I bet I could turn on my iPad and access a book in iBooks before he could turn on his netbook and access that same book in the Kindle reader for Windows.
I bet I could turn on my iPad and access Wikipedia.com from Safari before he can do the same task on his netbook with IE or Firefox.
Then we have issues with readability on a ≤5? high 600 pixel display (most of them crappy TN panels with weak CCFL backlights). And don?t even get me started with battery life.
I?m sure there are reasons why someone would spend that much for a netbook when they can get so much more from a cheap notebook, but I have to say those reasons are limited. And I?m sure there are reasons why some might find a netbook a better consumer option than an iPad, but if you look at what people do with these devices the iPad seems to be a much better fit all around for the average user. We?ll see the real results soon about netbook sales v. tablets soon.
after a week of looking at options and price (my imac is at end of life) i have decided that i am not going to give apple any more of my money for computers. the imacs all use the cheaper dual channel memory (even the top imac i7) and the mac pro with 6 core is just outrageously priced. so bye bye os x when the imac dies. bought a pc 12gig, 6 core machine with an ati 5770 video card with 24" display for 1600 dollars (that includes shipping and tax). will run ubuntu on it. sorry apple, i decided to 'think different'.
Steve Jobs is devastated that you are not going to buy a Mac anymore.
If it's not made by Apple, I don't want it. Plus this accessory makes the iPad too Top heavy, and it's not securely fit at it's most vulnerable point, which is the point at the bottom. Too easy for the device to slip out of place.
first of all, you have a netbook AND an iPad? Technology Whore are we? I suppose you're going to say you have an iPhone, iPod touch, MBP and iMac as well? Or some combination or form of these? I'm trying to simplify my technology, not add to it...
Second, I don't want a non-Apple product. yes, I'm dreaming up things that don't exist, and probably just waiting for the world to catch up. I want a netbook sized laptop that I can run iOS on (i.e. Apps, Airplay, etc.), and some features of OSX (like garage band, installing Google Chrome, looking at my files and organizing my primary PC off it, etc.) that's made by Apple. Is this too much to ask? Probably
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsenka
I guess it depends on which netbook. My HP netbook is a lot faster at most tasks than my iPad.
I bet I could turn on my iPad and access a book in iBooks before he could turn on his netbook and access that same book in the Kindle reader for Windows.
I bet I could turn on my iPad and access Wikipedia.com from Safari before he can do the same task on his netbook with IE or Firefox.
I think you are cheating as you haven't really turned off your iPad and similarly most people don't turn off their netbooks. They're kept in standby mode and are usable as soon as the screen is open.
ps - have you ever timed how long an iPad takes to start from being completely turned off? It is a surprisingly long time.
Maybe they'll drop the Macbook Air altogether. Maybe the replacement will be a iOS Air. Maybe people have just discovered the Macbook Air and love the outdated technology and tired form factor.
I think you are cheating as you haven't really turned off your iPad and similarly most people don't turn off their netbooks. They're kept in standby mode and are usable as soon as the screen is open.
I thought my use of the term ?turn on? made it clear that I was referring to actually turning on the device, not just the display and touch-screen sensor.
Quote:
ps - have you ever timed how long an iPad takes to start from being completely turned off? It is a surprisingly long time.
You think 25 seconds is a long time? Why don?t you time how long a netbook running Windows takes to get to the login screen, then add in the time it takes to load the desktop, then add in the time it takes to launch apps.
But that does bring up a good point. People can keep their iPad in a perpetual wait mode for days without charging while using throughout the day for many fast tasks with a minimal or start time for productivity app, and without worrying about the battery dying on you. This just isn?t the same for a device using a desktop OS. Surely will someone will argue that if IE or Firefox or Outlook Express or Thunderbird is open it?s just as fast but how long can all these apps be left running and still have a device that will still be power left in the battery.
I too carry my Macbook Pro and iPad everywhere, i think the question is... Would users prefer a thiner lighter more powerful MBA with the same 13.3 display or would they prefer an 11.6 with maybe those same specs. I think the price will definitely come down be it a 13.3 or an 11.6
I still believe that as Apple is the ONLY Mac OS hardware provider, they should consider expanding their range, though I fully appreciate the business/logistics/marketing aspect of multiple products. Perhaps if the MBA13 had the more-requested features, we would not be talking of an MBA11. Or, to follow-on from my opening line, both?
I was dead-against glossy displays, but for the iMac27 I bought for home recently, it really is not an issue, at least the way we use it. We also got a MBP13 and I can't say I still do not wish for a matte display- you would have thought with the option of moving/tilting you could find an acceptable angle. Of course with my MBP15/matte I can just use it with any tilting....
My wish-list: non-crippled processor, 4gb ram, new integrated graphics is ok, Giga ethernet, extra Ethernet, USB and FW ports. Better speaker(s) and matte option and I am sold!
I can see a version that marries the best of the MBA13 and the MB13 too, and drop the prices of the MBP's.
Finally, am I in the minority for wishing for a black Mac laptop? I believe Sony do a black one with textured finish (easy to grip, difficult to slip....).
Why is it incomprehensible? Have you seen the quarterly results for sales of MacBook pros with shiny screens? Fabulous numbers.
Come on, you are an intelligent guy, this is not a proper argument. Sales can be fab, and they can be even better. Ipad sales have exceeded all expectations, but they could have been half of that and still be fab. .
And besides it's a well know fact that business users are indeed preferring matte displays, or at the very least not glassy ones, how can you. How can you tell? See what they choose when they are given an option on other platforms than apple, and on other models of apple.
So, it is indeed self evident that had macbook pro 13" should have had a matte option it would indeed sell much more.
And that's why it's incomprehensible to me how apple won't offer this option. And very disappointing of course too.
Come on, you are an intelligent guy, this is not a proper argument. Sales can be fab, and they can be even better. Ipad sales have exceeded all expectations, but they could have been half of that and still be fab. .
And besides it's a well know fact that business users are indeed preferring matte displays, or at the very least not glassy ones, how can you. How can you tell? See what they choose when they are given an option on other platforms than apple, and on other models of apple.
1) I think Doretea is one of those elusive female posters.
2) If matte displays are so popular then…
… why don’t exist for all Macs
… why did it take so long for the 15" to get a matte display.
… why do they charge an extra $50 when the glossy glass panel will surely be more costly to engineer, produce, install and service than having the cheap plastic of matte top.
… why does matte only come on the high-res display options which in itself is an additional charge of $100, before you add the $50 additional charge on the 15” MBP?
Quote:
So, it is indeed self evident that had macbook pro 13" should have had a matte option it would indeed sell much more.
And that's why it's incomprehensible to me how apple won't offer this option. And very disappointing of course too.
Sure, if Apple has more products to sell to meet the diverse needs of more people they can sell more items. That is how commerce works, the problem with that concept is that products cost money so you have to find your core market and focus on that to maximize profits. Apple will allow a matte option in the 13” Mac if the sales are high enough to justify it, but that is the only reason they would or should do it. So far, based on the rhetorical questions I posed above it doesn’t look like something that is wildly popular among business users or consumers; I bet this is regulated mostly to a small but solid core of image and video-based professionals and how many of them use a 13” Mac with a 110ppi display for their work?
PS: If future Macs will all be touchscreen-capable expect glass panels on all future Macs.
Unlike most people on these forums, I seem to be the minority that thinks Less is more. I don't need a desktop, laptop, iPad and iPhone to function. I'm looking for Apple to make a device that truly bridges the gap between the desktop and the iphone. Right now the iPad nor the MBA does that for me. I don't want a Laptop as my primary PC and the iPad doesn't work well enough for me as a bridge device (for reasons i've already posted on this forum). I think this is where the MBA with a hybrid iOS/OSX or and iOS MBA would come into place. Apple needs to address an issue i've had for a while using multiple devices in their "ecosystem"; that being better integration across platforms. I don't want two PC's when i'm in my own house and want to coach-potato it up, or while traveling. I want a companion device that allows me to remote into my desktop while on the coach or can be sync'd while traveling. I usually don't want a full OSX device when on the coach or traveling, just some essentials. Right now a laptop nor the iPad combines the best of both worlds.
Edit:I think one way they could bridge the gap would be to allow iPHone/Touch/iPad Apps to run in OSX. Another way they could bridge this gap is to allow cloud sync from a laptop/iPad to my primary iTunes Server (being my PC). Now perhaps that's what Airplay is going to be, but I think Airplay will mainly just allow the reverse to happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTel
Maybe they'll drop the Macbook Air altogether. Maybe the replacement will be a iOS Air. Maybe people have just discovered the Macbook Air and love the outdated technology and tired form factor.
I see the rumored MBA (as rumored) as filling the gaping void between iPad and MBP.
You mean like the $999 Macbook?
iPad 499-699
Macbook 999
MBP 1199-2199
MBA 1499-1799
If they were to revamp the MBA and price it between the iPad and MBP, then what purpose does the white Macbook serve in the lineup anymore? If the price is dropping that significantly, then one or the other must go. I think we'll see similar price structures, maybe $100 off current MBA prices. CLV processors, 4GB RAM and SSD across the board.
Or Apple will zig when we all expect them to zag and wow us w/a take on things we never anticipated
I thought my use of the term ?turn on? made it clear that I was referring to actually turning on the device, not just the display and touch-screen sensor.
You think 25 seconds is a long time? Why don?t you time how long a netbook running Windows takes to get to the login screen, then add in the time it takes to load the desktop, then add in the time it takes to launch apps.
But that does bring up a good point. People can keep their iPad in a perpetual wait mode for days without charging while using throughout the day for many fast tasks with a minimal or start time for productivity app, and without worrying about the battery dying on you. This just isn?t the same for a device using a desktop OS. Surely will someone will argue that if IE or Firefox or Outlook Express or Thunderbird is open it?s just as fast but how long can all these apps be left running and still have a device that will still be power left in the battery.
Start up time is just one measure of performance and as people do leave their machines in sleep mode with IE or Firefox or Outlook Express or Thunderbird running it isn't that important. As I said I think you are cheating in your argument by focusing on this one performance measurement.
Start up time is just one measure of performance and as people do leave their machines in sleep mode with IE or Firefox or Outlook Express or Thunderbird running it isn't that important. As I said I think you are cheating in your argument by focusing on this one performance measurement.
I didn?t start at Sleep Mode because the netbook would have no chance. I can hit the home button on an iDevice and then start Safari or Mail before a netbook user can open up their netbook lid, wait for the HDD to spin up again and wake, then they have to use the mouse to click on IE/Firefox or OE/Thunderbird to launch their app. Let?s not forget that Windows can take a long time to reestablish a wireless connection.
If you are talking with this programs actually running in the background at all times and opening the lid only turns on the display but the full OS is constantly running, well that is a silly comparison as the battery life would be eaten up rather quickly that way. There is just no comparison to an iDevice and you still may have slower and worse access to mail and internet browsing due to the need to maneuverer a mouse and use a cramped keyboard.
Like I stated, I?m sure there are some consumers that find them ideal, but for what most people want from satellite computers is what Apple has provided and what others are now scrambling to offer.
BTW, just because an Atom processor is faster than an ARM processor doesn?t mean that it can do the same task faster. The OS and apps are important to how every runs. You tie an anvil to the world?s faster runner and he?s still the world?s fastest runner, but he?s not going to be impressing anyone.
The reason matte returned to the 15" is because so many people voiced this request, not the other way around - that it was delayed because of not enough interest. It was delayed because as you said apple are looking for uniformity with the glass displays that will enable them in the future to add the touch interface. That's one of the reasons it's not there on imacs. Apple have made a functional and above all aesthetic choice with the glass. Sadly this renders the glare for so many of us simply unbearable and this is no issue of blue ray or no blue ray, of no e-sata, and ll those other minor complaints that people whine about.
It's a huge usability issue for a vast array of people including myself. I can't barely tolerate the glare on the iphone, I can again barely accept it on the ipad, and I simply cannot stand it on the imacs and mbps. But we know how stubborn apple can be when they reach an aesthetic decision (let's take for example never having produced a two physical button mouse). The extra charge is there btw because I think it's a different manufacturing process to produce a matte macbook pro, and the volumes are much lower than the de facto glass panel.
The fact of the matter remains that if apple had only a small minority of users complaining about lack of matte, that being apple, they would have NEVER decided to switch back to matte on a brand new model with a new aesthetic. This concession on the macbook pro 15" tells me that they have a whole lot of people demanding them that they simply can't ignore. I would wager it's about half an half for matte and glassy. But of course when they made that aesthetic decision it would be admission of failure of their design if they then offered matte across the board. That's like saying we spent so much time designing this but if you don't like it or find it very useable we have back up option for you. This is simply not apple. Yet they have made many concessions against the glassy display: on the 17" and 15" mbps and on the air.
Apologies to Dorothea, which has beautiful Greek name for nick, where doro: is gift, and thea: is godess (as well as view).
Most things. Opening documents, typing, web browsing, email, photo browsing, and especially video playback. I often get "Your iPad is probably too slow to play this movie correctly" errors on files that play flawlessly on the HP netbook.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orlando
I think you are cheating as you haven't really turned off your iPad and similarly most people don't turn off their netbooks. They're kept in standby mode and are usable as soon as the screen is open.
ps - have you ever timed how long an iPad takes to start from being completely turned off? It is a surprisingly long time.
Exactly, it never takes more than a few seconds for me to "start" my netbook and start using it.
**It's important to distinguish that I'm not trying to promote HP over Apple here. I'd much rather have an Apple netbook with similar capabilities to the HP Mini 5103. That is the product that I think should replace the MBA.
Most things. Opening documents, typing, web browsing, email, photo browsing, and especially video playback. I often get "Your iPad is probably too slow to play this movie correctly" errors on files that play flawlessly on the HP netbook..
That is nonsense. And show us this "Your iPad is probably too slow to play this movie correctly? message.
Quote:
Exactly, it never takes more than a few seconds for me to "start" my netbook and start using it..
More nonsense. ?A few?, eh? Can?t even give an actual number like I provided? based on the specs of that HP Mini we can easily see you?re talking double the time to start up over the iPad, not to mention important things like display type and battery life compared to the iPad. If you go with the HD panel you impact battery and cost eve more.
Quote:
**It's important to distinguish that I'm not trying to promote HP over Apple here. I'd much rather have an Apple netbook with similar capabilities to the HP Mini 5103. That is the product that I think should replace the MBA.
Even the original MBA can run circles around your netbook, and that?s before you factor in the screen size and fullsize keyboard which make the MBA a much better choice for the people it was designed for.
It?s great that you like your netbook (though I would have personally gotten something from Asus) but to say that your netbook is what the MBA should be and that your netbook can perform any task faster than an iPad and do it better is silly. Why not find the enjoyment of your product without have to make up reasons to like it before you can do so? It makes no sense.
That is nonsense. And show us this "Your iPad is probably too slow to play this movie correctly? message.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
More nonsense. ?A few?, eh? Can?t even give an actual number like I provided?
I wasn't sure of the exact number, I just knew it was nowhere near as slow as Apple apologists usually claim. I just went and timed it, and it's just under 20 seconds from closed to running and displaying a page in Firefox.
That is nonsense. And show us this "Your iPad is probably too slow to play this movie correctly? message.
VLC on my old iBook gives me that "your CPU is too slow to play this" message on... just about every video. To be expected since it's an ancient laptop, but I'm sure VLC on the iPad has the same error messages.
Quote:
More nonsense. ?A few?, eh? Can?t even give an actual number like I provided? based on the specs of that HP Mini we can easily see you?re talking double the time to start up over the iPad, not to mention important things like display type and battery life compared to the iPad. If you go with the HD panel you impact battery and cost eve more.
Do you shut down your laptop every time you're done using it, or do you put it to sleep like a normal person? The wakeup time for a netbook is as fast as any other computer, a second or two.
Comments
Could you please name a few?
I?m curious, too.
I bet I could turn on my iPad and access a book in iBooks before he could turn on his netbook and access that same book in the Kindle reader for Windows.
I bet I could turn on my iPad and access Wikipedia.com from Safari before he can do the same task on his netbook with IE or Firefox.
Then we have issues with readability on a ≤5? high 600 pixel display (most of them crappy TN panels with weak CCFL backlights). And don?t even get me started with battery life.
I?m sure there are reasons why someone would spend that much for a netbook when they can get so much more from a cheap notebook, but I have to say those reasons are limited. And I?m sure there are reasons why some might find a netbook a better consumer option than an iPad, but if you look at what people do with these devices the iPad seems to be a much better fit all around for the average user. We?ll see the real results soon about netbook sales v. tablets soon.
after a week of looking at options and price (my imac is at end of life) i have decided that i am not going to give apple any more of my money for computers. the imacs all use the cheaper dual channel memory (even the top imac i7) and the mac pro with 6 core is just outrageously priced. so bye bye os x when the imac dies. bought a pc 12gig, 6 core machine with an ati 5770 video card with 24" display for 1600 dollars (that includes shipping and tax). will run ubuntu on it. sorry apple, i decided to 'think different'.
Steve Jobs is devastated that you are not going to buy a Mac anymore.
Want iPad with physical keyboard? Try this:
http://www.9to5mac.com/26887/ipad-ke...ble-in-the-u-s
Second, I don't want a non-Apple product. yes, I'm dreaming up things that don't exist, and probably just waiting for the world to catch up. I want a netbook sized laptop that I can run iOS on (i.e. Apps, Airplay, etc.), and some features of OSX (like garage band, installing Google Chrome, looking at my files and organizing my primary PC off it, etc.) that's made by Apple. Is this too much to ask? Probably
I guess it depends on which netbook. My HP netbook is a lot faster at most tasks than my iPad.
ROTFLMAO! I cannot imagine a MBA priced below $1199.
I’m curious, too.
I bet I could turn on my iPad and access a book in iBooks before he could turn on his netbook and access that same book in the Kindle reader for Windows.
I bet I could turn on my iPad and access Wikipedia.com from Safari before he can do the same task on his netbook with IE or Firefox.
I think you are cheating as you haven't really turned off your iPad and similarly most people don't turn off their netbooks. They're kept in standby mode and are usable as soon as the screen is open.
ps - have you ever timed how long an iPad takes to start from being completely turned off? It is a surprisingly long time.
I think you are cheating as you haven't really turned off your iPad and similarly most people don't turn off their netbooks. They're kept in standby mode and are usable as soon as the screen is open.
I thought my use of the term ?turn on? made it clear that I was referring to actually turning on the device, not just the display and touch-screen sensor.
ps - have you ever timed how long an iPad takes to start from being completely turned off? It is a surprisingly long time.
You think 25 seconds is a long time? Why don?t you time how long a netbook running Windows takes to get to the login screen, then add in the time it takes to load the desktop, then add in the time it takes to launch apps.
But that does bring up a good point. People can keep their iPad in a perpetual wait mode for days without charging while using throughout the day for many fast tasks with a minimal or start time for productivity app, and without worrying about the battery dying on you. This just isn?t the same for a device using a desktop OS. Surely will someone will argue that if IE or Firefox or Outlook Express or Thunderbird is open it?s just as fast but how long can all these apps be left running and still have a device that will still be power left in the battery.
I too carry my Macbook Pro and iPad everywhere, i think the question is... Would users prefer a thiner lighter more powerful MBA with the same 13.3 display or would they prefer an 11.6 with maybe those same specs. I think the price will definitely come down be it a 13.3 or an 11.6
I still believe that as Apple is the ONLY Mac OS hardware provider, they should consider expanding their range, though I fully appreciate the business/logistics/marketing aspect of multiple products. Perhaps if the MBA13 had the more-requested features, we would not be talking of an MBA11. Or, to follow-on from my opening line, both?
I was dead-against glossy displays, but for the iMac27 I bought for home recently, it really is not an issue, at least the way we use it. We also got a MBP13 and I can't say I still do not wish for a matte display- you would have thought with the option of moving/tilting you could find an acceptable angle. Of course with my MBP15/matte I can just use it with any tilting....
My wish-list: non-crippled processor, 4gb ram, new integrated graphics is ok, Giga ethernet, extra Ethernet, USB and FW ports. Better speaker(s) and matte option and I am sold!
I can see a version that marries the best of the MBA13 and the MB13 too, and drop the prices of the MBP's.
Finally, am I in the minority for wishing for a black Mac laptop? I believe Sony do a black one with textured finish (easy to grip, difficult to slip....).
Why is it incomprehensible? Have you seen the quarterly results for sales of MacBook pros with shiny screens? Fabulous numbers.
Come on, you are an intelligent guy, this is not a proper argument. Sales can be fab, and they can be even better. Ipad sales have exceeded all expectations, but they could have been half of that and still be fab.
And besides it's a well know fact that business users are indeed preferring matte displays, or at the very least not glassy ones, how can you. How can you tell? See what they choose when they are given an option on other platforms than apple, and on other models of apple.
So, it is indeed self evident that had macbook pro 13" should have had a matte option it would indeed sell much more.
And that's why it's incomprehensible to me how apple won't offer this option. And very disappointing of course too.
Come on, you are an intelligent guy, this is not a proper argument. Sales can be fab, and they can be even better. Ipad sales have exceeded all expectations, but they could have been half of that and still be fab.
And besides it's a well know fact that business users are indeed preferring matte displays, or at the very least not glassy ones, how can you. How can you tell? See what they choose when they are given an option on other platforms than apple, and on other models of apple.
1) I think Doretea is one of those elusive female posters.
2) If matte displays are so popular then…
So, it is indeed self evident that had macbook pro 13" should have had a matte option it would indeed sell much more.
And that's why it's incomprehensible to me how apple won't offer this option. And very disappointing of course too.
Sure, if Apple has more products to sell to meet the diverse needs of more people they can sell more items. That is how commerce works, the problem with that concept is that products cost money so you have to find your core market and focus on that to maximize profits. Apple will allow a matte option in the 13” Mac if the sales are high enough to justify it, but that is the only reason they would or should do it. So far, based on the rhetorical questions I posed above it doesn’t look like something that is wildly popular among business users or consumers; I bet this is regulated mostly to a small but solid core of image and video-based professionals and how many of them use a 13” Mac with a 110ppi display for their work?
PS: If future Macs will all be touchscreen-capable expect glass panels on all future Macs.
Edit:I think one way they could bridge the gap would be to allow iPHone/Touch/iPad Apps to run in OSX. Another way they could bridge this gap is to allow cloud sync from a laptop/iPad to my primary iTunes Server (being my PC). Now perhaps that's what Airplay is going to be, but I think Airplay will mainly just allow the reverse to happen.
Maybe they'll drop the Macbook Air altogether. Maybe the replacement will be a iOS Air. Maybe people have just discovered the Macbook Air and love the outdated technology and tired form factor.
I see the rumored MBA (as rumored) as filling the gaping void between iPad and MBP.
You mean like the $999 Macbook?
iPad 499-699
Macbook 999
MBP 1199-2199
MBA 1499-1799
If they were to revamp the MBA and price it between the iPad and MBP, then what purpose does the white Macbook serve in the lineup anymore? If the price is dropping that significantly, then one or the other must go. I think we'll see similar price structures, maybe $100 off current MBA prices. CLV processors, 4GB RAM and SSD across the board.
Or Apple will zig when we all expect them to zag and wow us w/a take on things we never anticipated
I thought my use of the term ?turn on? made it clear that I was referring to actually turning on the device, not just the display and touch-screen sensor.
You think 25 seconds is a long time? Why don?t you time how long a netbook running Windows takes to get to the login screen, then add in the time it takes to load the desktop, then add in the time it takes to launch apps.
But that does bring up a good point. People can keep their iPad in a perpetual wait mode for days without charging while using throughout the day for many fast tasks with a minimal or start time for productivity app, and without worrying about the battery dying on you. This just isn?t the same for a device using a desktop OS. Surely will someone will argue that if IE or Firefox or Outlook Express or Thunderbird is open it?s just as fast but how long can all these apps be left running and still have a device that will still be power left in the battery.
Start up time is just one measure of performance and as people do leave their machines in sleep mode with IE or Firefox or Outlook Express or Thunderbird running it isn't that important. As I said I think you are cheating in your argument by focusing on this one performance measurement.
Start up time is just one measure of performance and as people do leave their machines in sleep mode with IE or Firefox or Outlook Express or Thunderbird running it isn't that important. As I said I think you are cheating in your argument by focusing on this one performance measurement.
I didn?t start at Sleep Mode because the netbook would have no chance. I can hit the home button on an iDevice and then start Safari or Mail before a netbook user can open up their netbook lid, wait for the HDD to spin up again and wake, then they have to use the mouse to click on IE/Firefox or OE/Thunderbird to launch their app. Let?s not forget that Windows can take a long time to reestablish a wireless connection.
If you are talking with this programs actually running in the background at all times and opening the lid only turns on the display but the full OS is constantly running, well that is a silly comparison as the battery life would be eaten up rather quickly that way. There is just no comparison to an iDevice and you still may have slower and worse access to mail and internet browsing due to the need to maneuverer a mouse and use a cramped keyboard.
Like I stated, I?m sure there are some consumers that find them ideal, but for what most people want from satellite computers is what Apple has provided and what others are now scrambling to offer.
BTW, just because an Atom processor is faster than an ARM processor doesn?t mean that it can do the same task faster. The OS and apps are important to how every runs. You tie an anvil to the world?s faster runner and he?s still the world?s fastest runner, but he?s not going to be impressing anyone.
The reason matte returned to the 15" is because so many people voiced this request, not the other way around - that it was delayed because of not enough interest. It was delayed because as you said apple are looking for uniformity with the glass displays that will enable them in the future to add the touch interface. That's one of the reasons it's not there on imacs. Apple have made a functional and above all aesthetic choice with the glass. Sadly this renders the glare for so many of us simply unbearable and this is no issue of blue ray or no blue ray, of no e-sata, and ll those other minor complaints that people whine about.
It's a huge usability issue for a vast array of people including myself. I can't barely tolerate the glare on the iphone, I can again barely accept it on the ipad, and I simply cannot stand it on the imacs and mbps. But we know how stubborn apple can be when they reach an aesthetic decision (let's take for example never having produced a two physical button mouse). The extra charge is there btw because I think it's a different manufacturing process to produce a matte macbook pro, and the volumes are much lower than the de facto glass panel.
The fact of the matter remains that if apple had only a small minority of users complaining about lack of matte, that being apple, they would have NEVER decided to switch back to matte on a brand new model with a new aesthetic. This concession on the macbook pro 15" tells me that they have a whole lot of people demanding them that they simply can't ignore. I would wager it's about half an half for matte and glassy. But of course when they made that aesthetic decision it would be admission of failure of their design if they then offered matte across the board. That's like saying we spent so much time designing this but if you don't like it or find it very useable we have back up option for you. This is simply not apple. Yet they have made many concessions against the glassy display: on the 17" and 15" mbps and on the air.
Apologies to Dorothea, which has beautiful Greek name for nick, where doro: is gift, and thea: is godess (as well as view).
Could you please name a few?
Most things. Opening documents, typing, web browsing, email, photo browsing, and especially video playback. I often get "Your iPad is probably too slow to play this movie correctly" errors on files that play flawlessly on the HP netbook.
I think you are cheating as you haven't really turned off your iPad and similarly most people don't turn off their netbooks. They're kept in standby mode and are usable as soon as the screen is open.
ps - have you ever timed how long an iPad takes to start from being completely turned off? It is a surprisingly long time.
Exactly, it never takes more than a few seconds for me to "start" my netbook and start using it.
**It's important to distinguish that I'm not trying to promote HP over Apple here. I'd much rather have an Apple netbook with similar capabilities to the HP Mini 5103. That is the product that I think should replace the MBA.
Most things. Opening documents, typing, web browsing, email, photo browsing, and especially video playback. I often get "Your iPad is probably too slow to play this movie correctly" errors on files that play flawlessly on the HP netbook..
That is nonsense. And show us this "Your iPad is probably too slow to play this movie correctly? message.
Exactly, it never takes more than a few seconds for me to "start" my netbook and start using it..
More nonsense. ?A few?, eh? Can?t even give an actual number like I provided? based on the specs of that HP Mini we can easily see you?re talking double the time to start up over the iPad, not to mention important things like display type and battery life compared to the iPad. If you go with the HD panel you impact battery and cost eve more.
**It's important to distinguish that I'm not trying to promote HP over Apple here. I'd much rather have an Apple netbook with similar capabilities to the HP Mini 5103. That is the product that I think should replace the MBA.
Even the original MBA can run circles around your netbook, and that?s before you factor in the screen size and fullsize keyboard which make the MBA a much better choice for the people it was designed for.
It?s great that you like your netbook (though I would have personally gotten something from Asus) but to say that your netbook is what the MBA should be and that your netbook can perform any task faster than an iPad and do it better is silly. Why not find the enjoyment of your product without have to make up reasons to like it before you can do so? It makes no sense.
That is nonsense. And show us this "Your iPad is probably too slow to play this movie correctly? message.
More nonsense. ?A few?, eh? Can?t even give an actual number like I provided?
I wasn't sure of the exact number, I just knew it was nowhere near as slow as Apple apologists usually claim. I just went and timed it, and it's just under 20 seconds from closed to running and displaying a page in Firefox.
That is nonsense. And show us this "Your iPad is probably too slow to play this movie correctly? message.
VLC on my old iBook gives me that "your CPU is too slow to play this" message on... just about every video. To be expected since it's an ancient laptop, but I'm sure VLC on the iPad has the same error messages.
More nonsense. ?A few?, eh? Can?t even give an actual number like I provided? based on the specs of that HP Mini we can easily see you?re talking double the time to start up over the iPad, not to mention important things like display type and battery life compared to the iPad. If you go with the HD panel you impact battery and cost eve more.
Do you shut down your laptop every time you're done using it, or do you put it to sleep like a normal person? The wakeup time for a netbook is as fast as any other computer, a second or two.