Why wouldn't you get a fully-loaded MBP?

[klb028]

After looking at what a "fully-loaded" or "top-of-the-line" MBP comes out to be on apple.com (3 GB of RAM, 2.33 GHz processor, 200 GB of HD space and about $3,000), I began wondering how many people choose these options and how many people don't find much sense in it at all. I'm very curious as to see why you might find getting your MBP fully-loaded as a waste of money (if that was the case), a good investment, etc. This has no intentions on being a negative thread at all, so please keep that in mind. I'd love nothing but positive, helpful and supportive replies!

The idea of the thread also came from having several different people I know offline give me several different answers. One friend claim it wasn't worth the money, the other said he didn't need it all, and the last one said he didn't have enough money at the time. Are any of these the case for any of you? Please elaborate as much as possible if you can.

If not, what else?

 

[0007776]

I wouldn't get one just since if I was going to spend that much on a computer I would get a Mac Pro instead as I see that as more value for the money. Another reason is if you just don't need all of the power, why waste your money.

 

[siurpeeman]

the increase from 2gb to 3gb in ram doesn't justify the cost of the upgrade. not for me anyhow. as for the 200gb hard drive, the lower rpm is enough of a reason not to. so the only real question for me would be whether the 256mb graphics card justifies the extra cost over the 128mb. being that i'm not a hardcore gamer, it doesn't.

 

[aneks]

Not every region is as cheap as the US. I just bought a 2.3ghz C2d and stuck with 2gb ram and a 160gb drive, ram because its too expensive and drive because of the RPM. I already have a mac pro to do my serious heavy lifting !

 

[cLin]

3 gigs of ram? Do core duos support this or only C2D?

 

[phantasmagoria]

Just the C2D. The Core Duo only supports 2gb.

 

[schmintan]

i got a MBP 2.33, 2gb ram, 120gb hd and 256 ATI Graphics on the refurbished program. couldnt afford it only for that. was going to buy a 2.16 model, but the higher spec was actually cheaper on the refurb program. its the most i ever spent on a laptop, and i thought i was crazy spending 1700 euros on a laptop 4.5 years ago! was well worth it though, as that old laptop lasted me 4.5 years, and still runs xp perfectly and is going to my girlfriend. i expect the new macbook pro to give me at least 4 years good service, and hopefully 5. thats the reason i spend as much as possible on a laptop. it saves upgrading ever year or two.

 

[M@lew]

Some people want a Macbook Pro and can't afford to have it fully maxed out. That's probably why.

 

[djellison]

I think many people shy away from the over-the-top prices of the upgrades from a standard config, particularly HDD and Ram - both overly priced as options when you purchase, better to buy and fit yourself once you get the machine I would have thought.

Doug

 

[mattscott306]

I agree with siurpeeman on both his points. The upgrade for the 2 gig stick is a really high price for that. I use my MBP for some light editing (photoshop right now, FC after NAB), game playing, and general goofiness, and the 2 1 gig sticks that I have do just fine.

 

[student_trap]

as far as im concerned, mine is as upgraded as i could of hoped, i bought the upper model with 160 HD...didn't want the slower 200 gig HD, and i thought the upgrade from 2 to 3 gigs of ram was needlessly expensive!

 

[andiwm2003]

since money is limited i would spend the money i save on the MBP (that could easily be $1000 compared to the high end model) towards an external HD, a monitor or even an iMac. the combination iMac+refurb low end MBP gives you probably more bang for the buck than a high end MBP.

 

[TraceyS/FL]

I have a "stock" 17" - the upgrades on it I would have done to the 15". Hopefully in a year or so the 2gb chip will drop and I can have 3gb in it.

My Dad is buying a Mac Pro - so i'll have access to that power if I need it. If i had the room, i would have bought the 24" iMac, but i have to move my computer between rooms every day, so that didn't work.

Expensive, yes. I considered the iMac and an MacBook even - but I seriously have no place right now for the 24" and then there is that glossy screen...

 

[dreamfocused]

I bought the stock 17" MBP CD... the upgrade in memory is not within my budget and I can always buy cheaper RAM from a third party if I need more. I don't need such a big hard drive either. I'll be upgrading my RAM to 2GB (limit) pretty soon though as I see my computer is lagging a bit when I have a lot of apps running.

But buying it fully equiped to the max from Apple is a waste of $ as you can do it yourself and save some money.

 

[daze]

You should also think about whether you are the type of person who is likely to keep upgrading the computer later on, or would prefer (and can afford) to just replace it with a new one. If you're the latter kind, then spend as much as what you're likely going to need till the next upgrade cycle. Which is usually at least a year, or two...

 

[klb028]

3 gigs of ram? Do core duos support this or only C2D?

It's just the C2D.

Thanks for all of the detailed replies so far, guys! It looks like no one who has replied here has actually purchased a fully-loaded MBP. I'm going to take that into consideration.

Anymore input is greatly appreciated!

 

[QCassidy352]

the upgrade to 3 GB RAM is not worth it. 2 GB is quite enough for most of us, and even if it weren't, many would live with it at those prices.

 

[smueboy]

as far as im concerned, mine is as upgraded as i could of hoped, i bought the upper model with 160 HD...didn't want the slower 200 gig HD, and i thought the upgrade from 2 to 3 gigs of ram was needlessly expensive!

I agree, except i was quite taken by the 3GB RAM!

 

[shecky]

see my sig for my specs.

i did not get the 3GB b/c right now it is prohibitively expensive and in a year i can sell one of my 1GB sticks and get a new, 2GB stick for a third of what it costs now. while i do want the full RAM capacity i did not want to pay another 20% of the cost of the laptop just for an extra GB.

i did not get the 200GB HD as the slower speed worried me - i work with a lot of "linking" software (indesign, after effects) that link images to the main file - that means a lot of disk reading and that was where i wanted the faster drive.

i think that referring to the 200GB as maxed out vs. the 160GB is misleading; they are both maxed out in a different way - smaller but faster or bigger but slower.

ideally i would get a mac pro but the portability is a critical, must-have feature for me. i was considering going with a low-end macbook and a mid-range mac pro, but right now the single high-end macbook pro makes more sense (and ended up being cheaper.)

 

[shu82]

Top of the line products do hold up well. Well enough that I do like using maxed out products that are 2 years old. Apple hardware is very durable. I recommend getting a 1.67 G4 or so. It is fast enough to still wow your PC friends, and it looks just like the MBP. But you spend about 1/3 the price. It really feels good to buy a laptop that was taken for granted; repairing, cleaning and upgrading it. Then you sell it to a switcher cheap, and start all over. I started with a $100 broken ibook and have worked my way up to the 17" G4 in my sig. Not too much cash, just work and patience. You really learn to appreciate your hardware. And now 5 people around me are using macs, thanks to this hobby. The moral is, just get what you need. The secondary market for macs is a great place to start.

 

[klb028]

2 GB is more than enough for me, considering where I am coming from in my current computer situation. I only have 256 MB of RAM and a 900 MHz processor on my Gateway. I can imagine what ANYTHING more can do for me, whether it be incredibly drastic or not. Any change would blow me away. With that said, I also just feel like if I'm upgrading, I want to get the best and most that I can. Obviously, I don't go through computers or laptops every 2 years or so. My next machine will probably be with me 4-5 years. I've had had my current desktop for almost 6 1/2. What do you think?

 

[shu82]

In your situation, I would go with the used path. It will still blow you away. Just get something 1 or 2 years old and just upgrade every couple of years. When you get a new mac you just hook your firewire cable up to it and it will transfer all of your old files and settings over automatically. Just make sure to get something that runs leopard, 1ghz+ 1gb ram.

 

[klb028]

The used path is not something I'd like to pursue too much. A new computer is definitely something I'll be getting because I have the money for it and I haven't had one in a while.

 

[islandman]

I didn't see the point in getting 3GB of RAM (so I got 2GB). Even Photoshop and some other "heavy" apps won't fully utilize it. I also didn't like the 200GB HD because of the lower RPM (so I got the 160). I did go for the fastest processor, however.

 

[gmckenzi]

Given that the most important tool I use, for twelve hours every day, is my notebook, I'm always inclined to max out the specs.

If you make your living from your machine, you owe it to yourself to get the best configuration you can afford. I hate the feeling of my hardware or software getting in the way of doing my work successfully, and happily -- life is too short.

Before I switched to Macs, I used to always get my PC notebook configured to the max because I wanted to know that I could get three years out of it. Oddly, since I've gone Mac, I do find that I turn over my hardware more frequently, but that's mostly because of want rather than need, and because of the recent Intel switchover.

The 3Gb capability was an absolute must-have feature for me. I can run multiple VMWare systems at once and still do work in my Mac apps.