[tears2040]

My Macbook Pro runs flawless, a late 2007 model. 2.2 Ghz 4 Gbs ram and a future hard drive upgrade to 320 gb 7200 rpm.

While today on the Apple Refurbished site I seen this
http://store.apple.com/us/product/FB...mco=MjE0NjA3MA

It looks simply beautiful. A couple of years ago when I bought my MAC I was always traveling so a laptop made sense, now a days I strictly work at home doing professional music so my laptop never moves, unless I just want to take it to the bed or the crapper.

I think the 24" screen would be godly and having a faster computer might be worth it, opinions please? I might sell my Macbook Pro or give it to the wife but I am seriously considering on getting this IMAC


peace

[tears2040]

I'm not sure if this is a 2008 or 2009 IMAC, feedback is welcomed

[CharlesS]

Hell no. The iMac is basically just a laptop with no battery. Why not keep your MBP, and have a laptop that's actually portable rather than one that isn't?

Just get a good external 24" screen and hook it up to the MBP. You get:

- a nice big screen

- the ability to have your laptop's internal screen as a second monitor, giving you a dual-monitor setup

- the ability to disconnect your MBP from the screen and take it places

- other perks that come with most external monitors these days, such as a USB hub and probably a card reader too (if you're the sort of person who actually uses those).

I'm using a MBP with an external 24" monitor right now, and it's great.

[tears2040]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

Hell no. The iMac is basically just a laptop with no battery. Why not keep your MBP, and have a laptop that's actually portable rather than one that isn't?

Just get a good external 24" screen and hook it up to the MBP. You get:

- a nice big screen

- the ability to have your laptop's internal screen as a second monitor, giving you a dual-monitor setup

- the ability to disconnect your MBP from the screen and take it places

- other perks that come with most external monitors these days, such as a USB hub and probably a card reader too (if you're the sort of person who actually uses those).

I'm using a MBP with an external 24" monitor right now, and it's great.

Scratches head, ok here's my take.



Let's start from the top

2.8 ghz processor vs 2.2ghz = Imac wins
320 gb 7200 rpm drive vs 120 gb 5400 rpm drive = Imac wins
24" screen vs 15.4" screen = Imac wins
Memory = Equal, both of these machines can only be upgraded to 4gbs & use DDRII ram
USb & Firewire connections = Imac wins has it has 3 USb where MBP only has two, firewire is equal
Graphics cards, they both suck but the Imacs is better
Macbook pro has an Express Card slot that can be used for a whole bunch of things.



Honestly my main factor here is speed, since I cannot obviously upgrade my MBP cpu this IMAC would give me a big boost, going from 2.2 to 2.8. I could care less about anything else.

All I do is surf the net for info and use professional music applications like Logic and Pro Tools which run better on ram and cpu. Since the ram is the same I would get a boost with the Imac due to a faster CPu.

I have no idea why people bad mouth Imacs, I bought my MBP in November 2007 brand new & I have been using it till this date ( 1 year 8 months ) I just bought a hard drive for my MBP and a new 24" inch screen, but the cpu is what's bothering me & why I feel like upgrading to the IMAC.


Thoughs?

[Simon]

Charles is right. The iMac is a non-portable MBP with a big screen.

If you want a big screen buy a cheap 24" and attach it to the MBP.
If you want more speed, buy a new MBP with a faster CPU.
If you want a faster/bigger disk, buy a new disk and install it in the MBP.

If you need the kind of speed or performance the MBP can't give you, you need a MP, not an iMac.

[tears2040]

Originally Posted by Simon 

Charles is right. The iMac is a non-portable MBP with a big screen.

If you want a big screen buy a cheap 24" and attach it to the MBP.
If you want more speed, buy a new MBP with a faster CPU.
If you want a faster/bigger disk, buy a new disk and install it in the MBP.

If you need the kind of speed or performance the MBP can't give you, you need a MP, not an iMac.

This makes no sense......

A refurbished MBP would cost me about $1699, several hundred dollars more than this IMAC. Now that is a 2.66 GHZ processor but it has GDDR3 ram so it might be faster?




I am comparing a 2007 MBP to a 2008/2009 IMAC, in 1 or 2 categories does the MAcbook Pro beat the IMac, but in the most important it doesn't.


The most important thing in a computer is the Processor, the Imac has a faster processor than my MBP, it has a better graphics card, better hard drive, so how in the world is the MBP a better computer?

[OreoCookie]

The iMac has a faster processor mainly because it is newer. So if you need a faster processor and you don't have the money to get a MacBook Pro, then getting an iMac is the way to go.

However, since the iMac uses lots of mobile components (it can user cpus with higher clockspeeds as its cooling system can cope with more heat and uses 3.5" desktop harddrives), it is in many ways comparable to a MacBook Pro. However, you can upgrade a lot of things: you can replace the small harddrive with a 500 GB model and get an external screen.

[tears2040]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

The iMac has a faster processor mainly because it is newer. So if you need a faster processor and you don't have the money to get a MacBook Pro, then getting an iMac is the way to go.

However, since the iMac uses lots of mobile components (it can user cpus with higher clockspeeds as its cooling system can cope with more heat and uses 3.5" desktop harddrives), it is in many ways comparable to a MacBook Pro. However, you can upgrade a lot of things: you can replace the small harddrive with a 500 GB model and get an external screen.

I am fully aware that the main reason the Imac is better in the processor department is because it is newer, I am also aware that this Imac can go up to GDRRII 4gb Ram as opposed to the newer GDRRIII IMACS which support up to 8gbs.

Now what I didn't know is that the Imacs use 3.5" drives instead of the MPB 2.5" , what this means to me now is that the IMAC is the clear winner as 3.5 drives are not only bigger,faster, but cheaper.

The largest 2.5" drive is 500gb 16 Mb Cache which cost about $120.00 , I can put a 3.5" 640gb 32 Mb Cache into this Imac for at least $50 less!

This topic is getting very interesting now.......

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16822136319
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YsCTNVEYt8

ps. I have read that people have successfully put 1TB Hard Drives into their Imacs, that would be great! & to think about me putting another 24 inch monitor along this one would be king!

[ajprice]

I'm with the others, get a 24" screen and plug your MBP into it.

I'm not sure I understand your hard drive comparison argument, in the first post you're saying you will give your MBP a hard drive upgrade in the future. You might be able to get a 3.5" drive for $50 less, but you're still going to have to buy the iMac to put it in, so you're not really saving there at all. If you're looking at refurbs because money is tight, a 24" screen and a big hard drive will be a very nice upgrade now, then further on you can get a better spec Mac, there's always new things around the corner, some things we know about like OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard, some others are hope/guesses/rumours (quad processor laptops/iMacs), and you can keep the screen and drive to use with your next Mac.

My own setup is a white MacBook, a Dell 2407 24" screen, and a 1TB external drive. I've just got a new bigger desk and can now run it as a dual screen, so the 24" is my main screen and email/MSN is on the laptop screen, it works really well.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by tears2040 

2.8 ghz processor vs 2.2ghz = Imac wins

Probably the only category, too.

320 gb 7200 rpm drive vs 120 gb 5400 rpm drive = Imac wins

You don't mention what model MBP you have. If it's a unibody, the hard drive is going to be much easier to replace than the one in the iMac. Even if it's not a unibody, it's still probably easier on the MBP, because replacing the hard drive on the iMac is a real pain in the ass.

24" screen vs 15.4" screen = Imac wins

24" screen vs. dual 15.4" + 24" setup = MBP wins, by a mile.

USb & Firewire connections = Imac wins has it has 3 USb where MBP only has two, firewire is equal

The external 24" display you get will probably have a USB hub integrated into it. Plus, you have ExpressCard on the MBP, so you can upgrade to USB 3.0 or FireWire 3200 when they come out. Winner = MBP.

Macbook pro has an Express Card slot that can be used for a whole bunch of things.

Yes, the MBP is a real computer whereas the iMac is a toy.

And lastly, you forgot a really big one:

Portability.

I can't tell you how many times I wished I could take my computer somewhere when I was stuck with that iMac I used to have. If you get rid of the MBP for an iMac, I promise you will miss it.

[tears2040]

http://www.applepalace.com/apple-mac...-ma895ll-a.asp


This is the MBP I have ............

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

Yes, the MBP is a real computer whereas the iMac is a toy.
.

WTF ?

-t

[OreoCookie]

I wouldn't call the iMac a toy. It has a lot more cpu horsepower than 2-core G5s. And since the innards are intimately related to mobile Macs, there are very few reasons why you can call the iMac a `consumer machine' and the ProBook a `pro machine.' (The PCI Express slot would be the only one that spontaneously springs to mind as not all ProBooks have a discrete graphics card. But then, the same is true for iMacs.)

The OP seems set on replacing his ProBook, because he wants (needs?) a faster CPU. If that's so -- and he's sure, he doesn't need portability for the foreseeable future --, I don't quite understand the vigorous opposition to his plan.

Personally, I am not sure whether he needs to spend money on upgrading the whole computer now (I'd probably upgrade my ProBook and get an external screen as well) and he'd be better off using his computer for another year or so until Apple ships quad core iMacs.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

WTF ?

-t

Expandability makes the (pre-SD card) MBP a much more serious and more useful machine than most of the rest of what Apple makes. The iMac only works if you don't need to do anything that Steve Jobs didn't anticipate. For versatility it's not even in the same league.

Heck, you can't even replace the hard drive as easily on an iMac as you can with a laptop.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

Expandability makes the (pre-SD card) MBP a much more serious and more useful machine than most of the rest of what Apple makes. The iMac only works if you don't need to do anything that Steve Jobs didn't anticipate. For versatility it's not even in the same league.

Heck, you can't even replace the hard drive as easily on an iMac as you can with a laptop.

I agree with that, but all that doesn't make it a toy for me, just a consumer machine.

-t

[CharlesS]

All consumer machines save netbooks have some sort of expandability, except for Apple's. Even a $380 Dell Inspiron laptop has an ExpressCard/34 slot in it. You can't tell me that they couldn't have found somewhere to put an EC slot on the iMac. Leaving it out isn't "consumer", it's just a middle finger to the customers.

Combine the fact that no expansion means you have to throw away the machine whenever your needs change even a bit, the expensive built-in screen that you have to throw away with the rest of the computer once that happens, the impossible-to-access internals, the use of laptop parts in a "desktop" machine, and the bizarre obsession with thinness in a "desktop" machine, and I just don't get the iMac. If you're buying a laptop, get a portable one!

[tears2040]

Ok would the Imac 2.8 be faster than the 2.2 MBP?

I'm sure in real world benchmarks it is, but in real life applications would I notice the difference?


I agree with the MOD here that maybe I should hold onto my MPB for another year & than upgrade to a new MPB or IMAC that has a quad core processor in the future. I just feel kind of down because my Machine is about a year and a half old & I don't want to feel like I'm using outdate hardware.

I seen that I can still easily get about $1000+ for this laptop if I were to sell it, so I thought how cool it would be to get a newer 2008 Imac and replace my 2007 laptop. It seems now though that maybe a 2.8 vs 2.2 is really not that much faster & the express card slot on my MBP really means a lot for future upgrade.


Also it's a shame that the new 15" MBP does not come with firewire 400 or express card slots...... WTH is happening here, it's like the older MBP were built better.........

[abbaZaba]

Originally Posted by tears2040 

I am fully aware that the main reason the Imac is better in the processor department is because it is newer, I am also aware that this Imac can go up to GDRRII 4gb Ram as opposed to the newer GDRRIII IMACS which support up to 8gbs.

Now what I didn't know is that the Imacs use 3.5" drives instead of the MPB 2.5" , what this means to me now is that the IMAC is the clear winner as 3.5 drives are not only bigger,faster, but cheaper.

The largest 2.5" drive is 500gb 16 Mb Cache which cost about $120.00 , I can put a 3.5" 640gb 32 Mb Cache into this Imac for at least $50 less!

This topic is getting very interesting now.......

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16822136319
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YsCTNVEYt8

ps. I have read that people have successfully put 1TB Hard Drives into their Imacs, that would be great! & to think about me putting another 24 inch monitor along this one would be king!

I don't know why you asked this question in the first place. you obviously have decided that the extra 0.6GHz, harder to upgrade parts, and immobility of the iMac is more appealing than maybe spending a fraction of the cost of an iMac on a bigger 2nd screen and maybe getting a 1TB external drive, since you seem to want space.

go ahead and spend the extra on the iMac and send me your macbook pro. I promise I will appreciate it more than you.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by tears2040 

Ok would the Imac 2.8 be faster than the 2.2 MBP?

I'm sure in real world benchmarks it is, but in real life applications would I notice the difference?

I wouldn't. I don't know if you would or not. For me, GHz is hardly an issue anymore.

I agree with the MOD here that maybe I should hold onto my MPB for another year & than upgrade to a new MPB or IMAC that has a quad core processor in the future. I just feel kind of down because my Machine is about a year and a half old & I don't want to feel like I'm using outdate hardware.

A year and a half isn't that old. I once kept a G4 tower for 5 years before I finally replaced it. Of course, that was because it was expandable, and I was able to add things to it to keep it useful longer.

It seems now though that maybe a 2.8 vs 2.2 is really not that much faster & the express card slot on my MBP really means a lot for future upgrade.

That would be my thinking.

Also it's a shame that the new 15" MBP does not come with firewire 400 or express card slots...... WTH is happening here, it's like the older MBP were built better.........

I agree, I like the late 2008 unibody better than the current one. However, I can't imagine it staying this way for long. Apple will be forced to put the ExpressCard slot back, just like they had to put FireWire back on the 13" model. Their pro users will demand it. Just wait a year or so, it'll be all right.

As for FireWire 400, that's a non-issue. You've got a FireWire 800 port, which is far better, and which can connect to anything that FW400 can connect to.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by tears2040 

I'm sure in real world benchmarks it is, but in real life applications would I notice the difference?

Since you haven't mentioned any special apps, the answer is probably `no.' You can `feel' a difference if the measured difference exceeds 30 % (unless you're doing special, repetitive things).

Originally Posted by tears2040 

I agree with the MOD here that maybe I should hold onto my MPB for another year & than upgrade to a new MPB or IMAC that has a quad core processor in the future. I just feel kind of down because my Machine is about a year and a half old & I don't want to feel like I'm using outdate hardware.

Your machine is `outdated' the moment a new generation comes out -- which is once every ~250 days (more than once a year!). Forget about this feeling of being outdated. Start buying a new computer when you need to (unless money is not an issue and you can afford it). I'll probably have to get a new machine next April, because my employer owns my current first-gen ProBook. If it weren't for that, I would not update, there'd objectively be no need to (although I do lust for a 13" ProBook ).

Originally Posted by tears2040 

Also it's a shame that the new 15" MBP does not come with firewire 400 or express card slots...... WTH is happening here, it's like the older MBP were built better.........

The new ProBook has a FireWire 800 connector which is downwards compatible with FireWire 400. All you need is a cheap $3 cable (which is often included with hardware).

[Simon]

Originally Posted by abbaZaba 

I don't know why you asked this question in the first place.

It's been happening a lot lately. Some noob pops up, dumps a whole bunch of specs in a thread and asks for an expert opinion on A vs. B because A is what he wants to do. He is then told to go with B because A doesn't make any sense. After one or two pages of nitpicking he concludes he'll go with A. And we're left with another useless thread. Why ask for advice if you're already hell-bent on having it another way?

[tears2040]

Originally Posted by Simon 

It's been happening a lot lately. Some noob pops up, dumps a whole bunch of specs in a thread and asks for an expert opinion on A vs. B because A is what he wants to do. He is then told to go with B because A doesn't make any sense. After one or two pages of nitpicking he concludes he'll go with A. And we're left with another useless thread. Why ask for advice if you're already hell-bent on having it another way?

Noob? Because I do not post on these forums ...... I wonder if all people named "Simon" were born with a stick up where the sun don't shine.....

& to your complete inaccurate thought about me I decided to stay with my MBP instead of getting the Imac. Initially I thought the 2.8 would be a huge difference, but the portability of my MBP & express card is the reason I'm deciding to hold out a little longer.

Also my NEW monitor just came in today a 24" ASUS and I have a new Hard drive coming for my internal MBP later this week.

If just one person found some insight and light in this thread than it makes a WORLD of difference. The IMAC is a good computer but the MBP has portability which for now won this war. The IMAC though has a faster cpu, graphics card, & can be upgraded to a higher faster hard drive. They are both great cpus and no real clear winner, for now though I just added a 24" screen to my MBP & I'm going to enjoy life.


People need to relax ......

peace

[Simon]

Originally Posted by tears2040 

I wonder if all people named "Simon" were born with a stick up where the sun don't shine.....

People need to relax ......

Heh. Nice try.

[ajprice]

iMac, not IMAC .

[richwig83]

It sounds like you made you mind up before posting... :/

[tears2040]

Originally Posted by richwig83 

It sounds like you made you mind up before posting... :/

It seems you have nothing to contribute to this thread.

[richwig83]

Originally Posted by tears2040 

It seems you have nothing to contribute to this thread.

Neither do you... and you posted the question! Your asking a question which you have already in your mind made the decision on, or thats the way it seems!

FWIW... i think keeping the laptop would be what i would do!

[DarkVader]

The iMac is the much better choice if you don't need the portability.

While the MBP is a good machine, for the money the iMac is significantly faster (and yes, you WILL notice the difference), has a larger and FAR more reliable hard drive, has a better cooling system that will likely keep it running years longer than the MBP, and did anybody mention screen size? Those of you arguing for an external monitor and a MBP are forgetting something - the iMac can use an external monitor too. You get a lot more screen real estate on 2 24" screens than on a 15" and a 24". The 3.5" hard drive can be upgraded to a 2TB drive, the MBP is stuck at 500GB max right now. If you don't want to use the laptop keyboard (or you might want to use a numeric keypad - lots of people do) while at your desk, you'll need an external keyboard and mouse for the MBP, and you'll probably want a stand. That'll make it take up quite a bit more desk space than the iMac.

If you don't need the portability, a desktop is virtually always a better choice. A laptop as a desktop is a compromise machine, for people who need to move their desktops frequently.

[Big Mac]

Good points, but an AIO desktop is a compromise machine compared to a tower or other non-AIO desktop, so it's relative.
Also, it's a lot easier to change out the drive in an MBP than it is in an iMac, right?

[CharlesS]

It's almost impossible to change the drive in an iMac. It's also somewhat hazardous, as apparently it's very easy to drop that glass cover and cause it to shatter while removing it from the screen.

[Greenrobotics]

Buy the 24 inch LED that Apple makes or the 28 inch Samsung to hang off you MacBook Pro.
You will have the benefit of the iMac display and the continued portability and
no migration of software (a large advantage in time)
Regards,
Harry

[CharlesS]

The 24" LED that Apple makes won't work with an older MacBook Pro that doesn't have Mini-DisplayPort. However, the HP LP2475w and Dell 2408wfp are both pretty good displays.

[MuttleyMac]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

It has a lot more cpu horsepower than 2-core G5s.

My old dual 1.8 G5 beats my imac 2.4 core 2 duo ripping a movie or encoding to burn hands down. Thats not always true in my opinion

[DarkVader]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

It's almost impossible to change the drive in an iMac. It's also somewhat hazardous, as apparently it's very easy to drop that glass cover and cause it to shatter while removing it from the screen.

Well, I suppose it's easy to shatter if you're prone to things like dropping and breaking dishes in your kitchen - but no more hazardous than that.

Properly removed, it's just a flat glass panel. It's fairly tough (somewhat less tough than a glass trivet or cutting board, but much tougher than a windowpane) and lightweight.

The LCD removal is a bit more of a pain, but it's not that bad if you're careful. Once you've got that out, the hard drive is easy.

And, an external drive is less of a problem with a desktop than a laptop. Since the computer doesn't move, it's far less likely that someone will unplug the drive without properly unmounting it first.

[CharlesS]

An external drive isn't as fast as an internal drive (unless you have eSATA, but we all know that the iMac doesn't have this and there's no way to add it because of the lack of expansion). And sometimes the internal drive fails and needs to be replaced. Not being able to get at the drive without major hassles is a definite downside.