PDA

View Full Version : Is the Macbook Air worth paying 4 times the price of this?




macbook123
Dec 3, 2008, 04:13 PM
http://blog.laptopmag.com/hands-on-with-the-asus-eee-pc-1002ha

I understand the screen on the Air is a bit larger, the processor a smidgeon faster, the graphics card better (note that the memory on the Asus should be cheaply upgradeable), the software preferable to some (though I'd be happy with Linux on the Asus) but is Apple justified to demand 4 times the amount of money for the MBA?

If so, why?

Thanks in advance for sharing your opinion.



Mactagonist
Dec 3, 2008, 04:17 PM
If you think that is comparable to the Air then you are welcome to buy and use it. It isnt. But this is just the same old tired 'the air is too expensive' argument and it would be pointless to rehash it.

If you want something else, buy it. If you want an Air, buy it. But dont compare 2 tangentially related products as if their difference in price means something.

macbook123
Dec 3, 2008, 04:20 PM
If you think that is comparable to the Air then you are welcome to buy and use it. It isnt. But this is just the same old tired 'the air is too expensive' argument and it would be pointless to rehash it.

If you want something else, buy it. If you want an Air, buy it. But dont compare 2 tangentially related products as if their difference in price means something.

I never claimed that the two are the same kind of product. But as you seem to be so sure that they are in fact "tangentially related", would you mind mentioning ways in which the Air is different, that justify the extra price? I mentioned a few examples above, but I couldn't justify paying 4 times the price. I could justify paying two times the price maybe.

Take for example the Macbook Pro versus the Air. Different target groups and I would understand that the Pro is 20% more expensive than the Air, but I would be shocked to see if the Pro would cost $9,000.

JG271
Dec 3, 2008, 04:24 PM
Spec for spec it seems like a very good price. Of course you have to factor in the larger screen size of the air, unibody style construction, full core2 instead of atom(clock speed isn't everything!)

It still doesn't justify the massive price tag of the air, but at the market its aimed at, I'm not surprised. I suppose apple charges that much because they know someone will buy it!

j26
Dec 3, 2008, 04:27 PM
The MSI Wind (cousin to the EEE PC) runs OSX like a champ ;)

aristobrat
Dec 3, 2008, 04:31 PM
I mentioned a few examples above, but I couldn't justify paying 4 times the price. I could justify paying two times the price maybe.
Who cares? I'm with BryanHarig .. rehashing this topic is pointless. Buy whatever YOU can justify.

macbook123
Dec 3, 2008, 04:37 PM
Who cares? I'm with BryanHarig .. rehashing this topic is pointless. Buy whatever YOU can justify.

I see. So you guys are telling me that the question I ask shouldn't be asked. What's wrong with asking questions? Do you have some kind of tendency to control people?

I completely agree btw with JG271's point, that a good justification for asking for this price would simply that people are willing to pay for it. But I'm asking my question from the consumers standpoint, as somebody who has held the opinion for years that while Apple computers have a higher price tag to begin with, it pays of in the long run (better hardware and software). I'm not belittling the Air in any way, I think it's the greatest laptop out there right now, however I'm simply surprised about the large difference in price here.

If you mind my being surprised, I'm sorry, but I'm still surprised. Maybe look somewhere else if you don't want to get upset?

Molopo
Dec 3, 2008, 04:37 PM
Build quality and overall customer service just put the air in a different class. If you just need something to get by, then I don't see why you are even here.

macbook123
Dec 3, 2008, 04:46 PM
Build quality and overall customer service just put the air in a different class.

Thanks. Those are good points I hadn't mentioned above.

Indydenny
Dec 3, 2008, 04:47 PM
If you mind my being surprised, I'm sorry, but I'm still surprised. Maybe look somewhere else if you don't want to get upset?

I think the issue here is that those of us who have owned since the release of the rev. A, MBA have heard this question and responded to it countless times since February.

I also think that you'll find that most/many of the people in this forum would answer "Yes" to your question. That's why we bought it or are considering buying it. And that's why we hang around this forum.

mhnajjar
Dec 3, 2008, 04:55 PM
If you would go with a shirt from Wal-Mart instead of CK, then go with this instead of the Air! :cool:

Both might do the same job, but one is meant to give fashionable quality.

jimboutilier
Dec 3, 2008, 04:59 PM
The Asus EEE series are great netbooks that provide a lot of functionality for the price. Mainstream notebooks can have similar functionality and cost about double. Premium notebooks in the thinNlight or ultraportable catagory again can have similar functionality and again be twice the price of mainstream notebooks. You can see this in the models within a single manufacturer (including Asus).

Some of this difference is in the price of design and components. Smaller, lower quality screens cost less. Lower powered processors cost less. Slower memory costs less. Thicker costs less, plastic costs less, lower quality support costs less, less software or less full featured software costs less. Lower density batteries cost less.

I think the Asus EEE 1000 series is great value. But its power and form factor is not such that I can use it comfortably all day long like I do my MBA. I don't like Windows (or really anything MS) and don't use MS products where I have a choice. I could use Linux - great OS but I can't run a lot of the things I need on it. That leaves OSX - for many years I could not even go there because I could not do what I needed on it. Now I can so I am limited to Apple products. The MBA is the most portable Apple; I travel a lot, and its competatively priced with other premium machines in its class.

Its a personal choice and everyone has different needs, priorities, and means. The superficial specs of components that go into a machine are not everything and can often be very misleading. The proof is in the user experience with the whole package and Apple provides that like no other manufacturer.

Mactagonist
Dec 3, 2008, 05:02 PM
I see. So you guys are telling me that the question I ask shouldn't be asked.


Yes.


What's wrong with asking questions?


http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=6706907&postcount=11


Do you have some kind of tendency to control people?


Yes. I also have a short temper and I am colorblind. What do my faults have to do with you rehashing things that have been argued to death over the last year?

Kan-O-Z
Dec 3, 2008, 05:47 PM
I see. So you guys are telling me that the question I ask shouldn't be asked. What's wrong with asking questions? Do you have some kind of tendency to control people?

I completely agree btw with JG271's point, that a good justification for asking for this price would simply that people are willing to pay for it. But I'm asking my question from the consumers standpoint, as somebody who has held the opinion for years that while Apple computers have a higher price tag to begin with, it pays of in the long run (better hardware and software). I'm not belittling the Air in any way, I think it's the greatest laptop out there right now, however I'm simply surprised about the large difference in price here.

If you mind my being surprised, I'm sorry, but I'm still surprised. Maybe look somewhere else if you don't want to get upset?

Well there are a few things that set the Air apart from the Asus.

1. Performance: The Air offers the performance, screen and keyboard of a full size laptop. The Air will compete with the regular Macbook in performance. The Air gives you the experience of a Macbook all the while being one of the thinnest and lightest laptops in the world. The Asus on the other hand leans towards being a netbook. It's 10" screen, smaller keyboard is quite a bit smaller making it hard to work on for more than just email or casual web browsing. It also has an Atom processor which is NOT a core 2 duo. If I had to guess, it's probably half the processing power of the Air.

2. Parts: The Air uses high end components. The screen is better than a Macbook screen. It's pro quality. The Bus is 1066MHz, the RAM DDR3, the cache 6MB. There are even fine touches like ambient light sensor, lighted keyboard, multi-touch trackpad with recognition for up to 4 fingers. I don't think you can say any of this about the Asus. Asus most likely uses much cheaper components and is missing features.

3. Build: Again we are comparing a unibody aluminum v. plastic. The design, materials and build of the Air is on a much higher level compared to the Asus. The Air is also quite thin. I don't have the dimension of the Asus but it doesn't appear to be as thin. This may not mean much but a lot of engineering has to go into making a product like the Air which costs money.

4. Software/OS: Another reason Apple tends to be more expensive is because they include a lot of good software as opposed to windows laptops. First OS X itself should be worth $400. Remember that OS X is only one version and it should only be compared to the top version of Windows. Next iLife should be worth several hundred as well. Again there is no real PC equivalent here. Now take note that Apple does not make money selling software, whereas Microsoft does. Apple only makes money by selling computers. This means the cost of their software has to be added into their computers. When you go and buy a new version of OS X, you are buying an upgrade that is only available to someone who owns Apple hardware which is why it's cheap.

Another point to note is that Leopard WILL run faster than XP. So now you can start to see how the Air will offer a much better experience: Faster computer + More efficient OS

5. Service: The apple store and apple service is a big deal for some. There is just no equivalent for Asus here again. With Apple you can go to the store if you are having problems or even need a one on one session to learn how to do things. They will also service your Air right there in the store if needed.


Lastly I would like to add that comparing an Air to this Asus netbook is like comparing a BMW 5 series to a Hyundai. Now if you look at the specs on some of these V6 Hyundais, you may find that it doesn't look all that different from the BMW...but no one really feels that Hyundai=BMW right ;)

The Air is the BMW/Benz/Lexus of computers. While these cars don't appeal to everyone, they can't be judged just on their specs. The old saying is so true: You get what you pay for.

Bottom Line: The Air will give you the full laptop experience all the while being one of the thinnest, lightest, most stylish, best built laptops in the world running one of the best OSes in the world :)

By the way the old Air is on sale for $1149 which is just a hair more than 2X the Asus :)

Kan-O-Z

Schtumple
Dec 3, 2008, 05:51 PM
I'd love to see you use a netbook for more than an hour before you get fedup of it, the majority of netbooks aren't exactly good at going on the internet tbh... Saying that, MBA is essentially a large version of a netbook, and the lack of ports would eventually annoy me...

descartes
Dec 3, 2008, 05:55 PM
The MSI Wind (cousin to the EEE PC) runs OSX like a champ ;)

does it wake from sleep?

silverblack
Dec 3, 2008, 06:01 PM
We wouldn't be hanging around this forum if we didn't think so, would we?

1rottenapple
Dec 3, 2008, 06:23 PM
Its like a mercedez slk roadster vs. a ford focus. Both will get you from point a to point b, the ford can fit a big screen tv as well as two extra people, but the air with osx are something people pay extra for. The slk has 4 piston brake calipers, the ford has one, the air has multouch as well as lcd, the ford has a single piston caliper and great mileage. Which one is better? Its up to you.

EDIT DAMMIT: some one beat me to the car analogy.

Molopo
Dec 3, 2008, 06:35 PM
Its like a mercedez slk roadster vs. a ford focus. Both will get you from point a to point b, the ford can fit a big screen tv as well as two extra people, but the air with osx are something people pay extra for. The slk has 4 piston brake calipers, the ford has one, the air has multouch as well as lcd, the ford has a single piston caliper and great mileage. Which one is better? Its up to you.

EDIT DAMMIT: some one beat me to the car analogy.

It's alright; I think most of us are quite tired of feeble analogies anyway.

coupdetat
Dec 3, 2008, 07:13 PM
Plus, who doesn't love the Air's damped screen mechanism?? :D It's the little touches that most people will never understand!

By the way, I found the ultimate solution to the ports issue: Airport Extreme. After getting one, I have become even more happy with my MBA. The only cord I need is my power cord in order to get full access to my printer, external hard drives, and speakers (via AirFoil). It's awesome, reliable, and really easy to set up.

iomatic
Dec 3, 2008, 10:58 PM
Here's a classic iomatic response:


http://blog.laptopmag.com/hands-on-with-the-asus-eee-pc-1002ha#comment-14719

JL7
Dec 4, 2008, 10:07 AM
OS X is worth paying 4 times the price of that;)

GoCubsGo
Dec 4, 2008, 11:35 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5F136 Safari/525.20)

The Eee PC will do what an Air does. However the air runs a more stable os and in my opinion may last longer. I've seen the Eee PC run OSX but it wasn't easy. The MSI Wind runs OSX smoother for sure. I mean if you want to try it.

Kan-O-Z
Dec 4, 2008, 01:25 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5F136 Safari/525.20)

The Eee PC will do what an Air does. However the air runs a more stable os and in my opinion may last longer. I've seen the Eee PC run OSX but it wasn't easy. The MSI Wind runs OSX smoother for sure. I mean if you want to try it.

Well that's part of what you get when you buy the Air. If you're one of those hacker types that want to hack OSX to run on Eee PC go right ahead but you will pay. You will pay in the amount of time spent in hacking it and getting things to run in a stable way...and in the end it'll never be as stable as the Air. The fact is, Apple writes drivers specifically for it's hardware...which means other hardware is either no going to be supported or it'll be some unoptimized/unstable support. And you'll always be afraid to do a software update on the Eee PC cause you never know when it'll mess it up.
The next problem will be the processor. Again the Atom is no where near the same thing as Air's Intel Core 2 Duo. I would bet the Air is twice as powerful as Eee PC.

Finally I would like to add that when Snow Leopard comes out, the Air's nVidia will be put to use much more efficiently. Snow Leopard itself is going to be an efficient and fast OS, faster than Leopard, faster than RedHat/Ubuntu and much faster than any Windows to date.

Snow Leopard + Air:
A fast, lightweight, efficient OS + Air's Intel Core 2 Duo
and
Open CL OS support + Air's powerful nVidia GPU

Get the picture? The Air (Esp with SSD) will OUTPERFORM Windows Desktops in everything except maybe games! The little Eee PC (which doesn't even have enough power to run Vista and probably runs XP slow) will be left in the dust....no comparison!

Now lump all of this with the fact that OS X is pretty stable and mostly virus free and mostly secure.

Now we're talking. :)

Yes Air is worth 4X more and it will probably perform 4X better and is 4X sexier! :)

Kan-O-Z

Pixellated
Dec 4, 2008, 01:27 PM
The eee has a mono-core atom. This is the equivalent of a 900MHz Celeron. With the Air you're getting a dual core processor, DDR3 RAM, 9400M GFX, 1066MHz Bus.... The list is endless..

j26
Dec 4, 2008, 03:01 PM
does it wake from sleep?

Aye, just open it, press the power button and instant on.

StefanR.
Dec 4, 2008, 04:00 PM
for sure it is NOT. it is a nice toy, but nothing else...

iMacmatician
Dec 4, 2008, 05:09 PM
It also has an Atom processor which is NOT a core 2 duo. If I had to guess, it's probably half the processing power of the Air.Much less than half.

macbook123
Dec 9, 2008, 11:13 AM
Yes Air is worth 4X more and it will probably perform 4X better and is 4X sexier! :)

Kan-O-Z

I think you have to face the truth that it won't perform 4x better on the average tasks. Don't get me wrong, I'm willing to pay extra for the Air as long as it's the best small laptop out there, but just don't think Apple is as competitive as other companies in this singular case. I in fact plan to buy one come Jan because my employer pays for it, but this doesn't mean I think it's fair pricing.

Others above spoke about the lack of dedicated good graphics card (I also mentioned this in my original post) in the Eee. You may want to check out this article:

http://gizmodo.com/5105392/nvidia-bringing-geforce-9400m-to-atom-netbooks-to-make-them-suck-less

While just a rumor at this point, I wouldn't be surprised if this became true in a month or so and those netbooks would still only cost a fourth of the Air. Would you?

My guess is that even if these netbooks had a Dual Core processor, and would Run Mac OSX smoothly, people here would still say that the price increase of the Air is justified.

Everybody raves about the Air as being a "different dimension" of a laptop, but this is complete BS. It's simply *better* in a number of ways than the Eee (which is why I plan to get the Air), but it's not 4 times better in any one of them. That was the whole point of my original post.

Ironic
Dec 9, 2008, 12:09 PM
I use it for surfing and every day things and its perfect for that.

chewietobbacca
Dec 9, 2008, 12:13 PM
A lot of the hardware is the same so saying that they run the drivers for the air is a bit misleading

Heck the Dell/Broadcom wifi cards show up as an Airport card without a hitch

As for the netbook - they do their job for their price pretty damn fine. Yes you do spend time getting the Hackintosh to work, but if it works and you get OS X on it, what's there to complain about? The small footprint is damn nice to have too, and battery life is impressive with the 6cell models

But ultimately its up to you on what you want to do - personally, the Atom on my Acer Aspire One does everything I want with it. If i'm going to use processor intensive tasks, i'm going to be using a desktop or Pro anyways!

cube
Dec 9, 2008, 12:27 PM
You can do better. The Lenovo IdeaPad S10 starts at $399 and it has an ExpressCard slot.

Kan-O-Z
Dec 9, 2008, 01:08 PM
I think you have to face the truth that it won't perform 4x better on the average tasks. Don't get me wrong, I'm willing to pay extra for the Air as long as it's the best small laptop out there, but just don't think Apple is as competitive as other companies in this singular case. I in fact plan to buy one come Jan because my employer pays for it, but this doesn't mean I think it's fair pricing.

Others above spoke about the lack of dedicated good graphics card (I also mentioned this in my original post) in the Eee. You may want to check out this article:

http://gizmodo.com/5105392/nvidia-bringing-geforce-9400m-to-atom-netbooks-to-make-them-suck-less

While just a rumor at this point, I wouldn't be surprised if this became true in a month or so and those netbooks would still only cost a fourth of the Air. Would you?

My guess is that even if these netbooks had a Dual Core processor, and would Run Mac OSX smoothly, people here would still say that the price increase of the Air is justified.

Everybody raves about the Air as being a "different dimension" of a laptop, but this is complete BS. It's simply *better* in a number of ways than the Eee (which is why I plan to get the Air), but it's not 4 times better in any one of them. That was the whole point of my original post.

Well I guess what you are referring to is not specifically an Air v. Netbook argument but rather an Apple v. PC argument....which we all know about. Apple is a premium brand and we will argue that you get what you pay for.

Apple OS X
Apple Software (iLife - no PC equivalent)
Apple Hardware
- Cutting edge design that is usually the thinnest, sleekest, and sexiest on the market
- Components are usually the better...for example LED screen, backlit keyboard, multitouch trackpad, SSD drives, best integrated video, fastest bus, best RAM 1066 DDR3
- Materials...Apple barely uses plastic at this point, everything is high grade aluminum and glass
Apple Innovation - like multitouch interface and using the latest cutting edge technologies
Apple Service - best on the market

This is what you pay for with Apple. Of course many of these things you may not care for. Some people do and are willing to pay a little extra for this stuff.

Sure you can get a $500 netbook and hack it...but it's not quite the same. I for one don't have a weekend to waste in learning how to hack something and then additional time to make sure it works right all the time, esp after a new software update. What happens when something doesn't work with the hardware or software....there is no one that can really help you out...no Apple service you can take your computer to, etc. A long time ago I used to be into building and maintianing my own PCs. These days I would pay money for something that just works and has somewhere I can take it to if something comes up. I can't put a price on a stress free life :)

Finally a netbook is really just good for email and light web browsing. The MBA on the otherhand has a big enough screen and enough power to make it a real laptop. For instance I am into photography and own an DSLR. I would love to take an MBA with me to run Photoshop or Aperture. I wouldn't try doing that on a little netbook...not only would it have a hard time running these programs and be slow as a snail, the tiny and low quality screen just wouldn't work for me.

Kan-O-Z

macbook123
Dec 9, 2008, 04:47 PM
Thanks. So let me try to attach number to yours, mine, and everybody else's statements. It was always my impression that I'm paying extra for a Mac, on the order of 50%. So, while I can get a Dell with comparable specs to a Macbook, I would pay $1000 for the latter and ~$666 for the former.

Also, we agree that the Air is superior to the Eee, and really targets a different group. I'd say combining the larger screen, dual core, graphics card, aluminum body, etc (add all things people have mentioned above) it could be up to a factor 2 more expensive than the Eee, taking into account that the Air is not better in all the specs. That makes $1000. Furthermore add the 50% Apple Tax and you're at $1500. That's reasonably close to the price of the real Air, though still a bit short.

I guess in a way the question I had boils down to the question of why the Air is so much more expensive than the regular Macbook (which always seemed reasonably priced to me) and I guess this has been amply discussed elsewhere.

Anyway, thanks for taking part in the brain storming.

Kan-O-Z
Dec 9, 2008, 05:26 PM
Thanks. So let me try to attach number to yours, mine, and everybody else's statements. It was always my impression that I'm paying extra for a Mac, on the order of 50%. So, while I can get a Dell with comparable specs to a Macbook, I would pay $1000 for the latter and ~$666 for the former.

Also, we agree that the Air is superior to the Eee, and really targets a different group. I'd say combining the larger screen, dual core, graphics card, aluminum body, etc (add all things people have mentioned above) it could be up to a factor 2 more expensive than the Eee, taking into account that the Air is not better in all the specs. That makes $1000. Furthermore add the 50% Apple Tax and you're at $1500. That's reasonably close to the price of the real Air, though still a bit short.

I guess in a way the question I had boils down to the question of why the Air is so much more expensive than the regular Macbook (which always seemed reasonably priced to me) and I guess this has been amply discussed elsewhere.

Anyway, thanks for taking part in the brain storming.

Ultra-portable laptops always cost more than standard laptops. Check out your favorite brand, Dell, HP, Sony. You will find their mainstream laptop to be cheaper(like Macbook) and the ultraportable to be a good bit more(like Macbook Air). When you build an ultra-portable, almost everything is customized. Think about how they had to solder the actual memory chips right into the motherboard to save space. Think about the customized CPU which I'm sure Intel charges a lot more for. Think about that non-standard 8mm 1.8" drive. On top of that, a lot of design work is needed to make things fit and work reliably. All this stuff adds up!

I don't consider netbooks in the same league. For one thing, they aren't even that thin so design and custom parts is not so much an issue. Secondly they use the absolute cheapest parts on the planet. They are simply not meant to do much with except surf the web. Anything more, you're going to hate using it.

Just for reference, Sony's TT 11.1" is $2094, and Z 13.1" is $1649.

http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CategoryDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&categoryId=16154

Is this considered Sony Tax...or is Apple Tax a myth? ;)


Kan-O-Z

Kan-O-Z
Dec 9, 2008, 05:35 PM
Here is a 'cheap' Dell:

http://www.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/laptop_latitude_e4300?c=us&l=en&s=bsd&cs=04&~oid=us~en~4~laptop_latitude_e4300_anav1~~

$1549

http://www.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/laptop_latitude_e4300?c=us&l=en&s=bsd&cs=04&~oid=us~en~4~laptop_latitude_e4300_anav2~~

$1723

These don't even look as slim or half as nice as the Air. I'm starting to think that Apple Tax is a myth ;)

Kan-O-Z

macbook123
Dec 9, 2008, 06:07 PM
Here is a 'cheap' Dell:

http://www.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/laptop_latitude_e4300?c=us&l=en&s=bsd&cs=04&~oid=us~en~4~laptop_latitude_e4300_anav1~~

$1549

http://www.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/laptop_latitude_e4300?c=us&l=en&s=bsd&cs=04&~oid=us~en~4~laptop_latitude_e4300_anav2~~

$1723

These don't even look as slim or half as nice as the Air. I'm starting to think that Apple Tax is a myth ;)

Kan-O-Z

Wow! Those are expensive! Hmm...

cube
Dec 10, 2008, 03:12 PM
This is interesting and expensive:

http://explore.toshiba.com/laptops/portege/R600

cube
Dec 10, 2008, 03:17 PM
You can do better. The Lenovo IdeaPad S10 starts at $399 and it has an ExpressCard slot.

Now starting at $349. The top model is $399.

Kan-O-Z
Dec 10, 2008, 03:48 PM
This goes to show that there is a clear difference between an ultra-portble notebook and a netbook. The former offers full size like notebook performance, screen and features in an ultraportable package often requiring the most expensive parts to accomplish this. The latter offers minimal performance which is just enough to surf the web and check email. Although netbooks are small, they are not very thin. They often use the cheapest parts and processors that are no where near the capability of an ultraportable notebook.

The problem with this whole comparison and thread is that the wrong types of machines were being compared. The Macbook Air should be compared with Sony TT($2094), Sony Z($1649), Dell Lattitude E4300($1723), Toshiba R600($2099). In this comparison, the Macbook Air does quite well.

There is no such thing as Apple Tax. Apple has proven to be a very good value in all of it's products but you have to know what to compare it against. For example the iMac is a very well valued computer. Are there cheap dell towers that can beat it's price...sure. But the true comparison is the Dell XPS One. iMac does well against that.

Kan-O-Z

iPave
Dec 10, 2008, 05:07 PM
It's wayyy slower, wayyy more "toy" and it runs windows.

btw: do the math 4*500=2000≠1600

cube
Dec 11, 2008, 11:56 AM
This goes to show that there is a clear difference between an ultra-portble notebook and a netbook. The former offers full size like notebook performance, screen and features in an ultraportable package often requiring the most expensive parts to accomplish this. The latter offers minimal performance which is just enough to surf the web and check email. Although netbooks are small, they are not very thin. They often use the cheapest parts and processors that are no where near the capability of an ultraportable notebook.

The problem with this whole comparison and thread is that the wrong types of machines were being compared. The Macbook Air should be compared with Sony TT($2094), Sony Z($1649), Dell Lattitude E4300($1723), Toshiba R600($2099). In this comparison, the Macbook Air does quite well.

There is no such thing as Apple Tax. Apple has proven to be a very good value in all of it's products but you have to know what to compare it against. For example the iMac is a very well valued computer. Are there cheap dell towers that can beat it's price...sure. But the true comparison is the Dell XPS One. iMac does well against that.

Kan-O-Z

If the MBA had a gigabit ethernet port and optical drive, it could be compared against those notebooks.

As is the MBA is just an expensive high-end netbook and the OP's comparison is legit.

Kan-O-Z
Dec 11, 2008, 12:40 PM
If the MBA had a gigabit ethernet port and optical drive, it could be compared against those notebooks.

As is the MBA is just an expensive high-end netbook and the OP's comparison is legit.

So let me get this straight...if the MBA had a built in optical drive (which would probably cost $50 for a manufacturer to put in)...then it's ok for the MBA to cost $1700 and be comparable to the others. But since it doesn't it should cost $400 so that it can be compared to a $400 netbook?

Do you know how much space an optical drive occupies? Personally I don't use my optical drive except to install programs once a year. In those instances I can 'borrow' a drive from other mac or pc. I download movies from iTunes. DVDs are old school, they scratch up, they skip and most importantly they use up precious battery life for a small notebook like this. If you must have a DVD, rip it onto the harddrive. If I want an ultraportable to be good at being ultra-portable, get rid of stuff that is not often needed and give me ultra-thin and light instead! To those that understand, this is what the Air is.

By the way what do you think about HP Envy which is very similar to the Air....is it an overpriced netbook?
HP Voodoo Envy, no optical drive, $2099

Kan-O-Z

cube
Dec 12, 2008, 12:28 PM
So let me get this straight...if the MBA had a built in optical drive (which would probably cost $50 for a manufacturer to put in)...then it's ok for the MBA to cost $1700 and be comparable to the others. But since it doesn't it should cost $400 so that it can be compared to a $400 netbook?

Do you know how much space an optical drive occupies? Personally I don't use my optical drive except to install programs once a year. In those instances I can 'borrow' a drive from other mac or pc. I download movies from iTunes. DVDs are old school, they scratch up, they skip and most importantly they use up precious battery life for a small notebook like this. If you must have a DVD, rip it onto the harddrive. If I want an ultraportable to be good at being ultra-portable, get rid of stuff that is not often needed and give me ultra-thin and light instead! To those that understand, this is what the Air is.

By the way what do you think about HP Envy which is very similar to the Air....is it an overpriced netbook?
HP Voodoo Envy, no optical drive, $2099

Kan-O-Z

I said "high end netbook". The MBA has a bigger screen and a faster CPU. Whether this capability is worth an additional $1000 is up to the requirements of the user.

If you had actually taken a close look at the Lenovo X300 or the Toshiba R600 (which weighs 800 grams) you wouldn't be asking questions about optical drive size, you would hopefully realize how pathetic the MBA is.

At least the Envy has ethernet, but without optical drive, it's another stupid expensive machine.

coupdetat
Dec 12, 2008, 11:09 PM
Yeah man, and WTF is up with the iMac not having a floppy? It is clearly a piece of crap because it doesn't have a floppy drive.

Kan-O-Z
Dec 14, 2008, 12:57 AM
I said "high end netbook". The MBA has a bigger screen and a faster CPU. Whether this capability is worth an additional $1000 is up to the requirements of the user.

If you had actually taken a close look at the Lenovo X300 or the Toshiba R600 (which weighs 800 grams) you wouldn't be asking questions about optical drive size, you would hopefully realize how pathetic the MBA is.

At least the Envy has ethernet, but without optical drive, it's another stupid expensive machine.

It's not just the weight but also the size. If you look at the Lenovo or Toshiba, it's not as thin as the Air. You just can't beat how thin the Air is and still have an optical drive! For some people, yes this matters....and for some people they would take this tradeoff for having one of the thinnest notebooks in the world!

By the way the ethernet dongle is $29 so you can hook the Air up to a standard ethernet. Not a big deal as once again I can't remember the last time I actually physically connected an ethernet wire to my Macbook Pro. Homes, coffee shops, airports, and hotels all have wifi. It's very rare these days to have to connect a wire to your laptop. If you really have to, Apple sells a $29 Ethernet adapter for the MBA.

Again I stand by my point. Get rid of what is barely ever used in place of ultimate portability.

I gave the example of the Envy because so many people here think that the Air is expensive because it's an Apple and it's overpriced. Well it doesn't look like HP(a company known to be able to cheap computers) was able to make their version any cheaper!

So to counter your point, no the Air is not an overpriced high end netbook. It's a real computer, not a toy like most netbooks. It's actually worth what its sold for.

Kan-O-Z

yorkshire
Dec 14, 2008, 02:30 AM
The eee has a mono-core atom. This is the equivalent of a 900MHz Celeron. With the Air you're getting a dual core processor, DDR3 RAM, 9400M GFX, 1066MHz Bus.... The list is endless..

What he said. The C2D 1.86ghz will absolutly annihilate the atom in terms of performance.

drichards
Dec 14, 2008, 03:00 AM
A lower price doesn't necessarily mean something is a better value. Life will teach you this over and over.

jaytv111
Dec 14, 2008, 03:17 AM
It's not just the weight but also the size. If you look at the Lenovo or Toshiba, it's not as thin as the Air. You just can't beat how thin the Air is and still have an optical drive! For some people, yes this matters....and for some people they would take this tradeoff for having one of the thinnest notebooks in the world!

The Toshiba is .7 to 1.0 inches thick. Not a big difference I would say. Plus why does thickness matter but footprint doesn't? is one dimension more important than the others?

Again I stand by my point. Get rid of what is barely ever used in place of ultimate portability.

Why is it that the Toshiba is 2.4 lbs but the Air is 3.0? Weight matters too you know.

Yeah man, and WTF is up with the iMac not having a floppy? It is clearly a piece of crap because it doesn't have a floppy drive.

What about software? if you don't have a another computer and you don't have an external drive, you can't install software on the Air. I mean I barely use my optical drive too, but many people are still going to need it for installing software.

Also I think the Air is pretty lacking in features. Yeah I know, it's thin, but some people want 3G built in, some people need an optical drive, etc. For me, I want a higher resolution screen. The Lenovo X200s has a 1440x900 screen (same as the X300). That to me would be much more useful. Although I guess I love high res screens more than most people (probably has to do with having good eyes :) )

cube
Dec 14, 2008, 04:47 AM
It's not just the weight but also the size. If you look at the Lenovo or Toshiba, it's not as thin as the Air. You just can't beat how thin the Air is and still have an optical drive! For some people, yes this matters....and for some people they would take this tradeoff for having one of the thinnest notebooks in the world!

By the way the ethernet dongle is $29 so you can hook the Air up to a standard ethernet. Not a big deal as once again I can't remember the last time I actually physically connected an ethernet wire to my Macbook Pro. Homes, coffee shops, airports, and hotels all have wifi. It's very rare these days to have to connect a wire to your laptop. If you really have to, Apple sells a $29 Ethernet adapter for the MBA.

Again I stand by my point. Get rid of what is barely ever used in place of ultimate portability.

I gave the example of the Envy because so many people here think that the Air is expensive because it's an Apple and it's overpriced. Well it doesn't look like HP(a company known to be able to cheap computers) was able to make their version any cheaper!

So to counter your point, no the Air is not an overpriced high end netbook. It's a real computer, not a toy like most netbooks. It's actually worth what its sold for.

Kan-O-Z

Who cares about thinness? The Toshiba is lighter.

You can't have gigabit ethernet with that dongle, which is a necessity for network backups. That's the whole point.

The Air is a fashion object, not a practical computer.

MH01
Dec 14, 2008, 05:32 AM
Back on the days when apple used powerpc yeah you could argue about components etc.

These days the guts are all the same. They are all PCs inside. Apple does not use better components.

Take the new MacBook Pros, The design yes, best in the industry, but with that comes a catch, that thinniess and style is resulting in them overheating. The inside of them is no better then a PC, actually using hte Nvidia guts is proving to be a failure as people are constantly experienceing shutdowns, the firewire controller is crappy to be honest. If you jump into the MBP forums u will see how many issues people are having with them. At the end its the best looking 15" laptop.

The MBA, you have the thinnest portable on the market, and the most sexy by far, that is what you are paying, you are paying to show off Apples flagship of design. When you but a Ferrari, are its components 10X better then a BMW.....nope, you paying for hte name and sytle/design. This is where apple sits on the Computer world.

The biggest difference is OS X. Everyone seems to overlook this and compare hardware. The hardware is no diff, the design is, and only Apples run OS X.

Look at univerisities, your average student does not need an apple, but those that do feel so much cooler then the ones that do not. Its about image, every kid wants to be the coolest. No a single university course requires a Apple or a Laptop....the kid with the AIR is Bling bling cool.....same goes for the real world. Heck I got one, yup my Sony has more features, but i love my AIR, and yeah i feel smug at times when i take it out ;) Same if i rocked up to a cafe in a ferrari instead of my subaru.

macbook123
Dec 14, 2008, 12:50 PM
Look at univerisities, your average student does not need an apple, but those that do feel so much cooler then the ones that do not. Its about image, every kid wants to be the coolest. No a single university course requires a Apple or a Laptop....the kid with the AIR is Bling bling cool.....same goes for the real world. Heck I got one, yup my Sony has more features, but i love my AIR, and yeah i feel smug at times when i take it out ;) Same if i rocked up to a cafe in a ferrari instead of my subaru.

Just a random note: I think a Subaru is way cooler than a Ferrari. I mean, you can get to so many more places with it, and I'm also pretty sure you attract more intelligent people driving around in one. In this country you can't even drive near the max speed of the Ferrari. I think though that the comparison of the Air with a Ferrari is a little off. Not sure. Would be great if Apple can maintain both standards, to be leading in terms of technology and style. Judging from the disagreement of people on this thread I guess they're close but perhaps not quite there with the Air. Anyway, I'm buying one in part because of the OS, but would probably go with a Sony if it were just the hardware that mattered (mainly the fact that it has a higher resolution screen without shady lines).

The Toddfather
Dec 14, 2008, 01:12 PM
Just a random note: I think a Subaru is way cooler than a Ferrari...

Great point, exactly why this is a silly discussion. People buy based on need and preference, if you like the Air and can afford it, you buy it. If not, don't, but to debate on and on about what makes a person buy one computer over another is a waste of time.

macbook123
Dec 14, 2008, 01:18 PM
Great point, exactly why this is a silly discussion. People buy based on need and preference, if you like the Air and can afford it, you buy it. If not, don't, but to debate on and on about what makes a person buy one computer over another is a waste of time.

I disagree. The debate is around whether the Air's hardware is worth the price when competing with other laptops in terms of overall performance. A Ferrari is made in much smaller quantities relative to Subaru's, and that (next to bigger engine, better brakes, more leather inside, etc) is a main reason why it's more expensive and why the comparison is flawed.

People seem to be interested in debating here, so why not allow them to?

:-)

The Toddfather
Dec 14, 2008, 01:28 PM
I disagree. The debate is around whether the Air's hardware is worth the price when competing with other laptops in terms of overall performance.

So I think it is and you don't. What's your point?

macbook123
Dec 14, 2008, 01:35 PM
So I think it is and you don't. What's your point?

I never said I don't. I just thought it was worthwhile discussing, starting from the very large price difference with the Asus. As Kam-O-Z and others have described in detail, the Air is at least comparable in terms of many specs to Toshiba, Sony, Lenovo, etc, so it's actually a meaningful thing to look into details of the comparison and people seem to be interested in taking part in it and disagree in some ways. There you go, you have a conversation between people, and I just don't think you're going to reach anything dismissing the conversation as silly. Of course you can call it whatever you want, but I respectfully disagreed with your comparison with the Ferrari. That's all.

Kan-O-Z
Dec 15, 2008, 12:10 PM
Who cares about thinness? The Toshiba is lighter.

You can't have gigabit ethernet with that dongle, which is a necessity for network backups. That's the whole point.

The Air is a fashion object, not a practical computer.

Well some people care about thinness. With it being so thin, you can slip it into almost anything. If it's thin enough, you may not need a laptop bag anymore. Perhaps it can just slip into another bag you have. Women may particularly enjoy being able to slip it into purse ;)

So please don't discount thickness. It may not matter to you but it sure does matter to some people.

Again the Air isn't meant for those types of people who absolutely need gigabit backup speeds. For that to even happen, you have to have a lot of pieces in place on your network anyways. Some routers that are older than a year can't even handle gigabit. No average person is doing gigabit backups. Wireless N is quite fast (anywhere from 250 - 500 megabit and USB is 480 megabit). Sure if this is a big deal for you, look elsewhere.

I mean think about the average iMac or Macbook Pro owner. Most are using wireless, not a hardwired ethernet.

Again this is about keeping features that are used often and dropping the ones that are rarely used.

Kan-O-Z

Kan-O-Z
Dec 15, 2008, 12:23 PM
The Toshiba is .7 to 1.0 inches thick. Not a big difference I would say. Plus why does thickness matter but footprint doesn't? is one dimension more important than the others?

Did you know Apple's largest notebook, the Macbook Pro 17" is ONLY 1" thick....which would be the same as the Toshiba? So according to your logic, the thickness between the Macbook Air and the Macbook Pro is insignificant. We all know that's not the case :)

Some would argue that thickness is more important than footprint. A thin laptop can be slipped into any bag easily. Bigger footprint allows for a real screen and keyboard.

This same logic applies to my iPhone. It's very thin and I can slip it into my pant pocket without making a bulge in my pants...all the while have a nice large screen. I really would not want a phone that's got a smaller footprint but is 1" thick because that would just not fit into my pocket...at least not easily and it might looking like something is going on in my pants ;) And it would have an unusable screen being so small.

Kan-O-Z

jaytv111
Dec 15, 2008, 01:51 PM
I would say that once you get around to 1 inch thickness, its thickness won't really matter. Plus the Macbook Pro 17 inch has a huge footprint compared to the Air, and it's waay heavier. Thickness doesn't really matter to me once it's 1 inch thick or less.

The thing with bags is that you're still going to need a laptop bag. I don't think any purse could accommodate a 13 inch laptop. It's kind of impractical. Also I'd be fine with an 11 or 12 inch laptop. As far as I'm concerned they have a "real" screen and keyboard.

This doesn't apply to the Iphone. First off, the iphone isn't a laptop. Second, since it's a touchscreen, it requires a larger screen to be usable. Also, the iphone is perfect in every dimension. lol

Also, what about the overheating issues? I think a laptop is pretty useless if you can't use it for more than 5 minutes without it overheating.

People are trying to argue that the Air can do heavy duty things like Photoshop and CAD, whereas the netbook can't. Do people really do Photoshop or CAD on the Macbook Air? Or anything heavy duty? If you use if for email and web browsing or productivity apps, then I'd say any netbook could do just as well.

Did you know Apple's largest notebook, the Macbook Pro 17" is ONLY 1" thick....which would be the same as the Toshiba? So according to your logic, the thickness between the Macbook Air and the Macbook Pro is insignificant. We all know that's not the case :)

Some would argue that thickness is more important than footprint. A thin laptop can be slipped into any bag easily. Bigger footprint allows for a real screen and keyboard.

This same logic applies to my iPhone. It's very thin and I can slip it into my pant pocket without making a bulge in my pants...all the while have a nice large screen. I really would not want a phone that's got a smaller footprint but is 1" thick because that would just not fit into my pocket...at least not easily and it might looking like something is going on in my pants ;) And it would have an unusable screen being so small.

Kan-O-Z

Kan-O-Z
Dec 15, 2008, 02:30 PM
Also, what about the overheating issues? I think a laptop is pretty useless if you can't use it for more than 5 minutes without it overheating.

Have you tried out an Air or are you reading some posts from people who owned a problematic Rev A? Heat is not enough of an issue to make the Rev B useless.

People are trying to argue that the Air can do heavy duty things like Photoshop and CAD, whereas the netbook can't. Do people really do Photoshop or CAD on the Macbook Air? Or anything heavy duty? If you use if for email and web browsing or productivity apps, then I'd say any netbook could do just as well.

Well some people want to use their computer for a little more than email or surfing the web. If that's all I want to do, my iphone can even do that....and it sure beats a netbook in size and price :) :)

Think of the Macbook Air as the equivalent of the low-end Macbook (which is quite capable). People who are not power users could potentially make the Macbook Air their only notebook/computer. Yes you can bring up iphoto, photoshop, etc on the macbook and it runs pretty well. And since it has a 13" screen, it is actually usable for more than checking email. Using one of those small 9"-10" netbook screens and mini keyboards for hours on end per day, you will want to chuck that netbook at the end of the day.

A netbook can only be a second or perhaps your third computer used just to occasionally surf the web and check email....where as the Air could be your primary and only computer. That's the difference...and it's a big one.

So to answer your question, I think people view the Macbook Air as a thin version of a Macbook...which is exactly what it is...imagine that :)

Kan-O-Z

jaytv111
Dec 15, 2008, 05:50 PM
Have you tried out an Air or are you reading some posts from people who owned a problematic Rev A? Heat is not enough of an issue to make the Rev B useless.

Reading Engadget and posts here, that is the conclusion I drew about the Rev A. It does look like the Rev B is better though. I've spent about ten minutes with an Air at an Apple Store. I'm not too impressed overall.

Well some people want to use their computer for a little more than email or surfing the web. If that's all I want to do, my iphone can even do that....and it sure beats a netbook in size and price :) :)

Yeah but the Iphone doesn't even have a keyboard. At least the netbooks have a keyboard and 7-10 inch screen.

Think of the Macbook Air as the equivalent of the low-end Macbook (which is quite capable). People who are not power users could potentially make the Macbook Air their only notebook/computer. Yes you can bring up iphoto, photoshop, etc on the macbook and it runs pretty well. And since it has a 13" screen, it is actually usable for more than checking email. Using one of those small 9"-10" netbook screens and mini keyboards for hours on end per day, you will want to chuck that netbook at the end of the day.

A netbook can only be a second or perhaps your third computer used just to occasionally surf the web and check email....where as the Air could be your primary and only computer. That's the difference...and it's a big one.

So to answer your question, I think people view the Macbook Air as a thin version of a Macbook...which is exactly what it is...imagine that :)

Kan-O-Z
You didn't answer my question. Do you really use the Air for Photoshop or CAD or anything heavy duty? The question is not can you do it. It is, would you really want to.

I would get the Macbook of the two. More features/performance for a better price.

I think the comparison to the netbooks still stands. It seems that if you just do simple tasks like email or web browsing, then a netbook is just as good.

Also the non removable battery is a HUGE dealbreaker for me. I would never get a laptop like that.

Doju
Dec 15, 2008, 06:15 PM
I use Photoshop on my MBA tons, I have it idling now as a matter of fact. And I've never ever even removed my battery from any laptop, so I can't call that crucial either.

And are you serious? If I only need to check my e-mail, do light browsing and word processing, would I want a netbook with a horrid OS, cramped keyboard, slower processor, thicker, smaller screen and uglier, or a beautiful, fast (for those tasks it does MORE than needed) MacBook Air with a full sized keyboard and screen.

Hey, it costs more, but premium has a cost.

jaytv111
Dec 15, 2008, 06:32 PM
I use Photoshop on my MBA tons, I have it idling now as a matter of fact. And I've never ever even removed my battery from any laptop, so I can't call that crucial either.

Ok. I am glad someone answered my question. Being able to change my battery is essential for me though. I assume many people are the same way.

And are you serious? If I only need to check my e-mail, do light browsing and word processing, would I want a netbook with a horrid OS, cramped keyboard, slower processor, thicker, smaller screen and uglier, or a beautiful, fast (for those tasks it does MORE than needed) MacBook Air with a full sized keyboard and screen.

Hey, it costs more, but premium has a cost.

Yes I'm serious. Horrid OS? I've used XP for years and it's been rock solid. You could alternatively get linux as well. Cramped keyboard? Depends, read some reviews of different netbook models before making assumptions. Slower processor is true, but again web browsing and email won't require any more. Thicker, uglier, yes. But I probably woudn't care since netbooks are usually cheap.

By the way, anyone heard of the Sony X505? it was thin like the Air, and it was quite similar. It's not hard to cut out features to make a thin computer, anyone could do it. I'll only get an Air when it has 3G, a removable battery, and 2 USB ports.

Doju
Dec 15, 2008, 06:45 PM
See, that's why it's only for select people. I rarely ever use USB ports, don't need to take out my battery, and there's no 3G in my area. :P

But I hear you.

But in regards to things like an optical drive, in something like an Air, that space is very valuable. Even if they offered an optical drive, it would hinder the speed I'd reckon. They're packed to the brim as-is, they couldn't fit an optical drive without damage.

jaytv111
Dec 15, 2008, 07:18 PM
See, that's why it's only for select people. I rarely ever use USB ports, don't need to take out my battery, and there's no 3G in my area. :P

But I hear you.

But in regards to things like an optical drive, in something like an Air, that space is very valuable. Even if they offered an optical drive, it would hinder the speed I'd reckon. They're packed to the brim as-is, they couldn't fit an optical drive without damage.

Well, I don't care about optical drives either. But I still prefer the Macbook over the Air for the better performance and price.

andyOSX
Dec 15, 2008, 07:30 PM
Slower processor is true, but again web browsing and email won't require any more. Thicker, uglier, yes. But I probably woudn't care since netbooks are usually cheap.


Hope you don't plan on watching very many flash videos or having 10+ tabs open at once.

jaytv111
Dec 15, 2008, 07:39 PM
Hope you don't plan on watching very many flash videos or having 10+ tabs open at once.

I'm not in the market :)

SnowLeopard2008
Dec 15, 2008, 07:40 PM
MBA has bigger/better battery.
MagSafe adapter
OS X
Aesthetically better
Multi touch
Not a weakling cpu or gpu
Better screen
Bigger trackpad, thinner
Backlit keyboard

The list goes on and on

The EEE is a pile of junk. I bought one (forget which model) and the experience was so bad. It had the power of a baby toy. It was cheaply built and the keyboard was "smushed in" for some keys. Basically, the keys were broken. The trackpad's paint wore off in a day or two. And the button fell off. Oh yea, the webcam was like if you poured cream into a cup of coffee, it was very blurry. And the rubber feet for the LCD fell off too... Needless to say, it went back to the store (Fry's) and I bought a Lenovo S10.

Kan-O-Z
Dec 15, 2008, 08:01 PM
You didn't answer my question. Do you really use the Air for Photoshop or CAD or anything heavy duty? The question is not can you do it. It is, would you really want to.

I would get the Macbook of the two. More features/performance for a better price.

I think the comparison to the netbooks still stands. It seems that if you just do simple tasks like email or web browsing, then a netbook is just as good.

Also the non removable battery is a HUGE dealbreaker for me. I would never get a laptop like that.

The Air is not for you but it is for some people. Some people want the extra power, extra screen and extra keyboard as opposed to a Netbook. If you use your portable a lot, this makes a big difference. Small screens means a lot of scrolling and viewing only one application at once.
On a netbook I think XP would run painfully slow. I think the only thing you could really run on a netbook would be some form of streamlined linux which is not for a lot of people. I think a netbook would start to choke if you watch youtube videos while having word docs open, pdf docs open and multiple web pages open and iTunes and a photo browser/editor program open.

Once again if you want a real computer experience that can handle more than email and web in practically a netbook sized package, that's what the Macbook Air is about.

Personally I think the Macbook Air is amazing. It's yesterdays last years low end iMac in a netbook size :) It's very capable for it's size, actually it's deceivingly capable. By the way it can actually play some games as that nVidia 9400 is decent!

Kan-O-Z

jaytv111
Dec 15, 2008, 08:39 PM
The Air is not for you but it is for some people. Some people want the extra power, extra screen and extra keyboard as opposed to a Netbook. If you use your portable a lot, this makes a big difference. Small screens means a lot of scrolling and viewing only one application at once.
On a netbook I think XP would run painfully slow.

And you would be wrong. XP runs fine on most netbooks. Check a couple reviews first before making assumptions.

I think the only thing you could really run on a netbook would be some form of streamlined linux which is not for a lot of people. I think a netbook would start to choke if you watch youtube videos while having word docs open, pdf docs open and multiple web pages open and iTunes and a photo browser/editor program open.

Once again if you want a real computer experience that can handle more than email and web in practically a netbook sized package, that's what the Macbook Air is about.

Personally I think the Macbook Air is amazing. It's yesterdays last years low end iMac in a netbook size :) It's very capable for it's size, actually it's deceivingly capable. By the way it can actually play some games as that nVidia 9400 is decent!

Kan-O-Z

Meh, it's not that amazing. link (http://www.mackable.com/blog/a-laptop-thinner-than-macbook-air-10-years-ago/)
It'd be amazing if they crammed in more features like 3G and a second USB port in the same size.

Kan-O-Z
Dec 15, 2008, 10:02 PM
And you would be wrong. XP runs fine on most netbooks. Check a couple reviews first before making assumptions.



Meh, it's not that amazing. link (http://www.mackable.com/blog/a-laptop-thinner-than-macbook-air-10-years-ago/)
It'd be amazing if they crammed in more features like 3G and a second USB port in the same size.

Lets just come to terms with the fact that the Macbook Air isn't for you but it is for others like me. Ports do not make a computer amazing to me. I don't even use the ports on my MBP (everything is wireless), nor do own a second battery to change out on the go. The Air does exactly what I like to do and how I like to use my computer. And those things it does very well.

It has the power(core 2 Duo along with nVidia 9400 graphics), size (13" screen and extremely thin), the large multitouch trackpad, the quality(unibody and one of the best LED displays on the market), style, and service that I can appreciate and that I am willing to pay the extra money for. I would not be happy with a netbook. As a matter of fact if the Air can outlast a netbook 2-3X over then the Air is not even any more expensive in the long run in my opinion. I think it can given that it is several times more powerful than a netbook and is of higher quality.

The Macbook Air IS worth it's price. I've proven it by naming several other manufacturers like Sony, Lenovo, Toshiba, Dell that also make high end, expensive ultraportables. As a matter of fact Dell makes both, a netbook and an expensive ultraportable. This proves the fact that Apple is not overcharging for the Air. Its a different category all together and it's not a netbook.

Comparing a netbook and the Air is like comparing the cheapest car in the world to a Porsche and claiming they can both hold 2 people and take them from point A to point B. These are two different categories of cars just like how the Netbook v. Air is two different categories of computers.

Anyways I think I am done with this discussion. You get what you pay for and if you don't need the 'better' thing then I recommend not getting it. I think I need the better thing ;)

Kan-O-Z

Molopo
Dec 15, 2008, 10:10 PM
Much less than half.

Actually a 1.6 dual core will only outperform the 1.6 atom by 20-30%, roughly. Clock speed is still 1.6 on both, the extra core just lets you make the most out of your given resources.

Thanks. So let me try to attach number to yours, mine, and everybody else's statements. It was always my impression that I'm paying extra for a Mac, on the order of 50%. So, while I can get a Dell with comparable specs to a Macbook, I would pay $1000 for the latter and ~$666 for the former.

Also, we agree that the Air is superior to the Eee, and really targets a different group. I'd say combining the larger screen, dual core, graphics card, aluminum body, etc (add all things people have mentioned above) it could be up to a factor 2 more expensive than the Eee, taking into account that the Air is not better in all the specs. That makes $1000. Furthermore add the 50% Apple Tax and you're at $1500. That's reasonably close to the price of the real Air, though still a bit short.

I guess in a way the question I had boils down to the question of why the Air is so much more expensive than the regular Macbook (which always seemed reasonably priced to me) and I guess this has been amply discussed elsewhere.

Anyway, thanks for taking part in the brain storming.

It's already been proven/discussed on gizmodo that there is no such dell. Perhaps if you completely disgregard form factor (i.e. two inches thick/8~ pounds), then yes you may be able to get a laptop with better specs than a macbook for the same price.

Roadking
Dec 15, 2008, 10:33 PM
although I didn't purchase the air. I was in the same situation. I wanted to purchase one of the netbooks because of the size and portability. I ended up with the macbook instead of either.

I wanted to stick with osx instead of windows xp on the netbook. I know about the msi wind and installing osx on it, but I also heard that all the kinks have not been worked out of it yet. I wanted to use the camera function to be able to communicate with my family while i was on the road.

Although I only seem to use the optical drive when I am on the road (dvd's) It is still a nice feature to have built in.

I may still get an air one day. Probably once they get rid of the button on the track pad and upgrade it to the current look of the new books.

pointandclick
Dec 15, 2008, 10:47 PM
If I've ever seen a Mac-Nazi, you're it Kan-O-Z.:cool: Most of what you list as "facts" are simply your opinions, well presented in an authoritative manner.
Other facts are simply false or misrepresented.

Apple hardware isn't somehow magically "better" than any other computers. True, Apple tends to use better spec'd hardware standard, such as in their network components, backlighting, etc. That doesn't mean comparable offerings aren't available from other manufacturers.

Anyway, when comparing netbooks with the Air, you must first realize what you are comparing.
Netbooks are meant to be used for general use as a second computer.
The Air is a sub-notebook, which tend to have comparable specs to a regular notebook with a price premium for their size. Although they could be used as an only computer, it's safe to assume most use them as a secondary mobile computer also.

There's no comparison between the hardware. The Air will blow any netbook out of the water. The funny thing is, however, that either one will suit the needs of the majority of users.

The Air is competitively priced with other sub-notebooks. I would never buy any of these though. In my mind if I want a small, light machine that I can carry around to take notes and surf the web, I would rather have something cheap that I can throw around and not need to worry about damaging it or it walking off. I'm not so concerned with running photoshop.;)

Kan-O-Z
Dec 16, 2008, 12:51 AM
If I've ever seen a Mac-Nazi, you're it Kan-O-Z.:cool: Most of what you list as "facts" are simply your opinions, well presented in an authoritative manner.
Other facts are simply false or misrepresented.

Apple hardware isn't somehow magically "better" than any other computers. True, Apple tends to use better spec'd hardware standard, such as in their network components, backlighting, etc. That doesn't mean comparable offerings aren't available from other manufacturers.

Sorry if I came off that way. Would you like to give me examples of my false facts or facts that are really opinions?

When I stated that Apple is better quality, I was comparing the Air to the netbook, not a high end Sony PC. There is just no way that a $300-$400 computer can rival a $1600+ computer in quality. When I say quality I am not necessarily talking about CPU or harddrive. I am also talking about how the Air is put together, what materials are used, what parts are used. A unibody enclosure made of one piece of aluminum is higher quality, the 13" LED screen is higher quality, the trackpad and keyboard is higher quality, etc. True these aren't facts you would find in a spec sheet but surely you would agree wouldn't you?

Kan-O-Z

jaytv111
Dec 16, 2008, 10:00 AM
Sorry if I came off that way. Would you like to give me examples of my false facts or facts that are really opinions?

He's probably referring to when you said netbooks have a "horrid OS", "cramped keyboard", etc. Sometimes it's true, sometimes it isn't. Check some netbook reviews first before making assumptions.

When I stated that Apple is better quality, I was comparing the Air to the netbook, not a high end Sony PC. There is just no way that a $300-$400 computer can rival a $1600+ computer in quality. When I say quality I am not necessarily talking about CPU or harddrive. I am also talking about how the Air is put together, what materials are used, what parts are used. A unibody enclosure made of one piece of aluminum is higher quality, the 13" LED screen is higher quality, the trackpad and keyboard is higher quality, etc. True these aren't facts you would find in a spec sheet but surely you would agree wouldn't you?

Kan-O-Z

And carbon fiber is even higher quality :). But, just FYI, don't try to correlate quality with price every time. While I think the MBA is a high quality product, there are many times when an expensive item is truly and utterly junk. I've read horror stories about someone buying a $130,000 Mercedes sedan only to have it start breaking down literally after driving it off the lot. Also, the Mercedes CLK-GTR is one of the most expensive cars ever at over $1,000,000. But this link (http://www.autoblog.com/2006/06/15/one-big-lemon-dealer-sues-mercedes-benz-over-defective-1-7m-ro/) says at least one of them is a complete dud.

So clearly, paying more doesn't necessarily mean you're getting better quality. So do some research into quality and reliability before buying a product. Again, I do think the Air is high quality, but cost doesn't necessarily correlate with quality.

Kan-O-Z
Dec 16, 2008, 12:45 PM
And carbon fiber is even higher quality :). But, just FYI, don't try to correlate quality with price every time. While I think the MBA is a high quality product, there are many times when an expensive item is truly and utterly junk. I've read horror stories about someone buying a $130,000 Mercedes sedan only to have it start breaking down literally after driving it off the lot. Also, the Mercedes CLK-GTR is one of the most expensive cars ever at over $1,000,000. But this link (http://www.autoblog.com/2006/06/15/one-big-lemon-dealer-sues-mercedes-benz-over-defective-1-7m-ro/) says at least one of them is a complete dud.

So clearly, paying more doesn't necessarily mean you're getting better quality. So do some research into quality and reliability before buying a product. Again, I do think the Air is high quality, but cost doesn't necessarily correlate with quality.

I agree with you :) Quality can sometimes be mistaken for reliability. A Toyota Corolla is a cheap car with lots of plastic parts and cheap materials....but that thing will last longer than just about any car on the road. A $130,000 Mercedes will definitely use high quality materials, the finest leather, high quality wood...just about every part on the car from the wheels, engine and exterior to the interior will be high quality. Now just because the materials are high quality doesn't mean it's super reliable.

What you are paying for with a Mercedes is the whole experience(style, luxury, features, power, status, service). It will far surpass the experience of a Corolla. If one was to look at the function of what a Corolla and a Mercedes can do, it's the exact same thing....transport people from point A to point B! If one was to look at the specs of a Mercedes that cost 10X more than a Corolla, I can tell you that Mercedes isn't 10X faster or 10X better.

Personally I like Lexus, it's the 'reliable' Mercedes :) I like to think of Apple as the Lexus of computers.

Now in the case of the Air, I don't think it's 4X as reliable as a cheap netbook but it may just be 3-4X as fast. This is an important factor. What this means is that the Air will be much more 'future proof' than a netbook which can't even run todays latest OSes. At some point programs will come out that just won't run on XP or perhaps they will run very poorly. This means that the netbook will need to be replaced....which will again cost another $400.

In the long run the Air may not cost as much as it seems because it will need to be replaced 'less often'. At the same time you will get a luxurious, fast and stress free computer experience.

Again the old saying that you get what you pay for is so true, especially if you are able to look at the long term picture and the overall user experience.

Kan-O-Z

jaytv111
Dec 16, 2008, 09:36 PM
I agree with you :) Quality can sometimes be mistaken for reliability. A Toyota Corolla is a cheap car with lots of plastic parts and cheap materials....but that thing will last longer than just about any car on the road. A $130,000 Mercedes will definitely use high quality materials, the finest leather, high quality wood...just about every part on the car from the wheels, engine and exterior to the interior will be high quality. Now just because the materials are high quality doesn't mean it's super reliable.

What you are paying for with a Mercedes is the whole experience(style, luxury, features, power, status, service). It will far surpass the experience of a Corolla. If one was to look at the function of what a Corolla and a Mercedes can do, it's the exact same thing....transport people from point A to point B! If one was to look at the specs of a Mercedes that cost 10X more than a Corolla, I can tell you that Mercedes isn't 10X faster or 10X better.

Personally I like Lexus, it's the 'reliable' Mercedes :) I like to think of Apple as the Lexus of computers.

Now in the case of the Air, I don't think it's 4X as reliable as a cheap netbook but it may just be 3-4X as fast. This is an important factor. What this means is that the Air will be much more 'future proof' than a netbook which can't even run todays latest OSes. At some point programs will come out that just won't run on XP or perhaps they will run very poorly. This means that the netbook will need to be replaced....which will again cost another $400.

In the long run the Air may not cost as much as it seems because it will need to be replaced 'less often'. At the same time you will get a luxurious, fast and stress free computer experience.

Again the old saying that you get what you pay for is so true, especially if you are able to look at the long term picture and the overall user experience.

Kan-O-Z

Argh, do some research before you post! Look into Windows 7 first of all, it'll run just as well as XP and will be the latest OS and run the latest software. Second, the MBA isn't going to be 3-4X as fast as a netbook. At most, maybe 2X as fast as a netbook. If you want 3-4X the performance, you'd need maybe a regular Core 2 Duo laptop processor.

Also, a Macbook Air isn't going to last that long either. You can't even upgrade the RAM for crissakes! Not to mention the battery will lose a large portion of its charge within a few years. With every other laptop, you can just buy another battery and swap it in. But you'll have to go through this ridiculous battery swap process with the Air.

Frankly I think of the Air as a Lotus Elise. Small, light, impractical, not a lot of features, and while nimble, it's not that fast (it's only a four cylinder). And FYI, Lexus has their own problems. Like being more boring than a bag of rocks.

Kan-O-Z
Dec 16, 2008, 10:59 PM
Argh, do some research before you post! Look into Windows 7 first of all, it'll run just as well as XP and will be the latest OS and run the latest software. Second, the MBA isn't going to be 3-4X as fast as a netbook. At most, maybe 2X as fast as a netbook.

Lets take a look at the Dell Mini 9 ($349):
1.6 Single Core Atom (This is probably equivalent to an old Celeron. The Air's Core 2 Duo will be 4X this)
Memory (512MB) - you're complaining about 2GB on the air?
4GB SSD - ummm, this is capacity is what was around 10 years ago
Intel GMA graphics - the NVidia is 4X this

Let's up it a bit and look at Dell Mini 12 ($549)
1.33GHZ Atom
Memory (1GB)
40GB PATA HDD

Ok this one is a bit better than the 9 but it's still no comparison to the Air. The Eee PC is better but the only thing better is the harddrive. The rest is the same.

Yes the Air is 3-4X faster. I don't have the time to look up benchmarks but if you want to prove me wrong please do.


If you want 3-4X the performance, you'd need maybe a regular Core 2 Duo laptop processor.

I think you're the one that needs to do the research. The latest Macbook Air IS roughly the equivalent of a 'regular Core 2 Duo' such as the Macbook 2.1.

Speedmark:
Macbook Air 1.86 - 174
Macbook 2.1 Core 2 Duo - 179
http://www.macworld.com/article/136760/2008/11/macbook_air_review.html


Also, a Macbook Air isn't going to last that long either. You can't even upgrade the RAM for crissakes! Not to mention the battery will lose a large portion of its charge within a few years. With every other laptop, you can just buy another battery and swap it in. But you'll have to go through this ridiculous battery swap process with the Air.

Ridiculous battery swap? It's $129 and all you do is swing by an Apple store and they're do it there! Not a big deal for me if I do this once in 2-3 years. Notebook batteries tend to cost close to $100 anyways so this isn't so much more.

We'll see about Windows 7, Vista was supposed to be the best and we all know how that turned out. At best it will run like XP which quite frankly is slow. Even Leopard runs faster than XP.

Snow Leopard will be faster, lighter than Leopard. It will be ground breaking by utilizing the GPU cores with Open CL. This means the Air(especially with the nVidia) will run faster with Snow Leopard than it runs in Leopard! I will argue that Snow Leopard will make the gap EVEN LARGER when compared to a slow netbook running a slow Windows. Who knows perhaps the Air + Snow Leopard will be 5-6X faster ;) Now I'm really trying to get under your skin ;)

So I stand by my word, the Air is more future proof than a netbook. Another way to look at this is that the Air probably has the specs now to what a netbook will have in 2-3 years. When a current netbook owner buys a new netbook in 2-3 years, the Air owner won't have to as it will match the netbook of that time.

By the way I like your analogy about the Lotus.

Macbook Air + Snow Leopard = Lotus Elise(Snow Leopard) with a highly tuned 200hp Toyota 4 cylinder engine, (Air's Core 2 Duo). No it doesn't have that much power but it's still faster than most cars on the road.
netbook + Windows = Caprice Classic(Windows) with a 3 cylinder engine(Atom processor). This may be driveable but it sure won't be pleasant :)

Kan-O-Z

jaytv111
Dec 16, 2008, 11:52 PM
Lets take a look at the Dell Mini 9 ($349):
1.6 Single Core Atom (This is probably equivalent to an old Celeron. The Air's Core 2 Duo will be 4X this)

According to?

Memory (512MB) - you're complaining about 2GB on the air?

At least you can upgrade. Every other laptop you can upgrade the RAM. And my point was that you're not very future proof if you can't upgrade the RAM.

4GB SSD - ummm, this is capacity is what was around 10 years ago

I would compare never the crappy SSD's on netbooks to hard drive models. They're slower, smaller, and expensive.

Intel GMA graphics - the NVidia is 4X this

Maybe, but I don't believe it'll be of any use when the most anyone does with their Air is light Photoshopping.

I think you're the one that needs to do the research. The latest Macbook Air IS roughly the equivalent of a 'regular Core 2 Duo' such as the Macbook 2.1.

Speedmark:
Macbook Air 1.86 - 174
Macbook 2.1 Core 2 Duo - 179
http://www.macworld.com/article/136760/2008/11/macbook_air_review.html

So comparing a previous generation processor to a current generation one is your idea of a fair comparison? Laughable really. Stick to current generation processors only.

Ridiculous battery swap? It's $129 and all you do is swing by an Apple store and they're do it there! Not a big deal for me if I do this once in 2-3 years. Notebook batteries tend to cost close to $100 anyways so this isn't so much more.

I'd say it's still more convenient to do it at home. No downtime especially if you actually needed your laptop.

We'll see about Windows 7, Vista was supposed to be the best and we all know how that turned out. At best it will run like XP which quite frankly is slow. Even Leopard runs faster than XP.

As far as I can tell, Vista is pretty decent. It's not perfect of course. And have you used XP on a netbook, or 7 for that matter? If not, then you're not qualified to say how it is. Read this (http://blog.laptopmag.com/eee-pc-1000h-runs-windows-7-well)

Snow Leopard will be faster, lighter than Leopard. It will be ground breaking by utilizing the GPU cores with Open CL. This means the Air(especially with the nVidia) will run faster with Snow Leopard than it runs in Leopard! I will argue that Snow Leopard will make the gap EVEN LARGER when compared to a slow netbook running a slow Windows. Who knows perhaps the Air + Snow Leopard will be 5-6X faster ;) Now I'm really trying to get under your skin ;)

Well, just so you know, all of that is currently just hype. You can't even bring me a source that says the Air is 4x faster than a typical netbook. lol

So I stand by my word, the Air is more future proof than a netbook. Another way to look at this is that the Air probably has the specs now to what a netbook will have in 2-3 years. When a current netbook owner buys a new netbook in 2-3 years, the Air owner won't have to as it will match the netbook of that time.

I don't know what specs we'll see in 2 years. I don't think either netbooks or the Air are very future proof anyway. And pretty much all laptops are nowhere near what I would call future proof. I'm sure we'll see amazing things in a couple years that will make me just want to throw my laptop away. I'd probably put the Air at 3 years, and the Eee 1000H at maybe 1.5 to 2 years. But it's still a third of the price of the Air.

By the way I like your analogy about the Lotus.

Macbook Air + Snow Leopard = Lotus Elise(Snow Leopard) with a highly tuned 200hp Toyota 4 cylinder engine, (Air's Core 2 Duo). No it doesn't have that much power but it's still faster than most cars on the road.

So we agree then that the Air is utterly impractical for nearly everyone?

netbook + Windows = Caprice Classic(Windows) with a 3 cylinder engine(Atom processor). This may be driveable but it sure won't be pleasant :)

Kan-O-Z

I'm pretty sure a 3 cylinder engine isn't powerful enough to even move a Caprice. I'd say the Eee 100H is more like a Toyota Corolla, or maybe a Yaris. Slow, small, but does the job. And can fit more cargo than the Elise lol.

sanPietro98
Dec 17, 2008, 08:02 AM
There is one often unheralded feature about the MBA that is a HUGE deal for me... carpel tunnel / repetitve stress disorder.

I use a lot of laptop computers for work and home. The MBA is the ONLY laptop that doesn't give me these wrist and ergonomic issues. The MBA is so thin and low-to-the-desk that it is extremely comfortable to use -- even after hours of nonstop typing.

After 2 hours of typing on Dell or even MBP laptops, my wrists and fingers get very uncomfortable and "tingly". Of course, this is just me, but the thinness of the MBA makes all the difference.

GoCubsGo
Dec 17, 2008, 09:24 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5F136 Safari/525.20)

The Eee PC will do what an Air does. However the air runs a more stable os and in my opinion may last longer. I've seen the Eee PC run OSX but it wasn't easy. The MSI Wind runs OSX smoother for sure. I mean if you want to try it.

I'm quoting my own post because I stand mildly corrected.

Now having an Air I will comfortably say that while the netbook has it's place in life, it is not a replacement for the Air. The Air is in a class above the netbooks. I like the netbooks, they're toys though and this Air is handling more than I anticipated. I mentioned to some people my MacPro would do all my heavy lifting, I was incorrect. The Air actually handles some of this. While I'd be a fool to choose my Air over my MacPro for certain tasks, in a bind this Air definitely handles the tasks at hand. Moreover, I am certain the netbooks would not be suitable for general photo editing (slightly more than what you get in iPhoto but less than Photoshop (think PS Elements), it would not be suitable for ripping movies as far as I'm concerned, and the build quality of the ones I have seen are subpar compared to the Air.

The Air has flaws no doubt, the size overall clearly makes for something we can't ever really expand, but I knew this going in.

Kan-O-Z
Dec 17, 2008, 01:16 PM
According to?

Ok you made me do a little research and I wasn't too far off with my estimates:

Cinebench 9.5
Intel Core 2 Duo 2.0GHz - 617
Intel Atom 1.6GHz - 158
http://xtreview.com/addcomment-id-4801-view-Intel-atom-1.6-Ghz-benchmark.html

Now before you say that the 1.86 Core 2 Duo isn't the same as a 2.0 Core 2 Duo...it's not that far off. As a matter of fact, the closest thing to a 1.6 Atom is a 600MHz Core 2 Duo.

It looks like 3-4X holds true.


At least you can upgrade. Every other laptop you can upgrade the RAM. And my point was that you're not very future proof if you can't upgrade the RAM.


Well we know that Snow Leopard(future OS) is getting more efficient, not more bloated. This means that there will be no requirement for a higher RAM at least in the near future....as a matter of fact Snow Leopard might even have a lower requirement for memory. For most users, 2GB is not going to come up short for a very long time.
No you can't upgrade the RAM in the Air but netbooks are at 512MB of RAM today. Perhaps in 3 years 2GB of RAM will be standard in netbooks. So the Air will become a netbook in 3 years. Perhaps a netbook lasts 1.5-2 years as you stated. This gives a total duration for the Air as 4.5-5 years which is easily 2-3 times that of a netbook.
When comparing the price of the Air and a netbook, multiply the price of the netbook 2-3 times....because that is how much longer an Air will last in terms of power and specs.


Maybe, but I don't believe it'll be of any use when the most anyone does with their Air is light Photoshopping.


In case you didn't read about Snow Leopard, ALL GPU Cores will be used by the OS for general purpose processing. The Air will not only use it's dual core 1.86 CPU but will also combine the power of it's nVidia 9400 GPU for OS stuff! This means that you will gain benefits in anything you do since the GPU now behaves like a CPU. The Air will behave like it has 2 CPUs (one is the Intel Core 2 Duo, the other is the nVidia 9400 with many cores).

This is why I said that this will put an even bigger performance gap between the Air and a Windows netbook. I'll guess that the Air(with Snow Leopard) will perform 5-6X better than a netbook running Windows.


So comparing a previous generation processor to a current generation one is your idea of a fair comparison? Laughable really. Stick to current generation processors only.


Ummm, the one I listed is currently being sold by Apple. Go to their website. It is current!


I'd say it's still more convenient to do it at home. No downtime especially if you actually needed your laptop.


Yeah I won't argue that it would be nice but it's one of the ways they were able to make the Air so thin. It's not much of a negative to me.


Well, just so you know, all of that is currently just hype. You can't even bring me a source that says the Air is 4x faster than a typical netbook. lol


Read up on Snow Leopard(coming in just a few months).

I just did give you a link that showed CPU benchmarks that prove the Air is 3-4X faster.


So we agree then that the Air is utterly impractical for nearly everyone?


It is impractical for some, but not for others. It all depends what you use on your computer and what you value. Personally I don't use many ports on my computer nor do I use the optical drive. It does make a good daily computer for most. For me it's not impractical because they got rid of things that aren't important and gave me slim and light instead :)


I'm pretty sure a 3 cylinder engine isn't powerful enough to even move a Caprice. I'd say the Eee 100H is more like a Toyota Corolla, or maybe a Yaris. Slow, small, but does the job. And can fit more cargo than the Elise lol.

LOL, this is funny. The reason I said Caprice is because it's a boat, sort of like Windows. XP isn't so bad when it's freshly installed but in a few short months, it bloats up and really starts dragging.

Kan-O-Z

jaytv111
Dec 17, 2008, 07:10 PM
Ok you made me do a little research and I wasn't too far off with my estimates:

Cinebench 9.5
Intel Core 2 Duo 2.0GHz - 617
Intel Atom 1.6GHz - 158
http://xtreview.com/addcomment-id-4801-view-Intel-atom-1.6-Ghz-benchmark.html

Now before you say that the 1.86 Core 2 Duo isn't the same as a 2.0 Core 2 Duo...it's not that far off. As a matter of fact, the closest thing to a 1.6 Atom is a 600MHz Core 2 Duo.

It looks like 3-4X holds true.

Yeah exactly, it's not the same processor. 2-3X tops. lol

Well we know that Snow Leopard(future OS) is getting more efficient, not more bloated. This means that there will be no requirement for a higher RAM at least in the near future....as a matter of fact Snow Leopard might even have a lower requirement for memory. For most users, 2GB is not going to come up short for a very long time.

Well I didn't dispute anything, but we'll have to wait and see.

No you can't upgrade the RAM in the Air but netbooks are at 512MB of RAM today.

Most (that I've seen) are 1 GB by the way.

Perhaps in 3 years 2GB of RAM will be standard in netbooks. So the Air will become a netbook in 3 years. Perhaps a netbook lasts 1.5-2 years as you stated. This gives a total duration for the Air as 4.5-5 years which is easily 2-3 times that of a netbook.

Depends on your usage.

When comparing the price of the Air and a netbook, multiply the price of the netbook 2-3 times....because that is how much longer an Air will last in terms of power and specs.

Maybe you're right. But I'd still go for a Macbook over the Air. I would think the Macbook would last longer.

In case you didn't read about Snow Leopard, ALL GPU Cores will be used by the OS for general purpose processing. The Air will not only use it's dual core 1.86 CPU but will also combine the power of it's nVidia 9400 GPU for OS stuff! This means that you will gain benefits in anything you do since the GPU now behaves like a CPU. The Air will behave like it has 2 CPUs (one is the Intel Core 2 Duo, the other is the nVidia 9400 with many cores).

yes I read about it. It's still preliminary. Hold on a second, won't using your GPU as well as your CPU kill your battery life? I would assume they wouldn't use the GPU too much while on battery. By the way, I would think this feature will be used more with desktops with powerful GPUs than laptops. Regardless I'm not in disagreement seeing as how Snow Leopard isn't out yet.

This is why I said that this will put an even bigger performance gap between the Air and a Windows netbook. I'll guess that the Air(with Snow Leopard) will perform 5-6X better than a netbook running Windows.

We'll see, still preliminary.

Ummm, the one I listed is currently being sold by Apple. Go to their website. It is current!

The Macbook White? It's not Montevina, the latest architecture/chipset. The Macbook Air is. Hence, comparing the two isn't fair. You might as well compare it with the Mac Mini, which is several generations behind in processors.


Yeah I won't argue that it would be nice but it's one of the ways they were able to make the Air so thin. It's not much of a negative to me.

I'd think they could make it just as thin while still having a user replaceable battery. They just half-assed the engineering lol. (Sony's ultrathin X505 has a replaceable battery.)



Read up on Snow Leopard(coming in just a few months).

I just did give you a link that showed CPU benchmarks that prove the Air is 3-4X faster.

No you didn't. You gave me a link comparing completely different processors.



It is impractical for some, but not for others. It all depends what you use on your computer and what you value. Personally I don't use many ports on my computer nor do I use the optical drive. It does make a good daily computer for most. For me it's not impractical because they got rid of things that aren't important and gave me slim and light instead :)

Good for you. Doesn't work for me and other people though.

LOL, this is funny. The reason I said Caprice is because it's a boat, sort of like Windows. XP isn't so bad when it's freshly installed but in a few short months, it bloats up and really starts dragging.

Kan-O-Z

I've used XP for 4 years and it doesn't "bloat" up within months. That happens after several years. The point about Windows 7 still stands, and you suspiciously didn't even mention it. What did you think of the link I posted that said Windows 7 runs well on a netbook?

The Caprice comparison would be valid if it's a netbook running Vista, no doubt.

Kan-O-Z
Dec 17, 2008, 08:20 PM
Yeah exactly, it's not the same processor. 2-3X tops. lol



Well I didn't dispute anything, but we'll have to wait and see.



Most (that I've seen) are 1 GB by the way.



Depends on your usage.



Maybe you're right. But I'd still go for a Macbook over the Air. I would think the Macbook would last longer.



yes I read about it. It's still preliminary. Hold on a second, won't using your GPU as well as your CPU kill your battery life? I would assume they wouldn't use the GPU too much while on battery. By the way, I would think this feature will be used more with desktops with powerful GPUs than laptops. Regardless I'm not in disagreement seeing as how Snow Leopard isn't out yet.



We'll see, still preliminary.



The Macbook White? It's not Montevina, the latest architecture/chipset. The Macbook Air is. Hence, comparing the two isn't fair. You might as well compare it with the Mac Mini, which is several generations behind in processors.




I'd think they could make it just as thin while still having a user replaceable battery. They just half-assed the engineering lol. (Sony's ultrathin X505 has a replaceable battery.)





No you didn't. You gave me a link comparing completely different processors.





Good for you. Doesn't work for me and other people though.



I've used XP for 4 years and it doesn't "bloat" up within months. That happens after several years. The point about Windows 7 still stands, and you suspiciously didn't even mention it. What did you think of the link I posted that said Windows 7 runs well on a netbook?

The Caprice comparison would be valid if it's a netbook running Vista, no doubt.

Well I'm glad we agree then :)

Just one last thing.....

600MHz Core 2 Duo X 3 = 1.8GHz Core 2 Duo

Atom 1.6 is slower than 600MHz Core 2 Duo
Macbook Air 1.86 is faster than 1.8GHz Core 2 Duo

Sooo.....

Macbook Air 1.86 is MORE THAN 3X Atom 1.6

:)

Kan-O-Z

jaytv111
Dec 17, 2008, 09:18 PM
Well I'm glad we agree then :)

Just one last thing.....

600MHz Core 2 Duo X 3 = 1.8GHz Core 2 Duo

Atom 1.6 is slower than 600MHz Core 2 Duo
Macbook Air 1.86 is faster than 1.8GHz Core 2 Duo

Sooo.....

Macbook Air 1.86 is MORE THAN 3X Atom 1.6

:)

Kan-O-Z

Yeah, clock speed is everything, right? :rolleyes:
They're not the same, and multiplying 600 MHZ C2D by 3 isn't the same as 1.86 GHZ Low voltage C2D. Regardless I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, no more than 3 times as fast. :)

pointandclick
Dec 17, 2008, 11:45 PM
Sorry if I came off that way. Would you like to give me examples of my false facts or facts that are really opinions?

When I stated that Apple is better quality, I was comparing the Air to the netbook, not a high end Sony PC. There is just no way that a $300-$400 computer can rival a $1600+ computer in quality. When I say quality I am not necessarily talking about CPU or harddrive. I am also talking about how the Air is put together, what materials are used, what parts are used. A unibody enclosure made of one piece of aluminum is higher quality, the 13" LED screen is higher quality, the trackpad and keyboard is higher quality, etc. True these aren't facts you would find in a spec sheet but surely you would agree wouldn't you?

Kan-O-Z

Like when you put quantitative values on OS X and it's bundled software in order to justify the price premium Macs carry.

No doubt the Air contains higher quality components. I don't think anyone here is even implying that it doesn't. That's not the question. The question is, is paying several times more for a machine that will for the most part do the same thing worth it?
It's true that the specs of the Air blow any netbook out of the water. The 1.6 atom is roughly equal to a 900mhz Celeron. Versus any Core 2 in a processor intensive task would be like a Pinto vs a Corvette. For the small fraction of users that do more than web and word processing, it's a no brainer.

The kicker is that the majority of users of either the Air or a netbook will be doing little more than that. I consider myself somewhat of a power user (CS major). Out of all the people I know who own computers, I can pick out 3 that do more than web and email on a regular basis, 2 of which are also CS majors.
Most people aren't going to be slaving away in CS4 in the middle of class or in a cafe. If they are, they wouldn't be considering a netbook.

After discarding the technical merits, all that's left is build quality and aesthetics. I think most netbooks are build at least as well as an Air... at least my conscience would be more at ease throwing a netbook in my bookbag than an Air. Paying 3x as much for something that looks good is your prerogative.
I did it with the MBP. I could have found another machine somewhat cheaper, but it was worth paying a little more for the looks, size, weight, etc since it was my main machine. If the difference was 2-3-4 fold I probably would have reconsidered.

Like I said, spec for spec, there is no competition. If you need to run intensive apps there wouldn't even be any comparison, otherwise a netbook is a better value by far.:cool:

Quite frankly though, I've been kind of disappointed with some of Apples offerings of late. The success since the Intel transition must be going to Steves head.:D It doesn't help that no matter what he releases people think it's the best thing since sliced bread.:confused:

iomatic
Dec 18, 2008, 01:47 AM
Argh, do some research before you post! Look into Windows 7 first of all, it'll run just as well as XP and will be the latest OS and run the latest software. Second, the MBA isn't going to be 3-4X as fast as a netbook. At most, maybe 2X as fast as a netbook. If you want 3-4X the performance, you'd need maybe a regular Core 2 Duo laptop processor.

Also, a Macbook Air isn't going to last that long either. You can't even upgrade the RAM for crissakes! Not to mention the battery will lose a large portion of its charge within a few years. With every other laptop, you can just buy another battery and swap it in. But you'll have to go through this ridiculous battery swap process with the Air.

Frankly I think of the Air as a Lotus Elise. Small, light, impractical, not a lot of features, and while nimble, it's not that fast (it's only a four cylinder). And FYI, Lexus has their own problems. Like being more boring than a bag of rocks.

Good lord, this thread is still going?

FFS, another car analogy? As far as an Elise? Tell you what: I'll take one, you grab a freaking Taurus and we'll see who wins at the track. Autocross? Race? 1/4? Maybe you just browse the Web, but the rest of us, you know, work.

Kan-O-Z
Dec 18, 2008, 05:51 PM
Like when you put quantitative values on OS X and it's bundled software in order to justify the price premium Macs carry.

No doubt the Air contains higher quality components. I don't think anyone here is even implying that it doesn't. That's not the question. The question is, is paying several times more for a machine that will for the most part do the same thing worth it?
It's true that the specs of the Air blow any netbook out of the water. The 1.6 atom is roughly equal to a 900mhz Celeron. Versus any Core 2 in a processor intensive task would be like a Pinto vs a Corvette. For the small fraction of users that do more than web and word processing, it's a no brainer.

The kicker is that the majority of users of either the Air or a netbook will be doing little more than that. I consider myself somewhat of a power user (CS major). Out of all the people I know who own computers, I can pick out 3 that do more than web and email on a regular basis, 2 of which are also CS majors.
Most people aren't going to be slaving away in CS4 in the middle of class or in a cafe. If they are, they wouldn't be considering a netbook.

After discarding the technical merits, all that's left is build quality and aesthetics. I think most netbooks are build at least as well as an Air... at least my conscience would be more at ease throwing a netbook in my bookbag than an Air. Paying 3x as much for something that looks good is your prerogative.
I did it with the MBP. I could have found another machine somewhat cheaper, but it was worth paying a little more for the looks, size, weight, etc since it was my main machine. If the difference was 2-3-4 fold I probably would have reconsidered.

Like I said, spec for spec, there is no competition. If you need to run intensive apps there wouldn't even be any comparison, otherwise a netbook is a better value by far.:cool:

Quite frankly though, I've been kind of disappointed with some of Apples offerings of late. The success since the Intel transition must be going to Steves head.:D It doesn't help that no matter what he releases people think it's the best thing since sliced bread.:confused:

The question isn't whether you would use it or not, the question is whether it's worth it's price. I will say yes it is because if it's got 3X the specs of a netbook and will last 2X longer in usability(because of it's specs thus paying itself off in a way), and can run the latest and greatest software then it IS worth 3X more....for me. But not for all people. This is a very individual question you have to answer for yourself.

If we go by your logic, how many people in this world need a computer with a video card which most desktops have? How many people really need a 250GB HDD that's standard on most desktops? How many people need a 20" desktop screen when perhaps a 10" is good enough just to check email/surf the web? According to you most people just surf the web and check email so you might as well save your money and buy 3-4 year old computer. Right?

I'll speak from what I see with my wife since she is not a techie and she's in sales. Before our first Mac, she would do just surf the web and nothing more. Since our Mac, she has started to do a lot more. She uses iPhoto all the time (adding pics of the dogs, light editing, uploading to facebook)...I would say almost daily. She will use iMovie to post to youtube from time to time since we have dogs and we take movie clips of them with our digital camera. Once in a while, she'll add some stuff to our website using iWeb. She really likes iTunes and iChat. She now likes to video conference once in a while with her family. iLife is really awesome, especially for amateurs. She would never have done any of this on a PC.

What I am trying to say here is that since we got our first Mac, she now uses the computer more extensively than just surfing the web or email. It's actually really interesting to see a 'non-computer person' doing these things. Now I can't imagine her doing some of these things on a netbook(assuming you could even get OS X or iLife working on a netbook). So it's a no brainer for us that we'd like to have the capability to do these things on the Air while we're on the go or around the house :)

Kan-O-Z

jaytv111
Dec 18, 2008, 06:06 PM
Good lord, this thread is still going?

FFS, another car analogy? As far as an Elise? Tell you what: I'll take one, you grab a freaking Taurus and we'll see who wins at the track. Autocross? Race? 1/4? Maybe you just browse the Web, but the rest of us, you know, work.

Hey tough guy, you want the Elise? then take it. I'll take a car that can freakin hold more than 2 people and a backpack. Or tell you what, you take the Elise, I'll take a Lamborghini Murcielago and we'll which one's faster, k?

And where did I say I only browse the web? I was saying that people typically don't do more than web browsing and email, mmkay? I use Matlab, Photoshop, Visual Studio, NX 5, the usual productivity apps, in addition to web browsing and email. OK buddy?

jaytv111
Dec 18, 2008, 06:14 PM
If we go by your logic, how many people in this world need a computer with a video card which most desktops have? How many people really need a 250GB HDD that's standard on most desktops? How many people need a 20" desktop screen when perhaps a 10" is good enough just to check email/surf the web? According to you most people just surf the web and check email so you might as well save your money and buy 3-4 year old computer. Right?

Kan-O-Z

The difference is that desktops are usually dirt cheap. Plus you can actually game on desktops. But you make some good points. By the way, I looked at the original Asus Eee (700 series) today and it is pretty cheaply built. The keyboard was crap, but maybe I'm spoiled because I'm used to my Thinkpad keyboard :). You definitely are right about the low end netbooks, they have crap for keyboards and the screens are unusably small. But I still think the higher end netbooks are a lot better (much better keyboards and much bigger screens) and somewhat more comparable to the Air. In the end it will depend on your usage.

pointandclick
Dec 18, 2008, 11:03 PM
The question isn't whether you would use it or not, the question is whether it's worth it's price. I will say yes it is because if it's got 3X the specs of a netbook and will last 2X longer in usability(because of it's specs thus paying itself off in a way), and can run the latest and greatest software then it IS worth 3X more....for me. But not for all people. This is a very individual question you have to answer for yourself.

If we go by your logic, how many people in this world need a computer with a video card which most desktops have? How many people really need a 250GB HDD that's standard on most desktops? How many people need a 20" desktop screen when perhaps a 10" is good enough just to check email/surf the web? According to you most people just surf the web and check email so you might as well save your money and buy 3-4 year old computer. Right?

I'll speak from what I see with my wife since she is not a techie and she's in sales. Before our first Mac, she would do just surf the web and nothing more. Since our Mac, she has started to do a lot more. She uses iPhoto all the time (adding pics of the dogs, light editing, uploading to facebook)...I would say almost daily. She will use iMovie to post to youtube from time to time since we have dogs and we take movie clips of them with our digital camera. Once in a while, she'll add some stuff to our website using iWeb. She really likes iTunes and iChat. She now likes to video conference once in a while with her family. iLife is really awesome, especially for amateurs. She would never have done any of this on a PC.

What I am trying to say here is that since we got our first Mac, she now uses the computer more extensively than just surfing the web or email. It's actually really interesting to see a 'non-computer person' doing these things. Now I can't imagine her doing some of these things on a netbook(assuming you could even get OS X or iLife working on a netbook). So it's a no brainer for us that we'd like to have the capability to do these things on the Air while we're on the go or around the house :)

Kan-O-Z

Most desktops don't come with video cards, they come with integrated chips unless you buy mid-high end or pay for it. Your absolutely right. Most people could use a 3-4 year old desktop. Most wouldn't notice a difference between a 3 year old machine and a bundle you would go out to Best Buy and take home today. The kicker is that computer prices have steadily decreased while power has grown exponentially. There's no reason for most people to spend more than $5-600 on a machine, unless they want to. You can go out and buy a brand new Dell for little to no more than you would spend on buying a used system though.

You'd be hard pressed to find a new machine with less than a 250g hard drive and a 19, or at least 17" monitor.

You and your wife are probably more the exception than the rule. You can buy a "better" computer, but if your needs can be met buy something cheaper then it's not really better now is it?:cool:

Again, it all comes down to preference and needs, but like I said if your even bothering to compare a netbook and the Air it would have to be assumed that either would meet your needs and in that case a netbook would clearly be a better value.

The difference is that desktops are usually dirt cheap. Plus you can actually game on desktops. But you make some good points. By the way, I looked at the original Asus Eee (700 series) today and it is pretty cheaply built. The keyboard was crap, but maybe I'm spoiled because I'm used to my Thinkpad keyboard . You definitely are right about the low end netbooks, they have crap for keyboards and the screens are unusably small. But I still think the higher end netbooks are a lot better (much better keyboards and much bigger screens) and somewhat more comparable to the Air. In the end it will depend on your usage.
The 700 was the very first model. If Apple's rev A products are any indication, there's bound to be more than a few problems.:p

j26
Dec 19, 2008, 02:40 AM
....

I'll speak from what I see with my wife since she is not a techie and she's in sales. Before our first Mac, she would do just surf the web and nothing more. Since our Mac, she has started to do a lot more. She uses iPhoto all the time (adding pics of the dogs, light editing, uploading to facebook)...I would say almost daily. She will use iMovie to post to youtube from time to time since we have dogs and we take movie clips of them with our digital camera. Once in a while, she'll add some stuff to our website using iWeb. She really likes iTunes and iChat. She now likes to video conference once in a while with her family. iLife is really awesome, especially for amateurs. She would never have done any of this on a PC.

What I am trying to say here is that since we got our first Mac, she now uses the computer more extensively than just surfing the web or email. It's actually really interesting to see a 'non-computer person' doing these things. Now I can't imagine her doing some of these things on a netbook(assuming you could even get OS X or iLife working on a netbook). So it's a no brainer for us that we'd like to have the capability to do these things on the Air while we're on the go or around the house :)

Kan-O-Z

Just on a point of information - a netbook running OSX CAN do all of those quite well (okay, iMovie is a bit slow, but still usable). :)

andyOSX
Dec 19, 2008, 02:43 AM
Yeah, clock speed is everything, right? :rolleyes:
They're not the same, and multiplying 600 MHZ C2D by 3 isn't the same as 1.86 GHZ Low voltage C2D. Regardless I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, no more than 3 times as fast. :)

Um... 3x faster processor, 4x faster graphics, 3x HD size, not to mention faster bus, faster memory etc...

That is a HUGE difference. Good luck playing COD4 on a netbook. Cuz it runs very well on a Rev B MBA.

You're making this too easy! You are arguing our points for us.

andyOSX
Dec 19, 2008, 02:44 AM
Just on a point of information - a netbook running OSX CAN do all of those quite well (okay, iMovie is a bit slow, but still usable). :)

If you deem iMovie to be "usable" on a netbook with integrated graphics and a 1/3 as powerful processor, then it would absolutely SCREAM on a MBA (relatively). Not to mention the HD space limitations on a netbook. Good luck using that 10" screen to edit video!!!

j26
Dec 19, 2008, 03:20 AM
If you deem iMovie to be "usable" on a netbook with integrated graphics and a 1/3 as powerful processor, then it would absolutely SCREAM on a MBA (relatively). Not to mention the HD space limitations on a netbook. Good luck using that 10" screen to edit video!!!

I have a MacBook that's relegated to desktop duty and it does most of my iMovie work, but a netbook serves my on the move needs adequately. My netbook has a 320gig hdd and 2 gigs ram - there's ample space. The screen is fine for light iMovie use (I'm no pro, so that's fine), but can connect up to larger screens anyway.

It cost €379, plus €15 for an extra gig of ram, and €50ish (IIRC) to upgrade the hdd. That's less than €450 for a well competent machine, versus €1,699 for a MBA - I'll keep my €1,250 in my pocket, thank you very much. It's too high a price to pay for COD4 (which I don't play), and slightly faster video editing.

jaytv111
Dec 19, 2008, 09:07 AM
Um... 3x faster processor, 4x faster graphics, 3x HD size, not to mention faster bus, faster memory etc...

Yeah and over 3 times the price. We're not arguing pure specs here, that's worthless, we're arguing if it's worth it given the premium price.

That is a HUGE difference. Good luck playing COD4 on a netbook. Cuz it runs very well on a Rev B MBA.

I love that game. I play it whenever I can, which nowadays is once a week. It runs pretty well on my Xbox 360. And the X360 is a lot cheaper than the Air lol. I think you can buy an X360, Eee 1000H, and LCD TV for the price of an Air.

Doju
Dec 19, 2008, 10:27 AM
Jay, to be honest, you're an idiot.

Of course you can play COD4 on a 360, but that's not the point. The point is that you have a MacBook Air that runs it well, and tons of other things, not to mention being portable. If the only use of the Air was to play 360 games, then of course it wouldn't be worth it, but the list of things it can do stretch incredibly further than an XBox.

And secondly, statements like "impractical for nearly everyone" are childish and incorrect. You can't make the assumption that it's impractical for nearly everyone; you don't know nearly everyone. The fact is, there's quite a few of us that don't need ports, and don't need the speed for what we do, and for us, the air is perfect. Why buy specs and features you don't need when you could have a more portable laptop that does what you need? Sure, you pay a couple hundred dollars more, but considering the use you'll get out of your Air, and you'll likely have it for two years at minimum, the couple hundred dollars is like a drop of water in an ocean.

Are you so foolish to believe that due to the fact it's not convenient for you, that it isn't convenient for others? Grow up.

Kan-O-Z
Dec 19, 2008, 12:37 PM
Here is really what it comes down to. If you can afford an Air and really want it then get it. For me, I am sort of passionate about my computers. I want a really nice screen, I want some power, I want style, I want quality and I want service. I want a smile on my face when I am computing because it just looks so good and runs so smooth and fast, and just feels great. And it has an awesome OS. For me, these things are all luxuries and enhance my computing experience! These are all things that aren't 'specs' but are additional luxuries that you get with an Air. If you can afford an Air and want these luxuries then the Air is for you!
As a car analogy think of a 2 seater Porsche Boxster!

If you couldn't care less about your computer and just want it to get your job done while on the go(and I will still say light jobs here), then the netbook is for you. Some people view their computers as a tool and could care less how good their screen looks, how cheaply it's built or whatever. They just want to be able to check email/surf the web on the go for the cheapest amount of money. This is the mentality of a netbook owner. There is nothing wrong with this, it's just a different mentality and a different use. If you are one of these people, then get a netbook.
As a car analogy, think of a 2 seater Smart Car!

Both the Porsche Boxster and Smart car do the same thing, they carry 2 people easily up to 70mph and small luggage with them. Does that mean the Porsche is just a waste of money. While some may think so, it's not! It's for people who #1 can afford one and #2 are passionate about cars and passtionate about driving #3 want the luxury of an upscale brand.

It's sort of pointless to keep comparing these over and over again. Let the point be known that the Air does offer very impressive specs for it's size and offers luxuries beyond it's specs which IS what makes it worth what it's worth. There is no doubt about this. For instance, the high quality (Macbook Pro like) LED screen on the Air alone is probably worth $300-$400....about the price of a netbook. Once again there is no question that the Air is worth what it's worth!

The question really is: Whether it's worth it to YOU!

Kan-O-Z

j26
Dec 19, 2008, 02:32 PM
^^^ See the post above for quote^^^

The question really is: Whether it's worth it to YOU!

Kan-O-Z

With the exception of the last sentence, that is possibly some of the most ridiculous and arrogant tripe I've seen in my several years on this forum. Enough of the car analogies and ego stroking that goes with it.

It boils down to nothing like what you say. Value means different things to different people. I'd hate to have a MBA as I don't like the footprint, I don't like the bezel (I don't like it on the MacBook either), I don't like the lack of ports, I don't like the non-user replacable battery, AND I don't like the price.
To me a netbook is a sort of spiritual successor to the 12" PowerBook that the MBA should have been. It failed to be because of an obsession with style over substance which created an over-engineered product that costs a ridiculous amount of cash for what you get.

If Apple produced a low power laptop with a netbook style footprint at a reasonable price, I'd be first in line. But they don't - instead there is the MBA which is neither a full laptop nor a netbook, and priced above the price point of either.

But if you want one, fire ahead - just don't believe that the world envies you because you can afford such an expensive computer.

NT1440
Dec 19, 2008, 02:48 PM
But if you want one, fire ahead - just don't believe that the world envies you because you can afford such an expensive computer.

This is what bugs me about how people view apple customers. Apparently we are all arrogant jerks who are smug beyond belief simply because of what we buy.

Sure there are cocky people in any grouping of people, but PLEASE do not insult us all by assuming a small minority represents a group of people.

Vantagecb
Dec 19, 2008, 03:08 PM
I registered just to say...

Stop using the Lotus Elise as a comparison. I own and drive a 2007 Elise and everyone's opinion here on them is very incorrect. No car can take a corner like it can, not to mention 9/10 people think it's a ferrari when I payed 38 thousand for it.

And everyone is forgetting one thing. The name. Why buy a $275 Gucci wallet when the Fossil counterpart does just the same for $35? Why buy a $7,500 Rolex when a $10 watch from Walmart has more features? You pay a HUGE premium on the name of the product.

And everyone knows the Macbook Air is a niche product. It either works for you or it doesn't. And if you don't want to spend 2,000 on a laptop, get a cheaper one. The Macbook Air was engineered to be a secondary computer, so it is obviously aimed at people with money. I for one love my new Macbook Air that I bought as an early Christmas present. If you can't afford one, stop complaining about the price and buy something else.

j26
Dec 19, 2008, 03:42 PM
This is what bugs me about how people view apple customers. Apparently we are all arrogant jerks who are smug beyond belief simply because of what we buy.

Sure there are cocky people in any grouping of people, but PLEASE do not insult us all by assuming a small minority represents a group of people.

Not aimed at the Apple community in general, but I do have to say, sadly, I don't find macrumors as satisfying to post on as I used to a couple of years ago. It is in large part due to the attitude inherent in the post I responded to, which has become more prevalent in the last while. Many of the long term posters here are sound and pragmatic and know what they want - and yes this includes criticising Apple. What I cant stand is these people who believe Apple can do no wrong because they make shiny stuff, and then weigh in with the horrendously overused car analogy which is meaningless - I am a keen motorcycle enthusiast, but that doesn't compel me to want a MV Augusta F4 1000S, beautiful as it is, because it simply doesn't do what I want.

Having said that, I am aware that they are a minority, but as I said, sadly gaining more traction here.


Or maybe its just my sore neck making me cranky. :):)

jaytv111
Dec 19, 2008, 04:17 PM
Jay, to be honest, you're an idiot.

Why, thank you! it's nice to see civility on these forums. And I appreciate your honesty!

Of course you can play COD4 on a 360, but that's not the point. The point is that you have a MacBook Air that runs it well, and tons of other things, not to mention being portable. If the only use of the Air was to play 360 games, then of course it wouldn't be worth it, but the list of things it can do stretch incredibly further than an XBox.

Well maybe if games were important then you should consider a desktop or a console. Hey, if it runs COD4 great, then that's alright. I honestly don't care too much about gaming ability when I consider a laptop.

And secondly, statements like "impractical for nearly everyone" are childish and incorrect. You can't make the assumption that it's impractical for nearly everyone; you don't know nearly everyone. The fact is, there's quite a few of us that don't need ports, and don't need the speed for what we do, and for us, the air is perfect. Why buy specs and features you don't need when you could have a more portable laptop that does what you need? Sure, you pay a couple hundred dollars more, but considering the use you'll get out of your Air, and you'll likely have it for two years at minimum, the couple hundred dollars is like a drop of water in an ocean.

Alright, I should change that. It's impractical for me and that's that. If it's good for you, then buy it. Whatever. The point was a netbook would work well if you don't care about specs or ports or anything like that. Regardless, use your own judgment in this matter.

Are you so foolish to believe that due to the fact it's not convenient for you, that it isn't convenient for others? Grow up.

That's not only foolishness but arrogance and a touch of hubris :). I was just using my judgment as to what I believe most people are using their computers for. Not based upon my needs but observations in the real world. In fact, take a look at Amazon.com's bestselling laptops. 8 of the top 10 are netbooks, the other two are the MB and MBP. These things are selling like hotcakes, so like it or not, netbooks are the next big thing. link (http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/pc/565108/ref=pd_ts_zbw_pc_565108_more?&pf_rd_p=364098901&pf_rd_s=right-4&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_i=565108&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=16QJREFG0BEJ7K70NNPT) By the way, I've seen one Air owner in the real world. Take that with a grain of salt, but it doesn't look too popular to me.

I'll add this disclaimer: everything said in this post is by an idiot (according to Doju), so ignore everything in this post if you please. :D

Doju
Dec 19, 2008, 04:26 PM
Your honesty is both appreciated and rather amusing. :)

The Toddfather
Dec 19, 2008, 04:41 PM
I registered just to say...

Stop using the Lotus Elise as a comparison. I own and drive a 2007 Elise and everyone's opinion here on them is very incorrect. No car can take a corner like it can, not to mention 9/10 people think it's a ferrari when I payed 38 thousand for it.

And everyone is forgetting one thing. The name. Why buy a $275 Gucci wallet when the Fossil counterpart does just the same for $35? Why buy a $7,500 Rolex when a $10 watch from Walmart has more features? You pay a HUGE premium on the name of the product.

And everyone knows the Macbook Air is a niche product. It either works for you or it doesn't. And if you don't want to spend 2,000 on a laptop, get a cheaper one. The Macbook Air was engineered to be a secondary computer, so it is obviously aimed at people with money. I for one love my new Macbook Air that I bought as an early Christmas present. If you can't afford one, stop complaining about the price and buy something else.

Good post, but sadly it will fall on deaf ears.

Kan-O-Z
Dec 19, 2008, 05:23 PM
With the exception of the last sentence, that is possibly some of the most ridiculous and arrogant tripe I've seen in my several years on this forum. Enough of the car analogies and ego stroking that goes with it.


Sure there are cocky people in any grouping of people, but PLEASE do not insult us all by assuming a small minority represents a group of people.

Having said that, I am aware that they are a minority, but as I said, sadly gaining more traction here.

Am I the cocky ego stroking minority that you guys are referring to. Perhaps you guys don't know how to hold an intelligent conversation without resorting to namecalling.

In case you didn't realize, the title of this post is "Is the Macbook Air worth paying 4 times the price of this?" Am I not allowed to state that I believe it IS worth 4 times the price? And by giving my reasons as to why, I am being arrogant.

Seriously learn to have an intelligent conversation and don't be so judgemental. I have never put up an arrogant post here. I am not an arrogant person. Just because I like a luxury car or a luxury computer and I want to pay extra for it doesn't make me arrogant.

I gave you guys tons of reasons it's worth more....from specs, to everything else. I have even proven the specs and how they are at least 3X as fast. I have proven that even Toshiba, Dell, and Lenovo make their versions of the Air and are just as expensive. What all of this boils down to is that the Air is worth it's price. Just because it doesn't suit what you need or value doens't mean it's a piece of overpriced junk and that I'm arrogant!

Kan-O-Z

j26
Dec 19, 2008, 06:10 PM
...If you can afford an Air ... If you can afford an Air ...As a car analogy think of a 2 seater Porsche Boxster!

If you couldn't care less about your computer ... This is the mentality of a netbook owner ... If you are one of these people, then get a netbook.
As a car analogy, think of a 2 seater Smart Car!

... the Porsche ... It's for people who #1 can afford one and #2 are passionate about cars and passtionate about driving ...


I know I'm picking parts, but that can hardly be considered anything but derogatory towards netbook users, and pretty judgmental, despite your protestations. The constant repetition of the affordability issue certainly seems arrogant to me.

And believe me, the car analogy is so tired here that it immediately makes people switch off. However, at the risk of boring people here's a little bike tale.

A few years ago, I rode a Suzuki Bandit which I had to restrict the power down to 33bhp due to the intervention of the local constabulary :cool:. A friend of mine (a summer biker) rode an R1 (150+bhp). After a day out we raced home. On paper the R1 should have left me for dead in speed, it handles better, it is a prettier bike and it costs considerably more, but guess what? Yes, I won by some considerable distance.* Power, looks and price do not beat the ability to use what you have. Any enthusiast (as you profess to be) should know that. Similarly, a netbook in talented hands will achieve more than a MBA in a hacks hands (no comment about you or me here btw)

The MBA is without doubt a faster computer, but the performance gains are not worth the additional price. It's not junk by any means, but it is overpriced based on the specs. If style or "user experience" (which obviously depends on the individual user) is more important then maybe it's worth it. But remember that in a recession, where value comes to the fore, to most people it will look like an expensive toy.


*Having said that I never road raced again - it's way too dangerous

Kan-O-Z
Dec 19, 2008, 07:28 PM
I know I'm picking parts, but that can hardly be considered anything but derogatory towards netbook users, and pretty judgmental, despite your protestations. The constant repetition of the affordability issue certainly seems arrogant to me.

You're making it derogatory. If you read my whole sentence it says this: If you can afford it + are passionate about it and value the user experience, then you should get a Macbook Air!

That's a big plus in the middle of that sentence and it makes all the difference in the world. You seem to not have read this second part. Nowhere did I state that the Air is only for those that can afford it. As a matter of fact, many people here have made it clear that they can afford it but choose not to buy because either they don't need/value what it offers or it just doesn't fit their needs.

If style or "user experience" (which obviously depends on the individual user) is more important then maybe it's worth it.

Yes, exactly. This is what I'm trying to say. Yes the Air is for people who not only value the specs but also the "user experience" which consists of everything from a high quality screen, keyboard, trackpad to style, build quality, service, etc. Some don't care about any of this "user experience stuff" so I understand, the Air is not worth it. By the way this "user experience" stuff costs money and makes it more expensive along with it's faster components and specs.

So l'll still stand by what I said earlier:
The Air is worth what it's worth.
The question really is: Whether it's worth it to YOU! (Do you value it and does it fit your needs)

Kan-O-Z

Kan-O-Z
Dec 19, 2008, 07:35 PM
A few years ago, I rode a Suzuki Bandit which I had to restrict the power down to 33bhp due to the intervention of the local constabulary :cool:. A friend of mine (a summer biker) rode an R1 (150+bhp). After a day out we raced home. On paper the R1 should have left me for dead in speed, it handles better, it is a prettier bike and it costs considerably more, but guess what? Yes, I won by some considerable distance.* Power, looks and price do not beat the ability to use what you have. Any enthusiast (as you profess to be) should know that. Similarly, a netbook in talented hands will achieve more than a MBA in a hacks hands (no comment about you or me here btw)

Yes trust me, I used to own a Toyota Supra Twin Turbo, a Suzuki Katana 600 and a Mazda Miata. I think I liked the Mazda Miata the best and it was the slowest :) My brother owned a Porsche Boxster and I can also tell you that while that car does seem over-priced, drive one sometime. It's one awesome car despite it's not so incredible specs for it's price. You can feel the engineering that went into it, and how connected you feel, how nimble it is and how well it handles along with it's aural pleasure behind your ears of a mid engine...it's a feeling that specs don't describe. There are cars half the price that will go about as fast but there is something special there that stirs your senses that no other cheaper car will do. That was worth it to my brother :)

Kan-O-Z

NT1440
Dec 19, 2008, 07:42 PM
Kan-O-Z, just so you know I wasnt talking about you. I thought you've been quite in the right saying that the air is a great product, IF YOUR PART OF THE MARKET ITS AFTER (thats in regards to the people calling it a POS toy or something).