Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

@15" 2.2 or 2.3 owners! Air > Pro?

T

theturtle

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Aug 3, 2009
579
35
To the owners who have the 2.2 or 2.3 model with the high res option. would you give up your 2011 model for the 2011 macbook air?

I know a LARGE majority of new air lovers are people who gave up the 13". Lets be real, the 13" isn't that much of a powerhouse but to the 15" owners. would you give up your GPU/high res screen/quad core/larger screen/HD FaceTime to go SUPER portability and semi powerful (for a machine that size) processor?
 
It depends on what you use the Mac for.
I couldn't live without the 1920 x 1200 pixel on my MBP, I may be able to compromise to 1680 x 1050 pixel, but as I already have an iMac with that resolution, I know it is too small for me any my uses.
 
simsaladimbamba said:
It depends on what you use the Mac for.
I couldn't live without the 1920 x 1200 pixel on my MBP, I may be able to compromise to 1680 x 1050 pixel, but as I already have an iMac with that resolution, I know it is too small for me any my uses.
Click to expand...

i mean 132ppi vs 128ppi isn't much of a difference right?

and i know the airs ppi is equivalent to the 15" at 128.

the only deciding factor i might see is the actual screen size.
 
15inch if u want power

13inc h if ur not doing alot of app intesive aorund and want the ulltimate portable computer


so pick what u need
 
Most of the people who buy the 15" want the power so most of them wouldn't where as most of the 13" MBP owners bought it for portability so it makes sense they would trade it in for a MBA. I personally would never use anything smaller than a 15" screen.
 
theturtle said:
i mean 132ppi vs 128ppi isn't much of a difference right?

and i know the airs ppi is equivalent to the 15" at 128.

the only deciding factor i might see is the actual screen size.
Click to expand...

It is not the PPI I am interested in, it is the actual resolution (and I come from 1024 x 768 on a 12" iBook (the best laptop I ever had)).

I work with multi-window/pane applications, that wouldn't really fit on 1280 x 768 or 1440 x 900 or even 1680 x 1050 without compromising real estate.
But I am one of few people, I am not the main target of Apple anymore, thus the MBAs are such hot sellers.
 
If I didn't do photo editing, I would have gotten the 13" MacBook Air. My wife has one and it's so much more comfortable to use on the couch or in bed.
 
Vudoo said:
If I didn't do photo editing, I would have gotten the 13" MacBook Air. My wife has one and it's so much more comfortable to use on the couch or in bed.
Click to expand...

Could you just get an external monitor for the editing? Or are there other limiting factors?
 
Titanium81 said:
Could you just get an external monitor for the editing? Or are there other limiting factors?
Click to expand...

It's not the monitor, it's the processor. Of course I can edit on an Air, but when you're dealing with hundreds of RAW files that are quite large, you want all the horsepower possible.
 
Vudoo said:
It's not the monitor, it's the processor. Of course I can edit on an Air, but when you're dealing with hundreds of RAW files that are quite large, you want all the horsepower possible.
Click to expand...

I understand that the Air doesn't have a huge amount of processing power, but once a photo is loaded up and you are connected to an external display is there any difference while editing that photo say in pixelmator?

(Talking about the new 1.8GHz Airs)
 
I wouldn't replace my 15 MBP with an air, but would get an Air to compliment the Pro.

I need a good GPU for alot of the things i do, the intergrated intel will not cut it.
 
theturtle said:
To the owners who have the 2.2 or 2.3 model with the high res option. would you give up your 2011 model for the 2011 macbook air?

I know a LARGE majority of new air lovers are people who gave up the 13". Lets be real, the 13" isn't that much of a powerhouse but to the 15" owners. would you give up your GPU/high res screen/quad core/larger screen/HD FaceTime to go SUPER portability and semi powerful (for a machine that size) processor?
Click to expand...

I was tempted by the Air, but will go for the 15" MBP high res anti-glare.

Big performance difference, not to speak of the great MBP screen.

Weight-wise, I lifted the MBP in the store. Well, a strong wind won't blow it out of my hand, but it's still lightweight and easy to carry around.

That's me.

See for yourself. Go to an Apple store and compare.

Also, I would take these Geekbench test results with a grain of salt. Benchmark vs. real world computing: there's a difference.
 
thanks for the answers guys!

it seems that not alot of current gen 15" owners migrated. Most of the 15" owners that left were the ones running the old core 2 duo.

i asked this question cause i wanted to evaluate which had a better "value" later in life. My almost fully loaded 2.2 or a fully loaded air.
 
Titanium81 said:
I understand that the Air doesn't have a huge amount of processing power, but once a photo is loaded up and you are connected to an external display is there any difference while editing that photo say in pixelmator?

(Talking about the new 1.8GHz Airs)
Click to expand...

The difference is the amount of time it takes to do things. A few seconds here and there isn't much when editing just one photo. But when you have to do several in a row, it gets annoying.
 
Not until they really revamp the power and more accessories are available for Thunderbolt (wishful thinking but would like a TB to USB dongle). I need to connect too many accessories concurrently and constantly push the CPU with all of the VM's I run. I could use more ports on the 2.3 I7 15" I currently have, but I realize I am the exception more than the norm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back