From my perspective, the main differentiating factor, besides size/weight, between the 13" MBP and the 13" MBA is the battery life -- 10hrs vs. 7hrs, respectively. (And the MBP could be even better without the optical drive, if they used the space for battery.) Not that 7hrs is shabby, but an extra 3hrs is an extra 3hrs. The greater battery life vs. easier portability would be the main consideration for me in choosing one over the other. All the other stuff -- instant on, raw performance, storage capacity, etc. -- seem less important when deciding which one is right than weighing those two factors.
Funny, because the venerable "Now if they would just include this and up this spec and change this I would totally buy one" is the flip side of the "costs more than another machine with exactly the same GPU" moving target I just posted about.
If Apple took the cumulative demands of the average Apple new-release online discussion thread and actually implemented them, every single thing they make would weigh 8 pound and cost $3,000,-- including the iPods.
The worst part of this non-review is Mossberg's repetition of Apple's hype that the new MBA is inspired by the iPad. That is nothing more than marketing hyperbole -- the new MacBook Air is not fundamentally different than the original one that predated the iPad. But they all repeat this line that it's inspired by the iPad. It's like everyone suddenly "remembered" that we've been fighting Eastasia all this time!
That's a silly complaint. I agree that the 13" Air isn't all that different from the original--BUT it's a hell of a lot cheaper/better value. Apple says they learned a lot about efficiently designing and developing portable electronics based on their experience with the iPad. Somehow they are lying? They lowered the price, improved the battery, increased the screen size, and made other changes. They switched from off-the-shelf SSDs to raw flash storage, for one thing. Presumably that's an example of an engineering solution developed for the iPad that went straight into the Air. How is Apple to be criticized for telling their story in a way that puts the product in the best light?
Who ever thought we'd see this in a laptop evaluation... "...have only two gigabytes of memory in their base configuration" ONLY? 2 GBs in BASE?? Aren't we just 1 iteration from 2GB being the base for the bottom line MBP? Crazy...
I remember back when I had the original 128k Mac?the 512k Mac seemed like too much for my needs.
People that buy ultra-portable notebooks don?t care about upgradeability.
Perhaps not, but they care about repairability. The more generic parts something includes, the easier and cheaper it is to repair or replace.
I know I am not the average user, but I've never had a laptop I didn't at one point upgrade or repair some internal component. Once I had the pleasure of replacing the LCD of an old Compaq. Picked one up on eBay for $40, saved myself a hundred bucks on the repair and got another year and a half out of the thing.
Now imagine the cost of replacing Apple's custom LCD in the air...
2) The 128GB option on the 13" MBP costs $350 extra, and the 256GB option is $800 extra. For that, the 13" MBA is a steal.
That was the convincer for me on this round (bought a lot of the first gen MBA's for family and business acquaintances, mostly with SSD's). Use an iPad for a second monitor, and the 13" MBA makes a fantastic traveling 'puter for me.
Now, when all the MBP's go solid state like the MBA's, I'll want to see what they offer, but for the moment, for what I do, the 13" MBA is perfection.
More of Mossberg's typical word-fellatio. He barely mentions the fixed amount of RAM and Solid State, when those are two critical drawbacks to choosing the Air. I'm not saying it isn't an impressive machine but the sacrifices it makes to be impressive are too serious to just mention in passing. Even the "comparable" ultra-portable Dell uses replaceable/upgradable parts... for machines that are low on power to begin with, upgradeability (or lack thereof) is an important factor.
I think Solipsism had already responded to this: "I wonder what percentage of users are actively using more than 64GB on their systems and what percentage of users are actively processing data that requires a faster processor. It seems to me, anecdotally speaking from the majority of people I know, that most use a handful of apps for IM, web browsing, email, and playing video, which can easily be done by the cheapest MBA. Most aren?t converting large amounts of data, or copying large DV video to edit in iMovie, etc. I think these will be very popular."
The popularity of Apple products speak to the possibility that they are hitting sweet spots in consumer requirements for their PCs. As many have said, if the characteristics of these Apple (fill in the blank) don't meet your needs, buy something else that does. I don't think it's advisable to assume that because you want upgradeability that everyone else thinks that's what they have to have too.
You know, I think otherwise straight thinking types have so internalized the "Apple tax" meme that they can't drop it even when it makes no sense.
For instance, in an otherwise excellent review that balances the pluses and minuses of the new Airs, Anandtech has this mystifying bit:
Quote:
While $999 is much more affordable than the previous generation MacBook Air, it?s at least $400 more than you would expect to pay for a notebook with these hardware specs. We?re talking about 2GB of memory, a 1.4GHz Core 2 Duo CPU with 3MB L2 cache and an NVIDIA GeForce 320M integrated graphics chipset.
I guess I would "expect to pay" $400 less if the notebook in question were simply a low specced Dell that weighed 4 or 5 pounds with shoddy build quality that got 3 hours of battery life, but WTF? What is this insistence on comparing the price of Apple gear according to an ever changing set of limited criteria seemingly tuned to put the result in the worst possible light?
I hear ya. I?m a longtime reader of AnandTech. I posted on that thread and on the review of the 13? MBP as a Windows machine. On that latter article I even noted the odd disconnect being the author (who isn?t Anand) who praises Apple for components that are far superior to their competitors but at the end says it?s overpriced by hundreds of dollars because of the CPU, even though that C2Ds used aren?t much different from the Core-iX based on Intel?s price list. I think he even mentions on one page how the C2D with the Nvidia 320M is better than a Core-i7 with the IntelHD IGP.
On the new MBAs the 10W ULV, 18W LV and 35W C2Ds are all about the same price across the board of the MacBooks, but BareFeats even questioned how the 11? could be same price as the 13? MBA with the same configuration.
Quote:
Did you know that the 11" MBA with 1.6GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, and 128GB Flash Storage is priced exactly the same as the 13" MBA with 1.86GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, and 128GB Flash Storage? Both are $1399. Do you think it makes sense to pay the same for a smaller screen and slower CPU?
One reader pointed out the cost of the two processors is virtually the same, but I think the cost of the larger screen, SD slot, and additional aluminum for the larger body would need to be factored in.
That second paragraph is because of me (unless others emailed BareFeats). It?s possible the LCD is cheaper for the 11?, especially considering how the 13? LCD seems to be better quality, but I don?t think it would account for enough difference to affect the total price to the extent I think BareFeats is assuming.
I hear ya. I’m a longtime reader of AnandTech. I posted on that thread and on the review of the 13” MBP as a Windows machine. On that latter article I even noted the odd disconnect being the author (who isn’t Anand) who praises Apple for components that are far superior to their competitors but at the end says it’s overpriced by hundreds of dollars because of the CPU, even though that C2Ds used aren’t much different from the Core-iX based on Intel’s price list. I think he even mentions on one page how the C2D with the Nvidia 320M is better than a Core-i7 with the IntelHD IGP.
On the new MBAs the 10W ULV, 18W LV and 35W C2Ds are all about the same price across the board of the MacBooks, but BareFeats even questioned how the 11” could be same price as the 13” MBA with the same configuration.
That second paragraph is because of me (unless others emailed BareFeats). It’s possible the LCD is cheaper for the 11”, especially considering how the 13” LCD seems to be better quality, but I don’t think it would account for enough difference to affect the total price to the extent I think BareFeats is assuming.
Yep.
I just saw some article on the "the tablet market" (can't remember where off hand) that referred to the $500 entirely level iPad price as "typical Jobs money grab pricing" or some such, and practically within the same sentence casually referenced a $600 7" screen Android tablet.
It's like these guys long ago set up templates to refer to Apple's "obscene margins" or "the Apple Tax" or "high end boutique pricing" and never bothered to notice that Apple has entered a new era of aggressively priced mobile offerings-- even when it results in flatly self contradictory results.
The worst part of this non-review is Mossberg's repetition of Apple's hype that the new MBA is inspired by the iPad. That is nothing more than marketing hyperbole -- the new MacBook Air is not fundamentally different than the original one that predated the iPad. But they all repeat this line that it's inspired by the iPad. It's like everyone suddenly "remembered" that we've been fighting Eastasia all this time!
The flash drive in the new air is modeled along the drives used in the ipod, ipad etc. The flash drives used in the original models were physically very different and much more expensive. The instant resume from sleep is also very much like the experience you get from your ipad.
See what I did there?
I can't help but think you are chumming the waters with link bait for you blog.
Yep, and then call it "Apple Mac Monster" and sell for few hundred dollars It seems that you want everything for nothing. Do you really think that such a device have some advantages over iPad or MBA?
Excuse me, but did you happen to miss where I wrote I'd be willing to pay $1500 for that? Hardly "nothing." In fact, that's the cost of an MBP and an iPad combined. Your reading comprehension is abysmal. Eliminate the redundant parts (don't need two screens in one device, only a single bank of flash RAM, only one unibody case, only one battery pack, etc.) and there's no reason it should cost more than both devices combined.
And yes, I do happen to think it's nicer to carry a single device than two separate ones. That's a little something called "convergence" that you may have heard of. Even as slim as the new MBA is, why carry almost 4 pounds of devices instead of just 2.5 pounds of a single device?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Futuristic
I think Apple realized pretty early on that those "convertible" designs were a bad idea. Any moving part is subject to wear & tear over time. The hinge in a standard laptop is a necessary evil?but rotating the hinge about one axis mitigates it somewhat. Rotating a screen around two axes magnifies the problem significantly, and is much more subject to failure, let alone wear and tear.
I happen to have faith that Apple engineers could design a durable double-axis hinge. Especially with the slimness of Displayport cables (even with currently unused conductors), it would be a lot more durable than the old ribbon cables Apple used to connect LCDs. By the way, I know someone who works in a company that worships HP, so they use all HP equipment from servers on down. His convertible has been going strong for the last three years despite daily use. No loose hinge. He says other convertibles in the same company are fine as well. This isn't just guesswork and conjecture. This is actual real-world experience.
I happen to have faith that Apple engineers could design a durable double-axis hinge. Especially with the slimness of Displayport cables (even with currently unused conductors), it would be a lot more durable than the old ribbon cables Apple used to connect LCDs. By the way, I know someone who works in a company that worships HP, so they use all HP equipment from servers on down. His convertible has been going strong for the last three years despite daily use. No loose hinge. He says other convertibles in the same company are fine as well. This isn't just guesswork and conjecture. This is actual real-world experience.
I accept your word on that. But, I'm also pretty sure that Apple's engineers and designers looked at the dual-axis hinge option and decided not to go that route for whatever reason (who really can say what goes on in their crazy heads?!?!).
Well, they seem nice, but a normal macbook (pro), has the same capabilities to start up instantly (when you close and open the screen).
I like them using the flash memory though (SSD it's called actually), but it's not like they invented the thing :P It's expensive and has a quite small storage-size. It is, however, the only thing better than a normal macbook. The processor is weak. Oh, and they may be lighter and smaller, but not that much in comparison to a normal macbook.
I'd choose a normal macbook over a macbook air. (compared 999 dollar macbook vs 999 dollar macbook air). The 11" may be interesting because of being smaller, but buying the 13" would be just dumb (in my humble opinion).
I'll make a case for the 13" model
I prefer this because the screen, battery life and processor make it closer to a real MacBook, than an iPad. It loses a bit of portability, but it is still in the same featherweight class as the 11" model. The screen is the same resolution as the 15" MacBook Pro (1440x900 version). The only thing your giving up is the drive capacity and top-end CPU options. And it battery life is absolutely amazing, approaching 10+ hours if you conserve power.
Is it just me or do Walt's articles always sound as though he is a bit underwhelmed by Apples products...the iPhone, iPad and not the best laptop on the market for portability?
It's almost he is "hedging" so as not to appear too enamored with Apple.
I read this article in the WSJ day today and he comes across like an old fuddy duddy! Ugggh!
I mean in his help column he is always recommending Windows products, just like Consumer Reports...I mean do they even use computers?
As a grown man, what are you doing drinking a liquid with the exact molarity as blood designed for a baby cow! Just say'n!
Best
PS. If you ever cut off a finger...don't put it in your pocket and run to the Emergency Room...drop it in a glass of milk and then run to the Emergency Room! Good luck!
Comments
If Apple took the cumulative demands of the average Apple new-release online discussion thread and actually implemented them, every single thing they make would weigh 8 pound and cost $3,000,-- including the iPods.
The worst part of this non-review is Mossberg's repetition of Apple's hype that the new MBA is inspired by the iPad. That is nothing more than marketing hyperbole -- the new MacBook Air is not fundamentally different than the original one that predated the iPad. But they all repeat this line that it's inspired by the iPad. It's like everyone suddenly "remembered" that we've been fighting Eastasia all this time!
That's a silly complaint. I agree that the 13" Air isn't all that different from the original--BUT it's a hell of a lot cheaper/better value. Apple says they learned a lot about efficiently designing and developing portable electronics based on their experience with the iPad. Somehow they are lying? They lowered the price, improved the battery, increased the screen size, and made other changes. They switched from off-the-shelf SSDs to raw flash storage, for one thing. Presumably that's an example of an engineering solution developed for the iPad that went straight into the Air. How is Apple to be criticized for telling their story in a way that puts the product in the best light?
Who ever thought we'd see this in a laptop evaluation... "...have only two gigabytes of memory in their base configuration" ONLY? 2 GBs in BASE?? Aren't we just 1 iteration from 2GB being the base for the bottom line MBP? Crazy...
I remember back when I had the original 128k Mac?the 512k Mac seemed like too much for my needs.
People that buy ultra-portable notebooks don?t care about upgradeability.
Perhaps not, but they care about repairability. The more generic parts something includes, the easier and cheaper it is to repair or replace.
I know I am not the average user, but I've never had a laptop I didn't at one point upgrade or repair some internal component. Once I had the pleasure of replacing the LCD of an old Compaq. Picked one up on eBay for $40, saved myself a hundred bucks on the repair and got another year and a half out of the thing.
Now imagine the cost of replacing Apple's custom LCD in the air...
-Clive
1)
2) The 128GB option on the 13" MBP costs $350 extra, and the 256GB option is $800 extra. For that, the 13" MBA is a steal.
That was the convincer for me on this round (bought a lot of the first gen MBA's for family and business acquaintances, mostly with SSD's). Use an iPad for a second monitor, and the 13" MBA makes a fantastic traveling 'puter for me.
Now, when all the MBP's go solid state like the MBA's, I'll want to see what they offer, but for the moment, for what I do, the 13" MBA is perfection.
More of Mossberg's typical word-fellatio. He barely mentions the fixed amount of RAM and Solid State, when those are two critical drawbacks to choosing the Air. I'm not saying it isn't an impressive machine but the sacrifices it makes to be impressive are too serious to just mention in passing. Even the "comparable" ultra-portable Dell uses replaceable/upgradable parts... for machines that are low on power to begin with, upgradeability (or lack thereof) is an important factor.
I think Solipsism had already responded to this: "I wonder what percentage of users are actively using more than 64GB on their systems and what percentage of users are actively processing data that requires a faster processor. It seems to me, anecdotally speaking from the majority of people I know, that most use a handful of apps for IM, web browsing, email, and playing video, which can easily be done by the cheapest MBA. Most aren?t converting large amounts of data, or copying large DV video to edit in iMovie, etc. I think these will be very popular."
The popularity of Apple products speak to the possibility that they are hitting sweet spots in consumer requirements for their PCs. As many have said, if the characteristics of these Apple (fill in the blank) don't meet your needs, buy something else that does. I don't think it's advisable to assume that because you want upgradeability that everyone else thinks that's what they have to have too.
You know, I think otherwise straight thinking types have so internalized the "Apple tax" meme that they can't drop it even when it makes no sense.
For instance, in an otherwise excellent review that balances the pluses and minuses of the new Airs, Anandtech has this mystifying bit:
While $999 is much more affordable than the previous generation MacBook Air, it?s at least $400 more than you would expect to pay for a notebook with these hardware specs. We?re talking about 2GB of memory, a 1.4GHz Core 2 Duo CPU with 3MB L2 cache and an NVIDIA GeForce 320M integrated graphics chipset.
I guess I would "expect to pay" $400 less if the notebook in question were simply a low specced Dell that weighed 4 or 5 pounds with shoddy build quality that got 3 hours of battery life, but WTF? What is this insistence on comparing the price of Apple gear according to an ever changing set of limited criteria seemingly tuned to put the result in the worst possible light?
I hear ya. I?m a longtime reader of AnandTech. I posted on that thread and on the review of the 13? MBP as a Windows machine. On that latter article I even noted the odd disconnect being the author (who isn?t Anand) who praises Apple for components that are far superior to their competitors but at the end says it?s overpriced by hundreds of dollars because of the CPU, even though that C2Ds used aren?t much different from the Core-iX based on Intel?s price list. I think he even mentions on one page how the C2D with the Nvidia 320M is better than a Core-i7 with the IntelHD IGP.
On the new MBAs the 10W ULV, 18W LV and 35W C2Ds are all about the same price across the board of the MacBooks, but BareFeats even questioned how the 11? could be same price as the 13? MBA with the same configuration.
Did you know that the 11" MBA with 1.6GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, and 128GB Flash Storage is priced exactly the same as the 13" MBA with 1.86GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, and 128GB Flash Storage? Both are $1399. Do you think it makes sense to pay the same for a smaller screen and slower CPU?
One reader pointed out the cost of the two processors is virtually the same, but I think the cost of the larger screen, SD slot, and additional aluminum for the larger body would need to be factored in.
That second paragraph is because of me (unless others emailed BareFeats). It?s possible the LCD is cheaper for the 11?, especially considering how the 13? LCD seems to be better quality, but I don?t think it would account for enough difference to affect the total price to the extent I think BareFeats is assuming.
I hear ya. I’m a longtime reader of AnandTech. I posted on that thread and on the review of the 13” MBP as a Windows machine. On that latter article I even noted the odd disconnect being the author (who isn’t Anand) who praises Apple for components that are far superior to their competitors but at the end says it’s overpriced by hundreds of dollars because of the CPU, even though that C2Ds used aren’t much different from the Core-iX based on Intel’s price list. I think he even mentions on one page how the C2D with the Nvidia 320M is better than a Core-i7 with the IntelHD IGP.
On the new MBAs the 10W ULV, 18W LV and 35W C2Ds are all about the same price across the board of the MacBooks, but BareFeats even questioned how the 11” could be same price as the 13” MBA with the same configuration.
That second paragraph is because of me (unless others emailed BareFeats). It’s possible the LCD is cheaper for the 11”, especially considering how the 13” LCD seems to be better quality, but I don’t think it would account for enough difference to affect the total price to the extent I think BareFeats is assuming.
Yep.
I just saw some article on the "the tablet market" (can't remember where off hand) that referred to the $500 entirely level iPad price as "typical Jobs money grab pricing" or some such, and practically within the same sentence casually referenced a $600 7" screen Android tablet.
It's like these guys long ago set up templates to refer to Apple's "obscene margins" or "the Apple Tax" or "high end boutique pricing" and never bothered to notice that Apple has entered a new era of aggressively priced mobile offerings-- even when it results in flatly self contradictory results.
The worst part of this non-review is Mossberg's repetition of Apple's hype that the new MBA is inspired by the iPad. That is nothing more than marketing hyperbole -- the new MacBook Air is not fundamentally different than the original one that predated the iPad. But they all repeat this line that it's inspired by the iPad. It's like everyone suddenly "remembered" that we've been fighting Eastasia all this time!
The flash drive in the new air is modeled along the drives used in the ipod, ipad etc. The flash drives used in the original models were physically very different and much more expensive. The instant resume from sleep is also very much like the experience you get from your ipad.
See what I did there?
I can't help but think you are chumming the waters with link bait for you blog.
Yep, and then call it "Apple Mac Monster" and sell for few hundred dollars
Excuse me, but did you happen to miss where I wrote I'd be willing to pay $1500 for that? Hardly "nothing." In fact, that's the cost of an MBP and an iPad combined. Your reading comprehension is abysmal. Eliminate the redundant parts (don't need two screens in one device, only a single bank of flash RAM, only one unibody case, only one battery pack, etc.) and there's no reason it should cost more than both devices combined.
And yes, I do happen to think it's nicer to carry a single device than two separate ones. That's a little something called "convergence" that you may have heard of. Even as slim as the new MBA is, why carry almost 4 pounds of devices instead of just 2.5 pounds of a single device?
I think Apple realized pretty early on that those "convertible" designs were a bad idea. Any moving part is subject to wear & tear over time. The hinge in a standard laptop is a necessary evil?but rotating the hinge about one axis mitigates it somewhat. Rotating a screen around two axes magnifies the problem significantly, and is much more subject to failure, let alone wear and tear.
I happen to have faith that Apple engineers could design a durable double-axis hinge. Especially with the slimness of Displayport cables (even with currently unused conductors), it would be a lot more durable than the old ribbon cables Apple used to connect LCDs. By the way, I know someone who works in a company that worships HP, so they use all HP equipment from servers on down. His convertible has been going strong for the last three years despite daily use. No loose hinge. He says other convertibles in the same company are fine as well. This isn't just guesswork and conjecture. This is actual real-world experience.
I happen to have faith that Apple engineers could design a durable double-axis hinge. Especially with the slimness of Displayport cables (even with currently unused conductors), it would be a lot more durable than the old ribbon cables Apple used to connect LCDs. By the way, I know someone who works in a company that worships HP, so they use all HP equipment from servers on down. His convertible has been going strong for the last three years despite daily use. No loose hinge. He says other convertibles in the same company are fine as well. This isn't just guesswork and conjecture. This is actual real-world experience.
I accept your word on that. But, I'm also pretty sure that Apple's engineers and designers looked at the dual-axis hinge option and decided not to go that route for whatever reason (who really can say what goes on in their crazy heads?!?!).
Well, they seem nice, but a normal macbook (pro), has the same capabilities to start up instantly (when you close and open the screen).
I like them using the flash memory though (SSD it's called actually), but it's not like they invented the thing :P It's expensive and has a quite small storage-size. It is, however, the only thing better than a normal macbook. The processor is weak. Oh, and they may be lighter and smaller, but not that much in comparison to a normal macbook.
I'd choose a normal macbook over a macbook air. (compared 999 dollar macbook vs 999 dollar macbook air). The 11" may be interesting because of being smaller, but buying the 13" would be just dumb (in my humble opinion).
I'll make a case for the 13" model
I prefer this because the screen, battery life and processor make it closer to a real MacBook, than an iPad. It loses a bit of portability, but it is still in the same featherweight class as the 11" model. The screen is the same resolution as the 15" MacBook Pro (1440x900 version). The only thing your giving up is the drive capacity and top-end CPU options. And it battery life is absolutely amazing, approaching 10+ hours if you conserve power.
The 11" MacBook Air would TOTALLY meet my needs. Sadly, I'm poor. Sigh.
You only need one kidney to live
You only need one kidney to live
Okay, that made me blow milk up my nose.
It's almost he is "hedging" so as not to appear too enamored with Apple.
I read this article in the WSJ day today and he comes across like an old fuddy duddy! Ugggh!
I mean in his help column he is always recommending Windows products, just like Consumer Reports...I mean do they even use computers?
Best.
Okay, that made me blow milk up my nose.
As a grown man, what are you doing drinking a liquid with the exact molarity as blood designed for a baby cow! Just say'n!
Best
PS. If you ever cut off a finger...don't put it in your pocket and run to the Emergency Room...drop it in a glass of milk and then run to the Emergency Room! Good luck!
Okay, that made me blow milk up my nose.
I never said it wasn't mixed with something.
You only need one kidney to live
Ya. But I've kinda grown attached to my kidneys. Besides, how would I decide which to let go???