Dear Daniel and good WAMUG friends
So:
Aperture Edu 3 -$299.00
2.3 GHz upgrade +$270.00
Aperture 3 from MacStore +$99.99
That means it costs me $70.99 to get the 2.3GHZ upgrade with a MacStore
purchase of Aperture 3.
Interesting Maths. I'm tempted.
Thank goodness for the genii of WAMUG
But wouldn't that be $99.99 from the US store? shows $119.99 (go figure) in Oz
Cheers,
Chris
From: Reg Whitely rwhit...@internode.on.net
To: WAMUG Mailing List wamug@wamug.org.au
Sent: Tue, 8 March, 2011 8:24:59 PM
Subject: Re: New MacBook Pro: Should I order
Stocks cgstoc...@yahoo.com wrote:
But wouldn't that be $99.99 from the US store? shows $119.99 (go figure) in Oz
Cheers,
Chris
From: Reg Whitely rwhit...@internode.on.net
To: WAMUG Mailing List wamug@wamug.org.au
Sent: Tue, 8 March, 2011 8:24:59 PM
Subject: Re: New MacBook Pro: Should I
That's great (but not for Daniel)
From: Ronda Brown ro...@mac.com
To: WAMUG Mailing List wamug@wamug.org.au
Sent: Tue, 8 March, 2011 9:18:30 PM
Subject: Re: New MacBook Pro: Should I order 2.2 or 2.3 GHz i7?
The Mac App Store works for Snow Leopard users
Subject: Re: New MacBook Pro: Should I order 2.2 or 2.3 GHz i7?
Dear Daniel and good WAMUG friends
So:
Aperture Edu 3 -$299.00
2.3 GHz upgrade +$270.00
Aperture 3 from MacStore +$99.99
That means it costs me $70.99 to get the 2.3GHZ upgrade with a MacStore
purchase of Aperture 3.
Interesting
Robin
Why? Or in the words of a certain ex (I hope) politician - please explain?
Peta
On 07/03/2011, at 10:44 AM, Robin Belford wrote:
If you're going to use Aperture perhaps you should reconsider not going for
the fast processor and the extra cache?
robin
On 07/03/2011, at 9:55
Hi Peta,
I would imagine because of my reply further down in this email.
If you are heavy user in Photoshop and Final Cut Pro, I would suggest the
2.3GHz.
The 2.3GHz CPU has a larger L3 cache (8MB vs 6MB.) The increase in cache is
usually more important than the minimal increase in speed,
To put briefly, if browsing, email, a bit of text editing and maybe
spreadsheets is the usage then there is no need for the fastest.
If your work involves multimedia editing, e.g. Aperture, Final Cut Pro,
Photoshop, iMovie, etc. then there is a benefit to be gained from additional
processor
Thank you all for this.
Peta
On 07/03/2011, at 5:06 PM, Ronda Brown wrote:
Hi Peta,
I would imagine because of my reply further down in this email.
If you are heavy user in Photoshop and Final Cut Pro, I would suggest the
2.3GHz.
The 2.3GHz CPU has a larger L3 cache (8MB vs 6MB.) The
I agree with Ruben. To advise whether the 2.3GHz is worth the extra price would
depend on what you use the MBP for.
If you are heavy user in Photoshop and Final Cut Pro, I would suggest the
2.3GHz.
The 2.3GHz CPU has a larger L3 cache (8MB vs 6MB.) The increase in cache is
usually more
Thank you to all who have replied to my query on MacBook Pro 15. I've decided
to go for the standard 2.2GHz / 750 Gb HDD with standard glossy display and 8Gb
RAM. I'll put the extra $$ saved by not getting the 2.3GHz upgrade into an
extended warranty. I'm also tempted to get Aperture 3 and have
Hi Reg
As much as I hate to not give sales to stores, if you are looking at
Aperture it's actually cheaper to download it from the MacStore if you're
not worried about not getting a disk and little manual.
It's $249 in the shops, $229 on the education store and $99.99 to download
it from the
If you're going to use Aperture perhaps you should reconsider not going for the
fast processor and the extra cache?
robin
On 07/03/2011, at 9:55 AM, Daniel Kerr wrote:
Hi Reg
As much as I hate to not give sales to stores, if you are looking at
Aperture it's actually cheaper to download
Yes, it makes you wonder why Apple have bothered continuing with the box
products. They still sell them on the Apple store. I think the long term aim
is clear. From a resellers perspective it's another erosion of revenue, but
we all have to adapt. It's all going to be only online someday. What
Hi all WAMUGgers
Long time since I asked a question. I'm thinking of buying a new MacBook Pro
15.
Is the 2.3GHz i7 option worth the extra dollars over the 2.2?
What are experiences with glossy v anti-glare displays?
Any other tips?
Will buy ed price and plan to salary sacrifice.
Regards
Reg
I'm not sure whether the extra 100MHz is worth another $300 or not but the
performance gains you'll see will depend on what your using your computer for.
If the programs your using can make use of all the threads (including the
hyperthreads) you'll get that extra 100MHz per core so it's
i'm in the process of buying the 2.3gig 17inch pro
antiglare: i have it on the powerbook it's great because no
interference from enviroment mirrowing in the screen (eg your face or
lights behind you)
2.3ghz: because when i buy i buy the most powerful i can get
8gig ram: a lot of newer
wamug@wamug.org.au
Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 07:20:05 +0800
To: WAMUG Mailing List wamug@wamug.org.au
Subject: Re: New MacBook Pro: Should I order 2.2 or 2.3 GHz i7?
i'm in the process of buying the 2.3gig 17inch pro
antiglare: i have it on the powerbook it's great because no interference
from
Reply-To: WAMUG Mailing List wamug@wamug.org.au
Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 07:20:05 +0800
To: WAMUG Mailing List wamug@wamug.org.au
Subject: Re: New MacBook Pro: Should I order 2.2 or 2.3 GHz i7?
i'm in the process of buying the 2.3gig 17inch pro
antiglare: i have it on the powerbook it's great
: New MacBook Pro: Should I order 2.2 or 2.3 GHz i7?
Hi James and Reg, 8gig of RAM is available as a BTO option for the whole
range of MacBook Pros. It costs $240.00, even with the more powerful 17 or
15 machine. Just tried this on the online Apple Store. Cheers, Susan.
From: James / Hans Kunz sad
: Michael Hawkins michael.hawk...@mjhawkins.com.au
Reply-To: WAMUG Mailing List wamug@wamug.org.au
Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 08:46:49 +0800
To: WAMUG Mailing List wamug@wamug.org.au
Subject: Re: New MacBook Pro: Should I order 2.2 or 2.3 GHz i7?
8gig (2x4gb) available from OWC for $US112.99 (8.0GB
But relative to the question...
Antiglare is relative to environments and use. I prefer antiglare but the
glossy has been fine and provides richer colour. I¹m bemused that it costs
extra when glossy¹ used to be a no-cost option, however apparently glossy
are cheaper to make.
Below plagiarised
22 matches
Mail list logo
