Damn that's fast. Almost makes me want to switch from my rMBP to the air... but there is no way that I could work on such a small screen for hours on end...
As soon as we can mirror with any Apple TV via Mavericks that shouldn't be an issue
Damn that's fast. Almost makes me want to switch from my rMBP to the air... but there is no way that I could work on such a small screen for hours on end...
I'm really trying to convince myself that I don't need this upgrade from my 2012 MacBook but the battery life and now this!
Lol... I know right!? I feel the same lol. I have a 2012 rMBP and I think I will def upgrade. Damn you Apple!
Now THIS is a good trade-off for lack of accessibility. While the Macs in general are getting less and less accessible, doing awesome things like this (where you wouldn't be able to swap out the flash chips anyway) is A-Okay with me.
As a previous owner of said revision, I agree wholeheartedly.
I still can't believe I managed on 2 GB of RAM for 4 years...
Bold claim for a product we know nothing about
I disagree with complaints out there that the MBA upgrades were optimized primarily for battery life, and not performance. As an example, the clock speeds were lowered to further extend battery life - keeping Geekbench performance roughly on par with last year's machines rather than providing the standard 20% improvement.
For one thing, this new Flash architecture isn't something to sneeze at.
But more importantly, I bet you anything the rMBP's are where they will look more to performance. Which only makes sense, as it would continue differentiating the two lines.
And if that's the case, going all-in for battery life is the right decision for their consumer-grade notebooks.
As an aside - 9to5mac anecdotally reports double the battery life on a 2008 MBP running Mavericks. Imagine combining those OS gains with the new Haswell machines!!!
Another person who doesn't get the concept of humour without a smiley face, the equivalent of digital canned laughter.
Add to the power savings: No more need for a SATA controller!
Too bad they're probably just using a stock Intel northbridge that includes it anyway.
Not seen the +2000 megabytes per second PCI-E units? Mind you, cheap is the last thing I'd call those.
Though 800 megs per sec is still damn good speed in a lightweight machine; now I just wonder what its random I/O is - as thats still the big true-performance determining factor.
Not seen the +2000 megabytes per second PCI-E units?
You realize you just contradicted yourself?
1. Statement: The upgrades were NOT for battery life rather than performance.
2. Evidence: SAME benchmark performance.
3. Even if it is the case, it was the right decision.
Everything you said (with the exception of the SSD bit) supported the conclusion that Haswell will offer hardly any performance benefits, with almost improvements going towards battery life.
Real world scenario, unless you're running a workload that either has extreme seqential reads or writes (not likely, since you're on a small laptop with limited storage and IO options), or copied large files to and from a TB driven SSD, you're not going to see much real-world improvement from the increased speeds here.
your 2012 macs are definitely going slower since yesterday, and they keep slowing down if you don't buy a new one soon, so.. move on, don't waste time!