I own a 15" MBP and if I wanted anything as small as the 11" Air, I feel more inclined to buy an iPad instead. More portable, can do all the browsing, email etc and have the added benefits of game apps, and 3G subscriptions if needed.
For me, the Air is unquestionably "snappier" than the Macbook Pro in real-world use. I realize that the Air has a slower CPU so it's no surprise that the Air performs worse on the benchmark tests. I've used a 2.33Ghz Macbook Pro for years but for the past two days, I've been using 1.4Ghz 11" Air, and the Air starts up in seconds, apps open almost instantly, web pages load instantly, and every task takes much less time to complete than on my Macbook Pro. Maybe this is because the Air is newer and has fewer resident processes, maybe the faster Flash drive on the Air makes up for the CPU, maybe the Air will suffer during heavy-CPU tasks, or maybe I just have a slow Macbook Pro, but whatever the reason, the Air completes the mundane tasks much faster.
Thx. That's good to hear a real-life report.
I admit, I was one of the 'despisers' when the Air came out in its first iteration. I even remember speaking about its shortcomings to an Apple rep at the time who just wouldn't hear my comments.
But now... now that I do more repair work at client sites, and it seems "snappier" and at least has two USBs (albeit one may be filled with the USB-to-Ethernet), I might have to start thinking of it as a possible contender for my next portable computing purchase. (Please God, send me more paying clients so I can justify and cover the costs... )
I note with interest that the new 11" at 1.4GHz is almost as fast as my first-gen MBA at 1.6GHz. Since I don't have any performance complaints about my MBA, perhaps I can save $100 and stick with the 1.4 rather than upgrading to 1.6. On the other hand, it's only $100...
I'd certainly look at the 11" as an alternative to purchasing the iPad. With Lion taking on many of the features of iOS the Mac platform is starting to look fresh once more. I'm glad Apple isn't abandoning the Mac as they've appeared to be doing by not having sessions at WWDC for it.
Okay, the Macbook Air is slower than a Macbook Pro....we get it.
But, I don't think that matters to a majority of the people who will buy one. My new Macbook Air is perfect as my primary computer (on my desk), while the Mac Mini is connected to the TV. I don't think many hard-core geeks/computer folks understand that such a small and lightweight machine is fine for a vast majority of the people "out there". I won't do photoshop on this machine, but I don't use photoshot....the only heavy duty program I use is Arc GIS (on the Windows 7 partition) when connected to my desktop LCD monitor. The rest? email, web browsing, music, videos, etc. It works just fine.
So, for those who don't like it, don't buy it.
But if you're looking for "The rest? email, web browsing, music, videos, etc. It works just fine." then why not an iPad?
For me, the Air is unquestionably "snappier" than the Macbook Pro in real-world use. I realize that the Air has a slower CPU so it's no surprise that the Air performs worse on the benchmark tests. I've used a 2.33Ghz Macbook Pro for years but for the past two days, I've been using 1.4Ghz 11" Air, and the Air starts up in seconds, apps open almost instantly, web pages load instantly, and every task takes much less time to complete than on my Macbook Pro. Maybe this is because the Air is newer and has fewer resident processes, maybe the faster Flash drive on the Air makes up for the CPU, maybe the Air will suffer during heavy-CPU tasks, or maybe I just have a slow Macbook Pro, but whatever the reason, the Air completes the mundane tasks much faster.
It is ?snappier? but that is from the SSD*. If you replace the HDD in any PC you get the same results.
* It uses NAND for storage with a controller with Serial-ATA on a card connected via mini-PCIe. That is a Solid State Drive, even though currently not adhering to the form factor of a 2.5? HDD.
At the end of the day, people need what they need. All of this hypothesizing and postulating about what can/can't be done on the Air versus the iPad is silly. If you're making a LIST of things you need your device to be able to do, then you need to buy a COMPUTER, which means the Air, not the iPad.
"... and may be more appropriately categorized as a larger, faster iPad".
Except that the Macbook Air not a tablet, has no touch interface, can't be held like a tablet, doesn't operate like a tablet, doesn't look like a tablet and is not an iPad. Other than that, it's a faster iPad I guess.
or maybe dare I say it a "netbook" hmmm seems to fit the mold doesn't it.........
Weird thing about the iPad is everything felt instant to me. I don't actually have one at the present so i am going by memory but it was such a totally different experience from my MBP or Mac Pro I guess didn't mentally compare them.
Yep, stating the obvious...Apple's very elegant mobile computer platforms run the entire spectrum....
On one side, you have the lightest (i.e., most portable), least powerful, and smallest screen size-iPod, iPhone.
Then comes the iPad, MBA and lastly, the MBP's culminating with the 17" MBP being the heaviest, most powerful and with the largest screen size.
For me, weight is my main priority. Carrying the MBP 17" is like carrying around your own tombstone. I certainly can see MBP's worth carrying for some users. Just not me. Carrying a SuperDrive everywhere I go and never use, just seems daft!
I have an iPhone 4 for those times I want to be out and about (E.g., on my day off) but still connected to my business (Real Estate),
I will be getting a second gen. iPad for presentations and fun stuff. I will be getting a 11" MBA with 4gig of RAM, soon for updating my website, creating reports, etc., sitting at a restaurant, by the lake...working, somewhat.
To be honest, most of the time is spent dreaming and thinking "big!"
And, I will sell my iMac!
Gone are the days, where I want to sit at a desk, in my den, on my iMac...working! I may as well be in a cubicle. Who wants to work on a computer anymore, anyway? Ugggh!
But if you're looking for "The rest? email, web browsing, music, videos, etc. It works just fine." then why not an iPad?
The main reason? The iPad cannot exist without a computer. It is not an autonomous device. I am going to need a computer to transfer to and from the iPad. If Apple would not limit the device as such...it would do just fine so SO many people as a basic computer.
But if you're looking for "The rest? email, web browsing, music, videos, etc. It works just fine." then why not an iPad?
Then why not an iPad? Because the chart above shows what a pathetic machine the iPad is for web browsing.
"Magical".....that's the term Jobs used at the iPad's unveiling, and what the ad campaign was centered around. O.K., it's a handy tool that has a smaller form factor. But it's pathetically slow, not 'magical'. That's the reason I haven't bought one. I can surf the web much faster on my 3-yr-old MBP.
Comments
Still I wait when they answer my question about the comparison of iMac and a new iPod nano.
VS
For me, the Air is unquestionably "snappier" than the Macbook Pro in real-world use. I realize that the Air has a slower CPU so it's no surprise that the Air performs worse on the benchmark tests. I've used a 2.33Ghz Macbook Pro for years but for the past two days, I've been using 1.4Ghz 11" Air, and the Air starts up in seconds, apps open almost instantly, web pages load instantly, and every task takes much less time to complete than on my Macbook Pro. Maybe this is because the Air is newer and has fewer resident processes, maybe the faster Flash drive on the Air makes up for the CPU, maybe the Air will suffer during heavy-CPU tasks, or maybe I just have a slow Macbook Pro, but whatever the reason, the Air completes the mundane tasks much faster.
Thx. That's good to hear a real-life report.
I admit, I was one of the 'despisers' when the Air came out in its first iteration. I even remember speaking about its shortcomings to an Apple rep at the time who just wouldn't hear my comments.
But now... now that I do more repair work at client sites, and it seems "snappier" and at least has two USBs (albeit one may be filled with the USB-to-Ethernet), I might have to start thinking of it as a possible contender for my next portable computing purchase. (Please God, send me more paying clients so I can justify and cover the costs...
Both.
Slower than a MBP, really? Wow ...
Faster than an iPad, really? Wow ...
Are you serious?
Okay, the Macbook Air is slower than a Macbook Pro....we get it.
But, I don't think that matters to a majority of the people who will buy one. My new Macbook Air is perfect as my primary computer (on my desk), while the Mac Mini is connected to the TV. I don't think many hard-core geeks/computer folks understand that such a small and lightweight machine is fine for a vast majority of the people "out there". I won't do photoshop on this machine, but I don't use photoshot....the only heavy duty program I use is Arc GIS (on the Windows 7 partition) when connected to my desktop LCD monitor. The rest? email, web browsing, music, videos, etc. It works just fine.
So, for those who don't like it, don't buy it.
But if you're looking for "The rest? email, web browsing, music, videos, etc. It works just fine." then why not an iPad?
For me, the Air is unquestionably "snappier" than the Macbook Pro in real-world use. I realize that the Air has a slower CPU so it's no surprise that the Air performs worse on the benchmark tests. I've used a 2.33Ghz Macbook Pro for years but for the past two days, I've been using 1.4Ghz 11" Air, and the Air starts up in seconds, apps open almost instantly, web pages load instantly, and every task takes much less time to complete than on my Macbook Pro. Maybe this is because the Air is newer and has fewer resident processes, maybe the faster Flash drive on the Air makes up for the CPU, maybe the Air will suffer during heavy-CPU tasks, or maybe I just have a slow Macbook Pro, but whatever the reason, the Air completes the mundane tasks much faster.
It is ?snappier? but that is from the SSD*. If you replace the HDD in any PC you get the same results.
* It uses NAND for storage with a controller with Serial-ATA on a card connected via mini-PCIe. That is a Solid State Drive, even though currently not adhering to the form factor of a 2.5? HDD.
Would be teh perfect notebook *-*
AI Seriously ? things should be really slow today huh ?
"... and may be more appropriately categorized as a larger, faster iPad".
Except that the Macbook Air not a tablet, has no touch interface, can't be held like a tablet, doesn't operate like a tablet, doesn't look like a tablet and is not an iPad. Other than that, it's a faster iPad I guess.
or maybe dare I say it a "netbook" hmmm seems to fit the mold doesn't it.........
:-) Its really a lighter and faster PowerBook 100
Built for Apple by Sony.
On one side, you have the lightest (i.e., most portable), least powerful, and smallest screen size-iPod, iPhone.
Then comes the iPad, MBA and lastly, the MBP's culminating with the 17" MBP being the heaviest, most powerful and with the largest screen size.
For me, weight is my main priority. Carrying the MBP 17" is like carrying around your own tombstone. I certainly can see MBP's worth carrying for some users. Just not me. Carrying a SuperDrive everywhere I go and never use, just seems daft!
I have an iPhone 4 for those times I want to be out and about (E.g., on my day off) but still connected to my business (Real Estate),
I will be getting a second gen. iPad for presentations and fun stuff. I will be getting a 11" MBA with 4gig of RAM, soon for updating my website, creating reports, etc., sitting at a restaurant, by the lake...working, somewhat.
To be honest, most of the time is spent dreaming and thinking "big!"
And, I will sell my iMac!
Gone are the days, where I want to sit at a desk, in my den, on my iMac...working! I may as well be in a cubicle. Who wants to work on a computer anymore, anyway? Ugggh!
Best
But if you're looking for "The rest? email, web browsing, music, videos, etc. It works just fine." then why not an iPad?
The main reason? The iPad cannot exist without a computer. It is not an autonomous device. I am going to need a computer to transfer to and from the iPad. If Apple would not limit the device as such...it would do just fine so SO many people as a basic computer.
But if you're looking for "The rest? email, web browsing, music, videos, etc. It works just fine." then why not an iPad?
Then why not an iPad? Because the chart above shows what a pathetic machine the iPad is for web browsing.
"Magical".....that's the term Jobs used at the iPad's unveiling, and what the ad campaign was centered around. O.K., it's a handy tool that has a smaller form factor. But it's pathetically slow, not 'magical'. That's the reason I haven't bought one. I can surf the web much faster on my 3-yr-old MBP.