It's in the picture, which quite unmistakably is an Apple laptop. Macbook Air RAM is soldered to the motherboard, which is the set of 8 chips just above the battery = 2GB. The SSD chip would be the board to the left of that, which resembles SSD chips in netbooks:
DDR3 chip densities go up to 8 gigabits. That means 8GB out of eight chips, or any amount in between. There could also be eight more chips on the other side of the motherboard.
And that's definitely an SSD on a stick off to the left. This is it.
But I don't see how people would get excited if all it has is added USB, bigger drive and more battery life. Why not intel i3 chip?
Why the Core-i3? Why not the Core-i7? Apple does use the best SFF CULV in their MBAs already, so why downgrade them to the weakest category of the Core-i chips?
Why move to Core-i chips when that means using an IntelHD IGP. The Nvidia 320M has been shown to be a much better option and allow for a more balanced system. IOW, a slightly faster CPU and a downgraded GPU, or add a much faster GPU. I’d like to see a CULV Core-i7 but only if they add a proper GPU, too.
In fact, I only see one Core-3 that has a TDP under 35W: Intel® Core™ i3-330UM Processor (3M cache, 1.20 GHz). And I can’t even find it on Intel’s current price list for shipping chips, yet there are 5 Core-i7s with an 18W TDP.
Just thinking... Core iSeries probably not going to be used. Cost and lousy graphics. Also, I think the new MBA will have 4GB of RAM. That and SSD and 320M and you have a nice machine despite 2ghz Core2.
I'm still rocking a Macbook Alu 2ghz with 9400M. 4GB of RAM and 7200rpm drive. I can have Photoshop, Illustrator, iMovie, heck, even slam it with multiple synth tracks on Logic, iMovie with HD video, not that bad so far, and I'm hoping it will carry me into the end of 2011. Although my warranty runs out April next year so I will want to sell before the warranty ends.
Just thinking... Core iSeries probably not going to be used. Cost and lousy graphics. Also, I think the new MBA will have 4GB of RAM. That and SSD and 320M and you have a nice machine despite 2ghz Core2.
I'm still rocking a Macbook Alu 2ghz with 9400M. 4GB of RAM and 7200rpm drive. I can have Photoshop, Illustrator, iMovie, heck, even slam it with multiple synth tracks on Logic, iMovie with HD video, not that bad so far, and I'm hoping it will carry me into the end of 2011. Although my warranty runs out April next year so I will want to sell before the warranty ends.
I?d like to think that 4GB RAM will be used how many people need that much for an ultra-portable? What real benefit does it bring to the ultra-portable user?
I have been using 4GB for my last 4 machines. As of right now I have 9 apps in my Dock and a whole mess of apps running in my Menu Bar and I?m still only using 38%.
Other systems need more RAM to function. One because they run Windows, and two because of the crapware. Sony offered their systems with no crapware for an additional $150.
Here is an analysis of crapware on various stock systems. Even with half the RAM the MacBook had more free RAM than any other system because of the lack of crapware. Why isn?t this ever considered?
Well from decoding the serial number it was manufactured in Shanghai in 2010 on week 17 (April, May) with a model identifier of FX3... Kinda matches the label (FX).
Also that profiler doesn't show "Card Reader" so is that really an SD card reader (Could just be the OS doesn't recognise it I suppose)? And those 'USB' ports on either side don't look the same, the one on the right looks smaller, almost like a micro sim.... And where are the audio port/s?
So there's a mini DisplayPort, USB and maybe an SD card on the left. On the right there's MagSafe and a smaller USB port?
And is that just the WiFi chip up the top, could it include GPS or would that be separate?
Hmmm... It's a mystery.
It's just a prototype from quite a while back. It does provide some hints but I don't think we can speculate beyond that.
Fair enough. Sometimes Apple may need to do it just for marketing purposes. By your logic the Macbook Pro 13 should just have 2GB... And I could agree with you.
However consider as well this MBA will have to last people 3 years.
Overall we are seeing a shift it what people do with a desktop and laptop and the days of needing more and more powerful specs is slowly winding down, yet there is relentless marketing pressure for bigger and better. Which if you think about it is kind if the genius of the Core i Series (And Core series before that). Taking the focus out from clock speeds which could not keep going higher and higher endlessly.
I do feel conflicted.
I know I need that 4GB of RAM, because of Adobe CS4 and testing websites in VMWare WinXP and sometimes Win7 simultaneously, not to mention Mac browsers, email and iTunes open, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism;
I’d like to think that 4GB RAM will be used how many people need that much for an ultra-portable? What real benefit does it bring to the ultra-portable user?
I have been using 4GB for my last 4 machines. As of right now I have 9 apps in my Dock and a whole mess of apps running in my Menu Bar and I’m still only using 38%.
Other systems need more RAM to function. One because they run Windows, and two because of the crapware. Sony offered their systems with no crapware for an additional $150.
Here is an analysis of crapware on various stock systems. Even with half the RAM the MacBook had more free RAM than any other system because of the lack of crapware. Why isn’t this ever considered?
Ironically I spend a lot of my Foruming time on an iPad nowadays. When I come back from work sometimes I don't want to touch my Macbook LOL.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008
Fair enough. Sometimes Apple may need to do it just for marketing purposes. By your logic the Macbook Pro 13 should just have 2GB... And I could agree with you.
However consider as well this MBA will have to last people 3 years.
Overall we are seeing a shift it what people do with a desktop and laptop and the days of needing more and more powerful specs is slowly winding down, yet there is relentless marketing pressure for bigger and better. Which if you think about it is kind if the genius of the Core i Series (And Core series before that). Taking the focus out from clock speeds which could not keep going higher and higher endlessly.
I do feel conflicted.
I know I need that 4GB of RAM, because of Adobe CS4 and testing websites in VMWare WinXP and sometimes Win7 simultaneously, not to mention Mac browsers, email and iTunes open, etc.
By your logic the Macbook Pro 13 should just have 2GB.
My rationale is not what should or shouldn?t be, but that Macs are inherently more efficient at using HW resources for various reasons. I?d like to have 4GB RAM on the next MBA. As a minimum on all Macs for that matter.
If so the person who took them should be in jail. I hope Apple have ways to track him / her down. Meanwhile they really need to tighten security.
1. If everyone who ever leaked info about upcoming Apple products went to jail, there'd be no AppleInsider and about a jillion other Mac rumor sites.
and then where would YOU post?
This community acts as a mechanism for adding greatly to the buzz and anticipation of new Apple products, and Apple, marketer supreme, certainly recognizes that AI, et al. overall act in its best interest. Plus, when leakers get too close to the bone, Apple's demonstrated it's a hardly a shrinking wallflower in aggressively going after them. Witness the case of the iPhone 4 prototype "left in a bar" and the prosecution of a once active site in the rumor world.
2. Apple's probably both a leaker (when it suits their purpose) as well as leaking false info to throw speculators off-track. Reference the whole history of scandals in US politics the last few decades for more examples of calculated leaks and misinfo.
3. Since Apple outsources more and more - and has more and more distribution chains, e.g., cellcos and chain stores - they have less and less personal control over leaks, and also, the Apple watchers have become more sophisticated about monitoring events at outside suppliers, shipping company manifests from China, etc., etc.
But they're still the best in the biz at being tight-lipped.
My rationale is not what should or shouldn?t be, but that Macs are inherently more efficient at using HW resources for various reasons. I?d like to have 4GB RAM on the next MBA. As a minimum on all Macs for that matter.
I would agree; I would love to use my MBA for even more things, rather than dust off and carry my 15" about. For my uses (web design) the restrictions of my Air are not speed, but storage.
I want the lightest possible platform for Adobe CS5. 4GB would more than offset a slower, mobile CPU.
Am I the only one that thinks it is really wrong that someone got this prototype out of Apple in the first place?
If they get to here they get also to MS, Google, Dell and HP etc. Someone needs to go to jail.
But it's only a few days before it's going to be public anyway. And has Dell or HP ever copied a Mac design even after it's been released? No, so what difference does it make? And let's say Google knows the design. So what? What are they going to do with it?
It's not rocket science to figure out that a new MBA is going to be a lot like the old one, but perhaps faster with more memory and battery life. Seeing a big block of batteries or knowing that it has flash memory doesn't really help a competitor get there. They still have to have the will and expertise to implement such a design. And I never got the feeling that the MBA was a big seller for Apple in any case. Frankly, I'm surprised they're updating it.
Besides, breaking an NDA is not a criminal offense. It's a contract violation. If Apple wants to go after the perpetrator, they can sue them in civil court (or fire them if it's someone in-house.) And if this happened at the factory, this is the price Apple pays when it farms out their manufacturing work, especially to a country which generally doesn't recognize international copyright, trademark and patent law.
And has Dell or HP ever copied a Mac design even after it's been released? No, so what difference does it make?
Define design? If you mean the casing, then no, of course not, but they both have copied the concept of an ultra-portable using the same exact SFF ULV C2D that Apple had Intel dust off and put into production for this very specific niche market for the MBA. It had no ODD, used 2Gb RAM, was 13.3”, was a premium and thin machine and used a 1.8” drive. These were pretty much as identical internally as one could find between manufacturers without actually infringing on their IP.
I couldn't realize what was odd in this design, then I looked at the place where you place your thumb to open the screen: you are looking from top, not bottom. This indeed is not an unibody design
I couldn't realize what was odd in this design, then I looked at the place where you place your thumb to open the screen: you are looking from top, not bottom. This indeed is not an unibody design
I think you are right.
One possible (though unlikely) change that could make if they wanted this to convert to a tablet it so put all major components behind the display. This of coursecomes with it's own challenges and drawbacks but they could use a single unibody to house all but the keyboard and trackpad, which can be thin thus allowing for a thicker casing that does away with the trapdoor and is still as thin as the current design or thinner.
I couldn't realize what was odd in this design, then I looked at the place where you place your thumb to open the screen: you are looking from top, not bottom. This indeed is not an unibody design
It is unibody, it's upside down. The parts in the picture would normally be face-down. The mag-safe in the picture is on the right along with one USB port and audio in/out, this would normally be on the left. I reckon given the screenshot of the spec that the pictured model has a working display attached too and you can see the edge of it inside the thumb area.
Why? What do you think you will need more ram for? I have used the air and it runs very well.
I run several programs at once...If I didnt 2G would almost be too much! (aka iPad). For instance Safari ends up sucking 600mb of ram pretty quick, the OS takes another 500-600. If you do any technical work or programming, it is insanely easy to blow through another 2G. I would run into paging issues (WAY greater than 10% performance loss) non stop with only 2G of total system ram. I am not asking for a 20 Core, Super graphics processor MEGA system, but there IS a reason why all the MBPs come with 4G base memory.
A lot to ask for from the form factor? Maybe, but I think dropping 2G more ram would make a lot of difference for most pros trying to use this machine.
I?d like to think that 4GB RAM will be used how many people need that much for an ultra-portable? What real benefit does it bring to the ultra-portable user?
Well in the old days lots of RAM was good in portables because it reduced disk access. That meant longer battery life and faster operation.
As to a real benefit consider Java apps like Eclipse or somebody running XCode. Niether program would use all that RAM all the time but when they do use it there would be a huge performance difference.
Quote:
I have been using 4GB for my last 4 machines. As of right now I have 9 apps in my Dock and a whole mess of apps running in my Menu Bar and I?m still only using 38%.
That is nice! Change the app mix up and you might see dramatic differences.
Quote:
Other systems need more RAM to function. One because they run Windows, and two because of the crapware. Sony offered their systems with no crapware for an additional $150.
That however doesn't discount that Mac OS/X runs better with more RAM too.
Quote:
Here is an analysis of crapware on various stock systems. Even with half the RAM the MacBook had more free RAM than any other system because of the lack of crapware. Why isn?t this ever considered?
Because it doesn't matter. More RAM just opens more opportunities on a Mac. However you are right in one thing, most sub notebook users don't need a lot if RAM.
Comments
the 2 gig ram limit is what stopped me from purchasing the first Airs. Hope they figure this out.
But I don't see how people would get excited if all it has is added USB, bigger drive and more battery life. Why not intel i3 chip?
It's in the picture, which quite unmistakably is an Apple laptop. Macbook Air RAM is soldered to the motherboard, which is the set of 8 chips just above the battery = 2GB. The SSD chip would be the board to the left of that, which resembles SSD chips in netbooks:
DDR3 chip densities go up to 8 gigabits. That means 8GB out of eight chips, or any amount in between. There could also be eight more chips on the other side of the motherboard.
And that's definitely an SSD on a stick off to the left. This is it.
But I don't see how people would get excited if all it has is added USB, bigger drive and more battery life. Why not intel i3 chip?
Why the Core-i3? Why not the Core-i7? Apple does use the best SFF CULV in their MBAs already, so why downgrade them to the weakest category of the Core-i chips?
Why move to Core-i chips when that means using an IntelHD IGP. The Nvidia 320M has been shown to be a much better option and allow for a more balanced system. IOW, a slightly faster CPU and a downgraded GPU, or add a much faster GPU. I’d like to see a CULV Core-i7 but only if they add a proper GPU, too.
For comparison:In fact, I only see one Core-3 that has a TDP under 35W: Intel® Core™ i3-330UM Processor (3M cache, 1.20 GHz). And I can’t even find it on Intel’s current price list for shipping chips, yet there are 5 Core-i7s with an 18W TDP.
I'm still rocking a Macbook Alu 2ghz with 9400M. 4GB of RAM and 7200rpm drive. I can have Photoshop, Illustrator, iMovie, heck, even slam it with multiple synth tracks on Logic, iMovie with HD video, not that bad so far, and I'm hoping it will carry me into the end of 2011. Although my warranty runs out April next year so I will want to sell before the warranty ends.
Just thinking... Core iSeries probably not going to be used. Cost and lousy graphics. Also, I think the new MBA will have 4GB of RAM. That and SSD and 320M and you have a nice machine despite 2ghz Core2.
I'm still rocking a Macbook Alu 2ghz with 9400M. 4GB of RAM and 7200rpm drive. I can have Photoshop, Illustrator, iMovie, heck, even slam it with multiple synth tracks on Logic, iMovie with HD video, not that bad so far, and I'm hoping it will carry me into the end of 2011. Although my warranty runs out April next year so I will want to sell before the warranty ends.
I?d like to think that 4GB RAM will be used how many people need that much for an ultra-portable? What real benefit does it bring to the ultra-portable user?
I have been using 4GB for my last 4 machines. As of right now I have 9 apps in my Dock and a whole mess of apps running in my Menu Bar and I?m still only using 38%.
Other systems need more RAM to function. One because they run Windows, and two because of the crapware. Sony offered their systems with no crapware for an additional $150.Here is an analysis of crapware on various stock systems. Even with half the RAM the MacBook had more free RAM than any other system because of the lack of crapware. Why isn?t this ever considered?
Well from decoding the serial number it was manufactured in Shanghai in 2010 on week 17 (April, May) with a model identifier of FX3... Kinda matches the label (FX).
Also that profiler doesn't show "Card Reader" so is that really an SD card reader (Could just be the OS doesn't recognise it I suppose)? And those 'USB' ports on either side don't look the same, the one on the right looks smaller, almost like a micro sim.... And where are the audio port/s?
So there's a mini DisplayPort, USB and maybe an SD card on the left. On the right there's MagSafe and a smaller USB port?
And is that just the WiFi chip up the top, could it include GPS or would that be separate?
Hmmm... It's a mystery.
It's just a prototype from quite a while back. It does provide some hints but I don't think we can speculate beyond that.
However consider as well this MBA will have to last people 3 years.
Overall we are seeing a shift it what people do with a desktop and laptop and the days of needing more and more powerful specs is slowly winding down, yet there is relentless marketing pressure for bigger and better. Which if you think about it is kind if the genius of the Core i Series (And Core series before that). Taking the focus out from clock speeds which could not keep going higher and higher endlessly.
I do feel conflicted.
I know I need that 4GB of RAM, because of Adobe CS4 and testing websites in VMWare WinXP and sometimes Win7 simultaneously, not to mention Mac browsers, email and iTunes open, etc.
I’d like to think that 4GB RAM will be used how many people need that much for an ultra-portable? What real benefit does it bring to the ultra-portable user?
I have been using 4GB for my last 4 machines. As of right now I have 9 apps in my Dock and a whole mess of apps running in my Menu Bar and I’m still only using 38%.
Other systems need more RAM to function. One because they run Windows, and two because of the crapware. Sony offered their systems with no crapware for an additional $150.Here is an analysis of crapware on various stock systems. Even with half the RAM the MacBook had more free RAM than any other system because of the lack of crapware. Why isn’t this ever considered?
If so the person who took them should be in jail. I hope Apple have ways to track him / her down. Meanwhile they really need to tighten security.
Go and join the Taliban and then you can vent your spleen in the company of like minded individuals.
Are you even aware of what website you are on, it's name, and what that name implies?
Fair enough. Sometimes Apple may need to do it just for marketing purposes. By your logic the Macbook Pro 13 should just have 2GB... And I could agree with you.
However consider as well this MBA will have to last people 3 years.
Overall we are seeing a shift it what people do with a desktop and laptop and the days of needing more and more powerful specs is slowly winding down, yet there is relentless marketing pressure for bigger and better. Which if you think about it is kind if the genius of the Core i Series (And Core series before that). Taking the focus out from clock speeds which could not keep going higher and higher endlessly.
I do feel conflicted.
I know I need that 4GB of RAM, because of Adobe CS4 and testing websites in VMWare WinXP and sometimes Win7 simultaneously, not to mention Mac browsers, email and iTunes open, etc.
By your logic the Macbook Pro 13 should just have 2GB.
My rationale is not what should or shouldn?t be, but that Macs are inherently more efficient at using HW resources for various reasons. I?d like to have 4GB RAM on the next MBA. As a minimum on all Macs for that matter.
If so the person who took them should be in jail. I hope Apple have ways to track him / her down. Meanwhile they really need to tighten security.
1. If everyone who ever leaked info about upcoming Apple products went to jail, there'd be no AppleInsider and about a jillion other Mac rumor sites.
and then where would YOU post?
This community acts as a mechanism for adding greatly to the buzz and anticipation of new Apple products, and Apple, marketer supreme, certainly recognizes that AI, et al. overall act in its best interest. Plus, when leakers get too close to the bone, Apple's demonstrated it's a hardly a shrinking wallflower in aggressively going after them. Witness the case of the iPhone 4 prototype "left in a bar" and the prosecution of a once active site in the rumor world.
2. Apple's probably both a leaker (when it suits their purpose) as well as leaking false info to throw speculators off-track. Reference the whole history of scandals in US politics the last few decades for more examples of calculated leaks and misinfo.
3. Since Apple outsources more and more - and has more and more distribution chains, e.g., cellcos and chain stores - they have less and less personal control over leaks, and also, the Apple watchers have become more sophisticated about monitoring events at outside suppliers, shipping company manifests from China, etc., etc.
But they're still the best in the biz at being tight-lipped.
My rationale is not what should or shouldn?t be, but that Macs are inherently more efficient at using HW resources for various reasons. I?d like to have 4GB RAM on the next MBA. As a minimum on all Macs for that matter.
I would agree; I would love to use my MBA for even more things, rather than dust off and carry my 15" about. For my uses (web design) the restrictions of my Air are not speed, but storage.
I want the lightest possible platform for Adobe CS5. 4GB would more than offset a slower, mobile CPU.
Am I the only one that thinks it is really wrong that someone got this prototype out of Apple in the first place?
If they get to here they get also to MS, Google, Dell and HP etc. Someone needs to go to jail.
But it's only a few days before it's going to be public anyway. And has Dell or HP ever copied a Mac design even after it's been released? No, so what difference does it make? And let's say Google knows the design. So what? What are they going to do with it?
It's not rocket science to figure out that a new MBA is going to be a lot like the old one, but perhaps faster with more memory and battery life. Seeing a big block of batteries or knowing that it has flash memory doesn't really help a competitor get there. They still have to have the will and expertise to implement such a design. And I never got the feeling that the MBA was a big seller for Apple in any case. Frankly, I'm surprised they're updating it.
Besides, breaking an NDA is not a criminal offense. It's a contract violation. If Apple wants to go after the perpetrator, they can sue them in civil court (or fire them if it's someone in-house.) And if this happened at the factory, this is the price Apple pays when it farms out their manufacturing work, especially to a country which generally doesn't recognize international copyright, trademark and patent law.
And has Dell or HP ever copied a Mac design even after it's been released? No, so what difference does it make?
Define design? If you mean the casing, then no, of course not, but they both have copied the concept of an ultra-portable using the same exact SFF ULV C2D that Apple had Intel dust off and put into production for this very specific niche market for the MBA. It had no ODD, used 2Gb RAM, was 13.3”, was a premium and thin machine and used a 1.8” drive. These were pretty much as identical internally as one could find between manufacturers without actually infringing on their IP.
I couldn't realize what was odd in this design, then I looked at the place where you place your thumb to open the screen: you are looking from top, not bottom. This indeed is not an unibody design
I think you are right.
One possible (though unlikely) change that could make if they wanted this to convert to a tablet it so put all major components behind the display. This of coursecomes with it's own challenges and drawbacks but they could use a single unibody to house all but the keyboard and trackpad, which can be thin thus allowing for a thicker casing that does away with the trapdoor and is still as thin as the current design or thinner.
I couldn't realize what was odd in this design, then I looked at the place where you place your thumb to open the screen: you are looking from top, not bottom. This indeed is not an unibody design
It is unibody, it's upside down. The parts in the picture would normally be face-down. The mag-safe in the picture is on the right along with one USB port and audio in/out, this would normally be on the left. I reckon given the screenshot of the spec that the pictured model has a working display attached too and you can see the edge of it inside the thumb area.
Why? What do you think you will need more ram for? I have used the air and it runs very well.
I run several programs at once...If I didnt 2G would almost be too much! (aka iPad). For instance Safari ends up sucking 600mb of ram pretty quick, the OS takes another 500-600. If you do any technical work or programming, it is insanely easy to blow through another 2G. I would run into paging issues (WAY greater than 10% performance loss) non stop with only 2G of total system ram. I am not asking for a 20 Core, Super graphics processor MEGA system, but there IS a reason why all the MBPs come with 4G base memory.
A lot to ask for from the form factor? Maybe, but I think dropping 2G more ram would make a lot of difference for most pros trying to use this machine.
I?d like to think that 4GB RAM will be used how many people need that much for an ultra-portable? What real benefit does it bring to the ultra-portable user?
Well in the old days lots of RAM was good in portables because it reduced disk access. That meant longer battery life and faster operation.
As to a real benefit consider Java apps like Eclipse or somebody running XCode. Niether program would use all that RAM all the time but when they do use it there would be a huge performance difference.
I have been using 4GB for my last 4 machines. As of right now I have 9 apps in my Dock and a whole mess of apps running in my Menu Bar and I?m still only using 38%.
That is nice! Change the app mix up and you might see dramatic differences.
Other systems need more RAM to function. One because they run Windows, and two because of the crapware. Sony offered their systems with no crapware for an additional $150.
That however doesn't discount that Mac OS/X runs better with more RAM too.
Here is an analysis of crapware on various stock systems. Even with half the RAM the MacBook had more free RAM than any other system because of the lack of crapware. Why isn?t this ever considered?
Because it doesn't matter. More RAM just opens more opportunities on a Mac. However you are right in one thing, most sub notebook users don't need a lot if RAM.
Dave