To Pro or not to Pro? These updates complicate my decision.

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by bollweevil, Feb 27, 2008.

  1. bollweevil macrumors 6502

    Feb 1, 2008
    Should I get a MacBook or a MacBook Pro? I want a 15" matte screen, I have enough money, and I don't need portability, but I am having trouble justifying the expense of a Pro. The MacBook updates make it even harder to decide. Here are the factors to weigh:

    Pro Pro:
    Firewire 800 (I might never need it)
    Bigger screen (I believe this improves productivity, but that could be superstition)
    Matte screen (I hate glare, and I don't care what my colors look like, I am colorblind)
    Longer battery life? (Has someone checked Apple's claim here?)
    Don't need portability
    Metal finish
    Small screen bezel
    Multitouch trackpad (but they kept the button nice and big, unlike the Air, which I found difficult to click on. Good call, Apple)
    Backlit keyboard (I work in the dark a lot, because I touch type, but then suddenly I need to use a function key, and it sucks)
    Better video card (But I haven't played computer games in years, and don't plan to start)

    Pro MacBook:
    Cheaper (probably a bad thing to base my decision off of, seeing as I am not starving here)
    Also available with a 2.4 GHz processor and 2 GB RAM (I abuse my processor with scientific programs sometimes, but no way am I paying $500 for a .1 GHz upgrade on the MBP)
    Most MBPs look slightly open when they are closed. One or both corners don't sit flush. It is annoying.
    MBPs can get dented, are MacBooks more resilient?
    I didn't need Firewire 800, or the separate graphics card

    I didn't know what to expect from the update, but I didn't expect this. I thought they would update just the MacBook Pro, making the Pro significantly better than the MB. I thought they would use the 2.5 GHz Penryn for the base model, because there was obviously no way they were going to decrease the size of the on-chip cache, and the 2.5 GHz Penryn has the exact same price as the old 2.2 GHz in the baseline MBP.
  2. Neil321 macrumors 68040


    Nov 6, 2007
    Britain, Avatar Created By Bartelby
    If your not actually using it for pro sorta stuff ie:webdesign etc etc,and are just using for everyday stuff ie: surfing etc etc.My advice would be just to get the macbook & put the money you save to buying more RAM etc
  3. bollweevil thread starter macrumors 6502

    Feb 1, 2008
    I might do a few more Pro-level tasks. I use processor-heavy scientific software and big spreadsheets, and the MBP might conceivably be faster because it doesn't have to share its RAM with the video card. Would this actually make a difference? I might buy a TV tuner (like EyeTV) and capture live TV, would the MBP be better at that? Keep in mind, I would almost definitely get the same processor and the same amount of RAM for both computers.

    Are there reviews/benchmarks comparing an MB and MBP with the exact same memory and RAM? Does the MBP have a better motherboard, because that could make a difference? Links to reviews/benchmarks would be much appreciated.
  4. ktbubster macrumors 6502a


    Jan 20, 2007
    go with a 2.2 macbook pro refurb! 1449 now! You don't need all the features of the new one, but want the screen, so it would probably be a the perfect path and minimize the cost difference between the two.

  5. HLdan macrumors 603


    Aug 22, 2007
    Since you don't need portability you should consider the new iMac 24" with the SR 2.8 Core 2 Extreme. It's faster than the current line of MBP's and it has a very good GPU for pro apps and some decent gaming. Plus you get a 500GB hard drive for a lot less than the MBP. The iMac is still easy to move around the house.
  6. Neil321 macrumors 68040


    Nov 6, 2007
    Britain, Avatar Created By Bartelby
    To be honest i think your answered your own questions,id now say
    get the pro (if money's not a issue) or as one member pointed out
    the new iMac if you dont need a portable machine
  7. Michael CM1 macrumors 603

    Feb 4, 2008
    If you have ever dealt with shared video memory before, the answer is too easy. I know Apple probably does it better than the cHeaP notebook I had years ago, but it's still shared video memory. Having said that, unless you do something fancier than Photoshop, you don't need the extras on the MBP. I saw a benchmark that had the MB slightly better than the MBP (how, I'll never understand).

    Don't forget to plan your hard drive capacity when buying. You'd be surprised at how quickly I used up 120GB (not to mention the external 500GB drive) on this year-old MBP.
  8. bollweevil thread starter macrumors 6502

    Feb 1, 2008
    Perhaps this is because the MBP has more housekeeping tasks, because of its larger number of features. My rudimentary understanding of CS leads me to believe that having features available (especially having them available quickly, without loading) such as ports requires regularly scheduled scripts and such, which use a tiny amount of processor even when the features are sitting idle. Painting a larger screen also requires some processor power, even though it is largely handled by the video card.

    Well, it sounds like people recommend the MBP. I wonder if that is because I posted in the MBP forum, and not the MB forum? How annoying would it be to do the experiment, and try the same post in the MB forum? I am being annoying tonight.

    When I said I didn't need portability, I meant that I don't need the extra two inches. I do need to carry my computer around several times a week. I know, my original remarks were ambiguous.
  9. Neil321 macrumors 68040


    Nov 6, 2007
    Britain, Avatar Created By Bartelby
    I think they probably would, but looking at your needs the MBP is the way forward for you.You dont sound so lacking in computer skills to understand the basic diffs between the MB & MBP.Just go ahead
    and buy one,oh & stop pestering
  10. bollweevil thread starter macrumors 6502

    Feb 1, 2008
    Am I pestering you? Do you feel pestered? Sorry about the pestration. Pester is such a funny word.

Share This Page