<p>What do you recommend for undergraduate and McIntire use?</p>
<p>If you were going to VTech, buying a Macbook would be acceptable. You’re going to be a first year at UVa. Your snobby peers will think you’re a peasant if you don’t have a MacBook Pro.</p>
<p>^I laughed.</p>
<p>Lol, good post wahoomb. I find the “peasant” term used so freely (especially on collegeacb) pretty funny.</p>
<p>Lol wahoomb, I just saw this same question on FB for class of 2015 page and a few people are getting PC’s. I’m just going to go pro… I mean why not.</p>
<p>Yay, for once I’m not getting crucified at an obvious joke!</p>
<p>I think I’m just going to go Macbook Pro and install Windows 7 (I hear UVA sells it for 10-15 dollars). Have the best of both worlds.</p>
<p>It’s ironic because I’ve been anti-Mac for the past 4 years haha.</p>
<p>As have I plue.</p>
<p>If you really want to go Mac, then I’d go with the Macbook Pro. It’s more powerful, better built, and higher quality all-around than the normal Macbook.</p>
<p>That said, a Mac may cost a grand more than the comparable PC–especially if you want to do any sort of upgrades (e.g. Apple’s RAM prices are ridiculous). It all depends on your needs and what you’re looking for.</p>
<p>At first I suggested the MB, which is a fine machine. But to get you through four years, you may want to go with the MBP. Apple isn’t refreshing the MB on par with the MBP, so they may shift to a MBP-only route. The current cycle has top Intel cores (i5 or i7), Thunderbolt, and dedicated graphics card. You don’t necessarily need all of that, most people don’t unless you’re SEAS or ARCH. However, during your four years, new OSes and other software may be released and may not run on dated systems. While the MB wouldn’t be dated within 4 years, you’re going to be on the very low end of processing power.</p>
<p>I think the MBP is overkill for 75% of users, but I do have to suggest it in terms of the differences of hardware between the MB and MBP. When I started college, both had the same processing powers but had the graphics card/firewire difference. Now, the difference between the two is quite significant. Just FYI, most people get a new computer after graduation since by then your warranty is toast and computers will most likely have made significant strides by then.</p>
<p>ymon: Apple builds all quality stuff. I don’t get your comment about “better built and higher-quality all-around”. Both are very fine machines, it’s just what you want to do with them that makes a difference.</p>
<p>Disclaimer: I was '10 SEAS - EE. I know a bit about computers more than “ooh it’s pretty”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Because the Macbook Pro is higher-quality. The Pro model uses nicer and more sturdy materials (aluminum), you have an option for a larger and higher-resolution screen, there are faster (Thunderbolt) data ports, not to mention the internals of the system like a larger HDD and a discrete graphics card. I mean, is there anywhere that you would say the Macbook is higher quality than the Pro model? I’m not trying to get the impression that the normal Macbook is somehow low quality, but the Pro model is assuredly higher quality, and I think it’s the Mac that someone should go with since they’re going to be spending four years with it.</p>
<p>Heh, I’ve seen a few very dented MBPs. They just look sad.</p>
<p>I think in terms of hardware, like you mentioned, it is “better”. But saying something is “better” in the computer world doesn’t mean a whole lot, there’s always something faster and more complex coming out. I think if you need the power and gadgets of the MBP, go for it. But no one actually needs all that stuff, it’s just nice being on the forefront of technology since you’ll have it for four years.</p>
<p>As for quality, again, anything Apple puts out will work, and if it doesn’t, a nice warranty backs it. The level of superiority belongs to the guts of the computer.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t see that as a convincing argument. If you do buy the less powerful equipment, you’ll be even more behind the curve–you’re probably going to end up using this computer for four years. Moreover, by your reasoning it would be best to settle for a $300 netbook since you’re going to be behind the curve anyways.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I mean you can’t really guess how someone is going to use their machine in a period of four years. The features of the Pro model are really ideal if you’re going to be doing any sort of gaming, video editing, graphic design work, etc. The extra power is very useful if you’re going to be using a CAD program or MATLAB. The larger screen is helpful to programmers who often juggling several windows at once. The extra features are hardly things that no one needs.</p>
<p>The original poster said they’re CLAS/McIntire. 90% of those students will never use anything more than the larger screen. Had they been SEAS, digital art, or something along those lines, MBP would’ve won. (The MBP still wins in my book because it’ll be a great piece of technology for not only college, but will last years after, albeit any accidents) Actually, I would say go desktop and get the MB if you can afford the combo, but no college kid should have that much power with so much beer around. </p>
<p>My point wasn’t that the MB is on-par with the MBP. I just think saying the computer isn’t top-quality isn’t valid. It’ll check your email, play your DVDs, write a paper for you, feed itself, and hum along nicely. College kids don’t need much more than that. I didn’t get the top-of-the-line computer entering college and did just fine until I no longer needed/used the tablet. Being “behind the curve” in today’s computer world doesn’t mean a whole lot, that was my point. Apple’s OS/hardware combos are seamless. I could’ve gotten the MacPro with an octo-core, but what the heck would I ever use it for? A quad core does everything, even my occasional video rendering. Processing power is slowly reaching a plateau, and will continue, until new materials replace silicon and silicon mixes. The only big break throughs now are a reduction in size/heat loss/power consumption, although those are pretty major. In terms of computing power, we’re not gaining a whole in terms of a single processor. Instead, stacking cores (duel, quad, octo) and then writing code to take advantage of threading (dividing up tasks amongst cores, then running simultaneously) is the way to go. Sadly, software isn’t keeping up, look at Adobe…</p>
<p>I restate my view that no technology built by Apple isn’t top-quality. What a specific user needs is how they should rank the products…</p>
<p>I’ll make an argument for the MB.</p>
<p>I got one of the first updated MacBooks in '07 (14" Black)…It lasted me through 1.5 years at UVA (CLAS), 2 years of employment, and now a year of Grad School. Aside from having to replace the battery this past fall, and upgrading from 1gb to 2gb of RAM, it still continues to do well. Yes, it is more sluggish than when I first purchased it, but it more than adequately gets the job done more than 4 years later.</p>
<p>And honestly, regarding screen size…if you are going to be doing any serious multi-window work, you’re better off with a desktop. I’m working on very in-depth projects requiring multiple Excel spreadsheets and SPSS data software and it’s a nightmare on anything less than my 21.5" iMac screen. ;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I mean, if it’s not on-par with the MBP, I don’t see how they can both be the same quality. They’re both high-quality machines, but the Pro model edges the normal MB for reasons I mentioned before.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You never know what kind of things people might get into. Even if someone never uses the capabilities of the Pro model for their courses, it may end up being useful for any extracurricular activities that they might pick up along the way. Maybe someone gets involved in one of the several music, film, or theater groups around campus where the extra power of the Pro model would come in really handy. Not to mention if someone wants to do any PC gaming. I mean, even you admitted that “during your four years, new OSes and other software may be released and may not run on dated systems”.</p>
<p>I agree that a desktop tends to be the way to go–with a cheap companion laptop. That said, if you have to have a Mac, go with the Pro model. If you don’t have to have a Mac, there are plenty of cheaper high-quality alternatives. If all you want to do is check email, write papers, play DVDs, etc. why get a Mac in the first place (unless you really like OSX).</p>
<p>if you’re going to blow $1000+ on a computer get a kickass PC instead of an overpriced Apple computer</p>