Is this a serious question.. ._. Because you don't even have a USB port or an SD card reader.....
And Aperture is no longer supported by Apple anyways...

Yes it is

I don't use my aperture much and only occasionally

I don't mind the SD card absence as I've recently switched to a wifi enabled camera

Aperture is no longer supported but I can still use it as I have not found a better alternative

I like the macbook portability and the retina screen

Can't find a reason to buy the imac as I probably won't use it much

So yes it is a serious question...

Anyone?

It'll run Lightroom fine but don't expect it to blaze through your library like a well spec'ed desktop.

Yes it is

I don't use my aperture much and only occasionally

I don't mind the SD card absence as I've recently switched to a wifi enabled camera

Aperture is no longer supported but I can still use it as I have not found a better alternative

I like the macbook portability and the retina screen

Can't find a reason to buy the imac as I probably won't use it much

So yes it is a serious question...

Anyone?

The answer to this is both Yes and No. It really depends...

Contrary to popular belief Photoshop and Lightroom don't require that much power - surely more than Word or Excel but a lot less than typical 3D applications (Maya, C4D, 3ds Max etc.) or a lot of games.

The programs themselves don't require much to run perfectly smooth - it all depends on what you do with these programs and what you expect with regards to speed.

If you are a web designer chances are you're working on relatively small images (that is, images at only a few megapixels) and in that case both programs will run pretty smooth.

But if you're a professional photographer with a camera that produces 20+ megapixel image files then you probably want to get something much more powerful than the computer you mention.

Another thing worth mentioning is that your processor isn't really at work most of the time when you use for example Photoshop or Lightroom.
You use the brush to paint something, then you make a selection and do something with that selection, then you copy a layer and so on... Most of these tasks don't require much of the processor so the overall worktime for a task will depend mostly on your speed working with the program and a lot less on the processor in the PC.
You might be at work 90% of the time only the remaining 10% of the total work time for a task is where you wait for the processor to finish something so that you can continue working.
So doubling your processing power will only result in a tiny reduction of the overall time it takes to do the work.

Depending on how you use Photoshop this might be different.
If you're mainly processing hundreds or thousands of images using actions or other automated processes, then it's a case of your processor being at work 90% of the time and you only 10% of the time - since all you do is select the images and press a button, then you wait for the processor to finish.
If that is your typical workload then you will benefit a lot from a faster processor and you definitely want to skip on the Core M.
One last thing to take into account in this scenario is the overall amount of work you have to do.
For instance if you don't work on more than one project in a day then it might not matter to you that it takes 5 hours for your computer to run Batch processing on a thousand images. But if you have to work on several projects in a day then it will be crucial that a task can be finished in a very short time so that you can start working on the next project.

No matter what processor you get you should make sure that you get 8 GB RAM, having just 4 GB can easily result in some nasty performance impact.
However going  for 16 GB instead of just 8 GB is very unlikely to make any difference at all unless you are working on some extremely heavy stuff and multitasking.

I would recommend you against the MacBook... Despite many claims, the macbook is very underpowered..
It's not the notebook if you're going to use Aperture / Lightroom.
I'll recommend the Retina MBP 13 inch which is also lightweight and portable enough.. with much more power than the macbook.
Another thing to consider is.. this is Apple first gen product.. And they're just testing if its gonna work out.. It's not as matured as the MBP/MBA.

You can buy that.. I got an answer from Quora for you

right now rmb is about RM4700 with 3.5 currency

do i purchase now or wait until skylake coming

Thanks bro for the tip

The answer from Quora seems to say that the rmb will be sufficient for my needs.

The thing is I find the rmbp super heavy as I'm using a 11inch MBA now. The only issue with my 11inch MBA is the space restraint as it only has 128gb

I put my libraries on an external Hdd but it causes my aperture to freeze alot. Which is annoying.

I love the form factor of the macbook. I can't go any heavier. And I dread having to wait for the revised version but at the same time I don't do much photography work anyway to warrant a powerful macbook like the rmbp

So for me the question is to get the rmb or wait for next gen.

if apple use currency of 4.3, rmb will be as RM6000 (low spec) incl gst

thinking to grab it 1st at 4700 before it reach too high but also thinking how good rmb second gen with skylake processor

For the price might as well got for Dell XPS 13. Only slightly bigger than rMB but performance/spec wise is much better.

Spec wise, Windows notebooks are ALWAYS better la....

Problem is: it runs Windows. 

Bit the bullet

What is ur spec

New user reporting in. So far the performance above my expectation for base model.

damm im still cannot decide yet to choose 1.1 or 1.3

after transferring my libraries and photos

Aperture 3.6 absolutely FLIES on my 1.2ghz Macbook Retina

The issue i think was the lack of diskspace on my MBA and probably the 8gb of RAM also helps.

But whatever it is, I'm really really happy now that my Aperture actually flies on my mac

WOOHOO!