15 in Retina is a unit where you *can* replace the flash storage (according to some sources), but flash storage is still more expensive than HDD or SSD. Non-Retina 15 in is a unit where it is easy to access the HD/SSD to replace it.
It sounds like you regularly will exceed the internal storage of the unit, so non-Retina sounds like a better choice.
That's a pro point to the non-retina, and even more considering that I will have to create a partition for windows. And adding the 512Gb to the Retina is a 500€ extra.
If i go with the non-retina the specs will be like this:
- Intel Core i7 Quad-core 2,6 GHz, Turbo Boost 3,6 GHz
- 8 GB SDRAM DDR3 1600 MHz - 2 x 4 GB (probably upgrading after to 16Gb)
- 750 GB 7200 rpm
- Anti-glare screen
Would it be a machine that would last a couple years? And would it run smoothly Final Cut, After Effects and even games like Skyrim? Oh and the anti-glare screen is a detailed screen?
Sorry for asking so many questions but it involves a lot of money and I want to make a good choice!
Macs, by most accounts from those who game, are not prime gaming systems. They are designed to be general-use business systems. But I do not game so what do I know?
Paying Apple to upgrade to 16 GB will cost 3-4 times what you will pay from third-parties after purchase.
Disk size is your call, based on your projected disk usage.
Anti-glare is good, as is "hi-res" option (1680x1050). I have both in my 2011 15 in MBP.
Thank you once more!
I know that, but since I need to work with the specific software that I listed and I'm also a fan of games I'm trying to mix both worlds!
I will upgrade after buying it and only if I really feel the need to.
Theoretically if the Retina runs games like Skyrim (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zaw7bXiLRqg) so would the non-retina I described earlier right? Since the only difference is the flash storage (that I don't think will affect gaming, but I may be wrong) and the Retina screen, but please correct me if I'm wrong!
The Macbook Pro 15 with the specs I listed would last me for a couple years right?
I expect mine to outlast my needs, meaning that it will get too slow for heavy development needs before it will die completely. But that does not mean it is a failure because it will be too slow at some point, just that development needs will always out-pace "existing in-placehardware".
It should last at least 2 years, I would guess. Without having full knowledge of your actual use now or in the immediate future. 3 or more is possible.
If you're going to use FCP extensively then you should definately go for the biggest drive you can get, especially if you're filming and editing in HD. I personally would use an external drive as a scratch disk.
Also, if you're going to do a lot of editing in FCP or Photoshop then a retina screen would probably be advantageous but to appreciate the benefit you'd need to get retina compatible apps (FCP X & CS6 for example.)
Eventually all Macs will be retina, so that's something to bear in mind.
If you're only looking for a lifespan of two years then a 'standard' MBP that you've spec'd should be sufficient.
However, my first Macbook Pro (2007) lasted me for 5 years until I upgraded recently to a RMBP. I used it primarily for FCP, virtual machines, Photoshop and encoding. It was perfectly adequate and it was only a C2D processor with 4Gb memory and a 160Gb HDD. I stored everything, including backups on external HDDs. I only used the internal HDD for my apps and work in progress.
I fully expect my RMBP to last another 5 years. Hope this helps.
Good points from both steve359 and Vestan Pance. In addition I suggest investigating the Apple MBP refurbished section, specifically the 17" models. Though they may be a year behind, the performance parameters, they will be more than adequate and you can update the the RAM to 16 GB and put in a 1TB HDD (I saw a 1.5 TB HDD the other day) which should give sufficient storage. The large screen format would be beneficial for your requirements.
I have gone the refurbished route three time with no regrets.
But act fast ... 17 in is not manufactured anymore so any appearing can vanish within an hour.
A very highly sought after machine, in fact my 17" with 10.6 is two years old and used priced is going for what I paid for it.
Seems not many people like the non-user servicable Retina's, 10.7/10.8, nor the lack of the wonderously large 17" HD screen.
Apple really screwed up royally, likely why there has been heads rolling in Cupertino lately.
Well two years for an investment like this is not that many years.
The problem is that the 256GB of the Retina are really not enough and upgrading is too expensive. The solution had to be an external drive, but even that would not work due to the partition that I will have to create (I’m going to share it with a friend that works with Windows-exclusive software). The question is am I really going to need the resolution that the Retina offers? “Eventually all Macs will be retina, so that's something to bear in mind.” That’s the thing that “****** me off” because I don’t think that paying almost 3000€ is worth it, but buying the non-retina is betting in the past. So Vestan Pance the non-retina with those specs would only last 2 years maybe? Even with the 16Gb ram for now and hypothetically a flash storage?
I’m from Portugal and the refurbished section is not that popular here! But it would be a nice option!
So ds store in your opinion how many years would last the non-retina setup? And do you really think it would be equal to the Retina?
I will have that in mind, noondaywitch. Thanks!
Thanks to all of you and sorry for the long text!