What would you buy first?

Discussion in 'Buying Tips and Advice' started by xSOTYx, Sep 2, 2007.

  1. xSOTYx macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2007
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #1
    First off I know I have posted a thread similar but this time I need some opinions if possible please!

    Tomorrow I am going to go and purchase either a MacBook or Mac Mini (Im switching). Although Im really not too sure which one of the two, I should buy first. Im looking at the £499 Mac Mini and £699 MacBook, Ill upgrade the RAM on them shortly after getting them. Im not concerned about storage as I have a 500Gb MiniMax and two other external hard drives. Main reason I am buying both is because I download alot and general like to fall asleep with my computer on watching films etc.

    Generally I will be using them for IM, Internet, Small amounts of video editing, iPod and iTunes, Photoshop, and general stuff like that.

    Was really hoping to see what people would purchase first out of the two and why?!

    Thanks for your time. :):apple:
     
  2. scienide09 macrumors 65816

    scienide09

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #2
    Personally I would choose the MB, if only for the portability factor.

    You didn't say: do you have a monitor, keyboard, and mouse all ready to use with the Mini? Will the combo drive in the MB suffice, or do you need the superdrive included with the high-end Mini.
     
  3. Nugget macrumors 65816

    Nugget

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2002
    Location:
    Houston Texas USA
    #3
    It does sound like the MacBook will be more useful to you. I'm not even quite sure I understand why you'd need both, to be honest. It sounds like just a MacBook would do what you want. You could even take the money you'd planned to spend on the Mac Mini and bump up to a MacBook Pro. ;)
     
  4. xSOTYx thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2007
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #4
    I have a 19" Dell Monitor, Around a year old. And a keyboard etc too.
    The main reason I was going to get both was because I general have my Windows PC running 24/7 downloading and stuff like that etc.

    Not really bothered about MacBook Pro to be honest. As far as drives go ive had this computer im on now for a year and only burn around 3 dvds. Only really need to be able to play and watch DVD's and CD's.
     
  5. scienide09 macrumors 65816

    scienide09

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #5
    If you primarily want to watch movies and play CDs, I don't really understand why you need to purchase a new computer at all, especially if your current set up is only a year old. Let alone why the switch from PC to a Mac. However...

    My preference is still for the portability of the Macbook.

    If you want to save some money, buy a refurb Mini -- it should do what you want it to, unless your video editing/photoshopping is pretty intense.
     
  6. CalBoy macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #6
    I too have to cast my vote for the macbook. The portability and overall superior specs mean that it's worth getting over the Mini. However, I question how much you really need the Mini. Unless the Mini is going to be your ultimate multi-media hub, I don't see how it benefits you. You could use the 500 Quid you're thinking of throwing at the Mini, and use it for a big external, some nice speakers, or anything that fancies you. Just a thought.
     
  7. xSOTYx thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2007
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #7
    Thanks! I am deffinatley going to get the MacBook. Makes alot of sense to from what you have all said. And I do think ill forget the Mini and invest in some better speakers and another MiniMax hard drive like CalBoy said.

    scienide09 I do alot of stuff on my computer not just watch DVDs lol, I use alot of different applications (photoshop, music production etc). If I stay'd with Windows id be upgrading now also, but I really don't want Vista or XP again for that matter lol. So Mac it is :)
     
  8. scienide09 macrumors 65816

    scienide09

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #8
    Fair enough, and I don't blame you for wanting to avoid Vista. I guess I'm just surprised that you need to replace a one year old computer so that you can do the tasks you mentioned, be it video watching or working in Photoshop.
     
  9. darthraige macrumors 68000

    darthraige

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2007
    Location:
    Coruscant, but Boston will do.
    #9
    Yea, get the MacBook, you'll love it. I got one and the thing is great! Portable, camera, fast.
     
  10. CalBoy macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #10
    Good decision. Just remember, with the macbook, your display size is limited to 23". If you have a bigger tv that you think you'll want to use instead, be aware that tvs lose picture quality when compared to moniters.
     
  11. ucfgrad93 macrumors P6

    ucfgrad93

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado
  12. Nugget macrumors 65816

    Nugget

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2002
    Location:
    Houston Texas USA
    #12
    This is completely inaccurate and misleading.

    The MacBook is limited to a resolution of 1920x1200 pixels when connected to an external display. In terms of Apple Cinema Displays this means that it cannot drive the large 30" display (which has a native resolution of 2560x1600) but the limitation has absolutely nothing to do with physical display sizes. I don't think there's a television on the planet that has a native display higher than 1920x1200. HDTV resolution maxes out at 1080 vertical resolution and, not surprisingly, HD television resolutions do too. Nearly every fixed-pixel television on the market today has either 768 vertical pixels of resolution or 1080 vertical pixels. At the high end, 1920x1200.

    A MacBook can happily drive a 70" HD television at that device's full quality.

    I'm not sure what "lose picture quality" is supposed to mean, but it's nonsensical. Televisions have lower resolution than the average monitor.
     
  13. CalBoy macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #13
    If you read my post a little better, you would see that I had written that tvs lose picture quality when compared to moniters; this means that the picture isn't as good as it could be on a moniter. The best tv will never have the same resolution as a moniter.

    As for being able to physically drive a 30", it's true that you can plug a macbook into a 30" moniter, but it won't utilize it fully, so why waste the money? If you use some common sense, it's quite obvious that it's a waste of money to buy a product that can only do for you what another lower priced product can do, esspecially considering that the 30" ACD is a full $900 (US) more than the 23".
     
  14. Nugget macrumors 65816

    Nugget

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2002
    Location:
    Houston Texas USA
    #14
    And even after all those words I'm still not convinced you have any idea what you're talking about. Your original post sure makes it sound like you think that a MacBook is limited based on the size of the display when in fact it is resolution that is the limiting factor, irrespective of size. Maybe you could have put more effort into writing better instead of expecting the rest of us to read better.
     
  15. suneohair macrumors 68020

    suneohair

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2006
    #15
    Yes a TV can have the same resolution as a monitor. What you are talking about is pixel pitch or dot pitch (not intentionally it seems), whichever you prefer. A 37" with a 1920x1080 resolution will have "bigger" pixels than a 24/23. However, depending on the distance away from the 37" it can look much like a 24" as far as pixels are concerned.

    Now, no one is required to buy a 30" ACD here. You could buy a 32" LCD TV with a res of 1920x1080 and get the same effect for less. You cant assume everyone wants to buy an ACD. I could bring up the fact that Dells are cheaper but that is irrelevant.
     
  16. Dybbuk macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    #16
    Macbook. Bought one last week and love it. Never going back to PC again.
     
  17. xSOTYx thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2007
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #17
    Wow certainly from this thread and everything else I have seen on this site I am deffinately getting a MacBook now! (Hopefully tomorrow if money has been refunded back onto my Credit card)! I think on purchase or just after I will put in 2GB of RAM, Or more if thats possible?! And get a skin case and mighty mouse to go with it and buy .Mac (On Trial with that at the moment).

    Can't wait to get a MacBook.. Do miss my iBook!

    EDIT: As for the plugging up of an external monitor/tv, I need to worry about it on my 19" TFT monitor at the moment, which is plenty for my current needs. Do many of you MacBook owners use an external screen?
     
  18. CalBoy macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #18
    You can put in more RAM, even though Apple says you can't. The RAM limit is technically 3.3GB, so if you wanted, you could put in two 2GB sticks. Whatever you do, don't have Apple put in the RAM for you; it's a rip off.

    The Mighty Mouse looks nice, but I found it to be a bit weak. It felt like it was going to fall apart on me at any time. I'm sure there are those who feel it's a great mouse, but I just didn't like it. If you do go BT Mighty Mouse, remember that it can have one or two batteries, so it's up to you to decide how heavy you want it. Good luck:)
     
  19. Dustman macrumors 65816

    Dustman

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2007

Share This Page