That's because the Air's screen IS plastic. What value do you get out of a glass screen? It's more fragile, and it doesn't have an aluminium bezel to protect the screen from damage.
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.
Apple Predicted to Release Ultra-Slim 12-Inch MacBook with Retina Display in Mid-2014
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That's because the Air's screen IS plastic. What value do you get out of a glass screen? It's more fragile, and it doesn't have an aluminium bezel to protect the screen from damage.
I agree. I think there must be something wrong the the numbers. A 12" MBA that reduces the bezel in the current 11" MBA makes sense.
It they truly use an IGZO display, they ought to be able to do a higher resolution than quoted (at least that's my hope). A better quality display could allow the smaller fonts to have higher contrast.
I would have to lug a real monitor around with me if all MacBook's were at 16x9. It's just not tall enough for most things I do, which is of course "personal preference."
----------
Last time I checked, rumors are just that.
Last edited:
If it's really a 12" MBA, it will be exactly the same width as the current MBA. That's because the current smaller MBA isn't 11", it's a 11.6" and the new 12" will have a different aspect ratio.
Here's my calculation. Using the DPI calculator.
The dimension of the current 11.6" MBA display is 10.11" × 5.68"
The dimension of the rumored 12" MBA is display is 10.18" × 6.36"
Width-wise, the difference is only 0.07", imperceptible on something over 10" wide. That means the (rumored) new 12" MBA has virtually the same display width as that of the current 11.6" MBA.
I don't know what it'll look like but that does give us a few possibilities in terms of the form factor size and the bezel on the new MBA:
1) There's always a possibility the rumored size isn't entirely correct. For example the new MBA might not have a 12" display but instead a ~12.5" display. That means making the bezel smaller will make a good sense, and otherwise it will be about as big as the current 11.6" MBA.
But assuming if the new MBA really does have a 12" display,
2) Apple could decide to keep the same bezel size and make the form factor slightly taller.
3) Instead Apple could reduce the bezel just on the top and the bottom, while keeping the bezel the same in the sides, unlikely in my opinion.
4) Or they could reduce the bezel and at the same time make the keyboard smaller as well, unlikely in my opinion since they tend to care a lot about the keyboard and the trackpad.
As with the iPad Mini discussions - it's not really a 7" tablet but an 8"+ one even though everyone ignores the fact - the decimals in the diagonal and the aspect ratio do make substantial differences but often times forgotten.
Last edited:
Really? Another Apple consumer gadget? What ever happened to making professional computers?
----------
My glass screen on my 13" MacBook Pro is awesome! Really, do we need to go backwards? After 3 years of owning my MacBook, my screen still doesn't have a scratch on it. It is clear and, being a photo enthusiast, I can see and edit my work clearly and easily. There is new glass technology in the pipeline that is even thinner and stronger than Corning's gorilla glass. What is this awful new trend by Apple reverting back to plastic?
----------
My glass screen on my 13" MacBook Pro is awesome! Really, do we need to go backwards? After 3 years of owning my MacBook, my screen still doesn't have a scratch on it. It is clear and, being a photo enthusiast, I can see and edit my work clearly and easily. There is new glass technology in the pipeline that is even thinner and stronger than Corning's gorilla glass. What is this awful new trend by Apple reverting back to plastic?
You must be the only one who doesn't know the new mac pro is to be released...
Has anyone considered a 12" Macbook Air may not be an Macbook Air rather a ARM laptop to compete with the Chromebook/Ultralight market?
This maybe consistent with the rumours of a larger iPad and new Macbook Air for 2014.
This maybe consistent with the rumours of a larger iPad and new Macbook Air for 2014.
Interesting you say that, because 16:10 is 1.6, which is the golden ratio; which is subsequently found in the proportions of your eyes, shellfish, trees, leaves, and architecture. This proportion has also consistently been shown to be the most pleasing to the eye.
Also, you're not losing anything with 16:10 -- 16:9, by design, is supposed to decrease vertical res -- not increase horizontal res.
Every point you've made is null and void.
Like I said here: https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/18132362/
This laptop is going to run on an A7X or A8 ARM part.
Mac OS X will be upgraded to run both ARM & Intel architectures, like what happened when it ran PowerPC & Intel architectures.
Apple will start to use ARM CPUs for their low-end Macs.
This laptop is going to run on an A7X or A8 ARM part.
Mac OS X will be upgraded to run both ARM & Intel architectures, like what happened when it ran PowerPC & Intel architectures.
Apple will start to use ARM CPUs for their low-end Macs.
12" is only .4" extra than the current 11", and as you say the bezel is huge (13.5" edge to edge diagonally), so they could conceivably get away with something smaller - in fact I'm going to guess that's what is going to happen, the same form factor or smaller.
Same here, I prefer the 16:10, I have lots of tasks, that are "height intensive"
Heck, I actually prefer the 4:3 AR of the iPad vs. the 16:9 of many/most other tablets, I like the extra width/height depending on the orientation.
Yep, Apple did good with the 4:3 iPad. They just get it. And I like that. A 16:9 or 16:10 tablet I would not buy.
Of course not. Widescreen movies look soooooo much better on an awesome, magical, beautiful 4:3 display...
----------
They've given up on the professional market around six years ago. Didn't you notice?
I did some calculations, too, and worked out that:
If the height of the new display was 5.82", it’s width would be 10.35" — keeping the same 16:9 aspect ratio — and the diagonal would be 11.9" (close enough for Apple to call it 12"). That’s only 0.14" taller, and 0.24" wider, so would still fit within the footprint of the current Air.
Also; at that size, if they were to double the resolution of the current 11" Air, it would have the same pixel density as the retina iPad.
----------
He said in his opinion it looks better. You can’t “null and void” person’s opinion on how something looks to them, simply because you disagree with that opinion.
Also; the whole golden ratio thing has been well and truly debunked by now — another in the line of human’s tendencies to see patterns where there are none.
16:9 is okay for bigger screens, above maybe 18-20". I have a 27" monitor, 2560 x 1440 res, which is 16:9, and it has enough vertical working space.
But below about 20" the extra vertical working space in a 16:10 becomes a substantial benefit to me. So I'll take 16:10 in my laptop, please.
-----
Whatever else you do, Apple, please don't reduce the size of the Air keyboard.
But below about 20" the extra vertical working space in a 16:10 becomes a substantial benefit to me. So I'll take 16:10 in my laptop, please.
-----
Whatever else you do, Apple, please don't reduce the size of the Air keyboard.
Last edited:
I can't see that happening. If they do it's when I and many others look elsewhere for our next machine.
ARM CPU's at this moment in time are not very powerful so those people who use their MBA for more intensive tasks and for Virtualization will either have to spend a lot more money on a MacBook Pro with a 'proper' CPU or simply buy alternative hardware as I said.
I don't see anything on the ARM roadmap that compares favourably to the current low voltage Intel CPU's that are in the current MBA. The MBA can stretch for 12 hours right now, that's more than acceptable. I do not want the performance sacrificed any more to stretch the battery further. Most places in the civilised world have somewhere to plug a charger in to!
Of course not. Widescreen movies look soooooo much better on an awesome, magical, beautiful 4:3 display...
----------
They've given up on the professional market around six years ago. Didn't you notice?
Yeah, especially 3D HD movies with 10.1 Surround Sound - they look like crap on the iPad. Apple gave up nothing Winnie - stop crying. Follow or leave the road - there are no boundaries that force you to buy or use any kind of electronics. My '09MBP is still professional enough for me although soon mobile phones will surpass it CPU wise. I hate IT people.
Sorry, but the A7 is already competitive with low-end Haswell parts.
In general, most architectures can scale up to 10x power. The same Haswell chip can run in 10 Watts as well as 100 watts.
The A7 in the iPhone runs within a 1-2 watt power envelope.
A laptop would have a 10-20 watt power envelope.
Bumping up the A7 to the 10-20 watt range for Laptop use would easily be enough to finish off Intel parts.
Apple really owned Intel here. Few people understand what Apple was able to accomplish here...
Nope. Glass trackpad now, glass keys later.
----------
I think slightly more weight is less noticeable than slightly greater thickness.
And I think the battery accounts for much of the weight and thickness.
IGZO -> lower screen power consumption, even with Retina pixel density.
And lower power consumption allows for a thinner and lighter battery.
Maybe a 12" MacBook would replace both of the current MacBook Air models.
And eventually Apple could release an ultra-slim 14" or 15" MacBook using the same technology.
I think it's time to drop the "Air" branding.
----------
I still think there will still be a "Pro" market for high-end MacBook Pros. More computing power, overkill for the average consumer, but essential for serious media creation, controlling live performances, whatever.
So, maybe Apple could have 12" and 15" devices in the MacBook line (thinner than the current MacBook Air line) and 15" and 17" MacBook Pros. And the performance and price differences between the two lines could be greater. Kind of like the gap between the latest iMacs and the next-gen Mac Pro. Of course, the Mac Pro pricing hasn't been announced yet. There's probably a reason for that, but I'm not a marketing person so I couldn't guess what that reason is.
----------
Exactly. Intel wouldn't miss Apple's consumer Mac business very much.
But Apple could cut their component costs without that Intel Tax.
They'd be able to keep their margins up while dropping retail pricing.
Which could turn into a nightmare scenario for the HPs and Dells of the world.