$600 for 4GB, 500GB HD Lenovo. Did I just waste my money buying a Mac Air?

[nebulos]

Nice assumption there. No, the white MacBook lacked FireWire 800 and Thunderbolt and thusly lacked Target Disk Mode which is an absolute must-have for me; I mourn its loss for those who want to pay $1000 and actually get a full-featured Mac.

Cool story, bro. Again, unless weight, size, and Blade SSDs are a must, you are spending more for less computer, that you cannot argue against because a quick trip to the Apple Online Store (or any Authorized third-party reseller) will prove any argument against that to be wrong.

13" Pro sells more than either MacBook Air model. Always has. Also, I'm not excluding ultra-thin and ultra-light from the Air's list of strengths. On the contrary, I'm highlighting them as the only significant reasons to buy one of those instead of a 13" Pro as again, any other reason for doing so is pretty dumb, which doesn't negate your point of many people buying them (as many people are dumb).

(putting my baggage on this thread aside for the moment),

i think the MBA is actually among the best values of all the macs. the big problem with the 13 MBP is its resolution; so you have to add resolution to your list of what the MBA offers, over say the 13 MBP.

how is the Air not full-featured now that it has TB? 13 MBP has always sold more. the 2011 MBA is a different animal than previous gens.

here's one way to think of it:

Apple could have offered a $100 resolution upgrade on the 13 MBP to 1440x900. Let's suppose they did. Now the HD 13 MBP and the 13 MBA are the same price. which one do you go for? unless you're doing music or video or other power hungry work, the CPU and RAM options of the MBP are meaningless. so you're trading storage space and a DVD drive for lightweight and an SSD. i'd go with the Air.

... except, i, as a musician/other, would go for the HD MBP. unfortunately, the resolution on the 13 MBP IS a deal breaker. so weight and SSD are not the only reasons to go MBA. this is Apple fault for, god knows why, leaving the 13 MBP at 1280x800.

 

[Yebubbleman]

(putting my baggage on this thread aside for the moment),

i think the MBA is actually among the best values of all the macs. the big problem with the 13 MBP is its resolution; so you have to add resolution to your list of what the MBA offers, over say the 13 MBP.

how is the Air not full-featured now that it has TB? 13 MBP has always sold more. the 2011 MBA is a different animal than previous gens.

Ah yeah, the resolution on the 13" Air is (for some seriously stupid reason) better than the 13" Pro. And yes, for the components enclosed and the engineering required to make them, it's not a bad deal. However, in terms of sheer power, it's lacking in ways that the 13" Pro simply isn't. Don't get me wrong, I don't think it's a poorly made machine, but given that I can comfortably lift five pounds, the Air is underpowered for the money being spent on it.

Thunderbolt doesn't make the MacBook Air full-featured, it just means that to get the ports I sacrificed by having such a small computer, I need an external accessory which kind of negates the wonderful all-in-one nature of laptop computers to begin with.

 

[nebulos]

Ah yeah, the resolution on the 13" Air is (for some seriously stupid reason) better than the 13" Pro. And yes, for the components enclosed and the engineering required to make them, it's not a bad deal. However, in terms of sheer power, it's lacking in ways that the 13" Pro simply isn't. Don't get me wrong, I don't think it's a poorly made machine, but given that I can comfortably lift five pounds, the Air is underpowered for the money being spent on it.

Thunderbolt doesn't make the MacBook Air full-featured, it just means that to get the ports I sacrificed by having such a small computer, I need an external accessory which kind of negates the wonderful all-in-one nature of laptop computers to begin with.

i just don't think it's that underpowered, anymore. the CPU + RAM combos in the 2011 MBAs are more than enough for all but power hungry users.

anyways, i shouldn't say MBA is better. but that the trade-offs are reasonable, and do not center solely on weight, (which to some is meaningless, and to others means the world).

just like saying the loss of ports/etc makes the MBA less of a laptop, of course, the loss of ports/etc makes it more of a laptop, precisely because of the increase in portability.

... again, i'm guessing weight is not a big deal to you, so those arguments don't really appeal to you, but weight is a huge deal for many.

 

[grapes911]

Members seem very interested in this topic so we did our best to keep it open. For it to remain open:

• Refrain from naming calling, including calling others troll, fanboy or hater.

• Do not troll.

• Do not rehash or repost information that was deleted during cleanup. Posts and comments were deleted for a reason.

• This thread is not the place to discuss forum policy or complain about moderation.

• Report posts that do not conform to the rules of this forum. Do not reply to them as it makes clean up even harder.

• Follow the rules of the forum that are not specifically mentioned above.

Do not reply to this post.

 

[KnightWRX]

The MacBook Air is a terrible value unless thin and light are must-haves for you.

That's because thin and light are part of the MacBook Air's value. Obviously, a pick-up truck is a terrible value if you want a small commuter that is gas efficient. A small commuter that is gas efficient is a terrible value if you need towing capacity and cargo space.

Different needs, different products. To compare the MacBook Air to other computers that do not share it's primary value-added characteristics that are its weight and size is simply an exercise in futility.

Get another laptop.

 

[kulimer]

When you write a post, say it is pertaining to hardware or software in the beginning, it helps everyone to identify what you want to say, and away from guys off topic.

I quite like my Lenevo, it's perfect for the tasks I need it it to do, and takes a lot more abuse than the MBA does. Its a work horse, pretty much what it was designed to do.

This one is on hardware
On Mac
I can definitely relate to that, especially the fragility of the iphone, the cracked screen is one of the most common.

(I used to use Nokia N95, and came across the analogy that iphone is your gf/lust, while Nokia is your wife, no matter how much you drop the Nokia, she's still works, no complaint. Of course that can be a bit exaggerated, but you get the idea )

MacBook Air might be different from iphone in terms of quality, won't speak for it now. Though it is reasonable to assume its fragility.

On Thinkpad
This one in particular is Thinkpad E220s for $775.20, (see link), the highlight I find are
LED backlight
3.23 lbs
4 USB ports
military fireproof (or something like that, I read it but can't find it at the time of post)
http://shop.lenovo.com/SEUILibrary/...=858AB3587B7A473CDFFF16F8B846A06C&action=init


PS: I think everyone will agree with me on this, you don't have to use Mac or Windows to like or dislike the other. I also support the moderator above, our discussion will make things very clear what are the strength and weakness of each.

 

[Yebubbleman]

i just don't think it's that underpowered, anymore. the CPU + RAM combos in the 2011 MBAs are more than enough for all but power hungry users.

True, though again, you do get more power in a 13" Pro for cheaper than a 13" Air.

anyways, i shouldn't say MBA is better. but that the trade-offs are reasonable, and do not center solely on weight, (which to some is meaningless, and to others means the world).

Right, and that's why I said unless thinness and weight are important to you, it's a terrible value. That's not to say that for those who value thinness and weight, it is also a terrible value, but rather to say that if you don't care about thinness and weight, it's not a good value.

just like saying the loss of ports/etc makes the MBA less of a laptop, of course, the loss of ports/etc makes it more of a laptop, precisely because of the increase in portability.

I think that's subjective. Personally, I don't want to have to need to hook up my laptop to anything in order to do the things I could do (externally) on a desktop as that's inconvenient and why I was happy to see Apple abandon port replicators while the rest of the PC market continued to use them in the late 90's. But that's just my preference, not gospel.

... again, i'm guessing weight is not a big deal to you, so those arguments don't really appeal to you, but weight is a huge deal for many.

Oh sure, again, hence the "Unless weight and thinness matter to you" in my original statement.

That's because thin and light are part of the MacBook Air's value. Obviously, a pick-up truck is a terrible value if you want a small commuter that is gas efficient. A small commuter that is gas efficient is a terrible value if you need towing capacity and cargo space.

Different needs, different products. To compare the MacBook Air to other computers that do not share it's primary value-added characteristics that are its weight and size is simply an exercise in futility.

Get another laptop.

Reread what you quoted me saying. I say "unless weight and thinness matter to you", which doesn't imply that I think that the MacBook Air is stupid for everyone, just for people who don't care about the main things that the MacBook Air have going for it, namely weight and thinness. For those that want that in a computer, it's a great buy. For those that don't care and would be just as happy with a 13" MacBook Pro, it's a terrible buy.

 

[nebulos]

Right, and that's why I said unless thinness and weight are important to you, it's a terrible value.

but this is what i'm disagreeing with.

weight aside, the MBA still offers higher resolution and an SSD over the MBP. so, as far as other Macbooks are concerned, even if you don't care about weight, it can easily make perfect sense to go with the Air.

if you want to compare to PCs instead, that's a different story, but it's similar for the MBA or the MBP.

 

[dman2011]

well the asus just got its date released for america which is the 11th of october
hopefully some early reports come out before i make my decision although here in australia we are expecting november

 

[Yebubbleman]

but this is what i'm disagreeing with.

weight aside, the MBA still offers higher resolution and an SSD over the MBP. so, as far as other Macbooks are concerned, even if you don't care about weight, it can easily make perfect sense to go with the Air.

if you want to compare to PCs instead, that's a different story, but it's similar for the MBA or the MBP.

I definitely can't argue with the resolution disparity on the 13" machines (by the way, does anyone have ANY actual insight as to why this was?) and you can configure a 13" Pro to have an SSD drive that is just as fast; at that point, it's slightly pricier than the 13" MacBook Air (unless you just buy your own, in which case it's still cheaper), but you're getting a FireWire 800 port, Gigabit Ethernet, and an optical drive, which, for some, are good things to have. Don't get me wrong, SSDs are rad, but for a drive I can't anywhere near as easily replace with anywhere near as varied a selection of replacement drives, the novelty is only so much. Needless to say, this isn't the case with the standard form factor SSD drives you'd order in a 13" MacBook Pro.

 

[kulimer]

That's because thin and light are part of the MacBook Air's value. Obviously, a pick-up truck is a terrible value if you want a small commuter that is gas efficient. A small commuter that is gas efficient is a terrible value if you need towing capacity and cargo space.

Different needs, different products. To compare the MacBook Air to other computers that do not share it's primary value-added characteristics that are its weight and size is simply an exercise in futility.

On hardware: what's the cost of making it thin?
While I do agree that thin and light, but that is not an excuse to overprice. Again, several guys have talked about the term "overprice", I am going to use it carefully.

What is the actual cost of making it thin and light? Can someone explain that on the manufacture's end? Thinness has been the justification for high cost. I want to unveil this myth, hopefully from its very root.

 

[nebulos]

I definitely can't argue with the resolution disparity on the 13" machines (by the way, does anyone have ANY actual insight as to why this was?) and you can configure a 13" Pro to have an SSD drive that is just as fast; at that point, it's slightly pricier than the 13" MacBook Air, but you're getting a FireWire 800 port, Gigabit Ethernet, and an optical drive, which, for some, are good things to have.

yes. and i would gladly pay the extra $150 for the MBP with the SSD, IF the resolutions were equal. res is just absolutely critical for me. (for the moment, we're ignoring weight, though in this case, even though it does matter to me, i'd still go Pro for the CPU/RAM.)

why did the 13 MBP stay at 1280x800? i've never heard any explanation of this; i'd love to if anyone reading can point to one.

i think it would have meant a redesign of the panel, and they were looking to do just a 'guts' upgrade, and hold off on a chassis redesign for the next gen. however, this was a HUGE disappointment for so many people.

i waited for a really long time for the MBP to come out, precisely so i could get a 13 with 1440x900. when that failed to materialize, i started waiting for the next MBA. with the new CPUs, 4GB RAM, SSDs, and higher res displays, and the super lightweight as a bonus, i think these machines are great.

 

[Poindexter333]

"Does anybody remember laughter?" ~ Robert Plant

Let's be grown-ups here for a minute.

Whatever happened to:

1) Wow, that looks fantastic and works just like I want it to. It's a Mac, something I prefer over all others. That certainly can't be a shocking conclusion.

2) It can do everything that I require of a laptop, with no deal breakers (pro-graphics, NASA- math speed, huge storage, etc. I don't have to worry about squeezing the last fraction of a Ghz out of a processor.

3) I really want or need something smaller and lighter. Unibody is a huge plus too.

4) Who cares about a few hundred dollars? Some do. I don't. Thank god at this point in my life I don't have to worry over a few hundred bucks each way. What is my enjoyment and productivity worth anyway? Certainly not nothing. Plus I use it for business, so again, a portion of it comes off the top so to speak.

5) There are considerably more important things than mere numbers, as they can only describe the machine sitting there on a table, not what it's like under my hands doing actual tasks.

Doesn't everybody remember Moore's Law anyway? You can make yourself crazy worrying about things that are destined to change soon enough anyway.

 

[Yebubbleman]

Hardware
While I do agree that thin and light, but that is not an excuse to overprice. Again, several guys have talked about the term "overprice", I am going to use it carefully.

What is the actual cost of making it thin and light? Can someone explain that on the manufacture's end? This have been the justification for high cost. I want to unveil this myth, hopefully from its very root.

Actually, the MacBook Air in terms of what it is and what its price tag is, isn't a bad deal as evidenced by the trouble competitors and Intel are having with matching, let alone undercutting its price tag. If performance and speed and overall bang for buck/features/performance are what you're after, it's not a good buy. But if you're after an ultraportable laptop, it's a fantastic deal, if I have read and understood the news correctly.

yes. and i would gladly pay the extra $150 for the MBP with the SSD, IF the resolutions were equal. res is just absolutely critical for me. (for the moment, we're ignoring weight, though in this case, even though it does matter to me, i'd still go Pro for the CPU/RAM.)

why did the 13 MBP stay at 1280x800? i've never heard any explanation of this; i'd love to if anyone reading can point to one.

i think it would have meant a redesign of the panel, and they were looking to do just a 'guts' upgrade, and hold off on a chassis redesign for the next gen. however, this was a HUGE disappointment for so many people.

i waited for a really long time for the MBP to come out, precisely so i could get a 13 with 1440x900. when that failed to materialize, i started waiting for the next MBA. with the new CPUs, 4GB RAM, SSDs, and higher res displays, and the super lightweight as a bonus, i think these machines are great.

I don't think the panel would have to be redesigned all that much, it's just a glossy screen underneath the glass. But I hear ya, for a 13" screen, resolution can be mission critical; though I guess that's where external displays come in? But I suppose you could make the case that such a solution is inconvenient if I'm to also make a similar case saying that not having a FireWire 800 Port, an Ethernet Port, and an optical drive is also inconvenient.

"Does anybody remember laughter?" ~ Robert Plant

Let's be grown-ups here for a minute.

Whatever happened to:

1) Wow, that looks fantastic and works just like I want it to. It's a Mac, something I prefer over all others. That certainly can't be a shocking conclusion.

2) It can do everything that I require of a laptop, with no deal breakers (pro-graphics, NASA- math speed, huge storage, etc. I don't have to worry about squeezing the last fraction of a Ghz out of a processor.

3) I really want or need something smaller and lighter. Unibody is a huge plus too.

4) Who cares about a few hundred dollars? Some do. I don't. Thank god at this point in my life I don't have to worry over a few hundred bucks each way. What is my enjoyment and productivity worth anyway? Certainly not nothing. Plus I use it for business, so again, a portion of it comes off the top so to speak.

5) There are considerably more important things than mere numbers, as they can only describe the machine sitting there on a table, not what it's like under my hands doing actual tasks.

Doesn't everybody remember Moore's Law anyway? You can make yourself crazy worrying about things that are destined to change soon enough anyway.

Cool story, bro. A few hundred dollars is a lot for some. Congrats on being set in this terrible economy!

 

[nebulos]

I don't think the panel would have to be redesigned all that much, it's just a glossy screen underneath the glass.

yeah, i don't know. but the MBP uses a different panel than the MBA, with better color, etc. so, if they wanted to keep up the quality, they would have to find/commission new panels?

But I hear ya, for a 13" screen, resolution can be mission critical

for one thing, i don't like Apple's font smoothing. i find text almost unreadable on the 13 MBP. though it's not perfect on the higher res screens, it's much better. this is one of the big reasons i can't settle for a low res mac screen. but that's just me.

 

[Dunbar]

On Thinkpad
This one in particular is Thinkpad E220s for $775.20, (see link), the highlight I find are

The E220s has a glossy screen which I'd avoid like the plague. I'd personally wait for the X220 to go on sale. I'm a long time Thinkpad user who just moved from an X60s to a 13" MBA. One of my favorite features of the Thinkpad was the trackpoint (red eraser.) After test driving many MBA's in the store I decided the combo of hardware and multi touch gestures in OSX were worth the premium though. The gestures in OSX allow me to fly in OSX compared to a Thinkpad running Windows 7.

 

[nebulos]

The E220s has a glossy screen which I'd avoid like the plague. I'd personally wait for the X220 to go on sale. I'm a long time Thinkpad user who just moved from an X60s to a 13" MBA. One of my favorite features of the Thinkpad was the trackpoint (red eraser.) After test driving many MBA's in the store I decided the combo of hardware and multi touch gestures in OSX were worth the premium though. The gestures in OSX allow me to fly in OSX compared to a Thinkpad running Windows 7.

to me, software aside, the trackpad is THE defining feature of a Mac. i truly hope that the competition catches up, because its just too hard to give up that trackpad up leaving me with very little options.

p.s. i use a X61T, NO TRACKPAD!!! sadly, though i use it, me and the red nipple are enemies.

 

[KPOM]

On hardware: what's the cost of making it thin?
While I do agree that thin and light, but that is not an excuse to overprice. Again, several guys have talked about the term "overprice", I am going to use it carefully.

What is the actual cost of making it thin and light? Can someone explain that on the manufacture's end? Thinness has been the justification for high cost. I want to unveil this myth, hopefully from its very root.

It takes research and engineering to make sure the machines don't overheat. The first MacBook Airs back in 2008 had 1.6 and 1.8GHz Core 2 Duo processors that were notorious for shutting down cores or under clocking. Apple improved things a bit later in the year with the Penryn chip, but didn't really get it right until last October. The July 2011 version features a hotter processor, so the task is a bit more difficult. There's a reason that, until now, ultraportables were relatively underpowered. It isn't as easy to make a tiny machine as it is to make a bigger one where the engineers have room to work with.

We'll see how aggressive ASUS will be with their UX21 and UX31 in 15 days when they release them. My guess is that they will undercut the Airs by about $150-200 (if the purported prices in France are any indication - the €799 starting price for the 1.6GHz i5/4GB/64GB model being €150 less than Apple's price for the same configuration). Apple's margins are around 35% overall (very high for a tech company). However, the Airs are likely in the lower end of the range, while the MacBook Pros (particularly the 15" and 17") along with the iPhone and iPad lines are higher. I'm guessing ASUS will forego margin early on to try to get traction (they have learned from HP's experience with the Touchpad that simply matching Apple on pricing is a losing proposition), but I doubt we'll see much more aggressive pricing than that.

 

[nebulos]

The July 2011 version features a hotter processor, so the task is a bit more difficult.

the CPU is hotter, but it includes the IGP. so, while i don't think there was an increase in heat, since the CPU and IGP are now in the same spot, i believe there was an increase in heat density, which indeed presents a new challenge.

some jerk was eventually gonna come nitpick about this; i figured i'd take the blame. ;-)

 

[Yebubbleman]

the CPU is hotter, but it includes the IGP. so, while i don't think there was an increase in heat, since the CPU and IGP are now in the same spot, i believe there was an increase in heat density, which indeed presents a new challenge.

some jerk was eventually gonna come nitpick about this; i figured i'd take the blame. ;-)

I think in lieu of the GeForce 320M, by which I mean: in the exact same spot, is the Thunderbolt chip; though I could be getting its location mixed up with the location of the Cougar Point chip. You still have the same amount of heat coming off, you just have it coming off at different places than before and at different times. Meh.

 

[MacinDoc]

On hardware: what's the cost of making it thin?
While I do agree that thin and light, but that is not an excuse to overprice. Again, several guys have talked about the term "overprice", I am going to use it carefully.

What is the actual cost of making it thin and light? Can someone explain that on the manufacture's end? Thinness has been the justification for high cost. I want to unveil this myth, hopefully from its very root.

The cost is in the engineering, in more expensive parts, such as lower voltage processors, and in the cost of assembly, which will have much lower tolerances for error, and will likely result in a higher percentage of products being defective.

Just as a laptop cost more than a desktop with comparable power, an ultraportable will cost more than the laptop for the same reason.

 

[ChrisA]

I just bought a Mac Air 13", and saw the Lenovo website, Look at this, Lenovo is selling laptops for about $600...

Why care about the price if it can't run the software you want. You'd be stuck running MS Windows. Aperture will not run on the Lenovo, neither will Garage Band.

I did just buy a cheap $275 "notebook" Because all I wanted was good battery life and a web browser, nothing more. I put Linux on a way-cheap Dell. It pretty much matches the performance of a $600 notebook running Windows

 

[kulimer]

The cost is in the engineering, in more expensive parts, such as lower voltage processors, and in the cost of assembly, which will have much lower tolerances for error, and will likely result in a higher percentage of products being defective.

I most definitely agree the cost is engineering, and developers deserve their share of the profit. In fact, they are underpaid most of the time.

But back to what I asked in the last post, we need to answer "what is the actual cost in production?" in order to see if the product is being marked up. (This has been a very controversial question, tackle it with numbers or proofs to back it up)

And then, we will go back and look at how much the consumer is getting charged to decide if it is marked up.

And yes, I do believe Apple should make a profit.

 

[MacinDoc]

I most definitely agree the cost is engineering, and developers deserve their share of the profit. In fact, they are underpaid most of the time.

But back to what I asked in the last post, we need to answer "what is the actual cost in production?" in order to see if the product is being marked up. (This has been a very controversial question, tackle it with numbers or proofs to back it up)

And then, we will go back and look at how much the consumer is getting charged to decide if it is marked up.

And yes, I do believe Apple should make a profit.

Could you tell me which model you are comparing, so I can give you some details regarding differences in component costs?

 

[KnightWRX]

Reread what you quoted me saying. I say "unless weight and thinness matter to you", which doesn't imply that I think that the MacBook Air is stupid for everyone, just for people who don't care about the main things that the MacBook Air have going for it, namely weight and thinness. For those that want that in a computer, it's a great buy. For those that don't care and would be just as happy with a 13" MacBook Pro, it's a terrible buy.

And re-read my post. If you don't value the MacBook Air's characteristic, why are you even looking at it ? You shouldn't even be discussing it, it shouldn't even be on your mind. We're agreeing, but you're in this thread arguing about it. The point is simple :

Let this thread die. It makes no sense. It never made any sense. It was a thread made to flare up emotions and prompt responses.

----------

On hardware: what's the cost of making it thin?
While I do agree that thin and light, but that is not an excuse to overprice.

Citation Needed.

Please provide examples of other laptops that share the MacBook Air's characteristics (including it's weight and size) that are much cheaper than the MacBook Air.

Until then, the MBA is not overpriced. It's just not fit for your purpose. 6 pages in, you've been told and showed that many times. Just accept it or be welcome to my ignore list.

Others : Waste of time posting here guys, move along, this guy doesn't want to hear logic and arguments, he just wants to get you mad.