Apple's MacBook Air refresh may boost RAM, SSD specs

245

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 87
    asciiascii Posts: 5,936member
    The 4GB of RAM will make a lot of people happy. I am most interested in seeing how much the like Air the next-gen MBP is.
  • Reply 22 of 87
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    Apple's forthcoming refresh to its MacBook Air line may up the value proposition for...



    I don?t mean to be off-topic? but who talks about upping the value proposition? Biz-weasels, maybe? I mean, a boost in specs may make Apple?s product more enticing, sure. But the upping of value propositions is something I want no part of. Corporate jargon is, I guess, a pet peeve. We?re still best friends though.



    Back to the show.
  • Reply 23 of 87
    noirdesirnoirdesir Posts: 1,027member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mcarling View Post


    Going from 2GB to 4GB at the base price is already passing on the savings to us. If you really need 8GB, either wait for the 2012 models (at which time I expect 8GB to be a BTO option for the MacBook Air) or get a MacBook or MacBook Pro.



    The question is why should Apple not offer a BTO option? It sure adds extra revenue and from all their past pricing, even increases the overall margin.
  • Reply 24 of 87
    aiolosaiolos Posts: 228member
    I hope the 8GB RAM option is true, but as far as the ULV processors, go, I still don't understand why everyone thinks Apple will use the ULV processors. Since the GPU in now bundled with the CPU, and the power usage of those combined chips is 17W, I don't understand why they need to use them as the current MBA's use a 17W CPU + separate 10W GPU. That's 27W. Therefore Apple should be able to use LV processors, which are 25W. Am I missing something here because I don't see why Apple needs to drop performance to the ULV processors when the LV processors are in the same thermal design arena as what the current models employ. Maybe the ULV's processors can be used on the 11 inch, which has had complaints about the battery life, but the 13" is more than capable of handling the LV processors.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ktappe View Post


    Not sure it's a matter of price so much as space and power usage. The Air already needs some help in the battery life dept, and adding 8Gb to it will not help.



    Space? I was under the impression RAM modules were a given size, and the density of the RAM on it was the difference. Also, how does more RAM = more power usage? You either access the RAM or you don't.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mcarling View Post


    Going from 2GB to 4GB at the base price is already passing on the savings to us. If you really need 8GB, either wait for the 2012 models (at which time I expect 8GB to be a BTO option for the MacBook Air) or get a MacBook or MacBook Pro.



    Apply generally always provides a BTO RAM upgrade, so if they change the base amount to 4GB as this article implies, I would expect an 8GB option.
  • Reply 25 of 87
    rkdiddyrkdiddy Posts: 1member
    I'm seriously considering selling my 2.4ghz C2D MBP for this. If it is available with 256gb HD and 8 GB - that would seal the deal.
  • Reply 26 of 87
    prof. peabodyprof. peabody Posts: 2,860member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mcarling View Post


    I don't do media work -- unless you count text with an occasional picture as media. There is no way I could work on a 64GB system with 10.6 Snow Leopard.



    Snow Leopard wouldn't even use up half that space. If you don't have media files, why isn't the remaining 30GBs or so big enough for you?
  • Reply 27 of 87
    pendergastpendergast Posts: 1,358member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zunx View Post


    Ultrabooks should be 400 to 600 g and as pocketable as possible (7-inch or so).



    How useful would that be? A 7" laptop? What work would you be able to do on it?



    There's no market for that, especially with a desktop OS. Just get an iPad.
  • Reply 28 of 87
    mcarlingmcarling Posts: 1,106member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by noirdesir View Post


    The question is why should Apple not offer a BTO option? It sure adds extra revenue and from all their past pricing, even increases the overall margin.



    It would be expensive to offer an 8GB BTO option for the MacBook Air (whether anyone ordered it or not) and not many customers would choose it.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aiolos View Post


    I was under the impression RAM modules were a given size, and the density of the RAM on it was the difference.



    There are no RAM modules (SO-DIMMs) in a MacBook Air. The DRAM chips are soldered directly to the motherboard. To go from 4GB to 8GB requires either using denser chips (which are currently insanely expensive) or using twice as many of them (for which there is no space).



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aiolos View Post


    Also, how does more RAM = more power usage? You either access the RAM or you don't.



    DRAM uses power whenever the machine is powered on, whether the CPU is in use or idle.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aiolos View Post


    Apply generally always provides a BTO RAM upgrade, so if they change the base amount to 4GB as this article implies, I would expect an 8GB option.



    No, when I bought my MacBook Air, Apple did not offer a BTO for more RAM; it was 2GB minimum and maximum. I believe that was true for Revs A, B, and C. I believe only the Rev D MacBook Air models have offered a BTO option for more RAM (4GB rather than the standard 2GB).
  • Reply 29 of 87
    pendergastpendergast Posts: 1,358member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


    Snow Leopard wouldn't even use up half that space. If you don't have media files, why isn't the remaining 30GBs or so big enough for you?



    Especially considering Thunderbolt will allow you to use an external drive when at work or at home that runs just as fast as if it were inside the case.
  • Reply 30 of 87
    mcarlingmcarling Posts: 1,106member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


    Snow Leopard wouldn't even use up half that space. If you don't have media files, why isn't the remaining 30GBs or so big enough for you?



    I have a 15" MacBook Pro with the 128GB option. With no movies and no music, I have 14GB free.
  • Reply 31 of 87
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mcarling View Post


    I have a 15" MacBook Pro with the 128GB option. With no movies and no music, I have 14GB free.



    Then you must have a lot of apps. SL itself is only about 10 GB.
  • Reply 32 of 87
    dcorbandcorban Posts: 58member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by rkdiddy View Post


    I'm seriously considering selling my 2.4ghz C2D MBP for this. If it is available with 256gb HD and 8 GB - that would seal the deal.



    I have a 2010 aluminum 2.0Ghz MacBook that I am giving away to a friend after I buy this new MBA.
  • Reply 33 of 87
    dcorbandcorban Posts: 58member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    Then you must have a lot of apps. SL itself is only about 10 GB.



    I don't have a "lot of apps". If you subtract my iTunes folder, I am using about 90GB. The largest set of files I have on disk is my iPhoto library at 16GB.



    I have no idea how someone would get by with only 64GB. You'd have to only email and web browse.
  • Reply 34 of 87
    aiolosaiolos Posts: 228member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mcarling View Post


    There are no RAM modules (SO-DIMMs) in a MacBook Air. The DRAM chips are soldered directly to the motherboard. To go from 4GB to 8GB requires either using denser chips (which are currently insanely expensive) or using twice as many of them (for which there is no space).





    DRAM uses power whenever the machine is powered on, whether the CPU is in use or idle.





    No, when I bought my MacBook Air, Apple did not offer a BTO for more RAM; it was 2GB minimum and maximum. I believe that was true for Revs A, B, and C. I believe only the Rev D MacBook Air models have offered a BTO option for more RAM (4GB rather than the standard 2GB).



    Ah. Didn't realize that. How expensive is insanely expensive? (just out of curiousity)



    Ok, then I guess it would affect battery life, but that would only be with customers who would order 8GB, which probably wouldn't be too many ppl (excluding the average AI poster though, I suspect they're more likely than most to add the extra RAM).



    I guess you're right, forgot that it wasn't a BTO. I only recently started considering getting a MBA (in the last year), so they've always had that option since I started paying close attention. :P
  • Reply 35 of 87
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,705member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dcorban View Post


    I have a 2010 aluminum 2.0Ghz MacBook that I am giving away to a friend after I buy this new MBA.



    Hey dcorban, wanna be my friend? Seriously - very nice of you.



    I'd never buy a laptop with an 11" screen. Much as I LOVE the 13" air I think I am giving up on laptops. I am planning on exchanging my 13" MBP (which I use with a 24" monitor) for a Mini and an iPad. I can do my heavy lifting at work and still do all my email and admin on the move.
  • Reply 36 of 87
    mj webmj web Posts: 918member
    I got da money honey!
  • Reply 37 of 87
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    . . .
  • Reply 38 of 87
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by brianlfl View Post


    I'm due for a refresh but can't live with the low res on the 13.3 screen. I wish they put a higher pixel density panel in the higher end MBA...



    What display do you current use with a substantially lower dot pitch.
  • Reply 39 of 87
    ijaija Posts: 2member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aiolos View Post


    I hope the 8GB RAM option is true, but as far as the ULV processors, go, I still don't understand why everyone thinks Apple will use the ULV processors. Since the GPU in now bundled with the CPU, and the power usage of those combined chips is 17W, I don't understand why they need to use them as the current MBA's use a 17W CPU + separate 10W GPU. That's 27W. Therefore Apple should be able to use LV processors, which are 25W. Am I missing something here because I don't see why Apple needs to drop performance to the ULV processors when the LV processors are in the same thermal design arena as what the current models employ. Maybe the ULV's processors can be used on the 11 inch, which has had complaints about the battery life, but the 13" is more than capable of handling the LV processors.



    I believe battery life is something apple values more than power. The battery difference between a 17w and 25w is quite significant where as performance is not, for what the macbook air is made to do (business/multimedia oriented not gaming nor video editing). judging from the other reviews of what the HD3000 is capable of, personally i am willing to sacrifice the 320m for extra hour of juice. Also for the second gen's i7 25w, you will be using more juice because base freq is 2.1ghz(tb 3ghz) instead of 1.6ghz(tb 2.7ghz) , and also base freq for the HD3000 is 500mhz (tb1.1ghz) instead of 350mhz (tb1.2ghz).



    The problem with the first gen macbooks was throttling, this is because the CPU got too hot due to bad cooling. By using a 25w design there is a big chance that will happen, decreasing your performance output. So overall there really is no big gain by using a 25w design.







    Quote:

    Space? I was under the impression RAM modules were a given size, and the density of the RAM on it was the difference. Also, how does more RAM = more power usage? You either access the RAM or you don't.



    NO more ram does not decrease your battery life, unless you upgrade to a difference set that specifically draws more power. ram is similar to SSD. it either draws a certain amt of power or its at idle drawing another certain amt. unlike HDD slower it spins the less power it draws vice versa.
  • Reply 40 of 87
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mcarling View Post


    It doesn't take genius to figure out that Apple are moving to 4GB minimum for all new Macs and that 64GB is not very useable.



    This definitely is a "no sh!t Sherlock" article.
Sign In or Register to comment.