Retina Macbook Pro vs iMac

Discussion in 'Buying Tips and Advice' started by Cyborg21, Nov 1, 2013.

?

iMac or Macbook Pro with retina (read description please)

  1. iMac 27''

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. Retina Macbook Pro 15''

    3 vote(s)
    100.0%
  1. Cyborg21 macrumors 6502

    Cyborg21

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2013
    #1
    I know, it's the most classic question on MacRumors but I am really confused. I can afford an iMac 27 inch with 3.5 GHz intel i7, 8 gb RAM, 1 TB fusion Drive, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M 4GB GDDR5 OR a Retina Macbook Pro with 2.3 GHz intel i7, 512 GB PCl-e based flash storage. I can't change my computer every 3 years so I will use my Mac for at least 5 years. I have some questions about iMac and Macbook Pro. Macbooks sell more than iMacs, there must be reason, what is it? Will Macbook's Specs enough after 5 years also Laptop's battery dies over time, how much mAh will be left after 5 years of usage? If I use my retina macbook while it's charging will lifespan of battery get shorter (will it run without using battery, like a desktop computer?). Is retina display of MBP too dim for outdoor usage? Is iMac a better choice? iMac has better specs, does it matter? Please vote.
     
  2. jerrykur macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2013
    #2
    The reason laptops sell more than desktops is portability. The laptops have good enough performance and you can take them with you. If portability is not an issue than the iMac maybe a better often.
     
  3. velocityg4 macrumors 68040

    velocityg4

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2004
    Location:
    Georgia
    #3
    For probably 95% of computer buyers either computer described is complete overkill for their needs and will be perfectly sufficient 5 years from now. $500 desktop and laptop computers from 5 years ago are still more than sufficient for that same group.

    As to which to get given that you list none of your requirements. I would say neither. Going by the needs of most users either computer is complete overkill and you would be wasting money on features you wouldn't use.

    If a desktop will fit your needs best than get a desktop. Otherwise get a laptop. There are plenty on $200 tablets that would fill most peoples portable needs (reading, watching videos, e-mail and web browsing). So you can get plenty of desktop power and have a tablet for portability needs.

    As for battery life. At 5 years I would guess it would be at around 80% capacity. That really depends on how much you use it. Regular use of the battery is much better than letting it sit and charge constantly.

    Since you question if constantly using it like a desktop will shorten battery life. A desktop would likely be a better choice or a desktop and cheap tablet like the Kindle Fire HD.
     

Share This Page