Advice on a new MacBook, or not

[Titan]

So my early 2008 MacBook Pro is dying a slow death. I have been really happy with it and have no problem buying another Mac.

My first question is whether the Air is worth the extra money when compared to the states of the Pro. To me it seems like I am paying a whole lot for the lightness factor. (The below has the optional 8 gb for a extra $100) The Pro has no options added.

As this is primarily a stay in one place computer that doesn't really hold a lot of value for me. It would seem the Pro is a far better bang for the buck. Am I missing something? What else should I be considering.

My second question is whether I should consider going back to a windows machine? Can someone suggest a laptop similar to the Pro that I could consider? As you can see my budget is about $1500 but if I can get a smiliar machine and save $500 I would be a fool to not at least consider that, right? What are the best brands to consider?

I do have an Apple ecosystem but would that matter if the windows machine is running iTunes? The reason I went to Mac was to eliminate all of the "futzing" with the computer that I seemed to have to do with my old XP machine. I know things have come a long way since then. I should add that all of my photos are in iPhoto and that is one of the primary uses for the computer. Otherwise, it is mostly a surfing machine. I know the Pro is overkill for most of my uses but I do like to make movies and manipulate photos so I would use the extra horsepower for that. I also don't mind spending a bit more to future proof a bit, although I know that is a mugs game to a certain extent.

I did a quick look on Dell and based on price the Alienware seems to be the same price point. I am too out of touch to compare the machines though.

Is there a machine that will do what I need for considerably less?

Is there a big difference b/w windows 7 and 8?

Is there a big jump from the i5 to the i7?

I appreciate any feedback. Thanks.

• $1,499.00

13-inch MacBook Pro



Remove Save

Part number: MD102LL/A


Hardware

• 2.9GHz Dual-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.6GHz
• 8GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM — 2x4GB
• 750GB Serial ATA Drive @ 5400 rpm
• SuperDrive 8x (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
• Backlit Keyboard (English) & User's Guide (English)
• Accessory Kit

Software

• OS X
• iLife '11

<LI class="cart-product clearfix top-divided">

• $1,599.00
• Quantity (MacBook Air, 13-inch)
• $1,599.00

MacBook Air, 13-inch



Remove Save

Part number: Z0ND

• Available to ship: 1-3 business days

Hardware

• 2.0GHz Intel Dual-Core Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.2GHz
• 8GB 1600MHz DDR3L SDRAM
• 256GB Flash Storage
• Backlit Keyboard (English) & User's Guide
• Accessory Kit

http://www.dell.com/ca/p/alienware-m17x-r4/pd

[Titan]

I see you in here sclitheroe!! I would really appreciate your thoughts.

[sclitheroe]

Personally, having used a Retina Macbook Pro now for a while, if you are staying on the Mac platform not having Retina would rule out the current Air's for me. It's worth the increased cost in my opinion.

[Titan]

Could you expand on that? Does it make the "experience" better overall or is it just when working with pictures?

I assume you would vote for the Pro over the Air?

[TorqueDog]

I'm NOT a Mac fan whatsoever, but I must concur with Scott.

I had the chance to see the Retina MacBooks last week, and ho-ly crap, those are nice screens. For everything. Pictures, video, just browsing/word processing.

[Titan]

So for the same price the below is the trade off. That seems pretty significant to me. Is 128 gb enough to run a system? I do have a NAS that actually stores my stuff.

Retina: 2.5GHz dual-core Intel Core i5, 128GB flash storage

Non Retina: 2.9GHz dual-core Intel Core i7, 750GB 5400-rpm hard drive

[DownhillGoat]

Originally Posted by Titan

Is 128 gb enough to run a system? I do have a NAS that actually stores my stuff.

I have a 256GB SSD; only 180GB is allocated to OSX, and I'm currently using about 100GB on the system drive. I could easily drop 40GB of that if I moved my downloads folder elsewhere. Files are stored on a 1TB drive (which is basically the same idea you'd be using the NAS for).

So short answer, yes 128 is enough to run the system. You might want to look at the 256 if you're planning on keeping it a while, but the 128 would certainly work. You can always get the 128 and upgrade it yourself after.

Between the two choices you posted I'd take the retina i5 in a heartbeat vs the non-retinal i7.

[sclitheroe]

Originally Posted by Titan

Could you expand on that? Does it make the "experience" better overall or is it just when working with pictures?

I assume you would vote for the Pro over the Air?

It's shockingly better than a conventional panel, especially after you've used it for a while and go back to an older Macbook Pro (which, as standard panels went, had good to great ones).

Everything looks better, but the principal improvement for me is in fonts - to say I'm on the computer a lot would be an understatement, and even though I didn't previously perceive myself to suffer from eyestrain, the Retina display makes it much less tiring to use the machine for extended periods of time.

You pick up some other nice benefits - for casual and most business hours use I can run at 1440x900 and reap the full benefits of Retina, or if I'm working on technical diagrams or need a lot of terminal windows open or something, I can crank the resolution to 1920x1200. Now the key here is that when you bump the resolution, you end up with a 1920x1200 display that doesn't look retina-sharp, but every bit as sharp as a native 1920x1200 panel. (note this is on the 15" - you have been looking at 13" machines, which have a slightly lower top resolution, but the principle is the same)

It's a very different way of working with a machine - normally laptops look like crap at any scaled resolution, but this is different. It's actually a tool to leverage in your workflow rather than a kludge to make things look bigger or smaller.

My post-Retina Macbook Pro hierarchy of needs is now this:
- screen
- memory
- cpu
- disk capacity (SSD mandatory)

That's how much value I place on the retina display now that I've used it for a few months.

[photon]

I've got a 13" MBP Retina, I love it. When I travel and work on it exclusively, then come back to my 1920x1200 24" monitor on my PC, the difference is startling.

[Titan]

Originally Posted by photon

I've got a 13" MBP Retina, I love it. When I travel and work on it exclusively, then come back to my 1920x1200 24" monitor on my PC, the difference is startling.

This might actually be an argument to not get the retina. I work all day on crapy lenovo monitors. Going from a retina to that may be too jarring and make me hate my work.

Thanks for the input.

[silentsim]

Have a 15" retina...love it.

Have seen and used the 13" retina. Also a spectacular machine.

If you are happy with OS X, and like it, then I would see no reason to switch myself. (I mean you can get cheaper Windows laptops, but comparable ones in quality/performance are similar prices imo)

For your uses the non retina base Pro might even be fine (unless you have more uses then you mentioned) but if your going for future-proofing and a machine that will last years the Retina Pro is amazing (flash storage+ amazing display)

[MickMcGeough]

Considering how expensive any Mac is - I can't see a reason anyone would buy one without a retina display & SSD. After using one for a few months those two things are non negotiable for me.

[sclitheroe]

Going off topic, but something interesting for the Retina users by the way - fire up Safari and the current version of Chrome on your Retina machine and go look at the highest resolution images you can find (googling around for pictures of watches is fantastic because there are lots of metal textures as well as fine detail in the dial). Get the image in the same spot onscreen and command-tab between the two browsers.

The difference in sharpness between Safari and Chrome rendering of images is shocking, and once you see it, you will be hard pressed to stick with Safari. You'll be able to tell which browser you are using every time just by the way the graphics look.

(for potential Retina users, don't get me wrong, Safari looks great - it's just that Chrome renders even better)

[sclitheroe]

Another point about the retina screens that should be pointed out - they are significantly lower glare than any of the non-retina MBP or Air displays. I've worked in an office with a just-south-of-current generation MBP alongside my Retina and there is a staggering difference in glare.

This would be something you'd want to double check in-store - not sure if a current gen 13" or 15" non-retina has the same screen construction that results in the lower glare, but I'm inclined to think they don't.

I'm actually fairly certain that's the case, because they say this on their website:

More colour and contrast. Less glare.
The Retina display reduces glare up to 75 percent while maintaining incredible colour and quality. In fact, it has a 29 percent higher contrast ratio than a standard MacBook Pro display. Blacks are blacker. Whites are whiter. And everything in between is rich and vibrant. IPS technology gives you a wide, 178-degree view of everything on the screen, so you’ll see the difference at practically any angle. And you’re going to love what you see.

[simmonjam1]

One thing I think is a consideration, upgradability. My wife has a 2011 MB Air. It was the first ones after the redesign. You can't really upgrade anything on it. The memory is soldered to the logic board.

I have a Mac mini and MB Pro that I was able up the ram and hdd and get a few more years out of em.

[sclitheroe]

Originally Posted by simmonjam1

One thing I think is a consideration, upgradability. My wife has a 2011 MB Air. It was the first ones after the redesign. You can't really upgrade anything on it. The memory is soldered to the logic board.

I have a Mac mini and MB Pro that I was able up the ram and hdd and get a few more years out of em.

Yeah, I'd only purchase a Macbook with integrated memory if it had a minimum of 8GB of RAM (which all of the Retina class machines do), which should be enough for 3 years of use comfortably. One advantage of the SSD in this regard is that if/when you do get memory constrained, any swapfile access is much, much quicker so the impact to system responsiveness is lower.

Overall I don't feel like RAM requirements on desktop/laptop machines is going to dramatically increase any time soon, barring some massive innovation in user interface or functionality that we can't foresee right now. If you were running lots of virtual machines, you'd want to grab the 15" Macbook Pro with its 16 GB of RAM, but with 8GB you can very comfortably leave a Win7 or Win8 VM with 2 GB of RAM running in the background and not suffer for it.

[Bob]

Originally Posted by sclitheroe

Another point about the retina screens that should be pointed out - they are significantly lower glare than any of the non-retina MBP or Air displays. I've worked in an office with a just-south-of-current generation MBP alongside my Retina and there is a staggering difference in glare.

This would be something you'd want to double check in-store - not sure if a current gen 13" or 15" non-retina has the same screen construction that results in the lower glare, but I'm inclined to think they don't.

I'm actually fairly certain that's the case, because they say this on their website:

For a visual comparison, Anandtech has lots of indoor/outdoor pictures showing the Retina in comparison with the older glossy and matte screens. There are a few angles that show quite a reduction in glare.

http://www.anandtech.com/Gallery/Album/2115#1

(The Retina is usually the one in the middle)