First Look: Apple's new MacBook Air (with photos and video)

1457910

Comments

  • Reply 121 of 186
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by NYCMacFan View Post


    My point was on the overall real estate inside the 12inch PB case. They fit a lot in a small case and that was 4 years ago.



    Maybe I'm looking at the wrong specs, but it looks like the old 12 inch PB was 50%+ thicker and similarly heavier. Overall, that's not nearly as small (in volume) as the new model, and that's with a smaller screen.



    Could they have gone with a smaller screen to make it narrower? Sure.



    Could they have gone for as narrow as possible with a 13 inch screen, and not cared how thick the box needed to be? Sure.



    But I'm not convinced that either of those choices would have ended up with a better machine than what we're looking at now.



    And I think the real test of a machine that is designed primarily for shape and size is to actually hold one in your hand, which it sounds like nobody on this forum has been able to do yet.



    People bashed the "fatty" nano based on pictures, but people fall in love when they see them in person and get to hold them. Until people put an Air under one arm and whatever it is to be compared with under the other, we're all just wildly speculating.
  • Reply 122 of 186
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TBaggins View Post


    I myself am torn. I love 4:3 for most things (esp. Word and the web), but widescreen for watching DVDs, something I do a lot on my notebook (OMG... I'm someone who actually USES THEIR OPTICAL DRIVE! Heretic! Leper outcast unclean! ).



    I kinda wish they could all be 3:2, but whatev. Just as long as they aren't 16:9. I don't like having so little vertical space to work in. Even the current 16:10 kinda annoys me, and that's with the dock on the side. \



    What is special about 3:2? I think some pictures standards are like that, but I don't know anything else. I really don't think there's necessarily a special aspect ratio that all computing devices should adhere to, 4:3 isn't old, it's just an aspect ratio. There might be a use that it fits better than other ratios. The computer usually doesn't care, computers already do put out 3:2, 4:3, 5:4, 16:10, 16:9 and so on, and some panorama displays too.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Me too. Remember the Macs that were taller than they were wide, matching a sheet of notebook paper. That made sense back then! Who would have thought the screen would be turn 90˚ and stretched out even wider.



    The entire machine might have been taller than it was wide but the screen was wider than it was tall. I think it's the screen that's the most important. Actually displaying a full sheet of paper on the screen in portrait mode would have been more useful than the shape of the box. That said, 16:10 is about the size of two sheets of paper side-by-side.
  • Reply 123 of 186
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post


    Maybe I'm looking at the wrong specs, but it looks like the old 12 inch PB was 50%+ thicker and similarly heavier. Overall, that's not nearly as small (in volume) as the new model, and that's with a smaller screen.



    The MB Air is actually half as thick as the 12" Powerbook if you average the front and rear heights.
  • Reply 124 of 186
    tbagginstbaggins Posts: 2,306member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post


    What is special about 3:2?





    Seems kinda obvious, given my usage patterns, which I cited.



    It's a good compromise between my Word and Web use, and my DVD watching.



    I do sometimes use Photoshop and Captivate, but not enough to really pull me one way or another.





    .
  • Reply 125 of 186
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post


    What is special about 3:2?



    16:9 is 1280 by 800, which is what the air has.



    3:2 would be 1200 by 800. Shaving 80 pixels off the side doesn't seem to me like a big enough difference for most people to even notice.
  • Reply 126 of 186
    tbagginstbaggins Posts: 2,306member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Me too. Remember the Macs that were taller than they were wide, matching a sheet of notebook paper. That made sense back then! Who would have thought the screen would be turn 90˚ and stretched out even wider.



    I remember a line of CRT monitors way back when (not made by Apple) that you could turn 90 degrees and they'd do either portrait or landscape mode, depending on orientation.



    Thought they were pretty cool, but they never caught on, mainly due to the price. \



    I also seem to remember seeing some cute little portrait monitors sitting atop some old IIci's and IIsi's at my community college back in the '90s. Don't recall if they were Apple-made or not





    .
  • Reply 127 of 186
    tbagginstbaggins Posts: 2,306member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post


    16:9 is 1280 by 800, which is what the air has.



    3:2 would be 1200 by 800. Shaving 80 pixels off the side doesn't seem to me like a big enough difference for most people to even notice.





    1280 by 800 is actually 16:10, not 16:9.



    If it really were 16:9, it'd be 1280 by 720. Going 3:2 with that, that'd be 1080 by 720 (or 1280 by 854, if you want to go the other way), i.e. a 200 pixel difference. I think most ppl would notice that.



    .
  • Reply 128 of 186
    When I was graduating from college in 2006 I had noticed something around campus, tons of Macbooks. The little white things were popping up all over the place.



    I see the MacBook Air as a natural fit for college students and college life: Most colleges nowadays are complete wireless environments from dorms to the middle of campus wifi networks typically blanket campuses, many colleges offer their students remote storage on servers so that papers, powerpoints and the like can be accessed anywhere from your profile, and college kids love anything that would lighten their load as carrying a full 5+ lbs laptop around is a pain sometimes (trust me).



    So, a wireless environment+remote storage+small form factor = good for college kids.



    Now some of you will scoff at college kids being able to afford the laptop, but if they are will and able to (or their parents are) buy a MacBook priced at $1099-1499 I think many (not all) wouldn't mind saving up that extra few hundred for a nifty little machine.



    However outside the wireless envronment that is all friendly with remote storage, the MacBook Air falls apart. It isn't practical for every day living, rather it is a supplement for pple who go to college, work at nice corporate office, or have a really nice house.



    That being said, the MacBook Air 2.0 next year will be awesome.
  • Reply 129 of 186
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Me too. Remember the Macs that were taller than they were wide, matching a sheet of notebook paper. That made sense back then! Who would have thought the screen would be turn 90˚ and stretched out even wider.



    The one nice thing with widescreen is that it makes it much more likely one gets a full sized keyboard. Anything 12inches or more has the space. I have about 3 ultraportables at home and the older ones used to have very questionable keyboards. I'm a a professor and so type a lot.



    I'm using this in a bar having a beer as I type this and so things like a good screen and keyboard matter as I like to work outside and I don't want to have to go home and always be plugging it into different attachments.
  • Reply 130 of 186
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TBaggins View Post


    I remember a line of CRT monitors way back when (not made by Apple) that you could turn 90 degrees and they'd do either portrait or landscape mode, depending on orientation.



    Thought they were pretty cool, but they never caught on, mainly due to the price. \



    I also seem to remember seeing some cute little portrait monitors sitting atop some old IIci's and IIsi's at my community college back in the '90s. Don't recall if they were Apple-made or not



    Macintosh Portrait Display

    — 640x870

    — 1 bit (up to 256 shades of gray)

    — 35lbs

    — 13.1"H x 11.5W x 14.9"D

    — b.1989 — d.1992





    That is all I could find from Apple. I guess it was a 3rd party product.





    Here is my first Mac:

    Macintosh Performa 575

    — 640x480

    — 14" RBG

    — 33Mhz Motorola

    — 4MB RAM (had 20MB for an $800 premium, I think)

    — 250MB HDD

    — 2x CD-ROM

    — System 7.1

    — 40.5lbs

    — 17.9"H x 13.5"W x 16.5"D

    — b.1994 — d.1995 (used until 1997)

  • Reply 131 of 186
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by NewMacConvert View Post


    When I was graduating from college in 2006 I had noticed something around campus, tons of Macbooks. The little white things were popping up all over the place.



    I see the MacBook Air as a natural fit for college students and college life:



    Yeah, though I find a lot of college students never think about weight issues when purchasing. Many opt for a MBP 15 or even 17inch. So price isn't an issue.



    By contrast, grad students, especially MBA and law, love the Dell D420s, small Toshibas and Sonys.
  • Reply 132 of 186
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by NYCMacFan View Post


    Yeah, though I find a lot of college students never think about weight issues when purchasing. Many opt for a MBP 15 or even 17inch. So price isn't an issue.



    By contrast, grad students, especially MBA and law, love the Dell D420s, small Toshibas and Sonys.



    I can see that. The Air isn't going to be my only machine. If I did only one machine it surely would be a MB or MBP.
  • Reply 133 of 186
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by NYCMacFan View Post


    Yeah, though I find a lot of college students never think about weight issues when purchasing. Many opt for a MBP 15 or even 17inch. So price isn't an issue.



    By contrast, grad students, especially MBA and law, love the Dell D420s, small Toshibas and Sonys.





    Hmmm true, but then again I never thought anyone outside of the art crowd would buy a Macbook b/c of the screen size. I always thought Apple's laptops had strangely small screens, I guess it is a way of pushing people to buy the MacBook Pro.



    But I still think this computer will appeal to people who aren't crazy, heavy computer users, kids who need to write a paper, do a keynote presentation, have a light internet station. Plus, lets face it, as far as laptops go, its pure sex. lol It's beautiful, and that (much like the pink and blue iBooks) will appeal to pple who may not know exactly what they are getting......and thus the accessories will be cash cows.
  • Reply 134 of 186
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    AnandTech may be wrong about this being a mini-Merom C2D. The developer notes for the MBA state that it supports SSE4, so this might be a Penryn in here.
  • Reply 135 of 186
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    AnandTech may be wrong about this being a mini-Merom C2D. The developer notes for the MBA state that it supports SSE4, so this might be a Penryn in here.



    Do we know what the practical performance difference would be?
  • Reply 136 of 186
    backtomacbacktomac Posts: 4,579member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post


    People bashed the "fatty" nano based on pictures, but people fall in love when they see them in person and get to hold them. Until people put an Air under one arm and whatever it is to be compared with under the other, we're all just wildly speculating.



    You're very right about that. From the leaked pictures prior to it's release I thought the 3g nano was hideous. But as soon as I saw one and held it I was won over. I now own one and love it. A very versatile iPod. The MBA may very well be the same in that regard.
  • Reply 137 of 186
    Criticizing the MBA for lack of ports and this n that, is like complaining that the Enzo Ferrari doesn't have 7 seats, or doesn't have an in-car DVD system.

    Everyone can complain about something or another. There are cars that do 50mpg. There are cars that carry 7-8 people easily. There are cars that can traverse over rocky terrain. There are cars that blaze over 200mph. THere are cars that sell for a really cheap price. But there are no cars that do ALL of them.

    The complaints made against the MBA is like the above analogy: Seems that Apple should have done the following: 2.2lb, 10" screen, built-in blu-ray, thus somehow fit a 1080p display into that tiny 10" screen, 8hrs battery life thats replaceable, 1" thick, have at least 1 FW 800 and 3 USB ports, full range of audio and video outputs, a 128GB SSD drive, at least a 2.2Ghz C2D chip and at least an 8800 nVidia mobile chip. Oh and still sell it for US$1000.



    It's a very specialised machine. The MacBook was never designed for mobile professional artists. The Mac Pro was not ever designed for granny at home to just read on the web. The MacBook Air was not designed for for the poweruser.



    End of story.
  • Reply 138 of 186
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by backtomac View Post


    You're very right about that. From the leaked pictures prior to it's release I thought the 3g nano was hideous. But as soon as I saw one and held it I was won over. I now own one and love it. A very versatile iPod. The MBA may very well be the same in that regard.



    Ditto feelings on the 3G Nano. Though I didn't buy one, i am quite content with my iPhone for normal use and my Shuffle for the gym.
  • Reply 139 of 186
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BMWintoxication View Post


    oh.. did anyone mention why AAPL has dropped to 160??



    The entire stock market is getting sucker punched, not just Apple.
  • Reply 140 of 186
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post


    I think right now is a fantastic buying opportunity - when it's back at 200 before long people will be kicking themselves for not getting in.



    I liked getting in at 90 a whole lot better.
Sign In or Register to comment.