At first there seems to be an easy answer to that question but then again is it that obvious?
I need a very portable machine for "on the field" Photoshop work. Lately I spent a day with the high end 17"Macbook Pro ( 4g. ram,high def. screen,7200hd) and enjoyed the ride (of course!!). But I am not convinced that I need all that horsepower only to move images around, heck I still use a dual G4 with an on board 64mg ATI Radeon 9000 Pro and don't feel left behind ( most of the time). So, why pay for features that are invaluable for video editing but not so important for image work? The salesman told me that the soldering and components inside the box are not as rugged as the high ends, is this the crux of the problem
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
I have a Macbook, and before that had a Powerbook 15-inch (the precursor to the MacBook Pro.)
The Macbook Pro is a nice machine, and it's the only way to get the Matte finish LCD screen. But the 15-inch is large, and the 17-inch is huge. Then there's the cost factor.
My Macbook 13-inch is the mid-level model from last summer, with a dual-Intel 2-gHz processor, 120gig hard drive, and 2 gigs of RAM. With the AppleCare warranty (which I always buy for laptops), it was about $1400.
The Macbook is great as a basic computer for email, web, etc. -- the compact size is nice, and it's fairly light and has good battery life. The glossy LCD is somewhat annoying, especially in airports and other places with lots of windows. For picture editing and Photoshop work, it's not too bad. Shooting 8-megapixel RAW files, I can blaze through full-size previews in Photo Mechanic (hint -- turn off raw rendering in the preferences). For captioning, keywording, and generally figuring out what I shot, it's great. I can process RAW files on location and upload them to my editor, and it's just as fast as my dual-G5 tower back in the studio.
But, it's not really made to be a primary Photoshop machine. It gets very hot, and the fan fires up to full speed when processing a few files, sucking the battery dry in short order. However, I have never had any durability issues with this computer. It's gets heavily used (and I'm not very easy on my gear), and it still just hums along.
So if you need a compact laptop for use on location, and it's not your primary workstation, the Macbook should be fine. If you need horsepower and screen real estate, the Pro version is better.
Hope this helps.
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
Christian,
What programs will you be running on it?? If you're planning to run Aperture (which I love!) then the Pro is the way to go as the software uses (and needs) the extra power of the graphics card.
The only other reason in my opinion that you'd want to go Pro is the glossy screen. I personally can't stand them and have heard similar from others who use the glossy screens. If neither of these points are a factor, then I'd say a Macbook will do just fine!
Yeah that's what I thought at first ! But are a 2.16 vs 2.2 gz processor or a shared 64mg. vs 128mg dedicated video card enough to justify the 700$ difference??
Since I only use Bridge and Photoshop, I don't see these as being deal breakers....
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
The greatest difference that should be considered between the MacBook and MacBook Pro is memory capacity. The MacBook only supports 2 gigs while the MacBook Pro can support 4 gigs of memory. This alone should be the deciding factor.
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
Linear Mode
