Thinking of a MBP.. a few things to consider..?

[sparkyms]

Hey guys, I'm thinking of selling up my MacBook 2.16 and iMac 2.16 for a 2.4MBP, I want to do this basically because I use my MacBook as my main work machine, but want something with more power and bigger screen real estate, but also want portability at the same time.

So the plan would be to sell up, and then get a MBP and a 23inch screen or something to dock up when necessary.

Anyway, to the main point. I do a lot of work in Photoshop, and Illustrator, I take a design degree at university, so I was wondering what everyones experiences are with different screen types?
I get on okay with the glossy screen with my MacBook, so I was just wondering what everyone else thought for design work?

I know the iMac has a matte screen, but seeing as I don't really use it for work anyway, (amazing machine, but doesn't suit my needs anymore), i don't really get to use it as I do a lot of work and that tends to be on the lappy.

Cheers for any help.
x

 

[alphaod]

I'd get the 17 high res if you need the screen real estate. The 15" is good. I'd get the faster processor (2.5/2.6) rather than the lower 2.4 simply because multimedia stuff can use the extra boost.

 

[Notebooks]

Get a Matte Mac!

I highly recommend a Matte screen- no reflections, smudges/dust are less visible and it's easier on your eyes. There's a reason why all of Mac's pro monitors are matte vs. glossy on the relatively cheaper iMac and MacBook.

If you can shoulder the extra weight a high-res 17-inch MBP is definitely the way to go.

 

[Animalk]

I highly recommend a Matte screen- no reflections, smudges/dust are less visible and it's easier on your eyes. There's a reason why all of Mac's pro monitors are matte vs. glossy on the relatively cheaper iMac and MacBook.

If you can shoulder the extra weight a high-res 17-inch MBP is definitely the way to go.

See for yourself which you prefer. As for the quote above, pure rubbish. Glossy wasn't even around when the apple cinema displays were designed. I have seen many top of the line CRT professional displays that are much closer to a glossy LCD then a matte one in terms of image. So my point is that your logic to pick matte over glossy is quite wrong.

Also, one of the main reasons I picked glossy over matte for my MBP is that in any particular lighting situation, the glossy always required less brightness from the back-lamp (new machines would be LEDs) then a matte one. This saves battery power when on the go and is obviously less of a strain on the eyes.

The point is see for yourself and you will know what's best for you.

 

[jjahshik32]

I think since you already have a macbook you should just sell your imac/mbp and just buy a 23" ACD. I've owned my 23" ACD for 8-9 months now and absolutely love it! Believe me I've tried to save $$ by buying a cheaper lcd panel in the $400-500 range.. but in the end none could compare to the 23" ACD.

What I did was first buy the 23" ACD used it as my main display and looked around for dell,lg,viewsonic,samsung all around $300-$500 lcd. Let me tell you that the LG displays while were really cheap.. the colors and quality was very cheap.. all the colors looked "fake" and washed out (dont know why most lg screens colors looked washed out) and too much brightness that white masked the colors making the colors looked washed out. I dont remember the model number but circuit city was selling the lg panels (it had a grey bezel as well looked kinda like a mini ACD) part number was like lt-xxx something. Anyways I exchanged to 2-3 different models due to dead/pixels (I know it can happen with many other displays doesnt matter what company) and other artifacts shown. But clearly compared to the 23" ACD it looked horrible..

My next quest was bought from ebay a 24" 2407wfp (S-IPS guaranteed lcd). It was the best out of all the samsung 225bw, LG lt series, view sonic (dont remember the part number was real cheap though). Anyways comparing it side by side after calibrating the dell 2007wfp next to the 23" ACD.. but still the colors looked deeper and easier on the eyes from the 23" ACD. Not to mention the glass looked "untainted" from the colors that it showed on the 23" ACD.. the dell made the colors looked murky and non realistic. But for the price it was pretty good. But I wanted the best display and the 23" ACD's price is a bit much but better priced than the NEC,Eizos that I wanted and pretty close to those quality displays. So I ebay'd the dell and gladly kept the 23" ACD. I guess for the cheapest price the samsung 225bw was pretty good in color detail/accuracy.. but then it was still an S-PVA panel and has some color shifting problems and not to mention just not as good in quality as the dell 2407 or 23" ACD.

Even to this day I love its screen.. its just so colorful, vivid, deep and can look soft when the colors are intended to look at the same time. Its a joy to use everyday and I have it connected to my 2.4Ghz macbook and works very well. I had a 2.5Ghz mbp connected to this 23" ACD and to me this 2.4Ghz macbook while I do the exact same things, 20+ pages on safari, parallels open using bearshare, using unison to d/l more than 20gb files, transferring using fw400 to my 1tb drives of more than 60+gb files, word, ichat, firefox for some java required stuff, mail, itunes, iphotos, transmission of d/ling 20+gb files as well, burning a dl disc, colloquy all etc... feels exactly the same as the 2.5Ghz mbp!! These new macbooks are amazing.

The 2.4Ghz mbp and the 2.4Ghz macbook are pretty much exactly the same in performance overall and for photoshop/illustrator. Since photoshop is cpu dependent you wont get any advantages for the gpu. Not to mention its a $1000 cheaper but the 15" mbp does have the led screen (if you really need it for the road then I guess 15" is critical if not macbooks are more than fine).

 

[jjahshik32]

See for yourself which you prefer. As for the quote above, pure rubbish. Glossy wasn't even around when the apple cinema displays were designed. I have seen many top of the line CRT professional displays that are much closer to a glossy LCD then a matte one in terms of image. So my point is that your logic to pick matte over glossy is quite wrong.

Also, one of the main reasons I picked glossy over matte for my MBP is that in any particular lighting situation, the glossy always required less brightness from the back-lamp (new machines would be LEDs) then a matte one. This saves battery power when on the go and is obviously less of a strain on the eyes.

The point is see for yourself and you will know what's best for you.

Its a bit different for me. As many people here know Ive owned pretty much every laptop apple has since 2006. I've had glossy, matte all in led. Weird thing is that the glossy at fullbrightness wasnt as bright as the matte led mbps that I had.

And believe me I've had 3-4 glossy led mbp's exchanged last years model due to yellow tint and I had 3-4 matte led screens as well. All ranging from 9c81(LG), 9c83(Samsung), 9c80 (AUO) and 9c82 (chimei). I thought lg looked all washed out and samsung to be the most vividness in color just a bit yellow towards the bottom. AUO and Chimei imo was best all around as colors were vivid yet no yellowing. Anyways the matte was all around brighter at its max than the glossy that did have more saturated colors but not brighter overall.

I though that glossy was awesome to view movies/reading webpages because the black text under white looks more saturated and easier on the eyes. But viewing photos I thought the matte screens were better as the colors are more accurate and just softer and easy to distinguish the different shades of colors instead of the glossy it looks blended in too much due to the oversaturation.

Hope this helps.

 

[sparkyms]

Thanks for your tips guys, I will probably go for the matte version of the screen, and upgrade the Hard-Drive to 250GB, I'll max out the RAM myself with a kit from crucial.

The 2.4Ghz mbp and the 2.4Ghz macbook are pretty much exactly the same in performance overall and for photoshop/illustrator. Since photoshop is cpu dependent you wont get any advantages for the gpu. Not to mention its a $1000 cheaper but the 15" mbp does have the led screen (if you really need it for the road then I guess 15" is critical if not macbooks are more than fine).

I have a 2.16ghz MacBook, it's great because I can lug it around anywhere, but I just want something with a bit more.. ooomph if you get me? Plus, I want something with a graphics card for some future projects and, I dunno, I don't feel comfy sitting up with my iMac, I love it for watching stuff on, browsing, because quite frankly the Res is amazing, but at the end of the day where I've got used to working portably, its where I feel more comfortable, and a lot of my work is on here anyway.

I just want a workhorse that I can take anywhere, and an MBP seems to be what I need.

Anyway yeh thanks again dudes.

 

[jjahshik32]

Thanks for your tips guys, I will probably go for the matte version of the screen, and upgrade the Hard-Drive to 250GB, I'll max out the RAM myself with a kit from crucial.



I have a 2.16ghz MacBook, it's great because I can lug it around anywhere, but I just want something with a bit more.. ooomph if you get me? Plus, I want something with a graphics card for some future projects and, I dunno, I don't feel comfy sitting up with my iMac, I love it for watching stuff on, browsing, because quite frankly the Res is amazing, but at the end of the day where I've got used to working portably, its where I feel more comfortable, and a lot of my work is on here anyway.

I just want a workhorse that I can take anywhere, and an MBP seems to be what I need.

Anyway yeh thanks again dudes.

Yea the Macbook pros are awesome all around you will love it as your workhorse/overall everything to do computer all in one. Good luck.