Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I am shocked that anyone finds this as a positive.

So you all want a drop from 1.86/2.13 to 1.4GHz CPUs in your 13" MBA? That is a 30% drop.

Uh, megahertz myth, anyone? Based on the 2.3Ghz Core i5 in the MacBook Pro, I'd expect the 1.4GHz Core i5 with hyperthreading to be significantly faster than the 1.86 or 2.13GHz Core 2 Duo. Plus, it can turbo boost to 2.3GHz.

Then you want another drop of approaching 50% in graphics performance? Remember these IGPs clock in much lower than the STD voltage SB used in 13" MBP.

That is a legitimate concern. That said, if you aren't a gamer, the CPU may more than make up for it. Plus, we all know Apple can't use the Core 2 Duo forever, and is taking some heat for still using it now.
capabilities!
 
That is highly limited thinking. It might be time to open your mind and learn how and why other people might actually want a particular feature rather than assume that they are the person who is limited.

I, and many others, use our computers for way more than typing.

A simple example is when I use my MBPro on stage with any number of apps for musical performances.

Also the sound engineers use MBPro for audio cues,audio mixing, recording, effects processing. The lighting guys use them.

When you are heavily involved in multitasking you need to be able to see something, identify it and use it, all within a fraction of a second. You are not sitting there touch typing.


THANK YOU!!!!! That's precisely why I need A back light and no one will understand haha but you get it my friend.
 
And THAT's why I didn't jump the gun on a MBA yet. Now give me the new processors, and a backlit keyboard, and Apple's got my $.

(Be nice if they could bump up the battery life on the 11 too)

I couldn't have said it better myself!

Although I would change the $ to a € ;-)
 
For a programmer dealing with Terminal, Xcode, Netbeans, Eclipse, etc (not graphic intensive softwares), would this macbook air be a better deal than the 13/15" Macbook pro?

Anyone?

The main thing keeping me from wanting a MBA for software development is the 4GB RAM limit. If you're not running any virtual machines you'd probably do just fine with 4GB, but as soon as you need to run a Windows VM things will get painful (especially if you're running Visual Studio in it).

If could get a MBA with 8GB of RAM and Thunderbolt I would get it instead of a MBP for my next machine, at least if the MBP stays the way it is (16GB of RAM option on a MBP would change things for me; I'll take all the RAM I can get).

Edit: One minor thing to note is that the 13" MBA has the 13" MBP beat on screen resolution. That's completely silly considering the MBP updates came well after the MBA updates.
 
Last edited:
Both machines would be fine, though the 13"/15" MacBook Pro is more fully-featured of a machine than the Air, and frankly at that cost, why pay for an incomplete system?

With a 13" or 15" MacBook Pro, there's little practical use for a MacBook Air unless you have a problem lifting the two extra pounds, and really, if you do, either exercise or invest in physical therapy.
Disagree, the Air is a niche product, and there is a noticeable difference in weight. 2KG 13" Pro is exactly 50% heavier than 1.3KG Air, and if you lug the laptop around all day long such weight difference is noticeable. It might be added that most Air users are never gonna need the extra computing power of the MBP. If your work requires a MBP you're never going to get an Air anyway.

I am going even further - I like the featherweight of the 11" and the fact that after the update it is going to be a very serious machine is not to be neglected.

Last but not least, those 2 pounds you're talking about can be crucial when deciding what to take in your hand luggage when traveling by plane. I've been up to such a decision when I had to take my 2.8kg PC laptop. That's where I guess the name of the computer comes from - Macbook Air, designed for use on an Airplane.
 
Perfect day for this news....

I have a new 13" MBA sitting here at my desk unopened...just dropped off from FedEx today. I'm debating whether or not to just return it and wait for the refresh or be happy with what I got.

I'm a very light user..web, email, iTunes, sync iPhone and iPad. Do I really need the Sandy Bridge power..probably not but I dont want to have the "old not so shiny ball" come June (as the rumors suggest).

Any help from the MR community is greatly appreciated!
 
I don't mean to say that with a 27" iMac at home, one couldn't be happily mobile with a 13" MacBook Air if they so desired, I just don't think it has enough going for it to make it worthy of being stand-alone to anyone who isn't either (a) bat-**** crazy about about the MacBook Air or (b) very simple in their computing needs.

I think you need to define very simple, because the MBA can run about everything. Lets face it, computers have been capable of running pretty much anything for the last decade, the upgrades stopped being as meaningful as they used to be quite some time ago.

I'm a Unix sysadmin, the MBA is my only computer. I do casual gaming on it, I use it to do graphics for my website using CS5, I use it for my work (using a VM), I use it to do my hobby coding, I use it to watch TV series and Anime in 720p. It has the upside of being light and small, so carrying it around on the motorcycle for when I'm on stand-by is less of a pain than 15" MBP or even a 13" MBP (which I had before, when it was called the Unibody Macbook).

Call me bat-**** crazy or my needs "simple", but it works for me as a stand-alone computer.
 
Perfect day for this news....

I have a new 13" MBA sitting here at my desk unopened...just dropped off from FedEx today. I'm debating whether or not to just return it and wait for the refresh or be happy with what I got.

I'm a very light user..web, email, iTunes, sync iPhone and iPad. Do I really need the Sandy Bridge power..probably not but I dont want to have the "old not so shiny ball" come June (as the rumors suggest).

Any help from the MR community is greatly appreciated!

Don't get your hopes up, as any rumour is just a speculation. Apple may or may not release any updated version of the MBA very soon, but it can all depend. If you really want power, you could sell your Air for a MBP, which came out only couple months ago.
 
The integrated Intel HD 3000 seems to be about equal to the integrated GeForce 320M when Barefeets did their tests on vidoe games.

On Portal, the HD3000 was 68FPS and the 320M was 65FPS.
On X-Plane, the HD3000 was 38FPS and the 320M was 43FPS.

Certainly worth moving to SB processors.

http://www.barefeats.com/mbps04.html

The 4Gig RAM limit is more critical than the change in graphics.
 
Disagree, the Air is a niche product, and there is a noticeable difference in weight. 2KG 13" Pro is exactly 50% heavier than 1.3KG Air, and if you lug the laptop around all day long such weight difference is noticeable. It might be added that most Air users are never gonna need the extra computing power of the MBP. If your work requires a MBP you're never going to get an Air anyway.

If you don't need the power of a MacBook Pro, then a white MacBook is the best bang for the buck. Period. The only two reasons why an Air would be desirable over a white MacBook are superficial aesthetic preferences (please people, these are computers, not fashion accessories) and weight, which brings me to...

I am going even further - I like the featherweight of the 11" and the fact that after the update it is going to be a very serious machine is not to be neglected.

After the update, it'll still be the slowest Mac in the line-up. Serious machine? Perhaps compared to a Core 2 Duo machine, but then again, at that point, they'll all have Sandy Bridge and will thusly all be serious compared to the Core 2 Duo Macs in every respect (save for the IGP in tow, of course). Featherweight? Sure, but at that point, do I really want to be editing my Microsoft Word documents or Photoshop files on a computer with an 11.6" screen? And for the same cost as a full featured Mac laptop (white MacBook)? No thanks.

Last but not least, those 2 pounds you're talking about can be crucial when deciding what to take in your hand luggage when traveling by plane. I've been up to such a decision when I had to take my 2.8kg PC laptop. That's where I guess the name of the computer comes from - Macbook Air, designed for use on an Airplane.

A 13" MacBook Pro wouldn't make travel THAT much harder. Seriously. I've traveled with a white MacBook for quite a while, and honestly, an Air would make the bag lighter, but not to the point where I'd take it over a white MacBook or a 13" MacBook Pro. Were I doing constant walking with the thing, maybe. As it stands I don't have that kind of mobile computing lifestyle, nor do I know many people that do.


The integrated Intel HD 3000 seems to be about equal to the integrated GeForce 320M when Barefeets did their tests on vidoe games.

On Portal, the HD3000 was 68FPS and the 320M was 65FPS.
On X-Plane, the HD3000 was 38FPS and the 320M was 43FPS.

Certainly worth moving to SB processors.

http://www.barefeats.com/mbps04.html

The 4Gig RAM limit is more critical than the change in graphics.

For every test that the HD 3000 beat the 320M or matched it, the CPU was largely at play. Jus' sayin'. Though really of the four Macs that ship sans a discrete GPU, the only one where it is sorely missed is the 13" MacBook Pro. For everyone else, the difference between the 320M and the HD 3000 won't matter at all.

I think you need to define very simple, because the MBA can run about everything. Lets face it, computers have been capable of running pretty much anything for the last decade, the upgrades stopped being as meaningful as they used to be quite some time ago.

I'm a Unix sysadmin, the MBA is my only computer. I do casual gaming on it, I use it to do graphics for my website using CS5, I use it for my work (using a VM), I use it to do my hobby coding, I use it to watch TV series and Anime in 720p. It has the upside of being light and small, so carrying it around on the motorcycle for when I'm on stand-by is less of a pain than 15" MBP or even a 13" MBP (which I had before, when it was called the Unibody Macbook).

Call me bat-**** crazy or my needs "simple", but it works for me as a stand-alone computer.

By "run everything", you can't possibly mean run games at "higher than medium" settings, nor edit lots of HD footage in something like Final Cut Pro. Though that's not what YOU use YOUR MacBook Air for, and really that's fine. I'm not trying to invalidate your purchase decision, man. I'm saying that on the whole, unless ultraportability ABSOLUTELY HAS TO BE A CONCERN, it's not the best of buys in an already over-priced Mac market. If you handed me $1000 and told me to buy a Mac laptop, I'd buy the white MacBook over the 11.6" Air every time. But that's a difference in opinion and frankly, I'd rather not argue difference in opinions.
 
Last edited:
I loves me my 11.6 ultimate and it hasn't let me down yet in the power department for my work with CS5, but of course, updated more faster, more shiny MBA's are always welcome. Can't say I'll upgrade but nice to see them progressing.

D.

+1

I'm totally thrilled (still) with my 11.6" 1.6ghz/4gb/128gb model.
 
Next Air will see a DRAMATIC speed improvement CPU wise and a minor decrease in GPU performance.

The GPU performance decrease is much more severe that you let on, and the improvement in CPU is rarely even used, as it sits in the idle loop most of the time as most applications are mostly i/o bound or simply sit there waiting for user input.

Also, let's not forget 2 other major points :

- VDA (Video Decode Acceleration) framework support : Intel 3000HD isn't supported, forget hardware accelerated decoding of Flash content in H.264. This has been a major lacking point on Apple's part since introducing the framework and getting rid of nVidia chipsets, they haven't yet announced any change to this framework which right now only supports the 9400m, the 9600m and the 320m.

- OpenCL. Big selling point for Snow Leopard, absent from most of their hardware line-up now. GG Apple.

The Air with the 320m right now supports both. The SB MBP 13" does not.

The main thing keeping me from wanting a MBA for software development is the 4GB RAM limit. If you're not running any virtual machines you'd probably do just fine with 4GB, but as soon as you need to run a Windows VM things will get painful (especially if you're running Visual Studio in it).

I run a Windows VM with 1 GB of dedicated memory and a Linux VM with 1.5 GB of dedicated memory. All while Xcode is open and doing something in every OS.

Seriously, software development is about the less ressource hungry task you can do on modern computers. Browsers use more system ressources nowadays than code editors/compilers/debuggers. :rolleyes:
 
Once you have it, you don't want it without.

ps:I type fastttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt

sent from swipe keyboard :D

I've never liked backlit keys and have it turned off on my MBPs. I find it annoying, personally, but I do touch type so I'm never looking at the keys. I totally understand those who do want that feature (and Apple should add it to the MBA because it appears to be important for a enough people), but personally I don't care for it and am glad I can turn it off.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)

dethmaShine said:
For a programmer dealing with Terminal, Xcode, Netbeans, Eclipse, etc (not graphic intensive softwares), would this macbook air be a better deal than the 13/15" Macbook pro?

Anyone?

It depends upon the programmer doesn't it?

One concern I would have is wear on the SSD. Due to that I couldn't recommend the current model with it's limited SSD size. Look at how much space your current installation uses and then multiply by 3. That ought to give you enough excess capacity to assure that wear leveling works to your advantage. Considering how my machine is set up that would mean about 350GB of SSD.

In any event why would you even ask if an rumored un released machine is suitable for your usage? There are many factors to consider and to evaluate them you need the machines real specs nit rumors.
 
I've never liked backlit keys and have it turned off on my MBPs. I find it annoying, personally, but I do touch type so I'm never looking at the keys. I totally understand those who do want that feature (and Apple should add it to the MBA because it appears to be important for a enough people), but personally I don't care for it and am glad I can turn it off.

I'm with you buddy. I totally don't need it either. Even if I was a hunt and peck guy, I could see keyboard fine in a dark room just by the light of the screen so I don't see the point. But that's just me. Personally I'd rather not have it drain my battery.

But since I am such a good touch typist, I don't have to worry about that. :)

But to each their own.
 
I run a Windows VM with 1 GB of dedicated memory and a Linux VM with 1.5 GB of dedicated memory. All while Xcode is open and doing something in every OS.

Seriously, software development is about the less ressource hungry task you can do on modern computers. Browsers use more system ressources nowadays than code editors/compilers/debuggers.

Totally depends on what tools you are using. Sure, when I'm at home working on a light webapp running nothing but Emacs, Chrome, Postgres, and using, for example, Python as my server-side language, 4GB of RAM is more than enough, hell I could get by with 2GB no problem.

But at work I have open: Eclipse, one or more instance of Tomcat or Jetty, Oracle SQL Developer (Java app), Windows VM with Visual Studio and other tools, and maybe a Linux VM running Oracle. I always have the Windows VM running. When I had 4GB, things would drag, and I couldn't run the Linux VM without my system becoming unusable. Now that I have 8GB things run great; I can afford to give my Windows VM over 2GB, and I don't notice the difference between running and not running my Linux VM. Sometimes I have as many as 3 VMs running using over 3GB RAM in total and things are still smooth unless there's a lot of hard drive access going on.

But it's encourage to know that you're successfully using a MBA w/ 4GB even with VMs eating up half your RAM. Maybe the SSD makes a huge difference.
 
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.

I'll give you some insight into their potential. The desktop i7-2600k has been benchmarked to be roughly equivalent to a 9400m in performance (assuming similar CPU).

i7-2600k GPU clock = 850/1350 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2410m (13" Mac Pro base) GPU clock = 650/1200 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2620m (13" Mac Pro upg) GPU clock = 650/1300 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2537m (theorized 11/13 MBA) GPU clock = 350/900 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2649m (theorized 13 MBA upg) GPU clock = 500/1100 (normal/turbo)(MHz)

As you can see, none of the mobile GPUs run quite as fast as the desktop, but the 13" 2.7GHz upg cpu's comes fairly close. Now, the 2.13 GHz MBA + 320m combo matched or beat out the i7-2620m in 75% of the tests (and only narrowly was defeated in 25%). There is going to be some random inconcistancy regardless, due to driver variances in different apps. The issue here is (and this can be shown in core2 vs. i5/i7 testing on the alienware m11x) the core2 duo really very rarely gets beat by the i5/i7 in gaming/video playback. This is because not many games are single-threaded anymore, and if using 2+ threads, the i5/i7 ULV won't jump the clock speed any. Further, the 2.13GHz was keeping up with and beating a 2.7GHz (27% higher clock!) in that test, because graphics are the bottleneck, not the CPU. Take into account that NONE of the ULV core-i options match the MBP 13" 2.7GHz upg GPU speed and its pretty clear that for graphics-intensive apps, the older 320m would be the way to go. Now for most everything else, the i7-2649m would overtake the core2 2.13GHz. This includes a lot of non-accelerated video playback (high-CPU-overhead).

Something you guys need to be wary of is the 1333MHz memory topic. Likely, Apple will choose to run it down at 1066MHz to conserve battery life. Memory speed hikes = gratuitous battery drain.

I for one am happy Apple is growing with the modern tech, but I hold no illusions as to the benefits/drawbacks of either system.
 
I have something better than a MacBook Air. It's called an iPad 2.

Honestly, they aren't very comparable. Yes, the iPad takes the place of many people's general computing, but I couldn't survive well with just my iPad. My Air in the other hand does a great job replacing my 15" MBP.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.