Well, he's got a point. Unlike what Apple thinks, for laptops, footprint is just as important, if not more so, than thickness and weight.
I didn't say that footprint is not important. I stand by my implication that saying that the MacBook is just as portable as the MacBook Air is ridiculous. The significant weight difference has to factor in here. The MacBook Air is unquestionably more portable than the MacBook.
However, the points you make are valid. I don't quite understand Steve's obsession with thinness over all else. If they'd made the machine thicker, they could have shrunk the other dimensions (there's quite a bezel around the screen and keyboard) and maintained the same weight.
It is very possible that the choice of 13.3" display over a 12.1" one may have been a mistake. Some people will like the fact that the MacBook Air hits the traditional weight target of ultraportables without sacrificing screen and keyboard size, others will just think that it is too big. What's important is are there enough people in the former camp to make the MacBook Air's existence worthwhile? Time will tell?
Not that I give a damn about the Sony TZ Vaio, but it's actually smaller. It has an 11" screen to have a smaller footprint. If it's screen size that matters just get a 17" MacBook Pro.
"I get this so I look cool" isn't a joke; that's the only reason to buy this thing (either that or "I seriously have a hard time lifting a 5lbs notebook, HELP APPLE!!"). It's no smaller (in any practical terms) and it's less capable than its cheaper brother. This really is nothing more than a fashion statement.
The only thing nice is the weight difference (for $700 and fewer features).
YTV:
What does volume matter? Is there going to be some "hollow out your computer and carry water around" contest?
What matters is the fact that this thing is actually very slightly larger on your lap than the MacBook is. Which one holds the least amount of air inside if hollowed out is perhaps the most pointless measurement imaginable (let's also determine how many angels can dance on each!).
Mr. H:
Quote:
So you think all ultraportables are bizarre products, right?
No, ultraportables are cool. This is a thin, crippled version of a small notebook; not an ultraportable.
Quote:
And since when does weight not factor into how portable something is?
Weight is only a factor until you get to a point of diminishing returns. The difference between 5lbs and 3lbs is negligible to people without muscle atrophy.
Footprint is what matters. That's deskspace; that's lapspace (think about this versus a MacBook on an airplane).
Lighter is definitely better, but not at such a huge feature sacrifice for such a minimal return.
No, ultraportables are cool. This is a thin, crippled version of a small notebook; not an ultraportable.
Aren't all ultraportables crippled versions of bigger/heavier siblings?
If not please post a link here to one that isn't and an explanation as to why.
Certainly, the MacBook Air seems less crippled than many notebooks weighing 3 lbs (bigger screen & keyboard, much more powerful CPU). Whether you like it or not, many people consider 5 lbs as heavy (I've seen many, many posts on AI and elsewhere complaining that the MacBook and MacBook Pro are "too heavy"). An extra 2 lbs isn't much until you have to carry it around all day.
The question is, as I said earlier, how many consider smallness a "feature", and how many consider it a compromise?
What does volume matter? Is there going to be some "hollow out your computer and carry water around" contest?
...
No, ultraportables are cool. This is a thin, crippled version of a small notebook; not an ultraportable.
Thinner matters for an ultraportable as much as footprint. I can fit a MBA into a leather portfolio and till have room for some paper but I can't for a MB.
Here's a leather zip around portfolio for reference: 13.5" x 10.38" x .75"
Here is a leather writing pad for reference: 12.25" x 9.5" x .625" - 2 lbs.
It fits the ultraportable niche quite well thanks. While the clicking might be somewhat more annoying than writing I'd rather take the MBA to a meeting than a leather writing pad and it fits in the same space and is only a pound heavier. The magsafe brick and optical drive can sit in my rental car, hotel room (for many conferences its in the same building) or if needs be, in the briefcase.
And unlike the smaller ultraportables I'm not making typos all over the place because I'm used to a full sized keyboard.
Weight is only a factor until you get to a point of diminishing returns..
Exactly 3 lb out of 5 lb, cool 40% weight saving... but who carries around their bare laptop... they usually go inside bags or backpacks with other stuff. Suddenly it becomes 8 lb out of 10 lb... only 20% weight saving.
I'd say the MB is almost as portable as the MBA, ALOT more capable and ALOT less money.
Sorry Apple, go back to the drawing boards and bring that 11" Macbook Nano.
The comparisons between the MBA and the MB are meaningless. The MBA should be compared to other ultra portables. To see people like groverat make such comparisons is quite disappointing.
Anyone who doesn't realize that miniaturization and weight reduction in products is costly has their head in the sand (or somewhere else). The difference between a $500 road bike and a high performance $5000 bike is only a couple of pounds as well.
The comparisons between the MBA and the MB are meaningless. The MBA should be compared to other ultra portables. To see people like groverat make such comparisons is quite disappointing.
.
The comparison is exactly the point. Dont' start comparing Macs with PCs because that really defeats the point. For people with MacBooks and MBP, they wanted a differentiator. But clearly there is little value.
I would say, 1,6Ghz is way slow compared to MB @ 2.2. I expect nothing less than 2.66Ghz in there (Penryn to be exact). Not current class chip even if they shrink 60%. Why don't they shrink Penryn 30% and use that ?. Give it effective speed ramps so it can save battery. Come on, Apple, you rave about your advanced power management capbilities. Show us !.
Also, is it upgradeable to 4GB Ram ?. I doubt there is space for a RAM slot. Also, a 80GB disk???. What a disgrace, a 160 1.8inch disk would be a minimum. So, without these two "winning" features, I would rather stick to my MB. MBP is way too big.
Give us a aluminium casing MB and raise $250, speedwise, MB is close to MBP. Or make an MBP with 13.3inch screen LED please...
Disappointing. Only consolation is Time Capsule is just sweet... oh well.
The comparison is exactly the point. Dont' start comparing Macs with PCs because that really defeats the point.
Wrong.
This is a new product category for Apple and therefore most purchasers should be switchers rather than current Mac users. Before MacBook Air came out, how many people that wanted 3 lbs laptops were buying MacBooks? Not many, because the MacBook weighs 5 lbs.
Am currently using a 12" PowerBook and apart from thickness the MacBook Air is whoppingly bigger! Almost 1 1/2 inches wider and even a bit deeper.
So what's the big deal about the MacBook Air?
And look at that massive bezel around the screen and the totally huge rim around the keyboard! What's up with those? Couldn't they have made the Air a bit smaller too, not just thinner? There's clearly room for improvement (pun intended) without having to compromise screen or keyboard size.
I'm a bit disappointed. It's light, yes, but it's too big IMHO. Shave off that bezel and rim around the keyboard and save a few extra inches and we're talking!
Until then it's just an overpriced 13" MacBook 'thin'.
Size and design wise exactly what I was thinking!. Now add a few more "missing stuff" ports! Where is eSATA ? fw800 ? 2 more USBs , and for goodness sake a Penryn 2.5Ghz CPU. Puny 1.6Ghz is 2 years old technology. What a shame.
Size and design wise exactly what I was thinking!. Now add a few more "missing stuff" ports! Where is eSATA ? fw800 ? 2 more USBs , and for goodness sake a Penryn 2.5Ghz CPU. Puny 1.6Ghz is 2 years old technology. What a shame.
I can't tell if you are joking or not?
What you are saying is that you want a MacBook Pro the size and weight of a MacBook Air. Let's ignore what's actually physically possible and bitch and whine until we get our way!!!
Size and design wise exactly what I was thinking!. Now add a few more "missing stuff" ports! Where is eSATA ? fw800 ? 2 more USBs , and for goodness sake a Penryn 2.5Ghz CPU. Puny 1.6Ghz is 2 years old technology. What a shame.
The only thing I wished different about the MBA is an addition of an expresscard slot.
Alas, it probably doesn't have the space for that but with an expresscard slot you could have eSATA, FW800 or more USB ports along with a lot of other things that work with expresscard.
Size and design wise exactly what I was thinking!. Now add a few more "missing stuff" ports! Where is eSATA ? fw800 ? 2 more USBs , and for goodness sake a Penryn 2.5Ghz CPU. Puny 1.6Ghz is 2 years old technology. What a shame.
Yea, im sure all of what you just stated would be sooooo easy to design and manufacture. Because as everybody knows, when you make a product smaller there is actually more internal space.
{sarcasm}
They are more likely to do those computing changes with the macbook, not the air.
It is sort of absurd to watch all these people saying: its not a Macbook, therefore it sucks. The Air is not trying to be a MacBook. If you want a MacBook, just go buy a MacBook, stop complaining that this isn't one. If weight doesn't matter to you than the Air is not for you. Sheesh.
Then there are the people who want a different shape. I hear you. It simply appears Apple decided that there were more of me than of you.
For me, I would rather have lighter than a small footprint. I carry my computer in a briefcase every day--what matters to me is weight and space in the bag. A fatter computer with a smaller footprint takes up *more* space because everything in my bag (files and folders and such) are flat--they won't fit in those edges freed up by giving it a smaller footprint.
I am sure that there are people who want a computer that will fit in their coat pocket or on their belt. Or that will fit on one knee. This is not that product. It is not trying to be that product. It makes sense to lobby Apple for that product if you want it, but you don't need to denegrate the Air to do that.
- It doesn't need a second computer to do everything you need.
- It has sound input
- It has digital optical sound in and output
- It has a replaceable battery
- It has a Kensington lock connector
- It has a faster processor
- It has gigabit ethernet
- It can target disk mode
- It plays DVDs
- It doesn't require an USB Hub
- It's got stereo speakers
- It's got FrontRow and an Apple remote
The MBA has the following advantages:
- It weighs 2 pounds less (some of which will be made up by the fact that you'll have to bring several external devices with you)
- It's got a backlit keyboard
- It's got multitouch gesture support
- It's got Bluetooth 2.1
- It's got a LED backlit display
- It's slightly thinner.
- There's an option for an SSD drive. (which brings it right into MBP territory in terms of price).
Of these advantages, many are likely going to be incorporated into the next generation MacBook too. Namely LED backlight, Bluetooth 2.1, multitouch gesturing and maybe even an optional SSD drive and backlit keyboard.
So what it runs down to is that the MBA is 2 pounds lighter, and slightly slimmer at the expense of no less than 19 features the MacBook has in plus. And it costs 700$ more.
After having used MacBooks for maybe 20 years, maybe you need a back surgery. But the money you will have saved by buying the cheaper macbook instead of the lighter MBA will pay the bill. And you can watch DVDs while in hospital.
PS: If weight and size are truly a concern to you, then there are considerably lighter and smaller offerings available from companies like Aver, Lenovo and Fujitsu. Many of them even with more features.
Your argument is completely flawed in every aspect.
1. The price difference for both machines with 2gb ram is $550, NOT $700.
2. You are comparing 2 different classes of computers, you should not be comparing a macbook air vs a macbook, you should be comparing a macbook air vs other 3lb notebooks. Once you do this you will quickly realize 2 things. The macbook air packs a bigger punch and the macbook air is very competitvely priced compared to the competition.
If I were to follow your argument anylasys I would say that comparing your macbook to my Dell XPS 420 at work
-$200 cheaper
-has a much smaller footprint width wise
-has 6 usb ports
-has 3gb ram
-has 2 optical drives
-has a faster quad core processor
-plays dvds and blu-ray disks
Or you could compare the features of a Lexus GS430 and a Nissan Sentra.
Half of your points arent even features. Doesnt require a usb hub? WTH?
You think comparing the MacBook to the MacBook Air is dumb, over in another thread I've got a guy comparing the EEE PC to the MacBook Air and saying it's superior because it's got three USB ports!
The comparison is exactly the point. Dont' start comparing Macs with PCs because that really defeats the point. For people with MacBooks and MBP, they wanted a differentiator. But clearly there is little value.
I would say, 1,6Ghz is way slow compared to MB @ 2.2. I expect nothing less than 2.66Ghz in there (Penryn to be exact). Not current class chip even if they shrink 60%. Why don't they shrink Penryn 30% and use that ?. Give it effective speed ramps so it can save battery. Come on, Apple, you rave about your advanced power management capbilities. Show us !.
Also, is it upgradeable to 4GB Ram ?. I doubt there is space for a RAM slot. Also, a 80GB disk???. What a disgrace, a 160 1.8inch disk would be a minimum. So, without these two "winning" features, I would rather stick to my MB. MBP is way too big.
Give us a aluminium casing MB and raise $250, speedwise, MB is close to MBP. Or make an MBP with 13.3inch screen LED please...
Disappointing. Only consolation is Time Capsule is just sweet... oh well.
The comparison is exactly the point and the comparison IS to PC's. If you think that is beside the point, then tell Steve Jobs because he did exactly that in his keynote.
I am a PC user, former Mac user (work predicated PC) who is wanting to switch back. I have been waiting for this for 6 months. I have used ultraportables for 10 years. There ARE other makers who make laptops between 2.7lbs and 3.3lbs WITHOUT COMPROMISE, so while I appreciate Apple's design and it is *VERY* cool, it lacks features that I, my team, and others I know that are "road warriors" crave.
1. replaceable battery. I have a minimum of 2, and take more on overseas trips. Always. As important as having your suit in your carry-on in case your checked luggage is lost.
2. larger HDD. Maybe the 160gb ipod drive is double-platter, so make the laptop .08" larger, or whatever! I have never heard people complain about the height of their laptop, especially if it meant they had a still-light machine with more utility.
There are others (EVDO options, Ethernet built in - many hotels still require it for broadband connection in the room, so now I have a dongle to carry, great, more USB - now I have to carry a hub)
Now, before I get flamed that "if it isnt right, then dont buy it", all I am saying is that Apple created a machine with NO options. Yes, you have an SSD option, but otherwise nothing. No HDD increases, no RAM increases, no connectivity (EVDO) options.
Wanna make comparisons to cars? Go ahead. Tell me how many high-end cars have no options. Even high end track-use Porsches (GT3, GT2), for sure the automobile definition of automobile "ultralights" give you the option to add-back in your radio and a/c, in order to increase their marketibility and widen their reach. Even Lotus's have options.
You might be fine with 80gb, you might be fine without EVDO options, you might be fine without being able to carry extra batteries. But to restrict the options to everyone, limits the utility of the machine that at the end of the day is supposed to be useful.
The comparisons between the MBA and the MB are meaningless. The MBA should be compared to other ultra portables. To see people like groverat make such comparisons is quite disappointing.
Anyone who doesn't realize that miniaturization and weight reduction in products is costly has their head in the sand (or somewhere else). The difference between a $500 road bike and a high performance $5000 bike is only a couple of pounds as well.
No, it should be compared to the MB because it is still a 13.3" notebook.
Miniaturization is one thing but all they did was feature removal from a MB just to make it 1/3" thinner and on top of that... they raised the price.
How much does a MacBook weigh if you take out the SuperDrive, by the way?
What really bothers me is that Apple might cripple the MacBook in some way to keep the MacBook Air more attractive.
Mr H:
Quote:
Aren't all ultraportables crippled versions of bigger/heavier siblings?
The MacBook isn't really bigger in any appreciable way; that's the issue here. If you put them in tanks of water the MacBook will displace more; that's the size difference.
And it's lighter. 2 whole pounds. (And lighter is better, no argument there.)
Vinea:
So the thinness of the machine is useful for putting it into spaces where laptops aren't meant to be put? (unpadded places where an $1800 laptop is at unnecessary risk)
It's cute that you can slip it into a manila envelope, but how the hell is that useful? (1 reason: To impress others.)
It's a status object. And that's fine, the world needs them and there is probably a market (for all I know this thing will sell like mad). Let's just not pretend like this is some technological marvel.
backtomac:
If you compare the MacBook Air to actual ultraportables it will get embarrassing because they have much smaller footprints.
Bageljoey:
Quote:
If you want a MacBook, just go buy a MacBook, stop complaining that this isn't one.
Who is complaining that this isn't a MacBook?
The issue that it is not really smaller. You make a good point about a "fatter" notebook, but this is 0.34 inches. Hold your fingers apart 1/3rd of an inch. What are you going to fit there. 20 more pieces of paper? A really thin magazine?
And who is saying that the MacBook Air "sucks"?
YTV:
Quote:
If I were to follow your argument anylasys I would say that comparing your macbook to my Dell XPS 420 at work
That's just ridiculous.
The second item in his list was "slightly smaller footprint".
Try and make your arguments without being completely dishonest about them.
Comments
Well, he's got a point. Unlike what Apple thinks, for laptops, footprint is just as important, if not more so, than thickness and weight.
I didn't say that footprint is not important. I stand by my implication that saying that the MacBook is just as portable as the MacBook Air is ridiculous. The significant weight difference has to factor in here. The MacBook Air is unquestionably more portable than the MacBook.
However, the points you make are valid. I don't quite understand Steve's obsession with thinness over all else. If they'd made the machine thicker, they could have shrunk the other dimensions (there's quite a bezel around the screen and keyboard) and maintained the same weight.
It is very possible that the choice of 13.3" display over a 12.1" one may have been a mistake. Some people will like the fact that the MacBook Air hits the traditional weight target of ultraportables without sacrificing screen and keyboard size, others will just think that it is too big. What's important is are there enough people in the former camp to make the MacBook Air's existence worthwhile? Time will tell?
Not that I give a damn about the Sony TZ Vaio, but it's actually smaller. It has an 11" screen to have a smaller footprint. If it's screen size that matters just get a 17" MacBook Pro.
"I get this so I look cool" isn't a joke; that's the only reason to buy this thing (either that or "I seriously have a hard time lifting a 5lbs notebook, HELP APPLE!!"). It's no smaller (in any practical terms) and it's less capable than its cheaper brother. This really is nothing more than a fashion statement.
The only thing nice is the weight difference (for $700 and fewer features).
YTV:
What does volume matter? Is there going to be some "hollow out your computer and carry water around" contest?
What matters is the fact that this thing is actually very slightly larger on your lap than the MacBook is. Which one holds the least amount of air inside if hollowed out is perhaps the most pointless measurement imaginable (let's also determine how many angels can dance on each!).
Mr. H:
So you think all ultraportables are bizarre products, right?
No, ultraportables are cool. This is a thin, crippled version of a small notebook; not an ultraportable.
And since when does weight not factor into how portable something is?
Weight is only a factor until you get to a point of diminishing returns. The difference between 5lbs and 3lbs is negligible to people without muscle atrophy.
Footprint is what matters. That's deskspace; that's lapspace (think about this versus a MacBook on an airplane).
Lighter is definitely better, but not at such a huge feature sacrifice for such a minimal return.
No, ultraportables are cool. This is a thin, crippled version of a small notebook; not an ultraportable.
Aren't all ultraportables crippled versions of bigger/heavier siblings?
If not please post a link here to one that isn't and an explanation as to why.
Certainly, the MacBook Air seems less crippled than many notebooks weighing 3 lbs (bigger screen & keyboard, much more powerful CPU). Whether you like it or not, many people consider 5 lbs as heavy (I've seen many, many posts on AI and elsewhere complaining that the MacBook and MacBook Pro are "too heavy"). An extra 2 lbs isn't much until you have to carry it around all day.
The question is, as I said earlier, how many consider smallness a "feature", and how many consider it a compromise?
YTV:
What does volume matter? Is there going to be some "hollow out your computer and carry water around" contest?
...
No, ultraportables are cool. This is a thin, crippled version of a small notebook; not an ultraportable.
Thinner matters for an ultraportable as much as footprint. I can fit a MBA into a leather portfolio and till have room for some paper but I can't for a MB.
Here's a leather zip around portfolio for reference: 13.5" x 10.38" x .75"
Here is a leather writing pad for reference: 12.25" x 9.5" x .625" - 2 lbs.
Pulled at random off the first google hit: http://www.theelegantoffice.com/
It fits the ultraportable niche quite well thanks. While the clicking might be somewhat more annoying than writing I'd rather take the MBA to a meeting than a leather writing pad and it fits in the same space and is only a pound heavier. The magsafe brick and optical drive can sit in my rental car, hotel room (for many conferences its in the same building) or if needs be, in the briefcase.
And unlike the smaller ultraportables I'm not making typos all over the place because I'm used to a full sized keyboard.
Weight is only a factor until you get to a point of diminishing returns..
Exactly 3 lb out of 5 lb, cool 40% weight saving... but who carries around their bare laptop... they usually go inside bags or backpacks with other stuff. Suddenly it becomes 8 lb out of 10 lb... only 20% weight saving.
I'd say the MB is almost as portable as the MBA, ALOT more capable and ALOT less money.
Sorry Apple, go back to the drawing boards and bring that 11" Macbook Nano.
Anyone who doesn't realize that miniaturization and weight reduction in products is costly has their head in the sand (or somewhere else). The difference between a $500 road bike and a high performance $5000 bike is only a couple of pounds as well.
The comparisons between the MBA and the MB are meaningless. The MBA should be compared to other ultra portables. To see people like groverat make such comparisons is quite disappointing.
.
The comparison is exactly the point. Dont' start comparing Macs with PCs because that really defeats the point. For people with MacBooks and MBP, they wanted a differentiator. But clearly there is little value.
I would say, 1,6Ghz is way slow compared to MB @ 2.2. I expect nothing less than 2.66Ghz in there (Penryn to be exact). Not current class chip even if they shrink 60%. Why don't they shrink Penryn 30% and use that ?. Give it effective speed ramps so it can save battery. Come on, Apple, you rave about your advanced power management capbilities. Show us !.
Also, is it upgradeable to 4GB Ram ?. I doubt there is space for a RAM slot. Also, a 80GB disk???. What a disgrace, a 160 1.8inch disk would be a minimum. So, without these two "winning" features, I would rather stick to my MB. MBP is way too big.
Give us a aluminium casing MB and raise $250, speedwise, MB is close to MBP. Or make an MBP with 13.3inch screen LED please...
Disappointing. Only consolation is Time Capsule is just sweet... oh well.
The comparison is exactly the point. Dont' start comparing Macs with PCs because that really defeats the point.
Wrong.
This is a new product category for Apple and therefore most purchasers should be switchers rather than current Mac users. Before MacBook Air came out, how many people that wanted 3 lbs laptops were buying MacBooks? Not many, because the MacBook weighs 5 lbs.
I was hoping the MacBook Air would be smaller.
Am currently using a 12" PowerBook and apart from thickness the MacBook Air is whoppingly bigger! Almost 1 1/2 inches wider and even a bit deeper.
So what's the big deal about the MacBook Air?
And look at that massive bezel around the screen and the totally huge rim around the keyboard! What's up with those? Couldn't they have made the Air a bit smaller too, not just thinner? There's clearly room for improvement (pun intended) without having to compromise screen or keyboard size.
I'm a bit disappointed. It's light, yes, but it's too big IMHO. Shave off that bezel and rim around the keyboard and save a few extra inches and we're talking!
Until then it's just an overpriced 13" MacBook 'thin'.
Size and design wise exactly what I was thinking!. Now add a few more "missing stuff" ports! Where is eSATA ? fw800 ? 2 more USBs , and for goodness sake a Penryn 2.5Ghz CPU. Puny 1.6Ghz is 2 years old technology. What a shame.
Size and design wise exactly what I was thinking!. Now add a few more "missing stuff" ports! Where is eSATA ? fw800 ? 2 more USBs , and for goodness sake a Penryn 2.5Ghz CPU. Puny 1.6Ghz is 2 years old technology. What a shame.
I can't tell if you are joking or not?
What you are saying is that you want a MacBook Pro the size and weight of a MacBook Air. Let's ignore what's actually physically possible and bitch and whine until we get our way!!!
Size and design wise exactly what I was thinking!. Now add a few more "missing stuff" ports! Where is eSATA ? fw800 ? 2 more USBs , and for goodness sake a Penryn 2.5Ghz CPU. Puny 1.6Ghz is 2 years old technology. What a shame.
The only thing I wished different about the MBA is an addition of an expresscard slot.
Alas, it probably doesn't have the space for that but with an expresscard slot you could have eSATA, FW800 or more USB ports along with a lot of other things that work with expresscard.
Size and design wise exactly what I was thinking!. Now add a few more "missing stuff" ports! Where is eSATA ? fw800 ? 2 more USBs , and for goodness sake a Penryn 2.5Ghz CPU. Puny 1.6Ghz is 2 years old technology. What a shame.
Yea, im sure all of what you just stated would be sooooo easy to design and manufacture. Because as everybody knows, when you make a product smaller there is actually more internal space.
{sarcasm}
They are more likely to do those computing changes with the macbook, not the air.
Then there are the people who want a different shape. I hear you. It simply appears Apple decided that there were more of me than of you.
For me, I would rather have lighter than a small footprint. I carry my computer in a briefcase every day--what matters to me is weight and space in the bag. A fatter computer with a smaller footprint takes up *more* space because everything in my bag (files and folders and such) are flat--they won't fit in those edges freed up by giving it a smaller footprint.
I am sure that there are people who want a computer that will fit in their coat pocket or on their belt. Or that will fit on one knee. This is not that product. It is not trying to be that product. It makes sense to lobby Apple for that product if you want it, but you don't need to denegrate the Air to do that.
I can't tell if you are joking or not?
Not joking, just clueless.
Or looking for a $6,000 ultralight...
The regular MacBook wins hands down.
- It's 700$ cheaper
- It's got a slightly smaller footprint
- It's got 2 USB ports
- It's got a firewire port
- It has replaceable and upgradeable RAM
- It has a replaceable and upgradeable harddrive
- It has a bigger harddrive
- It has an optical drive
- It doesn't need a second computer to do everything you need.
- It has sound input
- It has digital optical sound in and output
- It has a replaceable battery
- It has a Kensington lock connector
- It has a faster processor
- It has gigabit ethernet
- It can target disk mode
- It plays DVDs
- It doesn't require an USB Hub
- It's got stereo speakers
- It's got FrontRow and an Apple remote
The MBA has the following advantages:
- It weighs 2 pounds less (some of which will be made up by the fact that you'll have to bring several external devices with you)
- It's got a backlit keyboard
- It's got multitouch gesture support
- It's got Bluetooth 2.1
- It's got a LED backlit display
- It's slightly thinner.
- There's an option for an SSD drive. (which brings it right into MBP territory in terms of price).
Of these advantages, many are likely going to be incorporated into the next generation MacBook too. Namely LED backlight, Bluetooth 2.1, multitouch gesturing and maybe even an optional SSD drive and backlit keyboard.
So what it runs down to is that the MBA is 2 pounds lighter, and slightly slimmer at the expense of no less than 19 features the MacBook has in plus. And it costs 700$ more.
After having used MacBooks for maybe 20 years, maybe you need a back surgery. But the money you will have saved by buying the cheaper macbook instead of the lighter MBA will pay the bill. And you can watch DVDs while in hospital.
PS: If weight and size are truly a concern to you, then there are considerably lighter and smaller offerings available from companies like Aver, Lenovo and Fujitsu. Many of them even with more features.
Your argument is completely flawed in every aspect.
1. The price difference for both machines with 2gb ram is $550, NOT $700.
2. You are comparing 2 different classes of computers, you should not be comparing a macbook air vs a macbook, you should be comparing a macbook air vs other 3lb notebooks. Once you do this you will quickly realize 2 things. The macbook air packs a bigger punch and the macbook air is very competitvely priced compared to the competition.
If I were to follow your argument anylasys I would say that comparing your macbook to my Dell XPS 420 at work
-$200 cheaper
-has a much smaller footprint width wise
-has 6 usb ports
-has 3gb ram
-has 2 optical drives
-has a faster quad core processor
-plays dvds and blu-ray disks
Or you could compare the features of a Lexus GS430 and a Nissan Sentra.
Half of your points arent even features. Doesnt require a usb hub? WTH?
The comparison is exactly the point. Dont' start comparing Macs with PCs because that really defeats the point. For people with MacBooks and MBP, they wanted a differentiator. But clearly there is little value.
I would say, 1,6Ghz is way slow compared to MB @ 2.2. I expect nothing less than 2.66Ghz in there (Penryn to be exact). Not current class chip even if they shrink 60%. Why don't they shrink Penryn 30% and use that ?. Give it effective speed ramps so it can save battery. Come on, Apple, you rave about your advanced power management capbilities. Show us !.
Also, is it upgradeable to 4GB Ram ?. I doubt there is space for a RAM slot. Also, a 80GB disk???. What a disgrace, a 160 1.8inch disk would be a minimum. So, without these two "winning" features, I would rather stick to my MB. MBP is way too big.
Give us a aluminium casing MB and raise $250, speedwise, MB is close to MBP. Or make an MBP with 13.3inch screen LED please...
Disappointing. Only consolation is Time Capsule is just sweet... oh well.
The comparison is exactly the point and the comparison IS to PC's. If you think that is beside the point, then tell Steve Jobs because he did exactly that in his keynote.
I am a PC user, former Mac user (work predicated PC) who is wanting to switch back. I have been waiting for this for 6 months. I have used ultraportables for 10 years. There ARE other makers who make laptops between 2.7lbs and 3.3lbs WITHOUT COMPROMISE, so while I appreciate Apple's design and it is *VERY* cool, it lacks features that I, my team, and others I know that are "road warriors" crave.
1. replaceable battery. I have a minimum of 2, and take more on overseas trips. Always. As important as having your suit in your carry-on in case your checked luggage is lost.
2. larger HDD. Maybe the 160gb ipod drive is double-platter, so make the laptop .08" larger, or whatever! I have never heard people complain about the height of their laptop, especially if it meant they had a still-light machine with more utility.
There are others (EVDO options, Ethernet built in - many hotels still require it for broadband connection in the room, so now I have a dongle to carry, great, more USB - now I have to carry a hub)
Now, before I get flamed that "if it isnt right, then dont buy it", all I am saying is that Apple created a machine with NO options. Yes, you have an SSD option, but otherwise nothing. No HDD increases, no RAM increases, no connectivity (EVDO) options.
Wanna make comparisons to cars? Go ahead. Tell me how many high-end cars have no options. Even high end track-use Porsches (GT3, GT2), for sure the automobile definition of automobile "ultralights" give you the option to add-back in your radio and a/c, in order to increase their marketibility and widen their reach. Even Lotus's have options.
You might be fine with 80gb, you might be fine without EVDO options, you might be fine without being able to carry extra batteries. But to restrict the options to everyone, limits the utility of the machine that at the end of the day is supposed to be useful.
The comparisons between the MBA and the MB are meaningless. The MBA should be compared to other ultra portables. To see people like groverat make such comparisons is quite disappointing.
Anyone who doesn't realize that miniaturization and weight reduction in products is costly has their head in the sand (or somewhere else). The difference between a $500 road bike and a high performance $5000 bike is only a couple of pounds as well.
No, it should be compared to the MB because it is still a 13.3" notebook.
Miniaturization is one thing but all they did was feature removal from a MB just to make it 1/3" thinner and on top of that... they raised the price.
What really bothers me is that Apple might cripple the MacBook in some way to keep the MacBook Air more attractive.
Mr H:
Aren't all ultraportables crippled versions of bigger/heavier siblings?
The MacBook isn't really bigger in any appreciable way; that's the issue here. If you put them in tanks of water the MacBook will displace more; that's the size difference.
And it's lighter. 2 whole pounds. (And lighter is better, no argument there.)
Vinea:
So the thinness of the machine is useful for putting it into spaces where laptops aren't meant to be put? (unpadded places where an $1800 laptop is at unnecessary risk)
It's cute that you can slip it into a manila envelope, but how the hell is that useful? (1 reason: To impress others.)
It's a status object. And that's fine, the world needs them and there is probably a market (for all I know this thing will sell like mad). Let's just not pretend like this is some technological marvel.
backtomac:
If you compare the MacBook Air to actual ultraportables it will get embarrassing because they have much smaller footprints.
Bageljoey:
If you want a MacBook, just go buy a MacBook, stop complaining that this isn't one.
Who is complaining that this isn't a MacBook?
The issue that it is not really smaller. You make a good point about a "fatter" notebook, but this is 0.34 inches. Hold your fingers apart 1/3rd of an inch. What are you going to fit there. 20 more pieces of paper? A really thin magazine?
And who is saying that the MacBook Air "sucks"?
YTV:
If I were to follow your argument anylasys I would say that comparing your macbook to my Dell XPS 420 at work
That's just ridiculous.
The second item in his list was "slightly smaller footprint".
Try and make your arguments without being completely dishonest about them.
backtomac:
If you compare the MacBook Air to actual ultraportables it will get embarrassing because they have much smaller footprints.
Fine. Show me.