mac Pro would be a waste of money and computer resources, if you dont do heavy graphical work or GPU orientate complex scientific software. For your use case I dont see the need for more than 4 cores and 16GB of ram. But if you can wait, perhaps the new MBP 2018 will arrive with the 32gb option (and 6 core proc), who knows ?

 

[robvas]

The 15" is a big improvement over the 13"

However, there was a programmer who did a iMac Pro review and had this to say:


When you get into an intense development or debug cycle that involves a lot of compiles, saving fractions of seconds here and there adds up and can give you extra hours in a day. This is one area where the 10-core iMac Pro shines when combined with Xcode’s ability to automatically take advantage of multiple cores to compile multiple source files simultaneously.

Most of my apps have around 20,000-30,000 lines of code spread out over 80-120 source files (mostly Obj-C and C with a teeny amount of Swift mixed in). There are so many variables that go into compile performance that it’s hard to come up with a benchmark that is universally relevant, so I’ll simply note that I saw reductions in compile time of between 30-60% while working on apps when I compared the iMac Pro to my 2016 MacBook Pro and 2013 iMac.

http://hrtapps.com/blogs/20171212/

 

[Brammy]

When you get into an intense development or debug cycle that involves a lot of compiles, saving fractions of seconds here and there adds up and can give you extra hours in a day

How does this math even work out? Admittedly, I suck at math, but I need to save 3600 seconds just to save an hour, but he is saying fractions of a seconds here and there save hours over a day. Did he mean over a week?

 

[Marc_S]

just wondering if any of your current sluggishness could be put down to your reliance on Cloud computing?

 

[0002378]

The 15" is a big improvement over the 13"

However, there was a programmer who did a iMac Pro review and had this to say:


When you get into an intense development or debug cycle that involves a lot of compiles, saving fractions of seconds here and there adds up and can give you extra hours in a day. This is one area where the 10-core iMac Pro shines when combined with Xcode’s ability to automatically take advantage of multiple cores to compile multiple source files simultaneously.

Most of my apps have around 20,000-30,000 lines of code spread out over 80-120 source files (mostly Obj-C and C with a teeny amount of Swift mixed in). There are so many variables that go into compile performance that it’s hard to come up with a benchmark that is universally relevant, so I’ll simply note that I saw reductions in compile time of between 30-60% while working on apps when I compared the iMac Pro to my 2016 MacBook Pro and 2013 iMac.

http://hrtapps.com/blogs/20171212/

I see what the programmer is saying, but to me, that is only one half of the overall picture. Saving seconds and hours is nice, but there is also the money that is put in to save those seconds and hours. And, that money may be no object (like if the OP has money coming out of his ears, or if his company is buying it), or it may be a huge deal (i.e. to most people).

The cheapest iMac Pro starts at $5k. Let's say that a nicely spec'd out MBP is about $3500. That's a difference of $1500 right there, and we haven't even started adding to the base iMac Pro. I don't know about you, but to me, that is a good sum of money I could use to buy peripherals/accessories or what-have-you.

So, we are weighing the advantage of speed vs the cost of that speed. And, the only accurate measuring scale is the one in the mind of the guy who's paying for the darn thing

 

[leman]

I don’t really buy the story, since we have incremental compilation and it’s very rarely that you actually have to rebuild all from scratch. And fully optimized builds with profiling and lto are not easy to parallelise. But there is clearly an improvement, even if it’s about comfort and response time after all.

As to money... $2000 more over say 3 years translates to $13 extra per working week (provided 52 weeks per year). If you are saving just one hour per week, you are still in a big plus. Not to mention tax deductions etc. So yeah it can be worth it.

 

[mctrials23]

What sort of dev are you doing OP? I have a 13" 2016 tbMBP with 16gb ram and never have any slowdown using any editors. It takes a few seconds to open a new project but once its open its fine. I usually have 20+ programs running, Chrome with 30+ tabs, Slack, terminal running build tasks, mysql and client, itunes etc.

Is webstorm just an absolute resource hog?

Oh, I'm also driving 2 4k monitors at non native res which makes GFX a little sluggish sometimes but I very very rarely have system slowdown unless something has gone wrong.

 

[meboy]

Laptops are terrible for programming.
Not because of power. That shouldn't be an issue. No idea what ide you're using or what you're doing that feels sluggish in a 2016 13". It should be just fine.
Because you sit at a desk and code. Multiple monitors is so much more important.

Build a fricking windows tower for 1k that destroys a MacBook pro.
Then buy 2 or 3 dell u2515 for like $250 each.
This makes waaaaaay more sense for programming.

 

[maflynn]

2.
Get a base iMac Pro (maybe 64Gb ram) + 3 monitors

Why do you feel you need Xeon processors, EEC memory for programming? I'm thinking the the 5,000+ iMac Pro is overkill for your stated needs. I could be misunderstanding the demands but I'm of the opinion that you don't need to spend so much money on such a high end machine.

If you don't have mobility needs, then the regular 27" iMac with the higher spec'd GPU makes more sense, as you can drive multiple screens and you have the gorgeous 27" screen.

 

[Samuelsan2001]

Yeah I agree with maflynn here, why the imac pro?? Keep the 13 inch for mobility needs, and buy a 27 inch iMac to code and compile on.

 

[mctrials23]

Laptops are terrible for programming.
Not because of power. That shouldn't be an issue. No idea what ide you're using or what you're doing that feels sluggish in a 2016 13". It should be just fine.
Because you sit at a desk and code. Multiple monitors is so much more important.

Build a fricking windows tower for 1k that destroys a MacBook pro.
Then buy 2 or 3 dell u2515 for like $250 each.
This makes waaaaaay more sense for programming.

Thats not really true is it. Most programmers I know work at a desk and on the go. Keeping a desktop tower and a laptop on the go and both capable of allowing you to work efficiently is a ballache. I have my 13" MBP hooked up to two 4k monitors at home and then I just use the laptop screen on the go.

I have tried the iMac + MBP route and it was super annoying. There is no reason at all why you wouldn't have a laptop that you hook up to multiple monitors. You seem to think that the main issue with a laptop for programming is the lack of screens for some reason.

 

[Nixir]

If you truly need the power of an iMac Pro and the $$ is coming out of your own pocket, I'd wait for the next gen Mac Pro. I am a firm believer in modular desktops, I bought the cheapest cheese grater that met my needs back in 2010, and slowly upgraded it over 4 years to fit my growing needs/wants. It's still alive and kicking today and keep up with all my working and hobby needs (i.e. dealing with large amount of data and playing around in android studio etc...) I fully intend to do the same with my next desktop purchase.

 

[jerryk]

Thats not really true is it. Most programmers I know work at a desk and on the go. Keeping a desktop tower and a laptop on the go and both capable of allowing you to work efficiently is a ballache. I have my 13" MBP hooked up to two 4k monitors at home and then I just use the laptop screen on the go.

I have tried the iMac + MBP route and it was super annoying. There is no reason at all why you wouldn't have a laptop that you hook up to multiple monitors. You seem to think that the main issue with a laptop for programming is the lack of screens for some reason.

A little more than screen. Also lack of a full size, full travel keyboard, and a real mouse for fine cursor control. And then there is the issues of not being able to use the GPUs via CUDA if you do any heavy calculations in your code. And then there is the 2 core limitation for the smaller systems which makes debugging slow and tedious, especially when Xcode starts trying to be helpful, or if you are doing web stuff and the debugging why some crazy piece of javascript or typescript is stuck in an event loop.

 

[PeterJP]

I have tried the iMac + MBP route and it was super annoying

This. I tried sync'ing my work over a git repository but it' s a pain. Even when I do actually push all my modifs every time. When I stay on the same machine, I don't have to pull them every time.

A little more than screen. Also lack of a full size, full travel keyboard, and a real mouse for fine cursor control. And then there is the issues of not being able to use the GPUs via CUDA if you do any heavy calculations in your code. And then there is the 2 core limitation for the smaller systems which makes debugging slow and tedious, especially when Xcode starts trying to be helpful, or if you are doing web stuff and the debugging why some crazy piece of javascript or typescript is stuck in an event loop.

There's a few forms of "programming on the go". One way is that you're actually sitting down in a coffee shop or somewhere else where you don't have a full setup. Then you're indeed stuck with the keyboard and screen you have. Dragging a magic mouse with you isn't too hard in any case. But no matter what, you'll be stuck with the GPU/CPU limitation that you picked. Any MBP15" should be plenty for programming. But when on the road, you'll be stuck with the processing limitations of an i7/mobile GPU.

The other way is that you move from home (where you can have a full setup) to an office (where you can have another full setup). In that case, no worries with the screen-mouse-keyboard. The only potential problem is that you need lots of processing. I know a few people who do some simulation or AI from time to time, but most get by with the power of an MBP 15" or, like me, a 13".

The question is: which is worse? Insufficient processing power or having to juggle multiple systems? If you don't have specific processing needs that excel what is currently available on laptops, you're better off getting an extra screen.

 

[mctrials23]

Personally I don't have any issues with the new macbook pro keyboards and the trackpads on them are amazing. Using trackpads on windows laptops is a complete **** show and even using my other halfs macbook air is horrible once you are used to the whole trackpad being clickable.

I quite often sit on the sofa programming in the evening to give me a break from my desk and apart from the lack of screen real estate I don't have any issues.

At my desk I have a magic keyboard and trackpad and run the laptop in clamshell mode. I find that having more than 2 screens to switch between fatigues my eyes eventually so I just use 2 * 21.5" LG ultrafines on a high resolution.

Either way, almost every dev that I know who doesn't need insane amounts of processing power uses a macbook of some sort.