Which of the two options should I go with?

a) Get a MacBook for when I am away from home, in bed, etc. and an iMac for my desk work.
b) Get a MacBook Pro and use it as a desktop replacement and for when away from the desk?

My use for the computer are work, home, and hobbies. For work and home it is basically nothing that the weakest of machines can’t do (emails, Word, Excel, Power Point, etc.). But it is my hobbies that is most demanding on the machine (a lot of Graphics, Sound, Imaging, etc.).

My current everyday machine is a Toshiba Portege tablet PC. Frankly, I am just too fed-up with its’ limitations (no firewire, speed of 1.6 GHz, RAM 1 GB – maximum it can handle, screen size of 12”, and I have never had the need for the tablet functions – of course when I bought it I thought I would be using it in tablet format most of the time, but how wrong was i).

Now that I am about to get a new system for myself (and it has to be Apple Mac), I am a bit confused on what set up to go with (both would be about the same price).

On the one hand, I could go with the MacBook (MB) for my travels and when I am away from my desk; with the iMac for my desk work (where most of the intensive work takes place). I would go with the 2GHz MB and a 17” – or 20” – iMac attached to a second monitor. The advantage of this is that I get to lug a small amount of weight; and since I am in bed a lot it is also that much easier to keep handy. The down side to this is that I have to sync both machines all the time and I just hate having to deal with 2 machines for my “personal” use; plus, this would also mean that in the event that I am away from home I am really limited by the amount of graphics work I can do since the MB doesn’t even run Apple’s Aperture, and I am sure it is flimsy with other graphics / photo editing applications.

On the other hand, I could just get myself the 17” MacBook Pro (MBP) and do with the one machine but get a secondary monitor for my graphic works. The advantage here is that I get an all-in-one machine that does all that I want whether I am at my desk, in bed, or away from home. The downside to this is the weight I would have to keep around (the times I am in bed are due to medical reasons and I am sure the weight of the MBP would be a major obstacle).

Both set-up would get a wireless keyboard and mouse for when I do desk work.

As I’ve said earlier, the price for either setup would be about the same; so it is not the price issue that would prevent me from going with either setup, it is the practicality of which ever. From past experience I have found that multiple machines are not the best means to get work done. All too often I find out that a file I need is not on this machine, but on that, and there are times when I think a file is on that machine and delete it from this one only to discover I no longer have the file since I’ve deleted it from both machines. Too complicated for my room-temperature IQ reading.

So, is anyone here working with two machines in a “relatively” same set-up? Even if not, I would like to get some input from others before I make any definitive plans to buy.

Thank you for any feedback.

 

Why not get a 15inch MBP and an external monitor?

 

if you get .Mac can't you sync all of your macs? that way dealing with the two computers will be pretty easy, since any change you make to one computer carries over to another... i think. Can anyone clarify?

 

cycloneguy2618,

You make a very valid and logical point. Somehow I have been too set in my thoughts on the 17” being one of the options that I forgot to think of the 15” MBP! Douh!! !!


oinkcluckmoobahh,

I have no idea what .Mac is! I haven’t used a Mac for years and years, so I have no clue about .Mac, how it works, and / or how suitable it is; but thank you for the suggestion.

 

.Mac is like a package of features provided for a fee by Apple. Most of it is internet based, it gives you a .Mac account which is used for publishing websites, email, stuff like that. But in addition, it also gives you stuff like backing up your hard drive and syncing between multiple mac machines. You can find more information here:

http://www.apple.com/dotmac/

It's all internet related stuff, but I think in your case since you said syncing the machines would be your biggest drawback, you should consider .Mac and see if this will make the difference.

 

.Mac is actually pretty neat since it's so integrated. However, I think you can only get 1 gig of storage space.

But that is a tough decision. I didn't have enough money to go the MB / desktop route, so I went with the MBP.
I sa 15" MBP and 30" cinema display! :-D

 

I would go for both a 20" iMac and a Macbook, no doubt. You get the best of both worlds. Beside, the macbook does run Aperture, even if its resolution is not officially supported.

But indeed the most cost-effective solution is a 15" MBP and an external monitor. Just make sure the 15" Macbook is enough considering your graphics needs (that is why I would opt for iMac+ macbook, if I had the money). A 17" MBP needs some pretty solid reasons to justify its price, methinks.

 

I believe it is officially supported as of Aperture 1.5. I am pretty sure they added the MacBook and Mini to the list.

 

Confirmed, you are correct it does indeed add support for mini and Macbooks now. Thats nice to see, I would assume it had mostly to do with computing power then screen resolution back at the time.

 

I bought a "desktop replacement" (back on PC) before and I never ended up using it the way it should be used. So I've learned my lesson and gone for smaller/portable/bedfriendly systems and am very happy. I have a real desktop for when i need to do anything major (which is almost never) and now the Macbook for internet/email/photos/music etc.

Nowadays with CoreDuo then these laptops are so powerful that its easy to go overboard and get "pro" or high end systems that you'll never take advantage of.

 

I would go with choice B. That is what I am doing and you won't regret it at all.

 

One question, do you need the power of the MBP when you're going mobile?
If not, then really, then option a is really much better.

 

Thank you all for the replies and help. I must say that I still can’t get over the shock of having discounted the option of the 15” MBP until it was suggested to me here. Shows how one’s mind can be narrow when a specific thought is set!


hollownail,

In general I don’t need the processing power of the MBP when away from desk, but I have been away from my desk for a good while in the past and I did want to have more power than my current notebook / tablet offers.

I would say that 90% of the time I am away from my desk I don’t need that much processing power, the MB would be more than sufficient, but as I have briefly mentioned, I do suffer a serious ailment which keeps me bed-bound for days / weeks / months. It is these 10% that makes me hate using a weak machine, and hence why I would much love the 17” MBP.

It does seem that my mind has been set – thanks to the replies I got here – and I most likely will go with the MBP 15” along with a 23” external monitor. This does seem like the best option for me – and one that is more economical and practical.

So, again, thank you all for your feedbacks; and if there are any other suggestions please do keep them coming.

 

I would get the macbook n imac, so u hav 2 things to be proud of.

 

Well, to tell you the truth, the main difference between teh MB and MBP is just the video card. I think the MB video card is good enough for anything but modern games. So if you like to play some older games, or simple games, then the MB should be for you.
More and more of what you say makes me think the MB and imac would be better.

 

supposing you had a bt keyboard and something to put it on alongside the mouse... couldn't you use an iMac while in bed? looks feasible to me.