I am very disappointed with this MBA. This thing is going to flop huge- think about it- this is a downgrade in performance from the macbook, and its thinner by less than an inch, but costs 700 bucks more. This isn't really any more portable- it actually has bigger dimensions than the macbook aside from the thickness. I can't see people paying 700 more for that thin aspect. Honestly I think this is a sort of tech showoff novelty. There is no way Apple can expect this thing to actually be a hit as far as sales are concerned. You can just get wayyyyyyyyy too much in the computer world for 1700 bucks to buy this thing. It is cool, but completely pointless to buy. There is no way this will fit anywhere your MB won't.
Then you don't understand the point to ultralights. If it means nothing to you, then none of the others will either.
Been thinking about this. I will probably buy, but still a bit of a let down. I don't mind the prices and may even go with the SSD. Unlike others I am a big fan of the full sized keyboard and full sized screen. Having said that, I have 4 concerns (I wrote about them earlier):
1. I think this could have been less than 3 lbs, maybe 12.5. I look at Toshiba and Panasonic offerings. They are not as thin, but lighter and smaller footprint. Some of those have 12inch screens, but they also have optical drives and a ton of ports. I don't want an optical drive or ports, but I do want to know why this MBA isn't gosh darn lighter given it skimps on all of those. I mean a panasonic R500 is 12inch, with an optical drive and is 1.75 lbs.
2. But it could have been narrower. I am typing on in iBook G4 12inch. I note the foot print of the MBA is wider than the existing MB and even a 14inch Panasonic. What's up with the wasted space to the left and right of the keyboard and screen. Rivals don't use this space. I really wonder if this tapered design has led to wasting space. If this was more square like an PB G4 12inch, would this have been lighter and narrower (albeit not the world's thinest).
3. I don't mind that the battery is not removable that much, but again would accept this compromise if it had a longer listed battery time or lighter weight. 5 hours with an LED is not that impressive. The SSD had better be lighter and offer battery life.
4. Speaking of which, why is there no listing of battery life and weight with SSD as other manufacturers do. I am supposed to pre-order with no word on this? I am sure someone asked on this in meetings at Apple. So the question is why didn't they choose to list it.
First of all, take a few minutes and watch the Keynote (about the 57 minute mark). Perhaps when you see how compact everything is and realize there is no extra space available you will better understand.
Secondly, look at the fine print. A lot of the things one takes for granted because Apple includes them is that they are not included in the competitors offerings. For example, they are not lighter as one doesn't include the 6.4 oz standard battery in their weight calculation.
And look at battery life that the opposing proposes. Again in the fine print, albeit buried deep in their web sites, is references to extended battery life as measured using the computer to play music only," not real life computing. Read the fine print on Apple's spec pages. It is open for consideration and it isn't composed as some have done when purporting 'longer' battery life to find that it referred to their 'optional' Extended Batteries which weighed significantly more. And I mean significantly.
By the way, that Toshiba R500 21.1" weighs 3.4 lbs with the standard battery. And look at measly processor, the dismal RAM, slow graphic's card, lack of built-in camera and just a RGB video output, etc.
It's amazing at how many computers people are quoting as being lighter, cheaper, or otherwise, are really not, once the actual specs are looked at.
I would have liked this to weigh a bit less, but it is what it is.
One reason is that the die cast aluminum case weighs a few ounces more than the plastic used by others, even those that have incredibly thin metal structures inside that parts are screwed to.
By the way, that Toshiba R500 21.1" weighs 3.4 lbs with the standard battery. And look at measly processor, the dismal RAM, slow graphic's card, lack of built-in camera and just a RGB video output, etc.
There are different battery configurations. 2.5lbs with a smaller battery (which is GASP removable) and that's with an optical drive, but a smaller screen. The SSD version is 1.72lbs without an optical drive. That is 12inches not 13 and yes not as fast a processor. But it is 40% lighter than Apple. Not as thin, but smaller and appreciably lighter.
Hey. I'll still probably buy the MBA (thinking with SSD as work pays). But I won't be an Apple apologist. Simple fact - Apple could have done better..
It's amazing at how many computers people are quoting as being lighter, cheaper, or otherwise, are really not, once the actual specs are looked at.
Umm.. Lighter and smaller footprint, yes. Cheaper, not really. Faster or better, definitely not. But they do achieve lighter. Apple failed here.
I also remain ticked off at not having a breakdown of weight, battery and other differences between HDD and SSD. If you want me to pre-order and drop 1000 for an SSD, don't you think I deserve this info Apple...
Umm.. Lighter and smaller footprint, yes. Cheaper, not really. Faster or better, definitely not. But they do achieve lighter. Apple failed here.
I remain ticked off at not having a breakdown of weight, battery and other differences between HDD and SSD. If you want me to pre-order and drop 1000 for an SSD, don't you think I deserve this info Apple...
Most aren't lighter once you add the weight of the battery, which mysteriously, is often left out of the specs, and must be added separately.
There is almost no difference in weight between the HDD and the SSD that Apple is offering.
Almost no manufacturer that offers an optional SSD (almost no manufacturers offer one yet) gives that info. But, you can look it up.
It's really easy. I typed 64 GB SSD in Google, and here's the search page that came up.
There are different battery configurations. 2.5lbs with a smaller battery (which is GASP removable) and that's with an optical drive, but a smaller screen. The SSD version is 1.72lbs without an optical drive. That is 12inches not 13 and yes not as fast a processor. But it is 40% lighter than Apple. Not as thin, but smaller and appreciably lighter.
Hey. I'll still probably buy the MBA (thinking with SSD as work pays). But I won't be an Apple apologist. Simple fact - Apple could have done better..
That isn't a fact, simple or otherwise. That is an opinion, and a not very informed one at that. You are comparing a 12" machine with a mini-keyboard and smaller footprint and cheap plastic parts and pointing out how it's lighter.
When you look at all the parts of the machine you see that Apple engineering did a great job with this machine. The battery is probably the heaviest part of this device. They could have made it smaller to reduce weight but by sacrificing usage time. They also could have used a slower processor. This would have reduced cost, saved on space and allowed for a smaller battery at the same usage time, but again, at what cost? A machine that is dog slow?
They comprised well. As the target consumer for this product this device is nearly perfect. I would have liked integrated 3G but having to use a USB dongle isn't going to make me cancel my order.
If you compare it to an ULW machine that 12 inches or less ir will probably be lighter, but you are looking the sum of the parts, you're just focusing on one aspect of it. I have a real world need for this device and I'm glad it finally arrived.
What will be interesting is to see performance comparisons to all these other supposedly better machines that cost more and are running 1.0GHz ULVs. What excuse will the Pearitians going to be pulling out their ass next?
Umm.. Lighter and smaller footprint, yes. Cheaper, not really. Faster or better, definitely not. But they do achieve lighter. Apple failed here.
Is you issue that Apple didn't make a 14" notebook with a full keyboard lighter than other ULWs? As i recall from the keynote, the ideal was around 3lbs. I don't think Apple was trying to achieve the lightest notebook but was trying to achieve the the most ideal notebook for the average business traveler.
Thanks for the homework assignment without answering the question. Toshiba breaks down the weight difference on their model, but it has other differences (no optical drive, tinier battery I believe).
The question is what is the weight difference between a 1.8 HDD and a 1.8 SSD. That I found harder to find... According to Samsung = a 1.8 SSD is 20 to 44grams. It's lower than 20grams if you had soldered it. A typical HDD is 62grams. Apple could have optimized either. But if you are saving 40 grams that is 1.3 ounces.
The SSD consumes 1/3 of the power of an HDD. This can add up, though the other components are bigger hogs. An SSD, with an LV processor, good management and a LED screen should allow a small battery and a small converter with a reasonably good battery life.
Is you issue that Apple didn't make a 14" notebook with a full keyboard lighter than other ULWs? As i recall from the keynote, the ideal was around 3lbs. I don't think Apple was trying to achieve the lightest notebook but was trying to achieve the the most ideal notebook for the average business traveler.
No I concur and personally am very happy with the full sized keyboard and screen. I find a 12inch widescreen too small. I am typing this on a 12 inch PB/ibook non-widescreen from the earlier generation. It has the same vertical space as the 13.3 but is narrower with less horizontal space (mostly a waste to me).
But I think a different design would have yielded something closer to 2.5 lbs and something slightly narrower on the sides. Its also possible the extra weight went into build quality on the case, in which case I am more forgiving...
I also remain ticked off at not having a breakdown of weight, battery and other differences between HDD and SSD. If you want me to pre-order and drop 1000 for an SSD, don't you think I deserve this info Apple...
I've ordered the stock configuration, and it's definitely the best deal. A little faster (and more power hungry) for $300? No thanks? And $1000 for a smaller, presumably much faster and slightly more efficient, drive? That's crazy. If you want that drive, wait 6 months before buying this computer. Then you'll have more options or at least save a few hundred bucks.
No I concur and personally am very happy with the full sized keyboard and screen. I find a 12inch widescreen too small. I am typing this on a 12 inch PB/ibook non-widescreen from the earlier generation. It has the same vertical space as the 13.3 but is narrower with less horizontal space (mostly a waste to me).
But I think a different design would have yielded something closer to 2.5 lbs and something slightly narrower on the sides. Its also possible the extra weight went into build quality on the case, in which case I am more forgiving...
Being aluminuum and tapering so much on the sides does make this wider. If they made this a the typical boxed design you see from other OEM and the 12"PB they could have brought the keyboard right to the side but the design does add some strength and rigidity to the structure. They could have also shed some weight by reducing the size of the battery and then used a ULV to maintain some of that battery time.
What we have is a 1.6GHz "Merom" C2D and 5 hours battery life in a 3lb package with a 13" display and full-size keyboard. That is absolutely ideal, IMO.
I've ordered the stock configuration, and it's definitely the best deal. A little faster (and more power hungry) for $300? No thanks? And $1000 for a smaller, presumably much faster and slightly more efficient, drive? That's crazy. If you want that drive, wait 6 months before buying this computer. Then you'll have more options or at least save a few hundred bucks.
Or buy the same config as you. Wait 1 year, have a third party replace the HDD with an SSD when its cheaper or with a 128gig. I live in NYC and so can take it to tekserve.
Thanks for the homework assignment without answering the question. Toshiba breaks down the weight difference on their model, but it has other differences (no optical drive, tinier battery I believe).
The question is what is the weight difference between a 1.8 HDD and a 1.8 SSD. That I found harder to find... According to Samsung = a 1.8 SSD is 20 to 44grams. It's lower than 20grams if you had soldered it. A typical HDD is 62grams. Apple could have optimized either. But if you are saving 40 grams that is 1.3 ounces.
The SSD consumes 1/3 of the power of an HDD. This can add up, though the other components are bigger hogs. An SSD, with an LV processor, good management and a LED screen should allow a small battery and a small converter with a reasonably good battery life.
I already said the difference was small, and it is.
It's not going to be 40 grams for a 64 GB SSD, more like 20.
Overall, even if it were 32 grams (an ounce) it would make no discernible difference to the user.
I have little interest in the minor weight differential, you do, so I gave you a headstart.
Being aluminuum and tapering so much on the sides does make this wider. If they made this a the typical boxed design you see from other OEM and the 12"PB they could have brought the keyboard right to the side but the design does add some strength and rigidity to the structure. They could have also shed some weight by reducing the size of the battery and then used a ULV to maintain some of that battery time.
What we have is a 1.6GHz "Merom" C2D and 5 hours battery life in a 3lb package with a 13" display and full-size keyboard. That is absolutely ideal, IMO.
I'll bite and likely but with same config as you. I appreciate that they did not go with ULV. But had the ULV gotten you down to say 2.5 with same battery life or 3lb with 7 hours, I am not sure if I would not have prefered that. I'm typing on a G4 and so its all blazing fast to me.
I could go for 1.8ghz, but then I guess that may have less battery life too...
Or buy the same config as you. Wait 1 year, have a third party replace the HDD with an SSD when its cheaper or with a 128gig. I live in NYC and so can take it to tekserve.
That would make sense. Tekserve is very good, and Dave, one of the owners I know, is a very honest guy. they do good work.
I already said the difference was small, and it is.
It's not going to be 40 grams for a 64 GB SSD, more like 20.
Overall, even if it were 32 grams (an ounce) it would make no discernible difference to the user.
I have little interest in the minor weight differential, you do, so I gave you a headstart.
More of an issue where you get a combined savings from the SSD and a slightly smaller battery it allows. This is also part of the do you go ULV or LV approach...
When you start to talk about LED, plus SSD, plus ULV or LV and then you get a lower energy requirement, it means the power brick gets smaller, the battery is smaller and so the case can be smaller. It just the cascading effects of different types of energy savings on weight all around.
Even with no weight savings, I don't expect SSD adds to much to battery life, but 10% on 5 hours is still an extra 30 minutes... Nice, just hard to pay 1,000 for it.
That would make sense. Tekserve is very good, and Dave, one of the owners I know, is a very honest guy. they do good work.
This opens up the same option with any potential battery replacement. Hopefully this is longer lived than some others. I just fear the hastle for people in some non-urban areas.
Comments
I am very disappointed with this MBA. This thing is going to flop huge- think about it- this is a downgrade in performance from the macbook, and its thinner by less than an inch, but costs 700 bucks more. This isn't really any more portable- it actually has bigger dimensions than the macbook aside from the thickness. I can't see people paying 700 more for that thin aspect. Honestly I think this is a sort of tech showoff novelty. There is no way Apple can expect this thing to actually be a hit as far as sales are concerned. You can just get wayyyyyyyyy too much in the computer world for 1700 bucks to buy this thing. It is cool, but completely pointless to buy. There is no way this will fit anywhere your MB won't.
Then you don't understand the point to ultralights. If it means nothing to you, then none of the others will either.
Been thinking about this. I will probably buy, but still a bit of a let down. I don't mind the prices and may even go with the SSD. Unlike others I am a big fan of the full sized keyboard and full sized screen. Having said that, I have 4 concerns (I wrote about them earlier):
1. I think this could have been less than 3 lbs, maybe 12.5. I look at Toshiba and Panasonic offerings. They are not as thin, but lighter and smaller footprint. Some of those have 12inch screens, but they also have optical drives and a ton of ports. I don't want an optical drive or ports, but I do want to know why this MBA isn't gosh darn lighter given it skimps on all of those. I mean a panasonic R500 is 12inch, with an optical drive and is 1.75 lbs.
2. But it could have been narrower. I am typing on in iBook G4 12inch. I note the foot print of the MBA is wider than the existing MB and even a 14inch Panasonic. What's up with the wasted space to the left and right of the keyboard and screen. Rivals don't use this space. I really wonder if this tapered design has led to wasting space. If this was more square like an PB G4 12inch, would this have been lighter and narrower (albeit not the world's thinest).
3. I don't mind that the battery is not removable that much, but again would accept this compromise if it had a longer listed battery time or lighter weight. 5 hours with an LED is not that impressive. The SSD had better be lighter and offer battery life.
4. Speaking of which, why is there no listing of battery life and weight with SSD as other manufacturers do. I am supposed to pre-order with no word on this? I am sure someone asked on this in meetings at Apple. So the question is why didn't they choose to list it.
First of all, take a few minutes and watch the Keynote (about the 57 minute mark). Perhaps when you see how compact everything is and realize there is no extra space available you will better understand.
Secondly, look at the fine print. A lot of the things one takes for granted because Apple includes them is that they are not included in the competitors offerings. For example, they are not lighter as one doesn't include the 6.4 oz standard battery in their weight calculation.
And look at battery life that the opposing proposes. Again in the fine print, albeit buried deep in their web sites, is references to extended battery life as measured using the computer to play music only," not real life computing. Read the fine print on Apple's spec pages. It is open for consideration and it isn't composed as some have done when purporting 'longer' battery life to find that it referred to their 'optional' Extended Batteries which weighed significantly more. And I mean significantly.
By the way, that Toshiba R500 21.1" weighs 3.4 lbs with the standard battery. And look at measly processor, the dismal RAM, slow graphic's card, lack of built-in camera and just a RGB video output, etc.
I would have liked this to weigh a bit less, but it is what it is.
One reason is that the die cast aluminum case weighs a few ounces more than the plastic used by others, even those that have incredibly thin metal structures inside that parts are screwed to.
By the way, that Toshiba R500 21.1" weighs 3.4 lbs with the standard battery. And look at measly processor, the dismal RAM, slow graphic's card, lack of built-in camera and just a RGB video output, etc.
There are different battery configurations. 2.5lbs with a smaller battery (which is GASP removable) and that's with an optical drive, but a smaller screen. The SSD version is 1.72lbs without an optical drive. That is 12inches not 13 and yes not as fast a processor. But it is 40% lighter than Apple. Not as thin, but smaller and appreciably lighter.
Hey. I'll still probably buy the MBA (thinking with SSD as work pays). But I won't be an Apple apologist. Simple fact - Apple could have done better..
It's amazing at how many computers people are quoting as being lighter, cheaper, or otherwise, are really not, once the actual specs are looked at.
Umm.. Lighter and smaller footprint, yes. Cheaper, not really. Faster or better, definitely not. But they do achieve lighter. Apple failed here.
I also remain ticked off at not having a breakdown of weight, battery and other differences between HDD and SSD. If you want me to pre-order and drop 1000 for an SSD, don't you think I deserve this info Apple...
Umm.. Lighter and smaller footprint, yes. Cheaper, not really. Faster or better, definitely not. But they do achieve lighter. Apple failed here.
I remain ticked off at not having a breakdown of weight, battery and other differences between HDD and SSD. If you want me to pre-order and drop 1000 for an SSD, don't you think I deserve this info Apple...
Most aren't lighter once you add the weight of the battery, which mysteriously, is often left out of the specs, and must be added separately.
There is almost no difference in weight between the HDD and the SSD that Apple is offering.
Almost no manufacturer that offers an optional SSD (almost no manufacturers offer one yet) gives that info. But, you can look it up.
It's really easy. I typed 64 GB SSD in Google, and here's the search page that came up.
http://www.google.com/search?client=...UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
There are different battery configurations. 2.5lbs with a smaller battery (which is GASP removable) and that's with an optical drive, but a smaller screen. The SSD version is 1.72lbs without an optical drive. That is 12inches not 13 and yes not as fast a processor. But it is 40% lighter than Apple. Not as thin, but smaller and appreciably lighter.
Hey. I'll still probably buy the MBA (thinking with SSD as work pays). But I won't be an Apple apologist. Simple fact - Apple could have done better..
That isn't a fact, simple or otherwise. That is an opinion, and a not very informed one at that. You are comparing a 12" machine with a mini-keyboard and smaller footprint and cheap plastic parts and pointing out how it's lighter.
When you look at all the parts of the machine you see that Apple engineering did a great job with this machine. The battery is probably the heaviest part of this device. They could have made it smaller to reduce weight but by sacrificing usage time. They also could have used a slower processor. This would have reduced cost, saved on space and allowed for a smaller battery at the same usage time, but again, at what cost? A machine that is dog slow?
They comprised well. As the target consumer for this product this device is nearly perfect. I would have liked integrated 3G but having to use a USB dongle isn't going to make me cancel my order.
If you compare it to an ULW machine that 12 inches or less ir will probably be lighter, but you are looking the sum of the parts, you're just focusing on one aspect of it. I have a real world need for this device and I'm glad it finally arrived.
What will be interesting is to see performance comparisons to all these other supposedly better machines that cost more and are running 1.0GHz ULVs. What excuse will the Pearitians going to be pulling out their ass next?
Umm.. Lighter and smaller footprint, yes. Cheaper, not really. Faster or better, definitely not. But they do achieve lighter. Apple failed here.
Is you issue that Apple didn't make a 14" notebook with a full keyboard lighter than other ULWs? As i recall from the keynote, the ideal was around 3lbs. I don't think Apple was trying to achieve the lightest notebook but was trying to achieve the the most ideal notebook for the average business traveler.
Most aren't lighter once you add the weight of the battery, which mysteriously, is often left out of the specs, and must be added separately.
There is almost no difference in weight between the HDD and the SSD that Apple is offering.
Almost no manufacturer that offers an optional SSD (almost no manufacturers offer one yet) gives that info. But, you can look it up.
It's really easy. I typed 64 GB SSD in Google, and here's the search page that came up.
http://www.google.com/search?client=...UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
Thanks for the homework assignment without answering the question. Toshiba breaks down the weight difference on their model, but it has other differences (no optical drive, tinier battery I believe).
The question is what is the weight difference between a 1.8 HDD and a 1.8 SSD. That I found harder to find... According to Samsung = a 1.8 SSD is 20 to 44grams. It's lower than 20grams if you had soldered it. A typical HDD is 62grams. Apple could have optimized either. But if you are saving 40 grams that is 1.3 ounces.
The SSD consumes 1/3 of the power of an HDD. This can add up, though the other components are bigger hogs. An SSD, with an LV processor, good management and a LED screen should allow a small battery and a small converter with a reasonably good battery life.
Is you issue that Apple didn't make a 14" notebook with a full keyboard lighter than other ULWs? As i recall from the keynote, the ideal was around 3lbs. I don't think Apple was trying to achieve the lightest notebook but was trying to achieve the the most ideal notebook for the average business traveler.
No I concur and personally am very happy with the full sized keyboard and screen. I find a 12inch widescreen too small. I am typing this on a 12 inch PB/ibook non-widescreen from the earlier generation. It has the same vertical space as the 13.3 but is narrower with less horizontal space (mostly a waste to me).
But I think a different design would have yielded something closer to 2.5 lbs and something slightly narrower on the sides. Its also possible the extra weight went into build quality on the case, in which case I am more forgiving...
I also remain ticked off at not having a breakdown of weight, battery and other differences between HDD and SSD. If you want me to pre-order and drop 1000 for an SSD, don't you think I deserve this info Apple...
I've ordered the stock configuration, and it's definitely the best deal. A little faster (and more power hungry) for $300? No thanks? And $1000 for a smaller, presumably much faster and slightly more efficient, drive? That's crazy. If you want that drive, wait 6 months before buying this computer. Then you'll have more options or at least save a few hundred bucks.
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 is 1.74" thick. Uses 1.06GHz CPU. Intel GMA965. No LED screen. Costs $2199
Toshiba is 1.57" thick. 1.2GHz CPU. Intel GMA950. No LED screen. Costs $2149
MBA .76" thick. Uses 1.6GHz CPU. Intel X3100 GPU. LED screen. Costs $1799.
No I concur and personally am very happy with the full sized keyboard and screen. I find a 12inch widescreen too small. I am typing this on a 12 inch PB/ibook non-widescreen from the earlier generation. It has the same vertical space as the 13.3 but is narrower with less horizontal space (mostly a waste to me).
But I think a different design would have yielded something closer to 2.5 lbs and something slightly narrower on the sides. Its also possible the extra weight went into build quality on the case, in which case I am more forgiving...
Being aluminuum and tapering so much on the sides does make this wider. If they made this a the typical boxed design you see from other OEM and the 12"PB they could have brought the keyboard right to the side but the design does add some strength and rigidity to the structure. They could have also shed some weight by reducing the size of the battery and then used a ULV to maintain some of that battery time.
What we have is a 1.6GHz "Merom" C2D and 5 hours battery life in a 3lb package with a 13" display and full-size keyboard. That is absolutely ideal, IMO.
Panasonic is 1.74" thick. Uses 1.06GHz CPU. Intel GMA965. No LED screen. Costs $2199
Toshiba is 1.57" thick. 1.2GHz CPU. Intel GMA950. No LED screen. Costs $2149
MBA .76" thick. Uses 1.6GHz CPU. Intel X3100 GPU. LED screen. Costs $1799.
In defense of the naysayers, those other machines typically are thicker but have a smaller footprint as they are 12" models.
I've ordered the stock configuration, and it's definitely the best deal. A little faster (and more power hungry) for $300? No thanks? And $1000 for a smaller, presumably much faster and slightly more efficient, drive? That's crazy. If you want that drive, wait 6 months before buying this computer. Then you'll have more options or at least save a few hundred bucks.
Or buy the same config as you. Wait 1 year, have a third party replace the HDD with an SSD when its cheaper or with a 128gig. I live in NYC and so can take it to tekserve.
Thanks for the homework assignment without answering the question. Toshiba breaks down the weight difference on their model, but it has other differences (no optical drive, tinier battery I believe).
The question is what is the weight difference between a 1.8 HDD and a 1.8 SSD. That I found harder to find... According to Samsung = a 1.8 SSD is 20 to 44grams. It's lower than 20grams if you had soldered it. A typical HDD is 62grams. Apple could have optimized either. But if you are saving 40 grams that is 1.3 ounces.
The SSD consumes 1/3 of the power of an HDD. This can add up, though the other components are bigger hogs. An SSD, with an LV processor, good management and a LED screen should allow a small battery and a small converter with a reasonably good battery life.
I already said the difference was small, and it is.
It's not going to be 40 grams for a 64 GB SSD, more like 20.
Overall, even if it were 32 grams (an ounce) it would make no discernible difference to the user.
I have little interest in the minor weight differential, you do, so I gave you a headstart.
Being aluminuum and tapering so much on the sides does make this wider. If they made this a the typical boxed design you see from other OEM and the 12"PB they could have brought the keyboard right to the side but the design does add some strength and rigidity to the structure. They could have also shed some weight by reducing the size of the battery and then used a ULV to maintain some of that battery time.
What we have is a 1.6GHz "Merom" C2D and 5 hours battery life in a 3lb package with a 13" display and full-size keyboard. That is absolutely ideal, IMO.
I'll bite and likely but with same config as you. I appreciate that they did not go with ULV. But had the ULV gotten you down to say 2.5 with same battery life or 3lb with 7 hours, I am not sure if I would not have prefered that. I'm typing on a G4 and so its all blazing fast to me.
I could go for 1.8ghz, but then I guess that may have less battery life too...
Or buy the same config as you. Wait 1 year, have a third party replace the HDD with an SSD when its cheaper or with a 128gig. I live in NYC and so can take it to tekserve.
That would make sense. Tekserve is very good, and Dave, one of the owners I know, is a very honest guy. they do good work.
I already said the difference was small, and it is.
It's not going to be 40 grams for a 64 GB SSD, more like 20.
Overall, even if it were 32 grams (an ounce) it would make no discernible difference to the user.
I have little interest in the minor weight differential, you do, so I gave you a headstart.
More of an issue where you get a combined savings from the SSD and a slightly smaller battery it allows. This is also part of the do you go ULV or LV approach...
When you start to talk about LED, plus SSD, plus ULV or LV and then you get a lower energy requirement, it means the power brick gets smaller, the battery is smaller and so the case can be smaller. It just the cascading effects of different types of energy savings on weight all around.
Even with no weight savings, I don't expect SSD adds to much to battery life, but 10% on 5 hours is still an extra 30 minutes... Nice, just hard to pay 1,000 for it.
That would make sense. Tekserve is very good, and Dave, one of the owners I know, is a very honest guy. they do good work.
This opens up the same option with any potential battery replacement. Hopefully this is longer lived than some others. I just fear the hastle for people in some non-urban areas.