Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Why so damn expensive?
- Thread starter stimpycat
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
the reason Macs are so exspensive is because your buying quality.
Richard
This deserves quoting. I hear this question so much and as someone intimately familiar with hardware from the case to the cpu, most people just don't get it.
For a second pretend you don't know *anything* about cars. Nothing, not even brand name recognition. Your thinking of buying a new sporty kind of car and have boiled it down to two options: Mazda Miata & BMW Z4. (no I'm not a car guy, so no nitpicking hehe)
They both look to have about the same specs, size, etc. at first glance, but the BMW is 2x the price. So you ask your friend whose into cars:
Aside from a lesson in cars, your friend is likely to respond: Because they are not in any way comparable.
Really?!!
I guess it's just a recommend then on the apple site to have a MBP?
I thought that fcp wouldn't even open on a macbook, but I was going to install just to see what happened!
Cool!
You also have to know *when* to buy too... best time to buy is after an update. That's when you get the most value for your money, by either buying the updated new model, or the older model as a closeout/refurb. Mac Pros will likely be updated in July or August.
I owned a Mac in my younger years and NEVER had a problem with it was a macintosh Performa all in one gave me years of trouble free service. you never realize how stranded you are until you install Vista GULP I just want to open the box and know that my computer is ready for years of troublefree service and with a Mac you get that hands down
I just want to open the box and know that my computer is ready for years of troublefree service and with a Mac you get that hands downWouldn't he have to pay import duty as well as VAT? Ouch....If you're in Britain buy in the USA! The exchange rate is SOOO in your favor I bet you save money even after airfare
Hmm, though Mac Pro might be a pain to get onto the plane...but the laptops would not be...
Uh, why would he? You don't bring back the laptop in the box! duh!
Unpack it, set it up, throw out all the packaging, then voila, you have a used laptop that your brought with you to the USA! Tada, no VAT etc.
You can also postal mail back the receipt if you are concerned.
That's ONLY Extended, which does 3D modelling. Obviously, it wants the better graphics card.
Photoshop CS3 Standard and every previous version of Photoshop does not use the graphics card. Nor does InDesign, Dreamweaver, Flash, Illustrator, etc, etc. The only app that does is Photoshop CS3 Extended, and ONLY if you're using the 3D rendering functions, which the OP probably is not.
The only real difference between the two is the video card. The MacBook Pro will perform better for anything using 3D rendering.
None of the Adobe apps use 3D rendering except the Extended version of Photoshop, so you wouldn't see much of a difference. Final Cut Pro will not have the Real-Time features without the better graphics card, but other than that performance should be similar (make sure it is universal though! The PowerPC version will run like crap).
Basically, any app that doesn't render things in 3D will run just as good on your MacBook as on the G5. But stock up on RAM! I have 2 GB.
Don't confuse him; the MacBook Pro only has two cores, just like the MacBook.
Somehow, I don't think it's quite that simple. I confess I don't know how it works with computers, but over on DPR, I see story after story of Brits that buy camera equipment here, bring it back in a beat up old camera bag and get hosed for duty and VAT when they try to get it back into their own country. I suspect British customs agents know a lot of these tricks.Uh, why would he? You don't bring back the laptop in the box! duh!
Unpack it, set it up, throw out all the packaging, then voila, you have a used laptop that your brought with you to the USA! Tada, no VAT etc.
You can also postal mail back the receipt if you are concerned.
Don't buy a Macbook if you want decent performance in CS3 or any professional app for that matter.
http://barefeats.com/rosa02.html
http://barefeats.com/rosa02.html
I don't believe it. How can they possibly prove you didn't own a device before you left the country? Sorry, no dice. the people caught probably did something stupid.
Big deal. 10 to 20% faster for non 3D applications. Many pro apps run perfectly fine on the MB. In fact, many run even faster on the current MB than on most previous Macs including the Core Duo MBPs.
Its true. They check the keyboards, the serial numbers, everything. If you leave the country with a computer or a camera, you should fill in a form with the serial number and have it filed before you leave. If you don't then it is your fault and you are charged.
Oh, now 10-20% is no big deal. Before it was no difference, only 3D apps matter. I had a Macbook 2.0 and it ran most apps like crap. Aperture, forget it. CS3 ran OK. Of course the current Macbook is faster than Core Duo Macs.
The advantages gained by the MBP are worth the money. Don't deny the differences and push this "Macbook is ok for everybody" agenda.
To outline a few:
15" or 17" display
Santa Rosa
Nice dedicated graphics
Faster CPUs
Of course some of this will be moot when the MB gets SR. But the graphics are what holds the Macbook back. And it is not irrevelent just because no 3D graphics are be used. The OS itself taxes the GPU and a lot of that gets offloaded to the CPU. That is the big reason why the Macbook performs the way it does when compared to a MBP.
I am the way I am because there is a GPU bias and snobbery by many here. Just look at the threads that are saying the 8600GT is a "low-mid range" GPU even when its pretty well the fastest thing for laptops available. Many people simply cannot be satisfied by anything, it seems. The GMA950 is no great GPU but for most people who don't do 3D work, even for many "pro's", it makes little or no difference. The real difference in my mind is the screen real estate.
If you find the MBP differences worth the money then great. But not everyone does, even after the SR update. I do agree that the argument has thinned quite a bit since the update and will hold more water after the MB is updated.
If you find the MBP differences worth the money then great. But not everyone does, even after the SR update. I do agree that the argument has thinned quite a bit since the update and will hold more water after the MB is updated.
I would consider myself a "pro," I have owned a Mini and a Macbook and both were terrible for anything other than browsing. Maybe I got some bad ones, but they performed terrible in the apps I use. It isn't even like, "oh its a little slow," I am talking barely usable. And I did have 2GB in both.
Anyhow. I don't like laptops, I think they are underpowered for real work. So trust me no bias here and no real will to defend them. The fact remains that the Macbook is crippled in many ways. I think in some ways it is intentionally made slower. Windows laptops running a GMA are rather zippy, maybe it is because the OS isn't as demanding on the GPU.
Apple made a bad move by putting the GMA, it barely handles the OS. I will say this, you can FEEL the difference between a MB and MBP. If you are doing something other than browsing or general taks don't even waste your money. You will be disappointed.
I think recommending the Macbook for professional duties is ridiculous. And it has nothing to do with a "pro" bias or "pro snobbery" it is the fact. A fact you can feel and see in real world benchmarks. Saying "it makes little or no difference" is a blatant lie.
Anyhow. I don't like laptops, I think they are underpowered for real work. So trust me no bias here and no real will to defend them. The fact remains that the Macbook is crippled in many ways. I think in some ways it is intentionally made slower. Windows laptops running a GMA are rather zippy, maybe it is because the OS isn't as demanding on the GPU.
Apple made a bad move by putting the GMA, it barely handles the OS. I will say this, you can FEEL the difference between a MB and MBP. If you are doing something other than browsing or general taks don't even waste your money. You will be disappointed.
I think recommending the Macbook for professional duties is ridiculous. And it has nothing to do with a "pro" bias or "pro snobbery" it is the fact. A fact you can feel and see in real world benchmarks. Saying "it makes little or no difference" is a blatant lie.
HUH. Never heard of anything like this from friends living in Europe.
Wow, I guess things are diff in Canada?? I bring electronics back and forth from the USA and never had to fill out a form. Wow, chalk one up for the USA! haha
I tend to agree. I was thinking of a imac but I am now lending towards a mac pro as I love power. Give me power!!!
My wife has a MacBook 2.0 Core 2 Duo with 1gig of RAM and CS2 is frustratingly slow on it. It does run it, but it's all very slow, and compared to my Dual CPU 2.0 G5 with 1.5gigs of RAM it's like night and day.
So claiming that the MacBook is just fine for pro apps doesn't fly with me. Just because it can run it doesn't mean you should.
I like to maximize my productivity, and running CS2 on my wife's MacBook or my Mac mini at the office doesn't cut it. That's why I do all my design work on my G5.
So claiming that the MacBook is just fine for pro apps doesn't fly with me. Just because it can run it doesn't mean you should.
I like to maximize my productivity, and running CS2 on my wife's MacBook or my Mac mini at the office doesn't cut it. That's why I do all my design work on my G5.
Unfair comparison. That's because CS2 is not Intel-native; it's running through Rosetta. And that's why so many people were waiting for CS3 as it runs natively on Intel machines.
And these arguments using benchmarks are silly, most pro places are not using 8-core Macs to run InDesign... we're using dual 2.5 G5s at work which come out well below the current MBs and MBPs in benchmarks and please don't tell me what is serious work and what isn't... most print designers I know are using a mixture of G4 towers which are pitifully slow by the standards of todays machines.
In a year or two's time, the specs of the MacBooks are going to be better and make those machines look like the dinosaurs they are. The work that most of us do, however, remains unchanged. Sooner or later, even the Mac Minis will outpace many of the machines used in many production places at the mo.
I also used to have an inherent bias against laptops, mainly because the PowerBooks were so underpowered, but since replacing my dual 1.4 G4 with a 2.33 MBP, I'm now converted. And it handles 'serious' work very well indeed.
Mind you, this is mainly about 2D design... 3D design is a different kettle of fish.
Check out:
http://creativemac.digitalmedianet.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=43717
Before the recent MBP update, there was basically no difference running a CPU intensive app like FCP on a MB or MBP - a GPU one like Motion was a different kettle of fish, albeit still a usable kettle.
Anyhoo, to the OP, which way are you gonna go?
The OP was interested in buying a Mac Pro, but the thread does seem to have gone on something of a tangent...