[style_x7]

Hi fellow members,

Going to get one from school, will be my 1st mac :

1. My main use is for development work (coding and some gfx design). Can't decide to get the 13.3" or 15" model, any advice? Other than being heavier and larger screen, does the 15" offer anything else more than the 13.3" one?

2. I will need dual boot into windows and mac has bootcamp for that. Is win xp 100% working fine in macbook pro?

3. I'm seriously considering getting a SSD upgrade (speed up development) and want to DIY. Any1 done it before, especially with the latest intel SSD on the 13.3" model? Also, did some research and seems like there's issues with macbook pro capped at sata I (150mb/s) speed? Will there be a good battery life improvement since SSD consumes much less power?

Thanks in advance.

[Audio]

(1) Get the 13" MacBook Pro because it is smaller and hence lighter, important when you are on the go within the campus. Lower price too so that it is affordable for a student like you. Get a Pro instead of the standard MacBook because the screen display is significantly better.

(2) No issue with dual booting but you will be using either Parallels or VM virtual machine instead of Bootcamp because you don't have to reboot to switch between Mac OS and Windows. No issues with running XP, Vista....and even Linux all in the same MacBook. That's why we want to do 500GB WD Blue in (3).

(3) SSD is good. But the price difference and capacity limit is too wide in favour for norminal hard disk. For $134 you can get a WD Blue 500GB. For over $1,200, you only get a 256GB SSD and you have to be careful as not all SSDs are comparable to the MacBook. 10 times the price, 1/2 the capacity and vernerable to incompatibility, no, now is not the time for SSD yet. But if you MUST, there is OCZ Vertex (Mac Version) for over $1,300 for the 256GB unit.

(Audio)

[style_x7]

Thanks Audio for the prompt reply

For the pricing, I'm getting a subsidy of ~$2k so I'm also taking into account the 15" model. Getting from NTU: 13.3" is $2.3++k and 15" is $3.1++k. The most important to consider the larger screen is I like to see more codes, as much as possible (scrolling code is interrupting my thoughts). But it is quite bulky >< I guess will ask the shop to let me see the 2 models.

Thanks for recommending Parallels and VM virtual machine, almost forgot that this is an option.

SSD vs hdd. Hmm, I find that I waste a lot of time waiting for compilation (web development, few hundred MBs application). Interested in the 80GB Intel SSD X25-M G2 which is ~$400 cuz I'm thinking it should help significantly to speed things. The storage space is no doubt small but an external hdd should resolve. Am I missing out any factor to consider? Also, any1 developing applications with SSD?

[Audio]

Look like you already made up your mind...

Need bigger screen, then, no choice. With a the subsidy, can even get the 17" as well...See even more lines of code. Understand also there is a reason why small things are more expensive.

There is also a reason why people upgrade their standard 160GB HD. If you just want speed and go for 120GB, you no better off than using the standard drive. That is why you have to start off with 256GB if you want SSD. Somemore you want Parallels and multlple OS.....you need the capacity more than speed itself. With a 80GB super fast speed SSD, you spend big bucks but still lacks the capacity of a standard drive.

(Audio)

[style_x7]

Heh, not yet though. I'm doing 2-page view of coding at one scroll so 15" helps but you're right, don't seems justified for a bigger screen I had a look at the actual models, most probably settling with 13.3".

Regarding SSD, still thinking Understand that compiling applications taxes cpu and ram more than the hard disk, so SSD might not help a lot. If only I can do some testing on a sample unit

[heave]

Originally Posted by style_x7

Heh, not yet though. I'm doing 2-page view of coding at one scroll so 15" helps but you're right, don't seems justified for a bigger screen I had a look at the actual models, most probably settling with 13.3".

Regarding SSD, still thinking Understand that compiling applications taxes cpu and ram more than the hard disk, so SSD might not help a lot. If only I can do some testing on a sample unit

SSD certainly help to speed things up. But as mention on previously post, the cost is at least 4 times more.

I have a SSD notebook and a development notebook. SSD is better only if do alot of presentation of the software product that you are developing on.
Comparing compiling time, its only slightly faster and it will not make you go "WOW that's fast".

Else just stick with the SATA. With VM, you will need the hdd space.

[style_x7]

Thanks heave

probably going for a 7,200rpm HDD upgrade instead of the SSD.

appreciate all the help