[Maos]

hey everyone, i've been planning to get a macbook for a while now. so today i saw an offer for a 1.83ghz Macbook pro going for $1400. is this a good deal? i mean it's cheaper than the current pro models by alot, but is it still worth buying now that the normal macbooks are at 2ghz? the faster vga and larger screen makes the macbook pro seem awfully tasty.
so i guess what's holding me back right now is how the MBP and the MB compare in terms of battery life and portability.
any recommendations?

[solarmoo900]

well, youve defiantly got more portability with the macbook (smaller screen) but i guess it mostly depends on your taste. with the extra hundred that you have between the macbook pro and the white 2gz macbook you can upgrade your ram and make your computer run faster
if you really want a small computer, then you should go for the macbook, if your looking for more power, then the pro is proly for u

[Maos]

im actually new to the whole apple thing. this upcoming computer will be my first mac.
anyways im thinking i'll either go with the 2ghz white or the black instead of the macbook pro. i dont think the extra video features will really be of much use to be because i dont play games. plus i'd rather have the extra battery life. but is the macbook's gma950 on par with the basic lowend mobility radeon? and will the gma950 be good with future versions of mac os? i'm planning to buy something that will last me for the next 3-4 years...

[solarmoo900]

yes, the macbooks will be compatible with leopard and most likely the next few version

[Maos]

okay that's cool. thanks for the info. i guess im going with the macbook.
anything else ie. stuff that i should do to make my mac experience as good as possible?

[rickbsgu]

Just posted this question on another board.
Actually, the 1.83ghz MacBook 13" goes for $1099 in most venues, including the Apple store & is probably equivalent.
You probably won't notice much difference in performance (vs. 2.0ghz), but the 2.0ghz MacBook 13" has the SuperDrive (=DVD Burner), where the 1.83 does not.
Enough of a difference to sway me to the 2.0ghz, for sure.
rickb

[solarmoo900]

well, if you plan on doing anything that may require nice graphics, or just want your computer to feel like its flying, you may want to upgrade your ram. just upgraded the standered ram up to 2x1GB and it is awesomly fast, even have windows running on the backround on parallels and dont notice a speed difference

[Maos]

yea i've already got 2x1gb in mind.
how's the battery life of the macbook in your experience?

[solarmoo900]

its been incredible. a good 2:30-3 hours everytime. thats with always running
-Mail
-iChat
-Camino
-iTunes
-Parallels
and sometimes running
-hardwood euchre /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
-desktop manager
-big bang mancala
-unreal tournament
quite a nice battery imo for powering technically 2 os's

[Maos]

sounds great especially under what would be considered very heavy usage.
thanks for the info. can't wait to get one. /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[Brammy]

I'm in the same connundrum (the 1.8 Macbook v. the 2.0 Macbook--I know that's slightly differen than the OP). I'm deciding to forgo spending the $200 on the Superdrive, and instead upgrade the ram on the 1.83. I don't burn enough DVDs, and with the 4x DVD drive, it may do it too slow a rate for me to have much patience. I'd mostly be using it for data backups, so I was thinking of getting a firewire drive to do that.

[Maos]

hey guys... i thought i had it all settled but after i saw the macbook's core imaging benchmarks im a bit worried.
apparently the gma950 is absolutely crap at rendering core images... 46 seconds in the barefeats.com review vs the 12 and 16 seconds of other macs.
link here on that http://www.barefeats.com/mbcd3.html
im new to this whole mac thing so my question is: is core imaging something that i should really care about? will it effect the, (lack for a better word) up-to-date-ness of the macbook im planning to buy?

[RichL]

Hi:
I just ordered a Black MacBook.
If you read some of the other posts on this board around the integrated graphics you'll find that it works very well except for hard core gaming.
If you want to do that, then the MBP is the only way to go.
RichL

[Maos]

i wont be playing games.
but can you guys enlighten me on what core imaging will be applied to?
im just afraid that it will be some sort of 'big new thing' in the future and i need my investment in a macbook to last...