Is the Macbook Air worth paying 4 times the price of this?

[jaytv111]

Sorry if I came off that way. Would you like to give me examples of my false facts or facts that are really opinions?

He's probably referring to when you said netbooks have a "horrid OS", "cramped keyboard", etc. Sometimes it's true, sometimes it isn't. Check some netbook reviews first before making assumptions.

When I stated that Apple is better quality, I was comparing the Air to the netbook, not a high end Sony PC. There is just no way that a $300-$400 computer can rival a $1600+ computer in quality. When I say quality I am not necessarily talking about CPU or harddrive. I am also talking about how the Air is put together, what materials are used, what parts are used. A unibody enclosure made of one piece of aluminum is higher quality, the 13" LED screen is higher quality, the trackpad and keyboard is higher quality, etc. True these aren't facts you would find in a spec sheet but surely you would agree wouldn't you?

Kan-O-Z

And carbon fiber is even higher quality . But, just FYI, don't try to correlate quality with price every time. While I think the MBA is a high quality product, there are many times when an expensive item is truly and utterly junk. I've read horror stories about someone buying a $130,000 Mercedes sedan only to have it start breaking down literally after driving it off the lot. Also, the Mercedes CLK-GTR is one of the most expensive cars ever at over $1,000,000. But this link says at least one of them is a complete dud.

So clearly, paying more doesn't necessarily mean you're getting better quality. So do some research into quality and reliability before buying a product. Again, I do think the Air is high quality, but cost doesn't necessarily correlate with quality.

 

[Kan-O-Z]

And carbon fiber is even higher quality . But, just FYI, don't try to correlate quality with price every time. While I think the MBA is a high quality product, there are many times when an expensive item is truly and utterly junk. I've read horror stories about someone buying a $130,000 Mercedes sedan only to have it start breaking down literally after driving it off the lot. Also, the Mercedes CLK-GTR is one of the most expensive cars ever at over $1,000,000. But this link says at least one of them is a complete dud.

So clearly, paying more doesn't necessarily mean you're getting better quality. So do some research into quality and reliability before buying a product. Again, I do think the Air is high quality, but cost doesn't necessarily correlate with quality.

I agree with you Quality can sometimes be mistaken for reliability. A Toyota Corolla is a cheap car with lots of plastic parts and cheap materials....but that thing will last longer than just about any car on the road. A $130,000 Mercedes will definitely use high quality materials, the finest leather, high quality wood...just about every part on the car from the wheels, engine and exterior to the interior will be high quality. Now just because the materials are high quality doesn't mean it's super reliable.

What you are paying for with a Mercedes is the whole experience(style, luxury, features, power, status, service). It will far surpass the experience of a Corolla. If one was to look at the function of what a Corolla and a Mercedes can do, it's the exact same thing....transport people from point A to point B! If one was to look at the specs of a Mercedes that cost 10X more than a Corolla, I can tell you that Mercedes isn't 10X faster or 10X better.

Personally I like Lexus, it's the 'reliable' Mercedes I like to think of Apple as the Lexus of computers.

Now in the case of the Air, I don't think it's 4X as reliable as a cheap netbook but it may just be 3-4X as fast. This is an important factor. What this means is that the Air will be much more 'future proof' than a netbook which can't even run todays latest OSes. At some point programs will come out that just won't run on XP or perhaps they will run very poorly. This means that the netbook will need to be replaced....which will again cost another $400.

In the long run the Air may not cost as much as it seems because it will need to be replaced 'less often'. At the same time you will get a luxurious, fast and stress free computer experience.

Again the old saying that you get what you pay for is so true, especially if you are able to look at the long term picture and the overall user experience.

Kan-O-Z

 

[jaytv111]

I agree with you Quality can sometimes be mistaken for reliability. A Toyota Corolla is a cheap car with lots of plastic parts and cheap materials....but that thing will last longer than just about any car on the road. A $130,000 Mercedes will definitely use high quality materials, the finest leather, high quality wood...just about every part on the car from the wheels, engine and exterior to the interior will be high quality. Now just because the materials are high quality doesn't mean it's super reliable.

What you are paying for with a Mercedes is the whole experience(style, luxury, features, power, status, service). It will far surpass the experience of a Corolla. If one was to look at the function of what a Corolla and a Mercedes can do, it's the exact same thing....transport people from point A to point B! If one was to look at the specs of a Mercedes that cost 10X more than a Corolla, I can tell you that Mercedes isn't 10X faster or 10X better.

Personally I like Lexus, it's the 'reliable' Mercedes I like to think of Apple as the Lexus of computers.

Now in the case of the Air, I don't think it's 4X as reliable as a cheap netbook but it may just be 3-4X as fast. This is an important factor. What this means is that the Air will be much more 'future proof' than a netbook which can't even run todays latest OSes. At some point programs will come out that just won't run on XP or perhaps they will run very poorly. This means that the netbook will need to be replaced....which will again cost another $400.

In the long run the Air may not cost as much as it seems because it will need to be replaced 'less often'. At the same time you will get a luxurious, fast and stress free computer experience.

Again the old saying that you get what you pay for is so true, especially if you are able to look at the long term picture and the overall user experience.

Kan-O-Z

Argh, do some research before you post! Look into Windows 7 first of all, it'll run just as well as XP and will be the latest OS and run the latest software. Second, the MBA isn't going to be 3-4X as fast as a netbook. At most, maybe 2X as fast as a netbook. If you want 3-4X the performance, you'd need maybe a regular Core 2 Duo laptop processor.

Also, a Macbook Air isn't going to last that long either. You can't even upgrade the RAM for crissakes! Not to mention the battery will lose a large portion of its charge within a few years. With every other laptop, you can just buy another battery and swap it in. But you'll have to go through this ridiculous battery swap process with the Air.

Frankly I think of the Air as a Lotus Elise. Small, light, impractical, not a lot of features, and while nimble, it's not that fast (it's only a four cylinder). And FYI, Lexus has their own problems. Like being more boring than a bag of rocks.

 

[Kan-O-Z]

Argh, do some research before you post! Look into Windows 7 first of all, it'll run just as well as XP and will be the latest OS and run the latest software. Second, the MBA isn't going to be 3-4X as fast as a netbook. At most, maybe 2X as fast as a netbook.

Lets take a look at the Dell Mini 9 ($349):
1.6 Single Core Atom (This is probably equivalent to an old Celeron. The Air's Core 2 Duo will be 4X this)
Memory (512MB) - you're complaining about 2GB on the air?
4GB SSD - ummm, this is capacity is what was around 10 years ago
Intel GMA graphics - the NVidia is 4X this

Let's up it a bit and look at Dell Mini 12 ($549)
1.33GHZ Atom
Memory (1GB)
40GB PATA HDD

Ok this one is a bit better than the 9 but it's still no comparison to the Air. The Eee PC is better but the only thing better is the harddrive. The rest is the same.

Yes the Air is 3-4X faster. I don't have the time to look up benchmarks but if you want to prove me wrong please do.

If you want 3-4X the performance, you'd need maybe a regular Core 2 Duo laptop processor.

I think you're the one that needs to do the research. The latest Macbook Air IS roughly the equivalent of a 'regular Core 2 Duo' such as the Macbook 2.1.

Speedmark:
Macbook Air 1.86 - 174
Macbook 2.1 Core 2 Duo - 179
http://www.macworld.com/article/136760/2008/11/macbook_air_review.html

Also, a Macbook Air isn't going to last that long either. You can't even upgrade the RAM for crissakes! Not to mention the battery will lose a large portion of its charge within a few years. With every other laptop, you can just buy another battery and swap it in. But you'll have to go through this ridiculous battery swap process with the Air.

Ridiculous battery swap? It's $129 and all you do is swing by an Apple store and they're do it there! Not a big deal for me if I do this once in 2-3 years. Notebook batteries tend to cost close to $100 anyways so this isn't so much more.

We'll see about Windows 7, Vista was supposed to be the best and we all know how that turned out. At best it will run like XP which quite frankly is slow. Even Leopard runs faster than XP.

Snow Leopard will be faster, lighter than Leopard. It will be ground breaking by utilizing the GPU cores with Open CL. This means the Air(especially with the nVidia) will run faster with Snow Leopard than it runs in Leopard! I will argue that Snow Leopard will make the gap EVEN LARGER when compared to a slow netbook running a slow Windows. Who knows perhaps the Air + Snow Leopard will be 5-6X faster Now I'm really trying to get under your skin

So I stand by my word, the Air is more future proof than a netbook. Another way to look at this is that the Air probably has the specs now to what a netbook will have in 2-3 years. When a current netbook owner buys a new netbook in 2-3 years, the Air owner won't have to as it will match the netbook of that time.

By the way I like your analogy about the Lotus.

Macbook Air + Snow Leopard = Lotus Elise(Snow Leopard) with a highly tuned 200hp Toyota 4 cylinder engine, (Air's Core 2 Duo). No it doesn't have that much power but it's still faster than most cars on the road.
netbook + Windows = Caprice Classic(Windows) with a 3 cylinder engine(Atom processor). This may be driveable but it sure won't be pleasant

Kan-O-Z

 

[jaytv111]

Lets take a look at the Dell Mini 9 ($349):
1.6 Single Core Atom (This is probably equivalent to an old Celeron. The Air's Core 2 Duo will be 4X this)

According to?

Memory (512MB) - you're complaining about 2GB on the air?

At least you can upgrade. Every other laptop you can upgrade the RAM. And my point was that you're not very future proof if you can't upgrade the RAM.

4GB SSD - ummm, this is capacity is what was around 10 years ago

I would compare never the crappy SSD's on netbooks to hard drive models. They're slower, smaller, and expensive.

Intel GMA graphics - the NVidia is 4X this

Maybe, but I don't believe it'll be of any use when the most anyone does with their Air is light Photoshopping.

I think you're the one that needs to do the research. The latest Macbook Air IS roughly the equivalent of a 'regular Core 2 Duo' such as the Macbook 2.1.

Speedmark:
Macbook Air 1.86 - 174
Macbook 2.1 Core 2 Duo - 179
http://www.macworld.com/article/136760/2008/11/macbook_air_review.html

So comparing a previous generation processor to a current generation one is your idea of a fair comparison? Laughable really. Stick to current generation processors only.

Ridiculous battery swap? It's $129 and all you do is swing by an Apple store and they're do it there! Not a big deal for me if I do this once in 2-3 years. Notebook batteries tend to cost close to $100 anyways so this isn't so much more.

I'd say it's still more convenient to do it at home. No downtime especially if you actually needed your laptop.

We'll see about Windows 7, Vista was supposed to be the best and we all know how that turned out. At best it will run like XP which quite frankly is slow. Even Leopard runs faster than XP.

As far as I can tell, Vista is pretty decent. It's not perfect of course. And have you used XP on a netbook, or 7 for that matter? If not, then you're not qualified to say how it is. Read this

Snow Leopard will be faster, lighter than Leopard. It will be ground breaking by utilizing the GPU cores with Open CL. This means the Air(especially with the nVidia) will run faster with Snow Leopard than it runs in Leopard! I will argue that Snow Leopard will make the gap EVEN LARGER when compared to a slow netbook running a slow Windows. Who knows perhaps the Air + Snow Leopard will be 5-6X faster Now I'm really trying to get under your skin

Well, just so you know, all of that is currently just hype. You can't even bring me a source that says the Air is 4x faster than a typical netbook. lol

So I stand by my word, the Air is more future proof than a netbook. Another way to look at this is that the Air probably has the specs now to what a netbook will have in 2-3 years. When a current netbook owner buys a new netbook in 2-3 years, the Air owner won't have to as it will match the netbook of that time.

I don't know what specs we'll see in 2 years. I don't think either netbooks or the Air are very future proof anyway. And pretty much all laptops are nowhere near what I would call future proof. I'm sure we'll see amazing things in a couple years that will make me just want to throw my laptop away. I'd probably put the Air at 3 years, and the Eee 1000H at maybe 1.5 to 2 years. But it's still a third of the price of the Air.

By the way I like your analogy about the Lotus.

Macbook Air + Snow Leopard = Lotus Elise(Snow Leopard) with a highly tuned 200hp Toyota 4 cylinder engine, (Air's Core 2 Duo). No it doesn't have that much power but it's still faster than most cars on the road.

So we agree then that the Air is utterly impractical for nearly everyone?

netbook + Windows = Caprice Classic(Windows) with a 3 cylinder engine(Atom processor). This may be driveable but it sure won't be pleasant

Kan-O-Z

I'm pretty sure a 3 cylinder engine isn't powerful enough to even move a Caprice. I'd say the Eee 100H is more like a Toyota Corolla, or maybe a Yaris. Slow, small, but does the job. And can fit more cargo than the Elise lol.

 

[sanPietro98]

There is one often unheralded feature about the MBA that is a HUGE deal for me... carpel tunnel / repetitve stress disorder.

I use a lot of laptop computers for work and home. The MBA is the ONLY laptop that doesn't give me these wrist and ergonomic issues. The MBA is so thin and low-to-the-desk that it is extremely comfortable to use -- even after hours of nonstop typing.

After 2 hours of typing on Dell or even MBP laptops, my wrists and fingers get very uncomfortable and "tingly". Of course, this is just me, but the thinness of the MBA makes all the difference.

 

[GoCubsGo]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5F136 Safari/525.20)

The Eee PC will do what an Air does. However the air runs a more stable os and in my opinion may last longer. I've seen the Eee PC run OSX but it wasn't easy. The MSI Wind runs OSX smoother for sure. I mean if you want to try it.

I'm quoting my own post because I stand mildly corrected.

Now having an Air I will comfortably say that while the netbook has it's place in life, it is not a replacement for the Air. The Air is in a class above the netbooks. I like the netbooks, they're toys though and this Air is handling more than I anticipated. I mentioned to some people my MacPro would do all my heavy lifting, I was incorrect. The Air actually handles some of this. While I'd be a fool to choose my Air over my MacPro for certain tasks, in a bind this Air definitely handles the tasks at hand. Moreover, I am certain the netbooks would not be suitable for general photo editing (slightly more than what you get in iPhoto but less than Photoshop (think PS Elements), it would not be suitable for ripping movies as far as I'm concerned, and the build quality of the ones I have seen are subpar compared to the Air.

The Air has flaws no doubt, the size overall clearly makes for something we can't ever really expand, but I knew this going in.

 

[Kan-O-Z]

According to?

Ok you made me do a little research and I wasn't too far off with my estimates:

Cinebench 9.5
Intel Core 2 Duo 2.0GHz - 617
Intel Atom 1.6GHz - 158
http://xtreview.com/addcomment-id-4801-view-Intel-atom-1.6-Ghz-benchmark.html

Now before you say that the 1.86 Core 2 Duo isn't the same as a 2.0 Core 2 Duo...it's not that far off. As a matter of fact, the closest thing to a 1.6 Atom is a 600MHz Core 2 Duo.

It looks like 3-4X holds true.

At least you can upgrade. Every other laptop you can upgrade the RAM. And my point was that you're not very future proof if you can't upgrade the RAM.

Well we know that Snow Leopard(future OS) is getting more efficient, not more bloated. This means that there will be no requirement for a higher RAM at least in the near future....as a matter of fact Snow Leopard might even have a lower requirement for memory. For most users, 2GB is not going to come up short for a very long time.
No you can't upgrade the RAM in the Air but netbooks are at 512MB of RAM today. Perhaps in 3 years 2GB of RAM will be standard in netbooks. So the Air will become a netbook in 3 years. Perhaps a netbook lasts 1.5-2 years as you stated. This gives a total duration for the Air as 4.5-5 years which is easily 2-3 times that of a netbook.
When comparing the price of the Air and a netbook, multiply the price of the netbook 2-3 times....because that is how much longer an Air will last in terms of power and specs.

Maybe, but I don't believe it'll be of any use when the most anyone does with their Air is light Photoshopping.

In case you didn't read about Snow Leopard, ALL GPU Cores will be used by the OS for general purpose processing. The Air will not only use it's dual core 1.86 CPU but will also combine the power of it's nVidia 9400 GPU for OS stuff! This means that you will gain benefits in anything you do since the GPU now behaves like a CPU. The Air will behave like it has 2 CPUs (one is the Intel Core 2 Duo, the other is the nVidia 9400 with many cores).

This is why I said that this will put an even bigger performance gap between the Air and a Windows netbook. I'll guess that the Air(with Snow Leopard) will perform 5-6X better than a netbook running Windows.

So comparing a previous generation processor to a current generation one is your idea of a fair comparison? Laughable really. Stick to current generation processors only.

Ummm, the one I listed is currently being sold by Apple. Go to their website. It is current!

I'd say it's still more convenient to do it at home. No downtime especially if you actually needed your laptop.

Yeah I won't argue that it would be nice but it's one of the ways they were able to make the Air so thin. It's not much of a negative to me.

Well, just so you know, all of that is currently just hype. You can't even bring me a source that says the Air is 4x faster than a typical netbook. lol

Read up on Snow Leopard(coming in just a few months).

I just did give you a link that showed CPU benchmarks that prove the Air is 3-4X faster.

So we agree then that the Air is utterly impractical for nearly everyone?

It is impractical for some, but not for others. It all depends what you use on your computer and what you value. Personally I don't use many ports on my computer nor do I use the optical drive. It does make a good daily computer for most. For me it's not impractical because they got rid of things that aren't important and gave me slim and light instead

I'm pretty sure a 3 cylinder engine isn't powerful enough to even move a Caprice. I'd say the Eee 100H is more like a Toyota Corolla, or maybe a Yaris. Slow, small, but does the job. And can fit more cargo than the Elise lol.

LOL, this is funny. The reason I said Caprice is because it's a boat, sort of like Windows. XP isn't so bad when it's freshly installed but in a few short months, it bloats up and really starts dragging.

Kan-O-Z

 

[jaytv111]

Ok you made me do a little research and I wasn't too far off with my estimates:

Cinebench 9.5
Intel Core 2 Duo 2.0GHz - 617
Intel Atom 1.6GHz - 158
http://xtreview.com/addcomment-id-4801-view-Intel-atom-1.6-Ghz-benchmark.html

Now before you say that the 1.86 Core 2 Duo isn't the same as a 2.0 Core 2 Duo...it's not that far off. As a matter of fact, the closest thing to a 1.6 Atom is a 600MHz Core 2 Duo.

It looks like 3-4X holds true.

Yeah exactly, it's not the same processor. 2-3X tops. lol

Well we know that Snow Leopard(future OS) is getting more efficient, not more bloated. This means that there will be no requirement for a higher RAM at least in the near future....as a matter of fact Snow Leopard might even have a lower requirement for memory. For most users, 2GB is not going to come up short for a very long time.

Well I didn't dispute anything, but we'll have to wait and see.

No you can't upgrade the RAM in the Air but netbooks are at 512MB of RAM today.

Most (that I've seen) are 1 GB by the way.

Perhaps in 3 years 2GB of RAM will be standard in netbooks. So the Air will become a netbook in 3 years. Perhaps a netbook lasts 1.5-2 years as you stated. This gives a total duration for the Air as 4.5-5 years which is easily 2-3 times that of a netbook.

Depends on your usage.

When comparing the price of the Air and a netbook, multiply the price of the netbook 2-3 times....because that is how much longer an Air will last in terms of power and specs.

Maybe you're right. But I'd still go for a Macbook over the Air. I would think the Macbook would last longer.

In case you didn't read about Snow Leopard, ALL GPU Cores will be used by the OS for general purpose processing. The Air will not only use it's dual core 1.86 CPU but will also combine the power of it's nVidia 9400 GPU for OS stuff! This means that you will gain benefits in anything you do since the GPU now behaves like a CPU. The Air will behave like it has 2 CPUs (one is the Intel Core 2 Duo, the other is the nVidia 9400 with many cores).

yes I read about it. It's still preliminary. Hold on a second, won't using your GPU as well as your CPU kill your battery life? I would assume they wouldn't use the GPU too much while on battery. By the way, I would think this feature will be used more with desktops with powerful GPUs than laptops. Regardless I'm not in disagreement seeing as how Snow Leopard isn't out yet.

This is why I said that this will put an even bigger performance gap between the Air and a Windows netbook. I'll guess that the Air(with Snow Leopard) will perform 5-6X better than a netbook running Windows.

We'll see, still preliminary.

Ummm, the one I listed is currently being sold by Apple. Go to their website. It is current!

The Macbook White? It's not Montevina, the latest architecture/chipset. The Macbook Air is. Hence, comparing the two isn't fair. You might as well compare it with the Mac Mini, which is several generations behind in processors.

Yeah I won't argue that it would be nice but it's one of the ways they were able to make the Air so thin. It's not much of a negative to me.

I'd think they could make it just as thin while still having a user replaceable battery. They just half-assed the engineering lol. (Sony's ultrathin X505 has a replaceable battery.)

Read up on Snow Leopard(coming in just a few months).

I just did give you a link that showed CPU benchmarks that prove the Air is 3-4X faster.

No you didn't. You gave me a link comparing completely different processors.

It is impractical for some, but not for others. It all depends what you use on your computer and what you value. Personally I don't use many ports on my computer nor do I use the optical drive. It does make a good daily computer for most. For me it's not impractical because they got rid of things that aren't important and gave me slim and light instead

Good for you. Doesn't work for me and other people though.

LOL, this is funny. The reason I said Caprice is because it's a boat, sort of like Windows. XP isn't so bad when it's freshly installed but in a few short months, it bloats up and really starts dragging.

Kan-O-Z

I've used XP for 4 years and it doesn't "bloat" up within months. That happens after several years. The point about Windows 7 still stands, and you suspiciously didn't even mention it. What did you think of the link I posted that said Windows 7 runs well on a netbook?

The Caprice comparison would be valid if it's a netbook running Vista, no doubt.

 

[Kan-O-Z]

Yeah exactly, it's not the same processor. 2-3X tops. lol



Well I didn't dispute anything, but we'll have to wait and see.



Most (that I've seen) are 1 GB by the way.



Depends on your usage.



Maybe you're right. But I'd still go for a Macbook over the Air. I would think the Macbook would last longer.



yes I read about it. It's still preliminary. Hold on a second, won't using your GPU as well as your CPU kill your battery life? I would assume they wouldn't use the GPU too much while on battery. By the way, I would think this feature will be used more with desktops with powerful GPUs than laptops. Regardless I'm not in disagreement seeing as how Snow Leopard isn't out yet.



We'll see, still preliminary.



The Macbook White? It's not Montevina, the latest architecture/chipset. The Macbook Air is. Hence, comparing the two isn't fair. You might as well compare it with the Mac Mini, which is several generations behind in processors.




I'd think they could make it just as thin while still having a user replaceable battery. They just half-assed the engineering lol. (Sony's ultrathin X505 has a replaceable battery.)





No you didn't. You gave me a link comparing completely different processors.





Good for you. Doesn't work for me and other people though.



I've used XP for 4 years and it doesn't "bloat" up within months. That happens after several years. The point about Windows 7 still stands, and you suspiciously didn't even mention it. What did you think of the link I posted that said Windows 7 runs well on a netbook?

The Caprice comparison would be valid if it's a netbook running Vista, no doubt.

Well I'm glad we agree then

Just one last thing.....

600MHz Core 2 Duo X 3 = 1.8GHz Core 2 Duo

Atom 1.6 is slower than 600MHz Core 2 Duo
Macbook Air 1.86 is faster than 1.8GHz Core 2 Duo

Sooo.....

Macbook Air 1.86 is MORE THAN 3X Atom 1.6



Kan-O-Z

 

[jaytv111]

Well I'm glad we agree then

Just one last thing.....

600MHz Core 2 Duo X 3 = 1.8GHz Core 2 Duo

Atom 1.6 is slower than 600MHz Core 2 Duo
Macbook Air 1.86 is faster than 1.8GHz Core 2 Duo

Sooo.....

Macbook Air 1.86 is MORE THAN 3X Atom 1.6



Kan-O-Z

Yeah, clock speed is everything, right?
They're not the same, and multiplying 600 MHZ C2D by 3 isn't the same as 1.86 GHZ Low voltage C2D. Regardless I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, no more than 3 times as fast.

 

[pointandclick]

Sorry if I came off that way. Would you like to give me examples of my false facts or facts that are really opinions?

When I stated that Apple is better quality, I was comparing the Air to the netbook, not a high end Sony PC. There is just no way that a $300-$400 computer can rival a $1600+ computer in quality. When I say quality I am not necessarily talking about CPU or harddrive. I am also talking about how the Air is put together, what materials are used, what parts are used. A unibody enclosure made of one piece of aluminum is higher quality, the 13" LED screen is higher quality, the trackpad and keyboard is higher quality, etc. True these aren't facts you would find in a spec sheet but surely you would agree wouldn't you?

Kan-O-Z

Like when you put quantitative values on OS X and it's bundled software in order to justify the price premium Macs carry.

No doubt the Air contains higher quality components. I don't think anyone here is even implying that it doesn't. That's not the question. The question is, is paying several times more for a machine that will for the most part do the same thing worth it?
It's true that the specs of the Air blow any netbook out of the water. The 1.6 atom is roughly equal to a 900mhz Celeron. Versus any Core 2 in a processor intensive task would be like a Pinto vs a Corvette. For the small fraction of users that do more than web and word processing, it's a no brainer.

The kicker is that the majority of users of either the Air or a netbook will be doing little more than that. I consider myself somewhat of a power user (CS major). Out of all the people I know who own computers, I can pick out 3 that do more than web and email on a regular basis, 2 of which are also CS majors.
Most people aren't going to be slaving away in CS4 in the middle of class or in a cafe. If they are, they wouldn't be considering a netbook.

After discarding the technical merits, all that's left is build quality and aesthetics. I think most netbooks are build at least as well as an Air... at least my conscience would be more at ease throwing a netbook in my bookbag than an Air. Paying 3x as much for something that looks good is your prerogative.
I did it with the MBP. I could have found another machine somewhat cheaper, but it was worth paying a little more for the looks, size, weight, etc since it was my main machine. If the difference was 2-3-4 fold I probably would have reconsidered.

Like I said, spec for spec, there is no competition. If you need to run intensive apps there wouldn't even be any comparison, otherwise a netbook is a better value by far.

Quite frankly though, I've been kind of disappointed with some of Apples offerings of late. The success since the Intel transition must be going to Steves head. It doesn't help that no matter what he releases people think it's the best thing since sliced bread.

 

[iomatic]

Argh, do some research before you post! Look into Windows 7 first of all, it'll run just as well as XP and will be the latest OS and run the latest software. Second, the MBA isn't going to be 3-4X as fast as a netbook. At most, maybe 2X as fast as a netbook. If you want 3-4X the performance, you'd need maybe a regular Core 2 Duo laptop processor.

Also, a Macbook Air isn't going to last that long either. You can't even upgrade the RAM for crissakes! Not to mention the battery will lose a large portion of its charge within a few years. With every other laptop, you can just buy another battery and swap it in. But you'll have to go through this ridiculous battery swap process with the Air.

Frankly I think of the Air as a Lotus Elise. Small, light, impractical, not a lot of features, and while nimble, it's not that fast (it's only a four cylinder). And FYI, Lexus has their own problems. Like being more boring than a bag of rocks.

Good lord, this thread is still going?

FFS, another car analogy? As far as an Elise? Tell you what: I'll take one, you grab a freaking Taurus and we'll see who wins at the track. Autocross? Race? 1/4? Maybe you just browse the Web, but the rest of us, you know, work.

 

[Kan-O-Z]

Like when you put quantitative values on OS X and it's bundled software in order to justify the price premium Macs carry.

No doubt the Air contains higher quality components. I don't think anyone here is even implying that it doesn't. That's not the question. The question is, is paying several times more for a machine that will for the most part do the same thing worth it?
It's true that the specs of the Air blow any netbook out of the water. The 1.6 atom is roughly equal to a 900mhz Celeron. Versus any Core 2 in a processor intensive task would be like a Pinto vs a Corvette. For the small fraction of users that do more than web and word processing, it's a no brainer.

The kicker is that the majority of users of either the Air or a netbook will be doing little more than that. I consider myself somewhat of a power user (CS major). Out of all the people I know who own computers, I can pick out 3 that do more than web and email on a regular basis, 2 of which are also CS majors.
Most people aren't going to be slaving away in CS4 in the middle of class or in a cafe. If they are, they wouldn't be considering a netbook.

After discarding the technical merits, all that's left is build quality and aesthetics. I think most netbooks are build at least as well as an Air... at least my conscience would be more at ease throwing a netbook in my bookbag than an Air. Paying 3x as much for something that looks good is your prerogative.
I did it with the MBP. I could have found another machine somewhat cheaper, but it was worth paying a little more for the looks, size, weight, etc since it was my main machine. If the difference was 2-3-4 fold I probably would have reconsidered.

Like I said, spec for spec, there is no competition. If you need to run intensive apps there wouldn't even be any comparison, otherwise a netbook is a better value by far.

Quite frankly though, I've been kind of disappointed with some of Apples offerings of late. The success since the Intel transition must be going to Steves head. It doesn't help that no matter what he releases people think it's the best thing since sliced bread.

The question isn't whether you would use it or not, the question is whether it's worth it's price. I will say yes it is because if it's got 3X the specs of a netbook and will last 2X longer in usability(because of it's specs thus paying itself off in a way), and can run the latest and greatest software then it IS worth 3X more....for me. But not for all people. This is a very individual question you have to answer for yourself.

If we go by your logic, how many people in this world need a computer with a video card which most desktops have? How many people really need a 250GB HDD that's standard on most desktops? How many people need a 20" desktop screen when perhaps a 10" is good enough just to check email/surf the web? According to you most people just surf the web and check email so you might as well save your money and buy 3-4 year old computer. Right?

I'll speak from what I see with my wife since she is not a techie and she's in sales. Before our first Mac, she would do just surf the web and nothing more. Since our Mac, she has started to do a lot more. She uses iPhoto all the time (adding pics of the dogs, light editing, uploading to facebook)...I would say almost daily. She will use iMovie to post to youtube from time to time since we have dogs and we take movie clips of them with our digital camera. Once in a while, she'll add some stuff to our website using iWeb. She really likes iTunes and iChat. She now likes to video conference once in a while with her family. iLife is really awesome, especially for amateurs. She would never have done any of this on a PC.

What I am trying to say here is that since we got our first Mac, she now uses the computer more extensively than just surfing the web or email. It's actually really interesting to see a 'non-computer person' doing these things. Now I can't imagine her doing some of these things on a netbook(assuming you could even get OS X or iLife working on a netbook). So it's a no brainer for us that we'd like to have the capability to do these things on the Air while we're on the go or around the house

Kan-O-Z

 

[jaytv111]

Good lord, this thread is still going?

FFS, another car analogy? As far as an Elise? Tell you what: I'll take one, you grab a freaking Taurus and we'll see who wins at the track. Autocross? Race? 1/4? Maybe you just browse the Web, but the rest of us, you know, work.

Hey tough guy, you want the Elise? then take it. I'll take a car that can freakin hold more than 2 people and a backpack. Or tell you what, you take the Elise, I'll take a Lamborghini Murcielago and we'll which one's faster, k?

And where did I say I only browse the web? I was saying that people typically don't do more than web browsing and email, mmkay? I use Matlab, Photoshop, Visual Studio, NX 5, the usual productivity apps, in addition to web browsing and email. OK buddy?

 

[jaytv111]

If we go by your logic, how many people in this world need a computer with a video card which most desktops have? How many people really need a 250GB HDD that's standard on most desktops? How many people need a 20" desktop screen when perhaps a 10" is good enough just to check email/surf the web? According to you most people just surf the web and check email so you might as well save your money and buy 3-4 year old computer. Right?

Kan-O-Z

The difference is that desktops are usually dirt cheap. Plus you can actually game on desktops. But you make some good points. By the way, I looked at the original Asus Eee (700 series) today and it is pretty cheaply built. The keyboard was crap, but maybe I'm spoiled because I'm used to my Thinkpad keyboard . You definitely are right about the low end netbooks, they have crap for keyboards and the screens are unusably small. But I still think the higher end netbooks are a lot better (much better keyboards and much bigger screens) and somewhat more comparable to the Air. In the end it will depend on your usage.

 

[pointandclick]

The question isn't whether you would use it or not, the question is whether it's worth it's price. I will say yes it is because if it's got 3X the specs of a netbook and will last 2X longer in usability(because of it's specs thus paying itself off in a way), and can run the latest and greatest software then it IS worth 3X more....for me. But not for all people. This is a very individual question you have to answer for yourself.

If we go by your logic, how many people in this world need a computer with a video card which most desktops have? How many people really need a 250GB HDD that's standard on most desktops? How many people need a 20" desktop screen when perhaps a 10" is good enough just to check email/surf the web? According to you most people just surf the web and check email so you might as well save your money and buy 3-4 year old computer. Right?

I'll speak from what I see with my wife since she is not a techie and she's in sales. Before our first Mac, she would do just surf the web and nothing more. Since our Mac, she has started to do a lot more. She uses iPhoto all the time (adding pics of the dogs, light editing, uploading to facebook)...I would say almost daily. She will use iMovie to post to youtube from time to time since we have dogs and we take movie clips of them with our digital camera. Once in a while, she'll add some stuff to our website using iWeb. She really likes iTunes and iChat. She now likes to video conference once in a while with her family. iLife is really awesome, especially for amateurs. She would never have done any of this on a PC.

What I am trying to say here is that since we got our first Mac, she now uses the computer more extensively than just surfing the web or email. It's actually really interesting to see a 'non-computer person' doing these things. Now I can't imagine her doing some of these things on a netbook(assuming you could even get OS X or iLife working on a netbook). So it's a no brainer for us that we'd like to have the capability to do these things on the Air while we're on the go or around the house

Kan-O-Z

Most desktops don't come with video cards, they come with integrated chips unless you buy mid-high end or pay for it. Your absolutely right. Most people could use a 3-4 year old desktop. Most wouldn't notice a difference between a 3 year old machine and a bundle you would go out to Best Buy and take home today. The kicker is that computer prices have steadily decreased while power has grown exponentially. There's no reason for most people to spend more than $5-600 on a machine, unless they want to. You can go out and buy a brand new Dell for little to no more than you would spend on buying a used system though.

You'd be hard pressed to find a new machine with less than a 250g hard drive and a 19, or at least 17" monitor.

You and your wife are probably more the exception than the rule. You can buy a "better" computer, but if your needs can be met buy something cheaper then it's not really better now is it?

Again, it all comes down to preference and needs, but like I said if your even bothering to compare a netbook and the Air it would have to be assumed that either would meet your needs and in that case a netbook would clearly be a better value.

The difference is that desktops are usually dirt cheap. Plus you can actually game on desktops. But you make some good points. By the way, I looked at the original Asus Eee (700 series) today and it is pretty cheaply built. The keyboard was crap, but maybe I'm spoiled because I'm used to my Thinkpad keyboard . You definitely are right about the low end netbooks, they have crap for keyboards and the screens are unusably small. But I still think the higher end netbooks are a lot better (much better keyboards and much bigger screens) and somewhat more comparable to the Air. In the end it will depend on your usage.

The 700 was the very first model. If Apple's rev A products are any indication, there's bound to be more than a few problems.

 

[j26]

....

I'll speak from what I see with my wife since she is not a techie and she's in sales. Before our first Mac, she would do just surf the web and nothing more. Since our Mac, she has started to do a lot more. She uses iPhoto all the time (adding pics of the dogs, light editing, uploading to facebook)...I would say almost daily. She will use iMovie to post to youtube from time to time since we have dogs and we take movie clips of them with our digital camera. Once in a while, she'll add some stuff to our website using iWeb. She really likes iTunes and iChat. She now likes to video conference once in a while with her family. iLife is really awesome, especially for amateurs. She would never have done any of this on a PC.

What I am trying to say here is that since we got our first Mac, she now uses the computer more extensively than just surfing the web or email. It's actually really interesting to see a 'non-computer person' doing these things. Now I can't imagine her doing some of these things on a netbook(assuming you could even get OS X or iLife working on a netbook). So it's a no brainer for us that we'd like to have the capability to do these things on the Air while we're on the go or around the house

Kan-O-Z

Just on a point of information - a netbook running OSX CAN do all of those quite well (okay, iMovie is a bit slow, but still usable).

 

[andyOSX]

Yeah, clock speed is everything, right?
They're not the same, and multiplying 600 MHZ C2D by 3 isn't the same as 1.86 GHZ Low voltage C2D. Regardless I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, no more than 3 times as fast.

Um... 3x faster processor, 4x faster graphics, 3x HD size, not to mention faster bus, faster memory etc...

That is a HUGE difference. Good luck playing COD4 on a netbook. Cuz it runs very well on a Rev B MBA.

You're making this too easy! You are arguing our points for us.

 

[andyOSX]

Just on a point of information - a netbook running OSX CAN do all of those quite well (okay, iMovie is a bit slow, but still usable).

If you deem iMovie to be "usable" on a netbook with integrated graphics and a 1/3 as powerful processor, then it would absolutely SCREAM on a MBA (relatively). Not to mention the HD space limitations on a netbook. Good luck using that 10" screen to edit video!!!

 

[j26]

If you deem iMovie to be "usable" on a netbook with integrated graphics and a 1/3 as powerful processor, then it would absolutely SCREAM on a MBA (relatively). Not to mention the HD space limitations on a netbook. Good luck using that 10" screen to edit video!!!

I have a MacBook that's relegated to desktop duty and it does most of my iMovie work, but a netbook serves my on the move needs adequately. My netbook has a 320gig hdd and 2 gigs ram - there's ample space. The screen is fine for light iMovie use (I'm no pro, so that's fine), but can connect up to larger screens anyway.

It cost €379, plus €15 for an extra gig of ram, and €50ish (IIRC) to upgrade the hdd. That's less than €450 for a well competent machine, versus €1,699 for a MBA - I'll keep my €1,250 in my pocket, thank you very much. It's too high a price to pay for COD4 (which I don't play), and slightly faster video editing.

 

[jaytv111]

Um... 3x faster processor, 4x faster graphics, 3x HD size, not to mention faster bus, faster memory etc...

Yeah and over 3 times the price. We're not arguing pure specs here, that's worthless, we're arguing if it's worth it given the premium price.

That is a HUGE difference. Good luck playing COD4 on a netbook. Cuz it runs very well on a Rev B MBA.

I love that game. I play it whenever I can, which nowadays is once a week. It runs pretty well on my Xbox 360. And the X360 is a lot cheaper than the Air lol. I think you can buy an X360, Eee 1000H, and LCD TV for the price of an Air.

 

[Doju]

Jay, to be honest, you're an idiot.

Of course you can play COD4 on a 360, but that's not the point. The point is that you have a MacBook Air that runs it well, and tons of other things, not to mention being portable. If the only use of the Air was to play 360 games, then of course it wouldn't be worth it, but the list of things it can do stretch incredibly further than an XBox.

And secondly, statements like "impractical for nearly everyone" are childish and incorrect. You can't make the assumption that it's impractical for nearly everyone; you don't know nearly everyone. The fact is, there's quite a few of us that don't need ports, and don't need the speed for what we do, and for us, the air is perfect. Why buy specs and features you don't need when you could have a more portable laptop that does what you need? Sure, you pay a couple hundred dollars more, but considering the use you'll get out of your Air, and you'll likely have it for two years at minimum, the couple hundred dollars is like a drop of water in an ocean.

Are you so foolish to believe that due to the fact it's not convenient for you, that it isn't convenient for others? Grow up.

 

[Kan-O-Z]

Here is really what it comes down to. If you can afford an Air and really want it then get it. For me, I am sort of passionate about my computers. I want a really nice screen, I want some power, I want style, I want quality and I want service. I want a smile on my face when I am computing because it just looks so good and runs so smooth and fast, and just feels great. And it has an awesome OS. For me, these things are all luxuries and enhance my computing experience! These are all things that aren't 'specs' but are additional luxuries that you get with an Air. If you can afford an Air and want these luxuries then the Air is for you!
As a car analogy think of a 2 seater Porsche Boxster!

If you couldn't care less about your computer and just want it to get your job done while on the go(and I will still say light jobs here), then the netbook is for you. Some people view their computers as a tool and could care less how good their screen looks, how cheaply it's built or whatever. They just want to be able to check email/surf the web on the go for the cheapest amount of money. This is the mentality of a netbook owner. There is nothing wrong with this, it's just a different mentality and a different use. If you are one of these people, then get a netbook.
As a car analogy, think of a 2 seater Smart Car!

Both the Porsche Boxster and Smart car do the same thing, they carry 2 people easily up to 70mph and small luggage with them. Does that mean the Porsche is just a waste of money. While some may think so, it's not! It's for people who #1 can afford one and #2 are passionate about cars and passtionate about driving #3 want the luxury of an upscale brand.

It's sort of pointless to keep comparing these over and over again. Let the point be known that the Air does offer very impressive specs for it's size and offers luxuries beyond it's specs which IS what makes it worth what it's worth. There is no doubt about this. For instance, the high quality (Macbook Pro like) LED screen on the Air alone is probably worth $300-$400....about the price of a netbook. Once again there is no question that the Air is worth what it's worth!

The question really is: Whether it's worth it to YOU!

Kan-O-Z

 

[j26]

^^^ See the post above for quote^^^

The question really is: Whether it's worth it to YOU!

Kan-O-Z

With the exception of the last sentence, that is possibly some of the most ridiculous and arrogant tripe I've seen in my several years on this forum. Enough of the car analogies and ego stroking that goes with it.

It boils down to nothing like what you say. Value means different things to different people. I'd hate to have a MBA as I don't like the footprint, I don't like the bezel (I don't like it on the MacBook either), I don't like the lack of ports, I don't like the non-user replacable battery, AND I don't like the price.
To me a netbook is a sort of spiritual successor to the 12" PowerBook that the MBA should have been. It failed to be because of an obsession with style over substance which created an over-engineered product that costs a ridiculous amount of cash for what you get.

If Apple produced a low power laptop with a netbook style footprint at a reasonable price, I'd be first in line. But they don't - instead there is the MBA which is neither a full laptop nor a netbook, and priced above the price point of either.

But if you want one, fire ahead - just don't believe that the world envies you because you can afford such an expensive computer.