Which Option?

[Glenn Wolsey]

I'm trying to get a clearer picture in my head of what setup I will purchase for myself late this year. At the moment, which setup would you choose?

- iMac 20" - MacBook 2Ghz White

- MacBook Pro 15" + 23" ACD

- iMac 20" + MacBook Pro 15"

 

[skunk]

Seems to depend on whether you need a portable...

 

[Glenn Wolsey]

Well all of the options include a portable, so the answer is yes.

 

[skunk]

Well all of the options include a portable, so the answer is yes.

Hmmm. I need new glasses...

 

[edesignuk]

MacBook Pro 15" + 23".

Working across two machines is never easy, keeping data in synch etc. One powerful laptop with a nice external screen at home is the way I would go.

 

[Scarlet Fever]

The iMac is more or less a 15" MPB without a battery. I would go the MPB and ACD.

 

[skunk]

Of course, having two separate computers would give you a real backup option. A bit of a pain keeping them synched, however, as e says.

 

[iGary]

MacBook Pro 15" + 23".

Working across two machines is never easy, keeping data in synch etc. One powerful laptop with a nice external screen at home is the way I would go.

I agree with the British fellow.

 

[nospleen]

I would get the 20" imac and the MB. I think it is good to have a backup machine. Just in case.....right iGary?!

 

[iGary]

I would get the 20" imac and the MB. I think it is good to have a backup machine. Just in case.....right iGary?!

See, I'm all complacent now....the spleen is right!

 

[MRU]

I've got the 20" imac core duo and 13.3" macbook option myself.

There are benefits to having two computers rather than 1. What if A - has to be repaired etc.. Also means if your doing a shed load of downloading or printing, you can leave 1 computer to do that, whilst the other is free to be exploited to its full load.

A 23" screen isn't as great a value as a 20" entire computer, even if it does have more pixels.

A macbook rather than a macbook pro simply because the extra grunt the graphic card your missing from a macbook is in your imac, so its not really missing it at all. Apart from on board graphics there's nothing on the macbookpro I couldnt do on a macbook.... Plus your saving $400 more money which you could always put towards a 20" 2005fpw dell monitor too and have either you macbook or your imac connected to it when needed......

 

[iGary]

I would get the 20" imac and the MB. I think it is good to have a backup machine. Just in case.....right iGary?!

You're as bad as me with machines...didn't you just get a Mac...Christ, I've lost track of what you had last.

 

[MRU]

You're as bad as me with machines...didn't you just get a Mac...Christ, I've lost track of what you had last.

LOL theres definetly a mac addiction, I should have added on my post that I already have a dual powermac G5, and ibook, a macmini and a G4 20" imac..... OK I really need the extra backup computers

 

[quidire]

I know it is not a popular opinion, but .Mac really does make backup easy.

I don't actually mean using Backup 3 (although it isn't bad, I can't vouch for it because I've never had to recover from an archive), but rather simply keeping one's important documents on one's iDisk.

I know that option is also available w/ one computer (and then you can download the files onto someone else's computer if you really need them post-hard-drive-crash) but...

Its not just backup; .Mac, in allowing seamless sync'ing of your bookmarks, keychain, etc etc, really does make using multiple machines a pleasure.

 

[imacintel]

Definitely White MacBook 2GHZ and 20inch iMAc. They will lok aesome together! Also, you actually may have one computer withoutproblems!

 

[nospleen]

You're as bad as me with machines...didn't you just get a Mac...Christ, I've lost track of what you had last.

There is something about that new mac smell... My name is Brandon and I am a macaholic.

 

[celebrian23]

An imac and a mbp are pretty pointless. They´re pretty much the portable and non portable versions of the same machine. I´d go for the mbp and acd. It makes the most sense.

 

[balamw]

Well the iMac does offer a larger faster & HDD than any of the portables and since it is not a portable (has no battery or charging circuitry) and is bigger it can run quite a bit cooler and so you might be able to run it a bit harder than an otherwise equivalent MBP. You can also get a DL Superdrive in the iMac.

Plus, the MBP just doesn't seem like a good value compared to the middle MacBook, unless you absolutely need the graphics or an expresscard slot for any particular reason.

I'd probably go for the iMac and 13" MacBook.

What do you intend to do with the machines?

B

 

[Glenn Wolsey]

What do you intend to do with the machines?

The usual tasks: Safari, Mail, iTunes, iCal, iChat.

And then the other stuff: Aperture, Dreamweaver 8, Photoshop CS, GarageBand.

I spend an hour in GarageBand a day with my work and around another hour (min) with Aperture.

 

[Peyton]

I say go with the mbp, its so nice to have everything on one computer. If you are waiting until late this year, there is no telling what the new ones will be like, (assuming you'll get something new) but seriously, it really is annoying having files you need on one or the other, go for the mbp.

 

[monke]

I would go with the MBP and the ACD.

As much as two computers is nice, the ease of only having one computer is nicer.

 

[balamw]

there is no telling what the new ones will be like

Definitely true, 6 months from now at the very least Merom should be in the MBP and iMacs and we should get the expected 20% performance boost.

Maybe by then they'll develop a DL superdrive that'll fit in the small MacBook/MBPs.

Somehow spending $700 more for the MBP than the middle MacBook seems way out of whack unless you explicitly need one of the features that's not in the MacBook.

B

 

[Glenn Wolsey]

I say go with the mbp, its so nice to have everything on one computer. If you are waiting until late this year, there is no telling what the new ones will be like, (assuming you'll get something new) but seriously, it really is annoying having files you need on one or the other, go for the mbp.

If I go for the MBP I will order the day its 64bit and has Leopard on it. I want to save myself some money on 10.5.

 

[Glenn Wolsey]

Definitely true, 6 months from now at the very least Merom should be in the MBP and iMacs and we should get the expected 20% performance boost.

Maybe by then they'll develop a DL superdrive that'll fit in the small MacBook/MBPs.

Somehow spending $700 more for the MBP than the middle MacBook seems way out of whack unless you explicitly need one of the features that's not in the MacBook.

B

To tell the truth, yes I could manage on a MacBook instead of the MBP, but I love the aluminium look and I want the matte screen, plus the video card for Aperture.

 

[balamw]

To tell the truth, yes I could manage on a MacBook instead of the MBP, but I love the aluminium look and I want the matte screen, plus the video card for Aperture.

The matte screen and video card are features that aren't (currently) available on the MacBook, so that tips the balance. Waiting for Leopard and Merom definitely sounds like a good idea.

B