Possibility of 15 in Air? Maybe reason for no update?

Discussion in 'MacBook Air' started by Jacey, Apr 15, 2010.

  1. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
    #1
    Hi, I'm new to these forums and have been waiting for a Macbook Air since October- I wasn't ready to buy one yet and ended up waiting too long. But has anyone seen this?

    http://translate.google.com/transla...apple.pro/?uid-1-action-viewspace-itemid-1861

    I don't want to troll, that would be deliberate right? Haha but here's a good quote from the Taiwanese site:

    "It is understood that Apple is producing more than the current MBA size MacBook Air (15 inch?) Will use the Core architecture of Intel 's newest processor Intel The new processor, which Intel ultra low voltage processors from the current "Core 2" and revisions to make a stunning, ultra-thin manual..."

    Wasn't it a Taiwanese website last time that predicted new Macbook Pros in April? I looked around and this wasn't posted elsewhere, I'm just an MBA fan that wants a little more than 2 gigs of RAM.

    Yay Apple :apple:
     
  2. gri
    macrumors 6502a

    gri

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2004
    Location:
    New York City, aka Big Apple
    #2
  3. macrumors 601

    Scottsdale

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2008
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    #3
    I just don't buy the CPU to ultra low voltage... it doesn't make sense with the 13" MBP update. Apple has been successful with the MBA since using the same chipset/GPU as the 13" MBP, MB, Mac mini, and smaller iMac. Why change something that's working and go to ultra low voltage and probably lose a bunch of graphics performance by going with Intel's GMA IGP as the sole graphics solution. The Intel GMA IGP wasn't good enough for the 13" MBP, so why would Apple think it's good enough for any of its portable Macs? Why would it need ultra low voltage if it's 15?"

    I don't believe it with these specs. Why not offer bigger MBAs with more power? So Apple is going with 1 GHz and 1.2 GHz CPUs? How does it market those? How does it sell that as better? How does it accept Intel's GMA IGP as even partly acceptable? With more space for cooling, why such an inferior CPU?
     

Share This Page