Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
11.6-Inch 'MacBook' Headed to Manufacturing?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
1280x800 - 11.6" - 130 DPI
1440x900 - 13.3" - 127 DPI
1680x1050 - 15.4" - 128 DPI
1920x1200 - 17" - 133 DPI
Unless of course Apple starts changing their displays to 16:9 in which case they would have the following viable resolutions available to them:
1280x720
1366x768
1600x900
1920x1080
2048x1152
I'm still waiting for resolution independence.
Edit: Also for those claiming that this is going to be Apple's netbook, when Apple mentioned netbooks at the iPad event their bullet points for what makes a netbook a netbook were that they were slow(atom processors, etc.), have low quality displays(non LED or IPS, low resolution, etc.) and run old PC software(XP). 8 minutes into the keynote
1440x900 - 13.3" - 127 DPI
1680x1050 - 15.4" - 128 DPI
1920x1200 - 17" - 133 DPI
Unless of course Apple starts changing their displays to 16:9 in which case they would have the following viable resolutions available to them:
1280x720
1366x768
1600x900
1920x1080
2048x1152
I'm still waiting for resolution independence.
Edit: Also for those claiming that this is going to be Apple's netbook, when Apple mentioned netbooks at the iPad event their bullet points for what makes a netbook a netbook were that they were slow(atom processors, etc.), have low quality displays(non LED or IPS, low resolution, etc.) and run old PC software(XP). 8 minutes into the keynote
Well, the Macbook/Macbook Pro line-up have this part covered well. Low resolution, white LED backlighting (which isn't much better than CCFL aside from power consumption) and TN panels with terrible viewing angles.
Seriously, anyone that wants to try to claim the Macbook screens are "high quality" needs a serious reality check.
They're "good enough", just like my 23" TN monitor at home is good enough.
Find me a notebook computer with a non TN panel. I want to be amazed.
In regards to white led backlighting, read this, then get back to me.
As for low resolution, I agree that Apple should've stepped this up last refresh by making at least the 13" MBP have a 1440x900 display while making the 1680x1050 standard on the 15". But even with that said DPI of 110 on the 1440x900 15" and 1280x800 13" is far from low.
HP 8740W EliteBook. S-IPS, 10 bit, RGB Led.
Of course, fringe and niche. But in general, I guess that is not a requirement for a Netbook, since all laptops have low quality displays, one can't differentiate between a netbook and a full laptop by the quality of the screen then.
Your claim not mine and you just debunked it yourself.
(As for "not low", heck even Dell offers an 11.6 laptop for less than 600$ with a 1366x786 screen..., it's high time Apple moved out of the Fischer Price pixel range).
Netbooks vs laptop is a function of size only. How the industry defines the size is what makes a netbook or a laptop. If the industry wants 11.6" to be a netbook, then it is. They will say "Netbook" in the marketing material and there's nothing you or anyone can do about it. Of course, that would be on the higher end of netbook sizes, since most hover around 9.7".
Wow. Seriously, did you even read that article yourself ? I don't think there's anything to get back here, aside from the fact that you've just performed self-ownage. Hint : Snakeoil salesman says Snakeoil better than Motul!
TVs are not monitors.
First Google search results in a review that says the following:
"Certain colors appear fuzzy and have a sort of movement in them indicating bad LCD panel timings - no wonder because the monitor is set up as a generic monitor under windows with no driver from HP. I have to get powerstrip if I don't want my screen to appear fidgety.
3 of 4 people agree"
Please tell me this is a joke of an example. It also starts at $2778 and has a resolution of 1680x1050 on a 17" screen with a DPI of 116, which is barely higher than the 13" and low-res 15" MBP. It comes with 2GB of RAM and a 250GB HDD.
ITT: Morons who think display quality relies solely on a few technical aspects.
So you essentially just called your $3000 laptop example a fisher price pixel pusher. Which your $600 Dell example out does in DPI. Funny how that works.
Netbooks are not only classified by size but also their components. 11.6" isn't too far off from Apple's 12" PowerBook size.
Wow. Seriously, did you read the article? Hint: Technical aspects of a certain technology are not limited to what the display happens to be classified as.
The S-IPS Dreamcolor panel is 1920x1200 resolution. It's an option. And stop moving the goal posts, you asked for a non TN laptop, I provided one.
Do you want to argue for arguments sake or do you want a proper argument where you don't argue in bad faith and change goal posts as the conversation proves your points wrong one after another ?
You assumed no such thing existed as a non TN panel laptop. You were shown one. Instead of buckling and trying to not be wrong, do what you said you would do : Be amazed.
Yes, I did, except I wasn't talking about the default panel in the laptop, and was only responding to your request for a non TN laptop. Again, goal posts, far out in left field... Stop moving them.
The PB 12" came out before the term netbook even existed. It was EOL'ed before the term came into existance too. What makes you think it wouldn't be a Netbook by today's standards ?
I will be amazed, at the price of the product you chose. What I should've said was find me a non TN panel laptop in the price range of a MacBook Pro. Not $1000 more expensive than the highest end MacBook Pro. So you are criticizing Apple for not using this display? You aren't going to spend the money on this HP notebook anyway, so who the hell are you one to complain about panel quality?
Even with the higher resolution screen, the $600 Dell still has a higher DPI than your now $3500 example. Should've done some more research before you decided to make a comment about fisher price pixels. The fact of the matter is, even if you weren't talking about the lower res monitor on this HP notebook that it's still there. It's high time that HP moves out of the fisher price pixel range right? Right?
The same thing I said before. It was using standard notebook power using parts, is larger than the average netbook and was using a full modern operating system.
Moving goal posts alert! Moving goal posts alert!
Comeback to argue when you can do so in good faith, you're getting further away from the real debate by trying to move goal posts on a single point you've lost.
The original debate : What constitutes a netbook. My original argument : Low quality screen is not a netbook only feature.
HAHAHAHA, too funny. You ignore the part where I smack down your fisher price ********, then take a dump over your examples and retorts. Your original response was more than just TN panel related, buddy.
I respond to your claim of poor viewing angles, you respond with a product that is no where even a viable product option for Apple to use making it irrelevant.
I respond to your claim of white LED's being poor by showing you an article that points out some advantages to using white LED's over RGB LED's and you respond with "TV IS NOT MONITOR HERP DERP"
I respond to your claim on low resolution monitors only to have you respond with an example that has similar DPI to said models. Making your example even worse, you talking about a $600 Dell which I continued to use against you but you have continued to shrug off because you can't accept the fact that you got totally demolished in that area.
No, I did answer your "smack down" by pointing out you were discussing a screen I never mentionned. The default panel on the laptop is not the 1920x1200 S-IPS screen. You asked for a non TN panel laptop, I provided one. Be amazed like you said you would be. There were no other criteria.
You responded with an article arguing that for TV viewing, wider color gamut provided by a RGB led hinders quality, by a marketing rep from a company that just chose white LEDs in their products and that was promoting their choice in a TV. And you don't see the bias and poor information as it related to screen quality in that ? Seriously ?
I think my answer was fair and showed how much not related to screen quality your article was.
Nope, my example was the 1920x1200 S-IPS screen with 130 or so DPI. You are trying to mangle my example by... drumroll please : Moving goal posts!
Seriously, my finger is hovering over the ignore button. Argue in good faith or don't respond to my posts.
I can answer this one. The 12" PB had the same CPU as was in the 15" and 17" PB's, and the video card was almost as good as well. Battery life was comparable, as were all other features, including RAM and keyboards. If it existed today, it would have an i5 or i7 CPU, with 320 or 330 GPU.
No Core iX laptop with that caliber GPU is a netbook.
Yet you love to ignore the fact that you were criticizing what displays Apple was using only for you to respond with a laptop that has a similar default DPI to that of Apple's. You criticize the fact that they are using TN panels when your only example is some $3500 HP laptop therefore your criticism of the fact that they are using TN panels is still void regardless of whether or not you happened to meet my over exaggerated "criteria".
"White LED light sources are more efficient in boosting image quality because the white balance fluctuates more easily when the light source is RGB LEDs. Second, image quality becomes more likely to degrade if the color gamut is extended more than necessary because it causes the display to render incorrect colors."
Ahh, well it's time to bring up the part that you decided to ignore two posts ago. "The fact of the matter is, even if you weren't talking about the lower res monitor on this HP notebook that it's still there. It's high time that HP moves out of the fisher price pixel range right? Right?"
Your low resolution option on your example is higher priced than any 15" high res with 130 DPI and and 17" MBP with 130 DPI. Your fisher price comment was debunked. You made an example of a $600 Dell against Apple's whole lineup, so I'll make an example of every option available for that HP.
And seriously, your last statement reminds me of a kid screaming "LALALALALA I DONT HEAR ANYTHING SO I WIN"
I would criticize the display on that HP laptop too as Fischer Price pixels too, if I had even been talking about it. The fact is I wasn't. The other fact is that now you are joining The List (ignore that is). Stop moving goal posts and maybe people will debate with you.
Ah, you finally realize that your expensive example is prone to the same complaints you had before about Apple's lower end line-up. Whether you mentioned that specific model or not was irrelevant as I already stated. I just find it hilarious that you ignored me, no loss to me. Have fun arguing with other people on MacRumors because it's clear that's all you plan on doing with your life.
No dilemma, get both.
That's exactly what I'll be doing, given that the new laptop will support enough RAM in order to run Win 7 VM through the Fusion.
And, the 12" Powerbook is 4.3 pounds. Not exactly in the same weight/size category as a netbook. I went from the 17" PB to the 12", and did not notice any difference in performance.
It appears the debate has gotten out of hand, too much pride in both corners. IMHO, have a cold beer, and kick back until we see what the new 11.6 has to offer. You both did well.
Nice revisionist history but no.
10/05 http://support.apple.com/kb/SP38 (PB 12" 1.5 and PB 17" 1.67 )
01/05 http://support.apple.com/kb/SP48 (PB 12" 1.5 and PB 17" 1.67 )
4/04 http://support.apple.com/kb/SP82 (PB 12" 1.33 and PB 17" 1.5 )
9/03 http://support.apple.com/kb/SP90 (PB 12" 1 )
http://support.apple.com/kb/SP92 (PB 17" 1.3 )
If going to claim they are all G4 CPUs so the "same" .... well the iBook had G4 CPUs too. The PB 12" had several overlapping characteristics with the iBook just as much as it had with the other PB if strip away the casing material differences.
The notion that were getting all of the 17 inch version's power in a 12 inch package is way off. The PB 12 was typically also deviant in how much memory you could put into the device also ( much closer to iBook capabilities than the 15" and 17" models ) . The PB 12" was much closer to be a hairs breath away from top end iBook computational/graphical horsepower than a 17" Powerbook (if taking screen size off the table in both cases ).
Never got the backlit keyboard. (http://support.apple.com/kb/SP38) . It managed full size by running the keyboard all the way to the edge of the lower box.
The standard RAM (because Apple always shipped "light" on memory) was same as lowest 15" , but wasn't close in RAM capacity.
Also never got 1Gb Ethernet. Or FW800 . ( although I guess the latter was part of Apple's overall bonehead long term dead ender plan for FW ) Again, this is much more like an iBook than a PB .
Unlikely, or else it would run even hotter than the other offerings just like the 12" did. There'd be no room for the discrete GPU plus an additional fan in the PB 12" anymore than there is room for it in the MBP 13". Perhaps if left just as thick (thicker than today's 17" ). Note in the last rev ( the SP38 link above) that the PB 12" was the thickest of all of the offerings 12" , 15" , and 17" . If brought into the alignment by the thickness police, no way it is getting a discrete GPU.
Apple picked those bullet points more so to lob some pitches over the plate for the iPad to knock out of the park.
There is no official definition but the one over at wikipedia is a bit less biased to a specific product introduction.
"Netbooks are a category of small, lightweight, and inexpensive laptop computers suited for general computing and accessing Web-based applications typically with long battery life."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netbook
Which gets at the non bullet point that Jobs mentioned but blew off writing it down. Netbooks are inexpensive laptops. You will have a mainstream laptop and the smaller form factor ones that are lower than that average price point are hovering around being classified as netbooks.
One way of shaving price is to use smaller components in some categories. Screens tend to get more expensive the larger they are. So you go smaller.
That also helps boost battery life because the consume more as get bigger too.
Relatively, if Apple brought out a new 11.6" version that was lower than the average selling price to their mainstream laptop it would be an Apple relative netbook. It would be a laptop. check. Relatively inexpensive. Check. Lighterwieght. One would hope since it is smaller; Check. Longer battery life. This is doable if avoid putting power hungry processors in there; check.
For the netbooks in the overall PC netbook market, Apple is competing with iPads. No, they are not exact equivalents, but they are competitors for many users (want second/third computer with limited capabilites) . I doubt Apple is going to put a laptop down into the upper price range of the iPad. Apple still needs what market is driving to. They are free to shift the price point to the right though so no huge gap between it and where the "bottom" of their laptop price line up is.
If Apple merged the MBA and Macbook it would not be too surprising. The Macbook is pigeonholed into too narrow a corner. The MBA is in a only slightly less narrow corner. They'll go back to being coupled similar to how the PB 12" was somewhat coupled with the iBook.
You think the new Air will come with an onboard SDD like the SF-1200?
Besides the lower manufacturing cost (less parts, simpler construction), Apple might be able to drop cost over a 'conventional' SDD by something like 30-40%. Something slightly bigger than an iPad with the Power (and price) of an iMac+SDD
Besides the lower manufacturing cost (less parts, simpler construction), Apple might be able to drop cost over a 'conventional' SDD by something like 30-40%. Something slightly bigger than an iPad with the Power (and price) of an iMac+SDD
You think the new Air will come with an onboard SDD like the SF-1200?
Besides the lower manufacturing cost (less parts, simpler construction), Apple might be able to drop cost over a 'conventional' SDD by something like 30-40%. Something slightly bigger than an iPad with the Power (and price) of an iMac+SDD
But then we won't be able to upgrade our SSDs that easily anymore!
The MBA isn't the kind of bottom of the line laptops. If they merge it with the MB, then the pricing would be I presume, somewhere in between the price of a MB and a MBA. Then it would not have the competitive edge of being cheap, when the role of MB is to be cheap.