It's really neat, and slim.. and light weight.. but unnecessarily wide and deep It must have been possible to shrink away the phat borders on the side of the screen.
It's really neat, and slim.. and light weight.. but unnecessarily wide and deep It must have been possible to shrink away the phat borders on the side of the screen.
What is difficult to accept is the perception that there are other choices, and a lot of them at that.
That the Dells, Sonys, HPs, etc., offer or have already made available, computers, i.e., laptops and desktops, that far exceed the innovative offerings of Apple, and significantly cheaper. And that they do so quite frequently.
Perhaps I am missing something. Give us an example of who else has addressed your needs.
Are you kidding? The specs are really low, basic functionality has been stripped out, and it's a totally closed system, including the battery. EVERY hardware manufacturer, including Apple, far surpassed this product years ago. Anyone who would find this even remotely usable would probably be better served by a used iBook for a quarter of the cost.
It's really neat, and slim.. and light weight.. but unnecessarily wide and deep It must have been possible to shrink away the phat borders on the side of the screen.
"We" won't know anything until "we" find out exactly what panel is being used. Being thinner might have meant having a wider border.
I think shrinking the perimeter might have meant a smaller battery.
Are you kidding? The specs are really low, basic functionality has been stripped out, and it's a totally closed system, including the battery. EVERY hardware manufacturer, including Apple, far surpassed this product years ago. Anyone who would find this even remotely usable would probably be better served by a used iBook for a quarter of the cost.
The iBook would take twice the volume, weigh nearly twice as much, not run as fast and still not have as long of a battery run time. It's not even in the same product class anyway. You shouldn't expect that an ultralight would be the same as a desktop replacement. Are there even any notebooks that used "open" standard batteries? As far as I know, every notebook battery is "closed".
This machine IS between the 10 hour life and doesn't do anything.
This machine isn't for everyone. Surprise!
No machine is for everyone. That's a surprise too, right?
What card options would you want, other than perhaps Firewire, or maybe eSATA?
It already has most everything else built-in.
Once again, I'll try to explain. If I could talk slower, melgross I would. I'll try using smaller words.
All I am saying is that there are many other competitive products on the market that do more, weigh the same, and cost the same or less. These compromises that you keep justifying by saying "no machine is for everyone" DO NOT HAVE TO BE THERE!!!!!!!!!! So even if I take your point that most of those features are not necessary, having an interchangeable battery (hardly a novel idea) and more HDD options (again - they are on the market, this isnt rocket science) just makes the machine appeal to more people.
Or are you saying that Apple would rather debut a new product that doesnt appeal to as many of its target market as possible?
Dumb question: Do the remotes work across machines?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsenka
Are you kidding? The specs are really low, basic functionality has been stripped out, and it's a totally closed system, including the battery. EVERY hardware manufacturer, including Apple, far surpassed this product years ago. Anyone who would find this even remotely usable would probably be better served by a used iBook for a quarter of the cost.
They are using a one off processor from Intel. It appears to be a low-voltage Core 2 Duo that is operating below ultra-low-voltage power consumption. There is no other OEM that can say that!
PS: I'm getting really annoyed with the crowd here today. Did AI and Digg combine today?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
"We" won't know anything until "we" find out exactly what panel is being used. Being thinner might have meant having a wider border.
I think shrinking the perimeter might have meant a smaller battery.
Panasonic CF-W2 (now the W4 or 5) - CD R/W, 2 USB, wireless b/g, SD, PCMCIA, VGA, EThernet, built in modem, armored HD, 12.1" screen, mono, 2.6 lbs
My current Panasonic CF-Y4 - DVD R/W, (2) USB, wireless b/g, SD, PCMCIA, VGA, Ethernet, built in modem, *armored HD* (tested up to a 4 ft. fall). 14" screen, stereo, and 3.4 lbs.
I'm not starting a flame-war, I *want* a Mac, but I'm looking at my 3 year old Panasonic that still has 15gb of HDD left, a larger screen, built in drive, ethernet, SD, PCMCIA and is only .4lbs heavier! I just dont think I can justify the 1800 to go backwards. Maybe rev.2 or by the WWDC Apple will have some more compelling options for the MBA????
Since you brought these two up:
Toshiba R200 (circa Apr 2005):
$2,099
1.2Ghz ULV Intel
512Mb Ram
2.7lbs
12.1" Screen
60Gb HD
Optical Drive: External
Panasonic CF-W5 (Mar 07):
$1,950
1.2Ghz Core Solo U1400
512Mb Ram
Weight: 2.9lbs
12.1" Screen
60Gb HD
Optical Drive: Internal
So... compared to those two, this isn't looking too bad
$1,799
1.6 Ghz (with 4mb cache, not 512k-1mb like the above two)
2Gb Ram
3.0 Lbs
13.1" Screen
80Gb HD
Optical Drive: Optional
Among subcompacts, the MBA really does well spec-wise. Comparing a subcompact to full size laptops is like comparing a desktop to a server (ie well it doesn't have 2 quad cores so it must suck).
All I am saying is that there are many other competitive products on the market that do more, weigh the same, and cost the same or less.
Can you point to those models that are as cheap or cheaper? I've only seen one ultralight that costs less than that, and that was a Dell. Everything else in that size class was more expensive. The current Dell Ultralight D430 is 1.2GHz, Core Solo or Core Duo.
Or are you saying that Apple would rather debut a new product that doesnt appeal to as many of its target market as possible?
Target market is not the same as largest possible market, which is what many OEMS do when they try to stuff as many things into the machine to win the oh-so-coveted Tech Specs award.
Crybabies at it again. If you don't like it don't buy it, no one is forcing you. You can also go look elsewhere, Apple will do fine without your whining self.
So... compared to those two, this isn't looking too bad
$1,799
1.6 Ghz (with 4mb cache, not 512k-1mb like the above two)
2Gb Ram
3.0 Lbs
13.1" Screen
80Gb HD
Optical Drive: Optional
Among subcompacts, the MBA really does well spec-wise. Comparing a subcompact to full size laptops is like comparing a desktop to a server (ie well it doesn't have 2 quad cores so it must suck).
WM,
You are right except the HDD space for the current models (W7 and Y7) go up signficantly 100gb and up, as do the current models from Toshiba, Dell, other brands (plus internal drives at less weight than the Apple). I was just giving examples of past machines I personally have used. Dont get me wrong - I like this machine a lot, I just wish it had a couple of more options - HDD and battery chief among them.
Can you point to those models that are as cheap or cheaper? I've only seen one ultralight that costs less than that, and that was a Dell. Everything else in that size class was more expensive. The current Dell Ultralight D430 is 1.2GHz, Core Solo or Core Duo.
I dont know. The price isn't an objection that I had. I just want some more options on the checkbox
You are right except the HDD space for the current models (W7 and Y7) go up signficantly 100gb and up, as do the current models from Toshiba, Dell, other brands (plus internal drives at less weight than the Apple). I was just giving examples of past machines I personally have used. Dont get me wrong - I like this machine a lot, I just wish it had a couple of more options - HDD and battery chief among them.
Panasonic W7
(Around $2,500)
1.06Ghz U7500 Intel Core 2 Duo (2mb cache)
1Gb Std (up to 2gb)
80Gb HD
12.1" Screen
3.0 Lbs
Optical Drive: Integrated
Also: 1.4"-2.0" thick (verses 0.16" to 0.76" for the MBA)
Panasonic Y7
(Around $2,300)
1.6Ghz L7500 Intel 4Mb Cache (looks to be the same processor as the MBA)
1Gb Std (up to 2)
80Gb HD
14.1" Screen
3.7 Lbs
Optical Drive: Integrated
Thickness: 1.4"-1.8"
So... these aren't faster nor do they have larger hard drives, more memory, weigh less, or cost less. I'm sure that you might be able to customize these, but that's not going to make them cost any less.
So... these aren't faster nor do they have larger hard drives, more memory, weigh less, or cost less. I'm sure that you might be able to customize these, but that's not going to make them cost any less.
These are Toughbookst. While they make some ultra-light machines they don't make for a fair comparison with other ultra-lights.
It's really neat, and slim.. and light weight.. but unnecessarily wide and deep It must have been possible to shrink away the phat borders on the side of the screen.
My question exactly. I love Apple and may buy this, but for the record, look at what Panasonic and Toshiba have done with less weight:
Personally, I could not care less about an optical drive, but am curious to note the Toshiba is also thin, and comes in at just 2.4lbs (albeit with a 12inch screen, but it also has a DVD burner and lots of ports). I thought the SSD version is like 1.75lbs (again 12inch but with DVD and lots of ports). Why is the Apple so heavy?
Comments
It's really neat, and slim.. and light weight.. but unnecessarily wide and deep It must have been possible to shrink away the phat borders on the side of the screen.
Why MUST it have been possible?
What is difficult to accept is the perception that there are other choices, and a lot of them at that.
That the Dells, Sonys, HPs, etc., offer or have already made available, computers, i.e., laptops and desktops, that far exceed the innovative offerings of Apple, and significantly cheaper. And that they do so quite frequently.
Perhaps I am missing something. Give us an example of who else has addressed your needs.
Are you kidding? The specs are really low, basic functionality has been stripped out, and it's a totally closed system, including the battery. EVERY hardware manufacturer, including Apple, far surpassed this product years ago. Anyone who would find this even remotely usable would probably be better served by a used iBook for a quarter of the cost.
It's really neat, and slim.. and light weight.. but unnecessarily wide and deep It must have been possible to shrink away the phat borders on the side of the screen.
"We" won't know anything until "we" find out exactly what panel is being used. Being thinner might have meant having a wider border.
I think shrinking the perimeter might have meant a smaller battery.
Are you kidding? The specs are really low, basic functionality has been stripped out, and it's a totally closed system, including the battery. EVERY hardware manufacturer, including Apple, far surpassed this product years ago. Anyone who would find this even remotely usable would probably be better served by a used iBook for a quarter of the cost.
The iBook would take twice the volume, weigh nearly twice as much, not run as fast and still not have as long of a battery run time. It's not even in the same product class anyway. You shouldn't expect that an ultralight would be the same as a desktop replacement. Are there even any notebooks that used "open" standard batteries? As far as I know, every notebook battery is "closed".
This machine IS between the 10 hour life and doesn't do anything.
This machine isn't for everyone. Surprise!
No machine is for everyone. That's a surprise too, right?
What card options would you want, other than perhaps Firewire, or maybe eSATA?
It already has most everything else built-in.
Once again, I'll try to explain. If I could talk slower, melgross I would. I'll try using smaller words.
All I am saying is that there are many other competitive products on the market that do more, weigh the same, and cost the same or less. These compromises that you keep justifying by saying "no machine is for everyone" DO NOT HAVE TO BE THERE!!!!!!!!!! So even if I take your point that most of those features are not necessary, having an interchangeable battery (hardly a novel idea) and more HDD options (again - they are on the market, this isnt rocket science) just makes the machine appeal to more people.
Or are you saying that Apple would rather debut a new product that doesnt appeal to as many of its target market as possible?
Dumb question: Do the remotes work across machines?
Are you kidding? The specs are really low, basic functionality has been stripped out, and it's a totally closed system, including the battery. EVERY hardware manufacturer, including Apple, far surpassed this product years ago. Anyone who would find this even remotely usable would probably be better served by a used iBook for a quarter of the cost.
They are using a one off processor from Intel. It appears to be a low-voltage Core 2 Duo that is operating below ultra-low-voltage power consumption. There is no other OEM that can say that!
PS: I'm getting really annoyed with the crowd here today. Did AI and Digg combine today?
"We" won't know anything until "we" find out exactly what panel is being used. Being thinner might have meant having a wider border.
I think shrinking the perimeter might have meant a smaller battery.
And a less durable case.
Toshiba R200 - less than 1" thick, 2 USB, SD, VGA, PCMCIA, internal modem, Ethernet wireless b/g. Weight = 2.74lbs. Battery life, approx 3.5 hrs
Panasonic CF-W2 (now the W4 or 5) - CD R/W, 2 USB, wireless b/g, SD, PCMCIA, VGA, EThernet, built in modem, armored HD, 12.1" screen, mono, 2.6 lbs
My current Panasonic CF-Y4 - DVD R/W, (2) USB, wireless b/g, SD, PCMCIA, VGA, Ethernet, built in modem, *armored HD* (tested up to a 4 ft. fall). 14" screen, stereo, and 3.4 lbs.
I'm not starting a flame-war, I *want* a Mac, but I'm looking at my 3 year old Panasonic that still has 15gb of HDD left, a larger screen, built in drive, ethernet, SD, PCMCIA and is only .4lbs heavier! I just dont think I can justify the 1800 to go backwards. Maybe rev.2 or by the WWDC Apple will have some more compelling options for the MBA????
Since you brought these two up:
Toshiba R200 (circa Apr 2005):
$2,099
1.2Ghz ULV Intel
512Mb Ram
2.7lbs
12.1" Screen
60Gb HD
Optical Drive: External
Panasonic CF-W5 (Mar 07):
$1,950
1.2Ghz Core Solo U1400
512Mb Ram
Weight: 2.9lbs
12.1" Screen
60Gb HD
Optical Drive: Internal
So... compared to those two, this isn't looking too bad
$1,799
1.6 Ghz (with 4mb cache, not 512k-1mb like the above two)
2Gb Ram
3.0 Lbs
13.1" Screen
80Gb HD
Optical Drive: Optional
Among subcompacts, the MBA really does well spec-wise. Comparing a subcompact to full size laptops is like comparing a desktop to a server (ie well it doesn't have 2 quad cores so it must suck).
All I am saying is that there are many other competitive products on the market that do more, weigh the same, and cost the same or less.
Can you point to those models that are as cheap or cheaper? I've only seen one ultralight that costs less than that, and that was a Dell. Everything else in that size class was more expensive. The current Dell Ultralight D430 is 1.2GHz, Core Solo or Core Duo.
Or are you saying that Apple would rather debut a new product that doesnt appeal to as many of its target market as possible?
Target market is not the same as largest possible market, which is what many OEMS do when they try to stuff as many things into the machine to win the oh-so-coveted Tech Specs award.
(Hell, I pre-ordered one despite all it's shortcomings)
Since you brought these two up:
Toshiba R200 (circa Apr 2005):
$2,099
1.2Ghz ULV Intel
512Mb Ram
2.7lbs
12.1" Screen
60Gb HD
Optical Drive: External
Panasonic CF-W5 (Mar 07):
$1,950
1.2Ghz Core Solo U1400
512Mb Ram
Weight: 2.9lbs
12.1" Screen
60Gb HD
Optical Drive: Internal
So... compared to those two, this isn't looking too bad
$1,799
1.6 Ghz (with 4mb cache, not 512k-1mb like the above two)
2Gb Ram
3.0 Lbs
13.1" Screen
80Gb HD
Optical Drive: Optional
Among subcompacts, the MBA really does well spec-wise. Comparing a subcompact to full size laptops is like comparing a desktop to a server (ie well it doesn't have 2 quad cores so it must suck).
WM,
You are right except the HDD space for the current models (W7 and Y7) go up signficantly 100gb and up, as do the current models from Toshiba, Dell, other brands (plus internal drives at less weight than the Apple). I was just giving examples of past machines I personally have used. Dont get me wrong - I like this machine a lot, I just wish it had a couple of more options - HDD and battery chief among them.
Can you point to those models that are as cheap or cheaper? I've only seen one ultralight that costs less than that, and that was a Dell. Everything else in that size class was more expensive. The current Dell Ultralight D430 is 1.2GHz, Core Solo or Core Duo.
I dont know. The price isn't an objection that I had. I just want some more options on the checkbox
WM,
You are right except the HDD space for the current models (W7 and Y7) go up signficantly 100gb and up, as do the current models from Toshiba, Dell, other brands (plus internal drives at less weight than the Apple). I was just giving examples of past machines I personally have used. Dont get me wrong - I like this machine a lot, I just wish it had a couple of more options - HDD and battery chief among them.
Panasonic W7
(Around $2,500)
1.06Ghz U7500 Intel Core 2 Duo (2mb cache)
1Gb Std (up to 2gb)
80Gb HD
12.1" Screen
3.0 Lbs
Optical Drive: Integrated
Also: 1.4"-2.0" thick (verses 0.16" to 0.76" for the MBA)
Panasonic Y7
(Around $2,300)
1.6Ghz L7500 Intel 4Mb Cache (looks to be the same processor as the MBA)
1Gb Std (up to 2)
80Gb HD
14.1" Screen
3.7 Lbs
Optical Drive: Integrated
Thickness: 1.4"-1.8"
So... these aren't faster nor do they have larger hard drives, more memory, weigh less, or cost less. I'm sure that you might be able to customize these, but that's not going to make them cost any less.
Panasonic W7
Panasonic Y7
So... these aren't faster nor do they have larger hard drives, more memory, weigh less, or cost less. I'm sure that you might be able to customize these, but that's not going to make them cost any less.
These are Toughbookst. While they make some ultra-light machines they don't make for a fair comparison with other ultra-lights.
Ah, someone who thinks he knows something, when he actually doesn't.
he said, totally unaware of the irony
Once again, I'll try to explain. If I could talk slower, melgross I would. I'll try using smaller words.
That's pretty dumb on your part. It makes the rest of what you're saying less credible.
he said, totally unaware of the irony
Irony would be lost on you.
It's really neat, and slim.. and light weight.. but unnecessarily wide and deep It must have been possible to shrink away the phat borders on the side of the screen.
My question exactly. I love Apple and may buy this, but for the record, look at what Panasonic and Toshiba have done with less weight:
Panasonic:
http://www.dynamism.com/w7/specs.shtml
Toshiba:
http://www.buy.com/prod/toshiba-port...204721663.html
Personally, I could not care less about an optical drive, but am curious to note the Toshiba is also thin, and comes in at just 2.4lbs (albeit with a 12inch screen, but it also has a DVD burner and lots of ports). I thought the SSD version is like 1.75lbs (again 12inch but with DVD and lots of ports). Why is the Apple so heavy?