AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple to begin production of Thunderbolt MacBook Airs next month
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple to begin production of Thunderbolt MacBook Airs next month - Page 5

post #161 of 215
5/17/11 at 4:52pm
As an old fart here I'm not to sure I could ever be happy with at 13" machine, this the mental lust for a 15" AIR. Of course resolution independence might help some but then there is decidedly less information on screen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RetroRichie View Post

I agree. IMO, CPU speed and storage are the two largest offenders here.

Storage especially. Lets face it if we don't get better CPU performance out of the SB machines then Apple has screwed up. Storage is s tougher nut to crack. Then again a 15" AIR would have plenty of room for more blade SSD's.
Quote:
What I am worried about is that the next gen Air is still only going to offer 256 GB SSDs. If that's the case, I am really in an awkward spot. Either I am going to buy the MBA with the form factor I want with not enough storage, or I'm going to buy the MBP with the form factor I don't want with a crappy resolution.

The only way that I can see Apple dealing with this is to added a second or maybe even a third SSD slot. It is a real problem on a thin AIR type machine.

As to crappy resolution the MBPs aren't that bad. In fact I'm wondering what you are talking about.
Quote:
What I can't figure out is why Apple isn't offering the 13" MBP with the MBA screen. Honestly, I think they would already have my money.

You do realize that some people don't really like the AIR screens. Or maybe to be more specific the almost half scale size of the image on screen. This is another reason why I don't ever expect Apple to consolidate their portable lineup into a limited number of machines as some argue. The simple fact is different people have different needs.
Reply
Reply
post #162 of 215
5/17/11 at 4:57pm
I'm almost expecting Apple to lower the base frequency on the CPU though. Even 1.4 and 1.6 GHz would offer a huge advantage over the current CPU's. Save a few GHz here and there to save battery life.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RetroRichie View Post

Well here is some interesting news from cpu-world.com which should maybe ease some concerns. The GPU is not underclocked by default--this isn't to say Apple won't do this themselves, but it is at least interesting to see that Intel is not delivering them underclocked.

Two forthcoming Core i7 ULV dual-core processors, i7-2637M and i7-2677M, have 1.7 and 1.8 GHz base, and 2.8 GHz and 2.9 GHz Turbo Boost frequencies. This is 200 MHz higher than the frequencies of their predecessors, Core i7-2617M and i7-2657M. Default clock rate of the HD 3000 graphics on new chips stays the same, 350 MHz, although the maximum turbo frequency is increased to 1.2 GHz.

The interesting thing with respect to modern processors is that the base frequency isn't a big factor when you have Turbo Boost. The boosted speed gives you good performance until the processor overheats.
Reply
Reply
post #163 of 215
5/17/11 at 5:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by RetroRichie View Post

Actually, what the MBA tells us is that most MBA users aren't CPU constrained. What you should be wondering is: How much of Apple's portable market would be captured by the MBA if it started to approach MBP performance? I disagree that most users as a whole aren't CPU-constrained. Maybe this is true for the email and word processing crowd, but I personally do a lot of CPU-intensive tasks and I don't feel like a "power user." (See: Civilization 5, for instance)

Please read the thread I linked to at Ars. These are very technically literate people. They are yearning not for faster CPUs in their MBAs, they're wanting SSDs in their other Macs. Some being Mac Pros.

There certainly are users who are CPU constrained. I not saying that Apple should only make MBAs and quit making MBPs. But most users would be surprised how well they would do with a MBA.
Reply
Reply
post #164 of 215
5/18/11 at 7:41am
Interesting article reporting that Intel are going to shift laptop cpu production towards ULV chips. I think this is a recognition by Intel that most laptop users are not cpu constrained.
Reply
Reply
post #165 of 215
5/18/11 at 7:45am
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

As to crappy resolution the MBPs aren't that bad. In fact I'm wondering what you are talking about.

Are you really wondering what I am talking about? The 13" MBA has a native 1440 by 900, while the 13" MBP has a native 1280 by 800. That's a huge difference in terms of screen real estate, and it seems to me that if you are labeling one machine "Pro" but giving it the lower resolution, you are doing it wrong. At the very least they should offer a Hi-Res option on the 13" MBP as they do for the 15".
Reply
Reply
post #166 of 215
5/18/11 at 9:42am
Quote:
Originally Posted by RetroRichie View Post

Are you really wondering what I am talking about? The 13" MBA has a native 1440 by 900, while the 13" MBP has a native 1280 by 800. That's a huge difference in terms of screen real estate, and it seems to me that if you are labeling one machine "Pro" but giving it the lower resolution, you are doing it wrong. At the very least they should offer a Hi-Res option on the 13" MBP as they do for the 15".

Agreed. This baffled me about the new 13" MBP. It seems like it got the spec bump too but otherwise Apple could care less about the 13" Pro. It has a lower res. screen than the 13" Air, Intel HD3000 only, almost* useless ODD...


*I say almost useless because I rarely use discs for anything and basically all of my friends and family rarely use them either, and they are your typical PC consumer, not by any means a "power user".
Reply
Reply
post #167 of 215
5/19/11 at 4:34am
Quote:
Originally Posted by RetroRichie View Post

Are you really wondering what I am talking about? The 13" MBA has a native 1440 by 900, while the 13" MBP has a native 1280 by 800.

If you are like most people you will sit in front of that MBA and blow up the font sizes to be the same as seen on other Macs.
Quote:
That's a huge difference in terms of screen real estate, and it seems to me that if you are labeling one machine "Pro" but giving it the lower resolution, you are doing it wrong. At the very least they should offer a Hi-Res option on the 13" MBP as they do for the 15".

Without resolution independence higher pixel density does little good. Maybe you have exceptional eye sight but I'm often laughing my ass off when I see people using high resolution screens in public. They park their noses ten inches from the screen to see all that the screen has to offer. In the end you see the same people simply blowing everything up on the screen to make for comfortable use. In the end a13" screen is a 13" screen and until Mac OS can leverage higher pixel density those high resolution screens offer nothing in the way of additional real estate.
Reply
Reply
post #168 of 215
5/19/11 at 6:16am
Although cost is obviously a factor governing any choice to include higher capacity SSDs in the MBA, is it even possible for Apple to offer a 512 Gb SSD in theSB MacBook Air when it launches? What is needed (20 Nm blades?) and does anyone make the necessary hardware yet?
Reply
Reply
post #169 of 215
5/19/11 at 6:41am
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

If you are like most people you will sit in front of that MBA and blow up the font sizes to be the same as seen on other Macs.

I am quite certain that "most people" do not do that, but that is irrelevant to the point. Apple seems to think there is value in a higher resolution on a 13" machine. But apparently they don't want to sell 13" MBPs to people who care about screen resolution.
Reply
Reply
post #170 of 215
5/19/11 at 6:46am
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

In the end a13" screen is a 13" screen and until Mac OS can leverage higher pixel density those high resolution screens offer nothing in the way of additional real estate.

You obviously don't do a lot of work in Excel
Reply
Reply
post #171 of 215
5/19/11 at 6:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tailpipe View Post

Although cost is obviously a factor governing any choice to include higher capacity SSDs in the MBA, is it even possible for Apple to offer a 512 Gb SSD in theSB MacBook Air when it launches? What is needed (20 Nm blades?) and does anyone make the necessary hardware yet?

Here is what I understand, Apple has not validated any flash memory at a process node under 32nm. Or someplace around that number, the exact number does not matter as the point is they have not approved any of the bleeding edge nodes.

Further it is my understanding that Apple is taking far longer than they have in the past to validate the new flash chips on the market. Apparently it is taking Apple nine months or longer to approve the integration of new tech into it's products. Tech here being sub 30nm flash. That is a very long time and frankly a bit surprising but it might be due to greatly reduced reliability of flash at these small feature sizes.

Whatever is infect happening has obviously delayed flash upgrades to many of the iOS devices. To your question about AIR there are a number of factors at work here. The higher integration seen with SB might free up more board space for example. Higher density chips would of course help.

So to answer your question yes it is possible. The probability is much harder to nail down. The easy way for Apple to deal with this is to simply offer up an extra blade slot. In the end it is all economics.
Reply
Reply
post #172 of 215
5/19/11 at 7:06am
Quote:
Originally Posted by RetroRichie View Post

I am quite certain that "most people" do not do that, but that is irrelevant to the point. Apple seems to think there is value in a higher resolution on a 13" machine. But apparently they don't want to sell 13" MBPs to people who care about screen resolution.

I'm not sure where your negative attitude comes from. Selling a lower resolution screen is not a negative if it keeps people from complaining about the size of controls and text on screen. Until Apple offers up some sort of resolution independence, the ultra high resolution screens are a burden to many.
Reply
Reply
post #173 of 215
5/19/11 at 7:15am
Quote:
Originally Posted by RetroRichie View Post

You obviously don't do a lot of work in Excel

When I do I still have the same issue. That is ultra small text is only useful for so long before it becomes a negative rather that a positive.

I do work a bit with text and databases. In both cases you run into a need for a wider screen, at least in my case it is a wider screen. Squishing your text down to half it's normal size is seldom a good approach.

The feeling I'm getting right now is that you are a young person with very good eye sight. Enjoy it while it lasts.
Reply
Reply
post #174 of 215
5/19/11 at 10:07am
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

The feeling I'm getting right now is that you are a young person with very good eye sight. Enjoy it while it lasts.

Not true on either account, but nothing that corrective surgery couldn't solve. I apologize if I am sounding negative or hostile, I just don't understand why Apple would offer a higher resolution in the Air than in their "Pro" line. I think whatever differences you and I have on this topic could be easily resolved with an option to upgrade the resolution on the 13" Pro, akin to what they offer on the 15" model.
Reply
Reply
post #175 of 215
5/19/11 at 10:18am
Quote:
Originally Posted by RetroRichie View Post

Not true on either account, but nothing that corrective surgery couldn't solve. I apologize if I am sounding negative or hostile, I just don't understand why Apple would offer a higher resolution in the Air than in their "Pro" line. I think whatever differences you and I have on this topic could be easily resolved with an option to upgrade the resolution on the 13" Pro, akin to what they offer on the 15" model.

  1. 13" MBP sells in quantities far greater than the 13" MBA, and they only had enough components for 13 MBA at the time.
  2. They had planned to offer the 13 MBA displays in the 13 MBP in the next revision in February but the the unprecedented success of the new MBAs made it impossible to source components for both machines.
  3. They plan on going to double-resolution IPS panels for the next MBPs after Lion is launched and want the jump between the old and new designs to be as drastic as possible.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #176 of 215
5/19/11 at 11:12am
I am not sure I believe any of those things
Reply
Reply
post #177 of 215
5/19/11 at 11:24am
Quote:
Originally Posted by RetroRichie View Post

I am not sure I believe any of those things

  • You dont think the 13 MBP outsells the 13 MBA?
  • You dont think that component sourcing can have limits?
  • You dont believe the 13 MBA could be selling better than expected?
  • You dont believe there will be a radical change to the MBP design after Lion?
  • You dont believe the reports of HiDPI display options in Lion?

To so strongly exclude rational reasons without a firm counterargument will leave you only with irrational reasons leading to conspiracy theories and other dark alleyways of conjecture that ultimately lead nowhere.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #178 of 215
5/19/11 at 11:40am
I don't believe:
  • They only had enough components for 13 MBA at the time
  • The unprecedented success of the new MBAs made it impossible to source components for both machines
  • They plan on going to double-resolution IPS panels for the next MBPs after Lion is launched

Apple has no problem sourcing components for any of their other devices, even when the iPad, iPhone, what-have-you vastly outsells their projections. Why should the MacBook X be any different? And the double-resolution IPS panel business is just a rumor. Please don't preach about firm counterarguments when you are presenting postulation as fact--and frankly, conspiracy theory (if you will) based on the fact that there's one big wallpaper in a developer preview of Lion.
Reply
Reply
post #179 of 215
5/20/11 at 6:15pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by RetroRichie View Post

Not true on either account, but nothing that corrective surgery couldn't solve. I apologize if I am sounding negative or hostile, I just don't understand why Apple would offer a higher resolution in the Air than in their "Pro" line.

You don't sound hostile, I just frustrated that you don't grasp the issues some have with tiny high resolution screens in Mac OS. Now maybe I'm normally parking myself farther from the screen but I find tiny text to be tedious. This was an issue with me well before my need to wear corrective glasses.
Quote:
I think whatever differences you and I have on this topic could be easily resolved with an option to upgrade the resolution on the 13" Pro, akin to what they offer on the 15" model.

Well I'm all for choice. In either case I'd much rather see some sort of resolution independence so that we can maintain usability of these screens for all users. As a side note I recently upgraded to an iPhone4, there the high resolution screen is fantastic. I'd really like the same experience on a Mac upgrade in the future. More importantly it is a requirement if resolution is double with the next go around.

There are two big issues. One as mentioned is the tedious nature of such displays. The other is the need to get back to WYSIWYG! I want a page of text on screen to reasonably represent a page on paper. Apple use to be good for this but no longer.
Reply
Reply
post #180 of 215
5/23/11 at 4:41am
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

  1. 13" MBP sells in quantities far greater than the 13" MBA, and they only had enough components for 13” MBA at the time.
  2. They had planned to offer the 13” MBA displays in the 13” MBP in the next revision in February but the the unprecedented success of the new MBAs made it impossible to source components for both machines.
  3. They plan on going to double-resolution IPS panels for the next MBPs after Lion is launched and want the jump between the old and new designs to be as drastic as possible.

You are absolutely right. There is no other logical reason why Apple would short-change 13" macBook pro users.

Double resolution IPS panels for the next version of the MacBook Pro would be excellent. You are raising what is bound to become the next hottest topic to be debated on Apple fanboy websites. Assuming an anticipated release in January 2012, or as soon after Ivy Bridge is itself released, speculation should become rife around November.

While many users will want power without the weight, designing the right form factor will be essential. An IPS display, SSD drives fitted as standard in a MacBook Air chassis would be perfect. I'd like to a much slimmer version of the existing box, i.e. without the taper.
Reply
Reply
post #181 of 215
5/23/11 at 1:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tailpipe View Post

You are absolutely right. There is no other logical reason why Apple would short-change 13" macBook pro users.

Apple does a lot of things intentionally to drive consumers to higher-profit products.
Reply
Reply
post #182 of 215
5/23/11 at 3:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

  1. 13" MBP sells in quantities far greater than the 13" MBA, and they only had enough components for 13 MBA at the time.
  2. They had planned to offer the 13 MBA displays in the 13 MBP in the next revision in February but the the unprecedented success of the new MBAs made it impossible to source components for both machines.
  3. They plan on going to double-resolution IPS panels for the next MBPs after Lion is launched and want the jump between the old and new designs to be as drastic as possible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RetroRichie View Post

Apple does a lot of things intentionally to drive consumers to higher-profit products.

I agree, but deliberately putting a lower quality screen in the MacBook Pro risks customers migrating towards the Air and, should they feel that they can survive with an inferior processor, they may not come back when the Pro gets a better screen and more powerful processor. As things stand the price points of the 13" Air and 13" Pro models are so close, that the Air wins through its form factor.
Reply
Reply
post #183 of 215
5/25/11 at 7:55am
Quote:
Originally Posted by RetroRichie View Post

Apple does a lot of things intentionally to drive consumers to higher-profit products.

When you see the price of the aftermarket Blade SSD upgrades, I highly doubt the Air is higher margin than the 13" MBP.

The only sane reason of why 1440x900 isn't an option on the 13" MBP is that the part is simply unavailable.

It's a ridiculous situation. The 11" MBA has more screen real estate than the 13" "Pro" machine...
Reply
Reply
post #184 of 215
5/25/11 at 8:06am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorre View Post

When you see the price of the aftermarket Blade SSD upgrades, I highly doubt the Air is higher margin than the 13" MBP.

Higher profit is not the same as higher margin. Apple is well on record as not deviating from a 40% margin on all of their products. But a higher-priced item at 40% margin is higher profit.
Reply
Reply
post #185 of 215
5/25/11 at 6:24pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

I'm almost expecting Apple to lower the base frequency on the CPU though. Even 1.4 and 1.6 GHz would offer a huge advantage over the current CPU's. Save a few GHz here and there to save battery life.


The interesting thing with respect to modern processors is that the base frequency isn't a big factor when you have Turbo Boost. The boosted speed gives you good performance until the processor overheats.

Thank you wizard69 that's very interesting, I did not know that.

I also hope they intro Res. Independence in 10.7. If so, perhaps they'll demo it at WWDC.
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
post #186 of 215
5/25/11 at 7:49pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorre View Post

When you see the price of the aftermarket Blade SSD upgrades, I highly doubt the Air is higher margin than the 13" MBP.

It isn't and I actually thought that Apple even indicated lower margins on the AIR.
Quote:
The only sane reason of why 1440x900 isn't an option on the 13" MBP is that the part is simply unavailable.

There us no data to support that position. Meanwhile other vendors are not having screen availability issues.
Quote:
It's a ridiculous situation. The 11" MBA has more screen real estate than the 13" "Pro" machine...

This is totally out of left field. The real estate is based on the dimensions of the screen not it's pixel count. There has been discussions here about screens with double the resolution of the current MBP screens, I hope you guys don't think that doubles your screen area. The area remains the same. On top of that such high resolution screens would require resolution independence which the Mac current doesn't have. Just because something works on the iPad doesn't imply that the Mac can handle it in the current rev.
Reply
Reply
post #187 of 215
5/25/11 at 8:06pm
Being that WWDC is not far off at all we should be getting all the dirt on 10.7.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aquatic View Post

Thank you wizard69 that's very interesting, I did not know that.

Turbo Boost is a fantastic new feature that really does work well. You would need a chart to figure out which processors boost how much but a few hundred MHz is nothing to sneeze at. I don't think Apple really wants AIRs to be all out performers anyways, they will balance performance against battery life. Even so I'm still expecting a significant performance boost.
Quote:
I also hope they intro Res. Independence in 10.7. If so, perhaps they'll demo it at WWDC.

Well we can hope so but honestly it would have leaked by now. If resolution independence is in Lion then a lot of the negatives with regards to high resolution screens goes away. It would also compliment things like Pinch to Zoom.
Reply
Reply
post #188 of 215
5/26/11 at 8:11am
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

There us no data to support that position. Meanwhile other vendors are not having screen availability issues.

Agreed, agreed. I don't know why people believe Apple is only offering 1280x800 on the 13" MBP for any reason other than "because they want to." Apple has perhaps the most formidable and efficient operations business in not just their industry but across all industries--they secure whatever parts they damn well please, and at a much lower price point than their competitors. If they wanted to offer the same screen in the 13" Air in the Pro, they would do it. This is nothing more than a product differentiation game--an attempt to drive people to certain products by feature set for either higher profit or to fulfill some other possible corporate strategy (think, perhaps: moving people to the Air, which eliminates the DVD drive, which makes the Mac App Store more attractive). Those are your "only sane reasons" right there. That's why businesses make these kind of decisions. It has nothing to do with 1440x900 screens being rare commodities (which is kind of a laughable position, in of itself).
Reply
Reply
post #189 of 215
5/26/11 at 12:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by RetroRichie View Post

Agreed, agreed. I don't know why people believe Apple is only offering 1280x800 on the 13" MBP for any reason other than "because they want to." Apple has perhaps the most formidable and efficient operations business in not just their industry but across all industries--they secure whatever parts they damn well please, and at a much lower price point than their competitors. If they wanted to offer the same screen in the 13" Air in the Pro, they would do it. This is nothing more than a product differentiation game--an attempt to drive people to certain products by feature set for either higher profit or to fulfill some other possible corporate strategy (think, perhaps: moving people to the Air, which eliminates the DVD drive, which makes the Mac App Store more attractive). Those are your "only sane reasons" right there. That's why businesses make these kind of decisions. It has nothing to do with 1440x900 screens being rare commodities (which is kind of a laughable position, in of itself).

I'm still convinced that Apple sell the lower resolution screen because many people prefer that resolution. It is a simple matter that everything is closer to WYSIWYG, and less of an eye strain. If someone doesn't think these high resolutions screens are not a problem just go to any WiFi public access point and watch some middle age or older person try to use one of these machines.

Until they have at least some sort of resolution independence I don't see Apple making huge advances in screen resolution on Mac OS devices. People seem to have a misunderstanding that indicates that they believe that the Mac can use the higher resolution screens as easily as the iOS devices. Apple has been talking about resolution independence for years now, but I've yet to see any results.
Reply
Reply
post #190 of 215
5/26/11 at 1:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac View Post

Interesting article reporting that Intel are going to shift laptop cpu production towards ULV chips. I think this is a recognition by Intel that most laptop users are not cpu constrained.

Intel stated that this was a result of Apple's involvement. They said that Apple has helped shape their CPU roadmap.

I'd say it's interesting and worrying at the same time. It means that Intel will hold back performance on portable products in the interests of increasing battery-life.

Right now, a Macbook Pro has a 77.5 W/h battery with a 7 hour battery life so an average draw of around 11W taken up by the display, peripherals and electronics. If Intel drops the TDP from 35W to 10-15W, that could bring that average consumption down to under 5W, which would allow for a 15 hour battery life, which is plenty to go an entire day without a recharge.

Or allow Apple to reduce the battery size and make thinner/lighter machines.

They may do this on the desktop side too of course but if not, they will widen the gap between laptop and desktop CPUs after bringing them so close together.

At least it means there will be a 15" Air though because the MBP will have a ULV chip at some point in the future. Then maybe the 13" Air and Pro can finally merge leaving a single lineup with all ULV and 11", 13", 15" and 17" screens.
Reply
Reply
post #191 of 215
5/31/11 at 11:21am
Quote:
Originally Posted by RetroRichie View Post

I am quite certain that "most people" do not do that, but that is irrelevant to the point. Apple seems to think there is value in a higher resolution on a 13" machine. But apparently they don't want to sell 13" MBPs to people who care about screen resolution.

Most people I have seen (YMMV) do exactly that, as I do. I want Res Ind. or at least the text resizing throughout the OS like Windows 7. Wizard you're making me sad but I guess you're right...we would have seen Res Ind. by now in Lion if it had it I'd assume.
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
post #192 of 215
5/31/11 at 2:11pm
Given that I've not heard any rumblings about resolution independence at all. If Apple is saving it for WWDC then they have done an excellent job of keeping a secret.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aquatic View Post

Most people I have seen (YMMV) do exactly that, as I do.

Yep that is exactly what I see and frankly from a variety of users. The only good thing here is that the text is often sharper on the high resolution screens.
Quote:
I want Res Ind. or at least the text resizing throughout the OS like Windows 7. Wizard you're making me sad but I guess you're right...we would have seen Res Ind. by now in Lion if it had it I'd assume.

I'd personally would like to see pinch to zoom, zoom the whole app. Well at least an alternative pinch to zoom gesture.

In any event I've spent more than a little time looking at the laptops in the Apple store, especially the new AIRs. They are really nice but sadly come up short for me in two ways. One of them is the screen size. The other is the lack of on board secondary storage. A 15" AIR could address all of these issues and still boost performance over the current models.
Reply
Reply
post #193 of 215
6/1/11 at 6:27am
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Given that I've not heard any rumblings about resolution independence at all. If Apple is saving it for WWDC then they have done an excellent job of keeping a secret.

Yep that is exactly what I see and frankly from a variety of users. The only good thing here is that the text is often sharper on the high resolution screens.

Sadly, I don't expect resolution independence until Mac OS XI. My guess is that it's just too big of a change to introduce into 10.7 or 10.8 or 10.9. Maybe by then we'll have monitors with high enough resolutions to make meaningful advantage of it?

  Google Maps: ("Directions may be inaccurate, incomplete, dangerous, or prohibited.")

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MC700LL/A MD481LL/A MD644LL/A MD388LL/A

Reply

  Google Maps: ("Directions may be inaccurate, incomplete, dangerous, or prohibited.")

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MC700LL/A MD481LL/A MD644LL/A MD388LL/A

Reply
post #194 of 215
6/1/11 at 6:32am
Quote:
Originally Posted by John.B View Post

Sadly, I don't expect resolution independence until Mac OS XI. My guess is that it's just too big of a change to introduce into 10.7 or 10.8 or 10.9. Maybe by then we'll have monitors with high enough resolutions to make meaningful advantage of it?

I'm really hoping that Jobs demos HiDPI in Lion next week.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #195 of 215
6/1/11 at 6:56am
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

This is totally out of left field. The real estate is based on the dimensions of the screen not it's pixel count. There has been discussions here about screens with double the resolution of the current MBP screens, I hope you guys don't think that doubles your screen area. The area remains the same. On top of that such high resolution screens would require resolution independence which the Mac current doesn't have. Just because something works on the iPad doesn't imply that the Mac can handle it in the current rev.

Ehm... I don't understand what you're saying. I think we might be in violent agreement here. Because Mac OSX DOESN'T have resolution independence, more pixels means more screen real estate. I can fit just as much stuff on a new 17" MBP's screen as I can on a discontinued 24" iMac, because they have the exact same resolution. You can fit two full size browser windows or two word documents next to each other on both screens, everything will just look much smaller on the 17". The 11" MBA has more pixels in the screen than the 13" MBP, hence, OSX can fit more stuff on the screen.

I'm not saying that's a good thing for everybody, the smaller system fonts on the MBA can be a serious usability issue for people with bad eyes. But, from the OS's perspective, and for people with good eyes, the 11" MBA has a "bigger" screen (offers more real estate) than the 13" MBP. Therefore, the 1440x900 screen seems a very trivial BTO option for the 13" MBP. I really don't understand why Apple doesn't offer it. The only sane reason I can think of is lack of supply, but as you already indicated, that seems unplausible.
Reply
Reply
post #196 of 215
6/1/11 at 8:24am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

At least it means there will be a 15" Air though because the MBP will have a ULV chip at some point in the future. Then maybe the 13" Air and Pro can finally merge leaving a single lineup with all ULV and 11", 13", 15" and 17" screens.

I see it differently.

I think think the MBPs will keep 35 watt cpus. Intel will keep making them, but will call them "extreme" parts and charge a premium for them. In a MBP that commands a premium price thats not a big deal.

Otherwise I agree that we may see a MBA family in different sizes aimed at a mainstream crowd.
Reply
Reply
post #197 of 215
6/1/11 at 10:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac View Post

I see it differently.

I think think the MBPs will keep 35 watt cpus. Intel will keep making them, but will call them "extreme" parts and charge a premium for them. In a MBP that commands a premium price thats not a big deal.

Otherwise I agree that we may see a MBA family in different sizes aimed at a mainstream crowd.

Intel seems to have clarified what they are doing at Computex:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4378/i...nfigurable-tdp

They will bring all CPUs down to the 15-20W range TDP with Ivy Bridge but the turbo mode will go above the TDP subject to the temperatures. Due to the limited cooling, MBAs won't be able to go as high as the larger MBPs.
Reply
Reply
post #198 of 215
6/1/11 at 10:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Intel seems to have clarified what they are doing at Computex:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4378/i...nfigurable-tdp

They will bring all CPUs down to the 15-20W range TDP with Ivy Bridge but the turbo mode will go above the TDP subject to the temperatures. Due to the limited cooling, MBAs won't be able to go as high as the larger MBPs.

In your (and anyone else's) opinion, is Atom getting fast enough to be viable option for the MBA?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #199 of 215
6/1/11 at 11:10am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Intel seems to have clarified what they are doing at Computex:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4378/i...nfigurable-tdp

They will bring all CPUs down to the 15-20W range TDP with Ivy Bridge but the turbo mode will go above the TDP subject to the temperatures. Due to the limited cooling, MBAs won't be able to go as high as the larger MBPs.

I would bet that the mobile CPUS that can "turbo" to 35 watts will be an "extreme" part. That way Intel can charge a premium for them.

Intel will offer performance mobile CPUs. There are users who need and are willing to pay for them.
Reply
Reply
post #200 of 215
6/1/11 at 12:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

In your (and anyone else's) opinion, is Atom getting fast enough to be viable option for the MBA?

The Atom chips are designed to be the cheapest and ugliest CPUs you can get. Basically the lowest performance you can get away with. They are the new Celerons.

The Macbook Air on the other hand isn't designed this way. It's designed as a machine that gives you ultimate portability without compromising on performance.

A ULV Ivy Bridge chip is far more suitable as it doesn't have disabled features like Atom that benefit virtualization and it has a better roadmap. At Computex, Intel said they have plans to get Atom into phones and tablets:

http://pcworld.co.nz/pcworld/pcw.nsf...maps-announced

All the TDPs drop down a notch. If Intel bring out a sub 2.5W Atom with an IGP bundled, that could make for a reasonably powered iPad that would run x86 apps. Although mobile apps have to be recompiled anyway and wouldn't immediately mean desktop-class Mac apps reach the iPad, it would mean an app built for an x86 iPad would run at native speed under Lion without modification (assuming the UI was scalable).

Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac

I would bet that the mobile CPUS that can "turbo" to 35 watts will be an "extreme" part. That way Intel can charge a premium for them.

It's certainly what they tend to do. It will be interesting to see what steps they take in future to ensure the higher-end chips are worthwhile to consumers. So many times these days I hear that people will 'just get a netbook' because it's all they need. Once Ivy Bridge has quad cores, the focus will be far more on shrinking batteries and ultimately getting Mac Pro performance on passively cooled hardware.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple to begin production of Thunderbolt MacBook Airs next month