internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/
List archive
Re: [internetworkers] Mac Users: Mac Book Pro 15"... 2.5 or 2.8?
- From: "David Matusiak" <dave AT matusiak.org>
- To: "Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/" <internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [internetworkers] Mac Users: Mac Book Pro 15"... 2.5 or 2.8?
- Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 09:02:35 -0700
All items listed below are great advice. I prefer VMWare Fusion to
Parallels. The breakdown is that most "engineering-types" prefer Fusion
whereas most "normal-users" prefer Parallels. Both seem to get the job
done, but Fusion allows you to install other operating systems (besides
Microsoft Windows).
If money is truly a consideration, then you should go for more installed
RAM (from Other World Computing) instead of the small processor bump. If
you can afford both, then go for it. Remember, you'll be driving this
machine for a long time, so make sure you like the features.
Congrats on getting a Mac, btw! :)
>>> Any help in deciding this quickly will be greatly appreciated!!
>
> Get the 2.8 version. Not so much for the processor, but for the
> increased RAM on the video card. That will help with Photoshop.
>
> I use VMWare Fusion at home and Parallels at work. I personally prefer
> Fusion, but I do not have the latest version of Parallels at work to
> compare with.
>
> I second the recommendations to 1) Upgrade your RAM to the max, and 2)
> get that RAM upgrade from Other World (http://eshop.macsales.com/).
>
> I'd also plan to spend about $100 or so (online) for an 1 TB USB 2
> external hard drive to use for TimeMachine Backups.
>
> Paul
-
[internetworkers] Mac Users: Mac Book Pro 15"... 2.5 or 2.8?,
Susan LaBarre, 08/04/2009
- Re: [internetworkers] Mac Users: Mac Book Pro 15"... 2.5 or 2.8?, Jim Ray, 08/04/2009
-
Re: [internetworkers] Mac Users: Mac Book Pro 15"... 2.5 or 2.8?,
zman, 08/04/2009
-
Re: [internetworkers] Mac Users: Mac Book Pro 15"... 2.5 or 2.8?,
Paul Cory, 08/04/2009
-
Re: [internetworkers] Mac Users: Mac Book Pro 15"... 2.5 or 2.8?,
David Matusiak, 08/04/2009
-
Re: [internetworkers] Mac Users: Mac Book Pro 15"... 2.5 or 2.8?,
zman, 08/04/2009
- Re: [internetworkers] Mac Users: Mac Book Pro 15"... 2.5 or 2.8?, David Matusiak, 08/04/2009
-
Re: [internetworkers] Mac Users: Mac Book Pro 15"... 2.5 or 2.8?,
Susan LaBarre, 08/04/2009
-
Re: [internetworkers] Mac Users: Mac Book Pro 15"... 2.5 or 2.8?,
Paul Cory, 08/04/2009
-
Re: [internetworkers] Mac Users: Mac Book Pro 15"... 2.5 or 2.8?,
zman, 08/04/2009
- Re: [internetworkers] Mac Users: Mac Book Pro 15"... 2.5 or 2.8?, David Matusiak, 08/04/2009
-
Re: [internetworkers] Mac Users: Mac Book Pro 15"... 2.5 or 2.8?,
zman, 08/04/2009
-
Re: [internetworkers] Mac Users: Mac Book Pro 15"... 2.5 or 2.8?,
Roger Austin, 08/04/2009
- Re: [internetworkers] Mac Users: Mac Book Pro 15"... 2.5 or 2.8?, david cherryholmes, 08/04/2009
-
Re: [internetworkers] Mac Users: Mac Book Pro 15"... 2.5 or 2.8?,
Paul Cory, 08/04/2009
-
Re: [internetworkers] Mac Users: Mac Book Pro 15"... 2.5 or 2.8?,
zman, 08/04/2009
-
Re: [internetworkers] Mac Users: Mac Book Pro 15"... 2.5 or 2.8?,
David Matusiak, 08/04/2009
-
Re: [internetworkers] Mac Users: Mac Book Pro 15"... 2.5 or 2.8?,
Paul Cory, 08/04/2009
- Re: [internetworkers] Mac Users: Mac Book Pro 15"... 2.5 or 2.8?, Tanner Lovelace, 08/04/2009
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.