Question for designers with Macbooks

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by sundayx, Nov 11, 2007.

  1. sundayx macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2007
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    #1
    I'm considering a Macbook (first time) to replace my stressing 3 year old centrino. I work with with Photoshop and Illustrator a lot, designing and photo editing, and on the internet almost all the time (when I'm at the computer). I was wondering if the 13" 1280x800 screen is a good size to work with, because I feel like its quite packed, but not dense (resolution wise). Right now I love my 14" 1400x1050 screen, but going back to the 13" would be a major downgrade. Anyone in the design field on a Macbook have any opinions? I COULD hook it up to a 2407WFP in the future, but I hope the integrated could handle it (with the strain on it from my work load).

    Macbook Pro would be a bit steep, but if I consider the Macbook I could move onto a new desktop end of next year. Or should I just go MBP and deal with it once and for all in the next 2 years.

    BTW if I choose MBP I will definately wait for Macworld.
     
  2. janitorC7 macrumors 6502a

    janitorC7

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2006
    Location:
    North Hollywood, CA
    #2

    I know that price-wise this may seem a little ehhh

    but your best options are these

    1. Macbook, fully loaded, and hook it up to an ADC, specifically ADC, they work better with macs, (what I;m using now)

    2. get a MBP and do the same thing with an ADC, this will work basically the same if not better than a mid-line iMac.

    I recommend the ADC specifically because they work better with macs, and have better colors and last longer, I know this may turn into a argument, so please dont let it, but from the apple refurb store you can get it pretty cheep

    JC7
     
  3. TheStu macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2006
    Location:
    Carlisle, PA
    #3
    Not trying to turn this into an argument, but the Dell Ultrasharps are generally regarded as some of hte best in the industry, and they work just fine with Macs. And since you can get something like the Dell 2407FPW-HC.... that right there would be ideal for photo editing.
     
  4. mojopixel macrumors 6502

    mojopixel

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2007
    Location:
    Somewhere in Time
    #4
    Depends on your budget, I don't the screen would be big enough for your needs so I suggest you go for a fully loaded macbook with an external monitor and maybe a external back-up drive.....:apple:
     
  5. Techguy172 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Location:
    Ontario Canada
    #5
    The macbook should be fine for that. I'm getting to do the exact same thing,
    as for monitors I'm in the same position because i love the syling of the cinema display's but the dell has all the ports and connections.
     
  6. janitorC7 macrumors 6502a

    janitorC7

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2006
    Location:
    North Hollywood, CA
    #6
    okay, I cant help myself....

    while this is a great monitor, apple spends millions and million of dollar creating the correct calibrations from the operating system, to the GPU, to the video card, to the monitor. THe reason that I support the ADC is not the displays board (I think it even uses the same one as the dell) the reason that I support it is that it is tuned for the ground up to sing on the mac system. and as a person, who considers themselves an "artist", in a few fields, graphic design, photography, and some film (basically I like making stuff that looks nice, on a number of mediums). I have worked in the Dell Monitor, and it does not compare to the colors that you see on the ADC. For the record I do not greatly recomend the ADC for people who dont have macs, its to expensive to use on a computer that cannot take advantage of its potential.

    JC7
     
  7. ale500 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2007
    #7
    Dells being one of the best ... hehe... for office work.
    If you do care get an ACD or an EIZO, those are good monitors.

    Edit: I fixed for the whining crowd :rolleyes:
     
  8. shecky Guest

    shecky

    Joined:
    May 24, 2003
    Location:
    Obviously you're not a golfer.
    #8
    they are? according to who exactly?
     
  9. TheStu macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2006
    Location:
    Carlisle, PA
    #9
    CNet, Anandtech, Bit-Tech.... every place I have ever read a review, the Dell Ultrasharps come out on top.

    I have never heard about Apple making sure that the ADCs look superb on Macs, and all the tests that I have seen were done on Windows boxes, so there could be something there. But that doesn't change the fact that the Dells still get reviewed well.
     
  10. smadder macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    #10
    It's working okay for me...

    I also do a lot of photo editing and publication work, but it's a second job that I do whenever the business comes my way. So given that...

    I held out for a Santa Rosa MB (midline white). I wanted to 2.2 newer C2D processor, the 800mhz bus and the new, faster, better Intel X3100 integrated graphics. I have 4GB of RAM and a 200GB 7200 Hitachi HD, so my MB is a little souped up. But I can tell you that after using an older model MacBook (midline white 2.0 C2D) and immediately switching to this has been a big improvement. Rendering is fast, resolution is crisp, and all of the tools and filters run faster and are quicker to respond/process before. I noticed that on MacWorld, they'd benchmarked the new SRMBs and the midline one and te Black one actually out perform the entry-level MBP on a few tests. It can't compare to a dedicated graphics card (even the entry 128MB Nvidia is way better), but if you are used to integrated graphics on your laptop, the SRMBs are a VERY nice step up.

    And don't slam me on this, but if you do boot camp, it will use anywhere from 128MB to 384MB of system RAM. I have to keep a Windows machine of some kind to do some different stuff for other folks an I have noticed a big difference in Vista (which I hate, but I have to use it). That is what the specs for the chipset state from intel's site. For some reason, the drivers that Mac provides don't allow that kind of access. Not sure why they stop at 144mb...

    I think it just depends on how much real estate you want. I was ALMOST going to splurge and get an entry MBP, but the MB is so much more affordable and upgradeable, I just wanted to stick with it. Plus, the 3yr AppleCare warranty is significantly cheaper for the MB as opposed to the MBP. I agree with what the folks said above: you can get a great extension LCD and a new SRMB at 2.2 C2D for less than the $500+ for a MBP entry 2.2C2D. I have been running mine via DVI dongle to a really nice Dell 24" flat screen at work, and it has been amazing (especially compared to the older graphics set) so far.

    If they really go with what a bunch of folks are talking about concerning the much-anticipated and hoped-for MBP revamp that has some of the super-cool features from the MB like a removable HD bay, the flat-keys keyboard (and backlit!), higher 15.4" resolution, eSATA port, new magnet closure latch, entry-level model at 2.4 C2D.... I would be incredibly tempted to sell this to get one.
     
  11. sundayx thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2007
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    #11
    Thanks smadder for that elaborated answer. Indeed the MB is a much better deal for similar performance. I'm just going to wait till Macworld to see what Apple has to offer in 2008.

    One thing that you could probably help me out though, is the screen size and resolution density a real downer for those MBs? So if I were to work on the Adobe suites will it be a real restriction? I have around half a year before I move back to Hong Kong where the monitors are, so I'll be working on the 13". As mentioned above the screen could become quite cramped, its a widescreen. I'm not so concerned about the 3D capabilities, just the screen asset the MB offers. I just hope it's not limiting my work.
     
  12. mikes63737 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2005
    #12
    ADC = Apple Developer Connection

    ACD = Apple Cinema Display

    I don't see how ADC matters when choosing a screen, unless you're using the discount. :p
     
  13. dacreativeguy macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2007
    #13
    A MacBook will be able to run design apps just fine, especially if you get one of the new SR models and max the RAM to 4GB. So graphics and CPU aren't the issue.

    The issue is screen real estate. The MacBook 13" screen will not give you much room to work in Photoshop or Illustrator after you arrange all your tool palettes. The wide screen also doesn't help you with the layers palette, since there isn't a lot of vertical space to stretch it out. If you go with the MB, you'll definitely need an external monitor to do 95% of your work.
     
  14. smadder macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    #14
    Yup yup

    Ditto! The MB screen is also not so hot for angle viewing or side viewing. It's awesome straight ahead though, so it depends if you're into sharing. I actually kind of like it because it affords you some privacy.

    If you peruse some of these postings, you will see a lot of new SR MBP folks complaining about the 15.4" models' screens. Bad color saturation, dead pixels, funky colors... once the shore up the LED issues, it'll be a kickass screen, and hopefully trickle down eventually to the MBs, which probably won't happen for a while since they ust completely revamped the guts for the SR chipset..
     
  15. patin22 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2007
    Location:
    Las Vegas, NV
    #15
    Yes, the screen res is a little small for design work. I do quite a bit of photo editing and I'm constantly moving things around. Hiding the dock helps, but it's still a little tight.
     
  16. smadder macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    #16
    This helps:

    I have been putting my dock on the right side of the screen. I keep magnification activated so when I roll over the icons I can see what's up. The dock gets really small, but it opens up the bottom of the screen entirely, and you don't have use the "hide dock"option (which is stupid in my opinion because as soon as you drag a screen all the way down, every time you go there, the dock pops up... dumb). It really frees up a good deal of space ad it helps a lot with the photo/video/web dev/publications stuff I work with. Give it a shot. As long as you have magnification on, it's a really good solution to the space issue. For me, that is.
     
  17. koobcamuk macrumors 68040

    koobcamuk

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2006
    #17
    ACD is amazing. I am so happy I bought it.
     
  18. MacHiavelli macrumors 6502a

    MacHiavelli

    Joined:
    May 17, 2007
    Location:
    new york
    #18
    Can't get the Dell 2407FPW in the UK any more :-(

    http://search.euro.dell.com/results.aspx?s=gen&c=uk&l=en&cs=&k=2407FPW&cat=all
     
  19. TychoBrahe macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2007
    #19
    Is this true ? I don't currently have Boot Camp so I don't know. But I'd like to use it soon and dual boot into Windows XP. Is it true that Boot Camp takes up 128MB to 384MB of RAM (without using Fusion or Parallels) ? I haven't seen this mentioned anywhere.

    Eric
     
  20. peterjun macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2007
    #20
    I just got the 15' mbp, I don't think I could ever work with Photoshop with the 13s. The 15' in my mind is a little bit of a reach but I come from working on dual 24's so maybe thats why. I suggest at least hooking it up to an external monitor. Just personal preference though I prefer working with a mouse/tablet and separate keyboard with external monitors
     
  21. patin22 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2007
    Location:
    Las Vegas, NV
    #21
    I'm looking into getting a 24' monitor to use with my 13' MB.

    Dumb question, but will I be able to use a higher resolution than 1280x800 on the external monitor? Will I be able to use the MB monitor as well as the external or is it one or the other?
     
  22. Animalk macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 27, 2007
    Location:
    Montreal Canada
    #22
    I usually stay clear from these threads because i have zero experience in design and their applications. But I am a software developer.

    Back in March of 2007, I had to choose between the high end MB and the low end MBP. This is the C2D pre-Santa-Rosa...also known as Merom.

    I had just enough to choose either. The MB would have saved me a couple hundred dollars if I took it. So spent weeks scouring the internet for help in making my decision. Only one piece of advice was useful to me out of all those hours of surfing the net.

    You need to try them for yourself and really see how they feel and operate in the real world.

    I thought the integrated graphics chip would only show its weakness in gpu demanding programs like video games. Man was I wrong. Just doing the apple two finger scroll on any webpage I loaded on both machines was night and day. The MB was "jittery" and not smooth. Whereas the MBP was unbelievably smooth. Zero jitters in the heaviest of websites. Both these machines had identical setups. The only difference was the graphics chipset.

    Some people I have talked with about this say that it doesn't make any difference to them as long as they get the job done. So you need to figure out if this kind of thing bothers you. Do you like always smooth and flowing UI or you don't mind that things get a bit jittery here and there.

    This doesn't only apply to this but also to many other little things. The only way you will really know if you will be happy with something is to try it out first and take your time exploring things.

    Good luck. :)
     
  23. TheStu macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2006
    Location:
    Carlisle, PA
    #23
    The MacBook can drive a display (in addition to its own) of up to 1920*1200 pixels in resolution. I have personally, on many occasion, used a 23" Apple Cinema Display on my MacBook. Both displays were running, at full res (1280*800 MacBook, 1920*1200 ACD) and were doing just fine. I couldn't really watch a video on either one, at least not a nice video, but for what I was doing (document editing and coding) it was perfect.
     

Share This Page