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.
MacBook Air Suitable Montevina Chips Due Later This Year
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple described sales numbers as "successful." It's impossible to say for sure, but this guy is running some estimates and comes up with some numbers that indicate they're selling well enough to be worth it for Apple.
http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/ba...sales-decoded-successful-not-thrilling-means/
Agreed, like I posted above, Intel is more likely to go down to the 17W chips and maintain the 1.86GHz speed (and drop the 1.6GHz speed).
The big improvement for the next MBAir will be SSD performance. Q3 is going to bring about much faster, cheaper SSDs. Supertalent announced their 2.5"/1.8" SSDs at cutrate prices for good performance (60GB for $450, 120GB for $680, 120MB/s read, 40MB/s write). The current SSDs were in the range of 40/40 for r/w performance.
Note differences exist between the Penryn and Merom cores that give Penryn advantages clock for clock (also access to better FSB throughput). The MacBook Air currently has a core based off of the Merom core not Penryn (also 65nm and 45nm process difference). That is what I was talking about.
I personally would expect Apple to use the SL9300 and SL9400 or some slightly bumped versions of those (slightly higher clock speed) in a revision to the MacBook Air. That would give you similar to better performance with longer battery life.
Either you can't read, or your sense of dimensions is massively distorted. In most of the free world, .7' IS thinner than .76'.
I know you were talking about functionality versus style but I found it amusing that you compared the MBA to a "brick" while at the same time saying you prefer the voodoo being "blocky". Hmmmmm...
Anyway, +1 for the voodoo uglinesss
How's that? If it consumes more power it will definitely use more battery!
I thought I read that the 45nm chips used less power, not more. Unless they underclock the processor as others mention, but to me that seems a bit self defeating. One would hope that we would see a speed bump also. We shall see!
I wonder if any one actually READS the threads and articles BEFORE posting.
The article indicated that they would have the new chip architecture (45nm vs 65nm) which one would think would improve battery life, BUT it ALSO says that they will be shipping at HIGHER clock speeds (2.26 and 2.4 vs 1.6 and 1.8 of the current models), THUS accounting for a higher wattage (25 vs 20) and thereby potentially sacrificing battery life. UNLESS other internal low power chips are perhaps designed by Apple's new acquisition, PA Semi, to help offset that additional power consumption.
Otherwise, as other posters have already indicated, the chips could be underclocked to help increase the battery life.
Personally, I'd prefer performance boosts with a light battery life drop versus dummying down a processor's capability just to increase battery life slightly. I can't personally imagine that there are many people who are away from an outlet (this is the 21st century) for more than 3 hours of use at a time. This segment of my reply is MY OPINION ONLY and how I feel. I will NOT, however, complain like some, that a failure by Apple to increase battery life, or to give a maximum speed chip, is a ball dropped by Apple. As long as they continue to improve upon the capability, design, and performance of their products in an OVERALL manner, I will continue to be a loyal and dedicated Apple user.
Doesn't everyone use their MBA for High Def video editing in the middle of Death Valley where there are no electrical outlets?
Doesn't everyone use their MBA for High Def video editing in the middle of Death Valley where there are no electrical outlets?
Yeah, and it's called Starbucks.
And 1.8 GHz to 2.4 GHz represents a speed performance of 33% (versus 25% you reference) ... kinda helps offset the "slight" wattage increase. Do the math already. The article did not say you were getting the same or less performance for your increase in wattage and loss of battery life.
That Voodoo box looks pretty ugly, but a nice selection of ports. It'd be nice to see the Air with 2+ USB and an eSata at least.
In terms of speed vs. battery, I'd like to see Apple let the user choose which "mode" he wants to work in. I can certainly see myself wanting both at different times. If it's not possible, then make it possible!
In terms of speed vs. battery, I'd like to see Apple let the user choose which "mode" he wants to work in. I can certainly see myself wanting both at different times. If it's not possible, then make it possible!
It's an issue if you take flights that last longer than 3 hours, especially since the battery isn't swappable. And it'll remain so until airlines offer power at every seat, which won't happen soon.
For me, though, the Air's biggest current limitations are the size and/or cost of its HDD and SSD, both of which I hope will be improved later this year.
sez you! The voodoo is what results when engineers come to work with no desire or incentive to do any thing all day..., but to be fair, it seems that these engineers are real good at designing ugly + outdated (design wise) laptops. Credit given where credit is due.
The difference is the way they're clocked it seems. The Voodoo aims for better speed whilst the Air aims for better battery life. While there is the same power management as on all Apple laptops (better battery life > better performance), the speed difference isn't in the realm of 200kHz.
Doesn't everyone use their MBA for High Def video editing in the middle of Death Valley where there are no electrical outlets?
yea... but death-valley is an awesome place to display your favorite photovoltaic power source, and then the air would be as happy as a bug in a baker's shop!
Note: (of course, you got there by driving your Prius and waring one of the five pairs of sneakers that you keep in the trunk),
You do realize they make airline adapters for computers? Right?!? And if they don't offer power at every seat, those who need more, and travel on those types of really long flights REGULARLY, should opt for the MB or MBP, not the MBA.
Hmmm.
It's still listed as the #1 most popular item on Apple's online store, and #26 on Amazon.com's top selling notebook list.
Didn't see the Thinkpad X300 listed on Amazon's top selling list at all.
All things considered, it seems like the Mac mini is the product closest to being Cube 2.0, no?
I agree, I hope Apple chooses to adopt the newer processors for the improvment of battery life only. Using more efficient processors at identical clock speeds should give the air some more going for it.
I really don't get much battery out of my air, regardless of what the specs are, I may get 3 hours, maybe 3.5. Originally it did really well. I've been careful not to overcharge the battery, and to kill the battery occasionally to keep it at good health. The thing is, the fans are always running fast when I use it because I'm not just browsing files, I actually watch a movie, play some music, and open pages or numbers once in a while!
I really don't get much battery out of my air, regardless of what the specs are, I may get 3 hours, maybe 3.5. Originally it did really well. I've been careful not to overcharge the battery, and to kill the battery occasionally to keep it at good health. The thing is, the fans are always running fast when I use it because I'm not just browsing files, I actually watch a movie, play some music, and open pages or numbers once in a while!