15-Inch MacBook Air Rumored to Launch in April as Display Production Begins

[compwiz1202]

What would a 1tb 15 air be priced at?
I want is a 1tb air so i can fit all my junk right on laptop and have everything on it double backed up on 2 externals

$1899? And that's probably if the SSD is the only thing to change by going to 1TB

 

[Lounge vibes 05]

I personally don’t see the point of 15 Air. I will get a 16 inch MacBook Pro if I need a bigger laptop. I love the 13 inch MacBook Air, light and easy to move around.

Do you really not see the point?
The 13 inch Air starts at $999… M2 at 1199… and the 16 pro at $2499.
A $1499 15 inch MacBook Air would be over $1000 in savings for someone who just wants a big screen and nothing else.

 

[Falhófnir]

Do you really not see the point?
The 13 inch Air starts at $999… M2 at 1199… and the 16 pro at $2499.
A $1499 15 inch MacBook Air would be over $1000 in savings for someone who just wants a big screen and nothing else.

And likely considerably more compact into the bargain in exchange for the extra power of the Pro. The one really good thing about the Touch Bar 15" Pros over their Retina predecessors was how much smaller they were. On paper it didn't seem much, but it really made a difference in the hand!

 

[G5isAlive]

I personally don’t see the point of 15 Air. I will get a 16 inch MacBook Pro if I need a bigger laptop. I love the 13 inch MacBook Air, light and easy to move around.

And that's cool for you. But I own a MBA 2, and 16" MBP Max, and I would get rid of both of them for a 15" MBA 2. Why? The MBA2 handles 95% of the work I do with no problem, but I find the screen to be small. Conversely, I dont enjoy traveling with the 16" MBP because of its weight. So for that 5% need for heavy lifting while in the office, I would just rather have a Mac Studio and Studio Display, and a 15" MBA 2 while on the road.

Choice is a good thing.

 

[TechnoMonk]

Do you really not see the point?
The 13 inch Air starts at $999… M2 at 1199… and the 16 pro at $2499.
A $1499 15 inch MacBook Air would be over $1000 in savings for someone who just wants a big screen and nothing else.

I doubt It would be anything close to 1499, unless Apple sticks to the lousy MacBook air13 screen. Good luck using a 500 nit display on 15 inch screen. What’s the weight going to be? Thermals? I will wait for Apple.

 

[Falhófnir]

I doubt It would be anything close to 1499, unless Apple sticks to the lousy MacBook air13 screen. Good luck using a 500 nit display on 15 inch screen. What’s the weight going to be? Thermals? I will wait for Apple.

Can only speak for myself but I've gotten on fine with a retina 15" to date, and it only gets to 300 nits and only sRGB colour to boot.

 

[Lounge vibes 05]

To be fair, other manufacturers are offering high refresh rate screens in products far cheaper than the MacBook Air. Apple would just like you to believe it's a pro feature because they slapped a fancy name on it.

Yes, and it’s working.
120hz clearly isn’t something that most consumers care about, seeing as the 13 inch MacBook Air and Pro are both the best selling Mac models, and the iPad 9 and mini are the best selling iPad models.
None of Apple’s best selling iPad or Macs have 120 Hz and it’s not hurting them.
Also, pro motion isn’t just about 120 hz, it’s about LTPO technology that allows for an adaptive refresh rate, and that is *not* cheep.

 

[JDHiro]

15" MacBook Pro would make the perfect personal laptop for me! (Along with my 16" MBP for work).

 

[TechnoMonk]

Can only speak for myself but I've gotten on fine with a retina 15" to date, and it only gets to 300 nits and only sRGB colour to boot.

That’s fair, I think some one used to 16 inch display can see a difference. Cue all the threads about disappointment and drama here if Appl sticks to 500 not display.

 

[G5isAlive]

To be fair, other manufacturers are offering high refresh rate screens in products far cheaper than the MacBook Air. Apple would just like you to believe it's a pro feature because they slapped a fancy name on it.

Who? With a 2560-by-1664 500 nits screen, or is it something with less pixels and or less nits?

but regardless, the point is Apple uses refresh rates to differentiate between tiers, something other manufacturers does as well. They offer cheap screens on cheap models and if you want better, you pay for it. Just like Apple.

 

[TheWatchfulOne]

It's honestly just the Midnight color for me. It's stunningly gorgeous. Something MacBook Pro lacks.

Yes. Love the Midnight finish. But I would also need it to drive more than one external display. I would also need TwelveSouth to introdice a BookArc in Midnight.

 

[sam_dean]

I had the i9 for a while. It mostly sat at my desk because of the airflow demand. Also the battery sucks so it needed to be plugged in a lot. Putting it on my lap was just a no go, it was like wearing a heating pad! So it sort of defeated the purpose of a laptop for me. Otherwise, I really liked it, especially the big retina screen.

The 2021 16” M1 is awesome but heavy. A little too big for me to be a comfortable laptop, again kinda defeats the purpose. But this new Air is going to be exactly right, I think.

I got sales talked by Dave2D & MKHD that Apple finally solved the HSF in the 2019 MBP 16" Core i7! Then I saw a deal within 24 hrs of their review that reduced pricing by $300

So much temptations!!!! That's why unscrubscriebd from them or else I'd lost another $12k over a period of a decade because of YouTubers like em!

Also was unaware that Apple was jumping from 14nm > 10nm > 7nm > straight to 5nm at one go!

Skipping 6 years of die shrinks in a blink of an eye! I time my purchases during every shrink to get that rush of POWERRRRR!

Ideally I should have done these upgrades

- 2011 MBP 13" 32nm > 2021 MBP 16" 5nm
Or
- 2011 MBP 13" 32nm > 2013 MBA 13" 22nm > 2023 MBA 15" 5nm

&

- 2012 iMac 27" 22nm > 2023 iMac 27" 5nm
Or
- 2012 iMac 27" 22nm > 2015 iMac 27" 14m > 2025 iMac 27" 2nm

2013 MBA 13" 22nm was a hand me down.

2015 iMac 27" 14m was half off if I gave my 2012 to my uncle.

 

[Falhófnir]

That’s fair, I think some one used to 16 inch display can see a difference. Cue all the threads about disappointment and drama here if Appl sticks to 500 not display.

Yeah I can already see people setting themselves up for disappointment with talk of 512GB base storage, ProMotion, etc. I've got pretty modest expectations, the display on this will undoubtedly be an upgrade either way, and the machine should be smaller and lighter as well. Weirdly I don't get the fixation on ProMotion, I struggle to see it on my iPP, and I don't think the panels Apple have been using on the iPads or MacBooks have a decent enough response time to actually showcase it properly (FWIW I can see it on the OLED iPhone Pros, so I don't think it's just me!). I guess the argument then would be use better panels, or switch to OLED, but that's pretty much asking for a better display than the 16" MacBook Pro & that just isn't happening! 😅

 

[Ener Ji]

Hopefully it comes with WiFi 6E and Bluetooth 5.3, like Apple's latest devices. If it supports that and two display support? Almost certain to be a buy for me, as long as the price is reasonable.

 

[Lounge vibes 05]

I doubt It would be anything close to 1499, unless Apple sticks to the lousy MacBook air13 screen. Good luck using a 500 nit display on 15 inch screen. What’s the weight going to be? Thermals? I will wait for Apple.

It’ll be a 60hz display, basically identical to the current air… but bigger.
And 99% of people will love it.
And since when is it a common opinion that the MacBook Air has a bad screen?
I’ve never heard a complaint about it outside of here, and up until a year ago Apple’s retina LCDs were considered basically the best in the business.
The MBP had a 15 inch LCD at around 500N for years without issue.

 

[v0lume4]

Yes, and it’s working.
120hz clearly isn’t something that most consumers care about, seeing as the 13 inch MacBook Air and Pro are both the best selling Mac models, and the iPad 9 and mini are the best selling iPad models.
None of Apple’s best selling iPad or Mac bottles have 120 Hz and it’s not hurting them.
Also, pro motion isn’t just about 120 hz, it’s about LTPO technology that allows for an adaptive refresh rate, and that is *not* cheep.

While you're right that the average consumer probably doesn't know or care about high refresh rates, I don't believe we should defend Apple for not offering them in more products. Another example: Apple still sells 8GB/256GB computers but we shouldn't defend that either. Especially when you consider the price premium Apple charges.

 

[TechnoMonk]

I got sales talked by Dave2D & MKHD that Apple finally solved the HSF in the 2019 MBP 16" Core i7! Then I saw a deal within 24 hrs of their review that reduced pricing by $300

So much temptations!!!! That's why unscrubscriebd from them or else I'd lost another $12k over a period of a decade because of YouTubers like em!

Also was unaware that Apple was jumping from 14nm > 10nm > 7nm > straight to 5nm at one go!

Skipping 6 years of die shrinks in a blink of an eye! I time my purchases during every shrink to get that rush of POWERRRRR!

Ideally I should have done these upgrades

- 2011 MBP 13" 32nm > 2021 MBP 16" 5nm
Or
- 2011 MBP 13" 32nm > 2013 MBA 13" 22nm > 2023 MBA 15" 5nm

&

- 2012 iMac 27" 22nm > 2023 iMac 27" 5nm
Or
- 2012 iMac 27" 22nm > 2015 iMac 27" 14m > 2025 iMac 27" 2nm

2013 MBA 13" 22nm was a hand me down.

2015 iMac 27" 14m was half off if I gave my 2012 to my uncle.

Upgrade when you have to, chasing specs is never ending loop. I usually stick to 4-5 year upgrade cycle for my main MacBook Pro Work horse. 2009,2014, and 2019. I made an exception with M1 Max and sold the 2019 Intel 15 inch. Probably my next upgrade will be M4 or M5, unless there is a huge leap in my workflow with M3.

 

[v0lume4]

Who? With a 2560-by-1664 500 nits screen, or is it something with less pixels and or less nits?

but regardless, the point is Apple uses refresh rates to differentiate between tiers, something other manufacturers does as well. They offer cheap screens on cheap models and if you want better, you pay for it. Just like Apple.

I present to you the laptop that I'm typing from right now: link. MORE pixels than even the MacBook, OLED panel, 400-600 nits (finding conflicting numbers), 90Hz (short of 120, I give you that). Retails for $750 USD.

 

[sam_dean]

Upgrade when you have to, chasing specs is never ending loop. I usually stick to 4-5 year upgrade cycle for my main MacBook Pro Work horse. 2009,2014, and 2019. I made an exception with M1 Max and sold the 2019 Intel 15 inch. Probably my next upgrade will be M4 or M5, unless there is a huge leap in my workflow with M3.

Late did I realize that I should upgrade per use case or after final Security Update is released.

My use case has not changed since 2015. So the Macs since 2011/2012 were adequate. Just put SSDs to get ~500MB/s throughput.

Intel computers from 2014-2020 stagnated at 14nm. So it wasnt worth buying anything more than once within those years.

 

[nothingtoseehere]

Hopefully it comes with WiFi 6E and Bluetooth 5.3, like Apple's latest devices. If it supports that and two display support? Almost certain to be a buy for me, as long as the price is reasonable.

very much doubt two-display support.

 

[Weasel13]

Knowing Apple, they will call it the MacBook Air Pro. And it will come with an M2 or M2 Pro chip. So you can buy the M2 Pro MacBook Air Pro.

Or MacBook Air Ultra!

 

[Lounge vibes 05]

While you're right that the average consumer probably doesn't know or care about high refresh rates, I don't believe we should defend Apple for not offering them in more products. Another example: Apple still sells 8GB/256GB computers but we shouldn't defend that either. Especially when you consider the price premium Apple charges.

I’ll defend whatever I’d like thank you, and 8/256 is fine for most people who are purchasing that version.
Maybe 12GB would be a nicer way to start, but I think that 256 GB is plenty of storage for the majority who don’t store anything.
Most average people these days stream their movies and music, keep their photos and videos in some cloud service and keep their documents and data in the cloud as well.
By default the Mac already puts all your files on your desktop and in your documents folder in iCloud.
As for 120hz, as a totally blind MacBook Air user who’s asked pretty much everyone I know if they can tell 60hz from 100hz and only got one “yes”, you’ll never convince me that’s not just a luxury feature 99% don’t care about.
Also, “but you can get some $200 windows PC that has 8 TB of RAM and 240 hz and 15 Gigaflops of” sorry, Don’t care.

 

[v0lume4]

I’ll defend whatever I’d like thank you, and 8/256 is fine for most people who are purchasing that version.
Maybe 12GB would be a nicer way to start, but I think that 256 GB is plenty of storage for the majority who don’t store anything.
Most average people these days stream their movies and music, keep their photos and videos in some cloud service and keep their documents and data in the cloud as well.
By default the Mac already puts all your files on your desktop and in your documents folder in iCloud.
As for 120hz, as a totally blind MacBook Air user who’s asked pretty much everyone I know if they can tell 60hz from 100hz and only got one “yes”, you’ll never convince me that’s not just a luxury feature 99% don’t care about.
Also, “but you can get some $200 windows PC that has 8 TB of RAM and 240 hz and 15 Gigaflops of” sorry, Don’t care.

Again, I don't know why you'd defend a company offering objectively worse value at a higher price. They're laughing all the way to the bank. We're the losers in this situation. You and I are on the same side in this situation -- we are the consumers.

I'd be delighted if I got to purchase a MacBook for $1,200 that today would cost $1,600 today (16GB/512GB). Wouldn't you?

 

[john123]

Someone has to do it...

 

[Sir_Macs_A_Lot]

The 15" MBA has got to come sooner or later (if not in April). Too many people clamoring for this size to be ignored.