Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Well, a hard drive is just a platter that can contain a certain density of individual bits, with hardware that reads the platters. They can be of arbitrary size. a lot of different "20 GB" drives aren't even actually the same size as each other. SSD is a lot more like the RAM in your computer, embedded in chips. it's made from collections of chips stamped onto electronics boards, and in such an architecture it is extremely important to have parallelism, symmetry, simplicity, etc. so that collections of chips can be scaled and addressed easily. Does that make sense?

I don't think I explained myself properly! What I meant was that all memory that 'moves' is a rounded number (10GB, 30GB, 500GB, 1TB etc.) whereas all solid state memory (be it SSD, Compact Flash, SD Card etc.) seems to be anything but rounded (32GB, 64GB, 128GB etc.).

I appreciate manufacturers can choose whatever amount of data they wish to attempt to cram onto a medium, but I was wondering if there is some historic reason why they are not all rounded amounts.

Does that make sense??
 
There should have been a 32GB SSD option...

Since SSDs are still expensive, what would have been a good third option for the Macbook Air (in my opinion) would be for a 32GB SSD option which would make it $500-$600 cheaper -- therefore creating a third MBA for around $2400-$2500. (It still seems ridiculous that the high-end MBA is more expensive that the 17" MBP :eek:)

Since it is suppose to be a travel-light laptop, you are not going to want to carry all your files with you, but use it in conjunction with the 500GB Time Capsule when I home/office. So you can just make room and exchange files easily on your 32GB SSD wirelessly. This way, I think 32GB is plenty.

So you could have enjoyed the benefits of SSD performance for the whole of 2008, and then in the future, once SSDs become cheaper in 2009-2010 (and your warranty passes its 12 months) you can simply open it up and exchange your low 32GB SSD into a new higher-capacity SSD of your own choice and price-range.

Any thoughts?
 
I don't think I explained myself properly! What I meant was that all memory that 'moves' is a rounded number (10GB, 30GB, 500GB, 1TB etc.) whereas all solid state memory (be it SSD, Compact Flash, SD Card etc.) seems to be anything but rounded (32GB, 64GB, 128GB etc.).

I appreciate manufacturers can choose whatever amount of data they wish to attempt to cram onto a medium, but I was wondering if there is some historic reason why they are not all rounded amounts.

Does that make sense??
Arguably, the 32/64/128 etc is the more 'rounded' number because they are all powers of 2.

Hopefully, the 12" MacBook Pro will be out by 2009. :p

http://mbp12.com/

Bleh. I have 80GB in my three year old 12" PB G4. And it has a smaller footprint than the MBA. And I could upgrade the HD to 160GB if I wanted. Hmmm... maybe I should since Apple doesn't seem to be interested in releasing a laptop I can replace my 12" PB with...

I have $3800 waiting for a suitable PB replacement. If my PB would die today I would buy a used 12" PB tomorrow. :mad:
It is true that the 12" PB has no replacement - I'm also in that league, although I'm going to move up to the 15" MBP whenever the damn update appears.

The hard drive issue, more than the form factor of the MacBook Air (which, although thinner, has a larger footprint than the 12"), seems to be the sticking point. It is a given that updates will happen as soon as the technology is available at a reasonable price (if you could call $999 reasonable!). I still believe that the 80GB HD option was not what Apple really wanted, but had to deliver purely because flash memory is still a little too expensive. Had they waited 6-12 months before unleashing the MBA, it may have lost its impact and people would still be moaning about Apple not having a 'sub-notebook'. (Of course, whether the MBA actually is a sub-notebook is another debate entirely :p)

I wouldn't get your hopes up on being able to swap out the HD for an SDD when they become available, however; when Steve showed us the guts of each of them during the keynote, they looked pretty different...

Overall, however, the MBA is not intended to be the long-awaited replacement for the 12" PB. It is intended for a different market. Therefore, those of you moaning about the lack of HD space should look elsewhere - at the MacBook or MacBook Pro. Or PC. Too bad, Apple hasn't yet filled the void that the 12" left behind... :(
 
Think Different

Apple is thinking out of the box.. they did the same with the original iPods.. people were poo'ing it for not having x, y and z. Like it didn't have a a fm radio, a display on the remote etc

The MBA is the same.. people want to "tick box" a list of things that they expect because other manufacturers are offering it...

I know there is a need to furureproof your purchase, but we have to realistic about what we will be doing with it in 2 or 3 years time. I actually had my PBTi 800Mhz for 5 years (at year 2 i maxed out the RAM, year 3 upgraded to a Seagate Momentus 5400).

Personally I would not buy the MBA as I already have more than 60Gb of music and photos. But given the 3 lines (MBA, MB and MBP) as a consumer we have a choice.

Still.. kudos to Apple for "thinking different".. :)
 
This might be a useful application to help improve performance and disk efficiency. But I don't know how much though.

"Xslimmer not only frees space wasted by unused code, it can even increase your Mac's performance. Some of our users have reported applications loading in almost half the time, because OS X does not need to analyze Xslimmed applications in search for the most suitable version of the code."

God. Would you like some water for that PLANT? Astroturf somewhere else.:mad:
 
I certainly understand that this computer appears somewhat quirky and impractical today. However, the future of computers is less wires, less drives, more internet and interconnectivity. The "quirks" of this computer are a window into the future of personal computing.

I'd bet that sales of this computer are tepid (reasonable for today's "niche" market) for awhile, and take off in a few years.


The day after the MBA was announced my company got two new theatres for presentations all equipt with the newest and most advanced stuff. In these rooms everything is wireless, including the beamers. Before I was in these rooms I dislike the MBA but after I came into these rooms it suddenly made sense. Way to go Apple. Tad bit smaller Footprint (1cm on each side of the keyboard wasted space) would have been nice tho'
 
I don't think I explained myself properly! What I meant was that all memory that 'moves' is a rounded number (10GB, 30GB, 500GB, 1TB etc.) whereas all solid state memory (be it SSD, Compact Flash, SD Card etc.) seems to be anything but rounded (32GB, 64GB, 128GB etc.).

For memory:

1 GB = 2^30 (two to the power of 30, or 2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2*2) = 1,073,741,824 Bytes

32 GB = 2^5 * 2^30
64 GB = 2^6 * 2^30
128 GB = 2^7 * 2^30

The controller circuitry is simple

For hard drives:

Depends on the number of platters times the number of tracks (circles on the disk surface, imagine songs on a record) times the number of sectors (imagine spokes on a wheel) times the number of clusters times cluster size (usually a power of 2), all of which can be pretty arbitrary. Then it depends on what definition of a GigaByte the manufacture uses (1,000,000,000 vs 2^30 or wierder(there have been lawsuits over this)), space consumed by formatting(like how 3.5 inch floppies are 1.44MB formatted, or 2MB unformatted),etc.

The controller circuitry is a bit more complex.
 
With SSD prices falling over the next year or so, it'll be interesting to see how much effort manufacturers put into developing 1.8" single-platter HDDs with higher capacity.

I haven't seen anyone describe how difficult it is to exchange the HDD in a MBA, though. If it's not too bad, I'd consider the 80GB version now and upgrade to something more next year.
 
Engineered around SSD?

Does anyone else get the impression that the Air was really engineered around the SSD drives, but they just didn't get cheap enough fast enough, and the engineers backpedaled to a small HD relatively late in the design cycle?
 
Can someone please enlighten me... So this SSD RAM, what's the point in it? OK, so no moving parts, much quicker read/write speads blah blah blah... But seriously, are ppl gona pay the extra $1000 (or whatever it is), especially in a machine that is supposed to be for less intensive apps (ie Office/iLife/Safari/iWork) as opposed to top end photoshop/video editing apps - surely those are the kind of apps where you will notice the benefit of having flash-based RAM. Or am I completely wrong? And also, how can some ppl say optical drives are gona die out like the floppy did... BluRay/HDDVD is on its way in... Lack of optical drive is the sole reason I'm not buying me a MBA...
 
I don't think I explained myself properly! What I meant was that all memory that 'moves' is a rounded number (10GB, 30GB, 500GB, 1TB etc.) whereas all solid state memory (be it SSD, Compact Flash, SD Card etc.) seems to be anything but rounded (32GB, 64GB, 128GB etc.).

I appreciate manufacturers can choose whatever amount of data they wish to attempt to cram onto a medium, but I was wondering if there is some historic reason why they are not all rounded amounts.

Does that make sense??

Learn your powers of two. The understanding will follow when you consider that memory chips have capacities that are a power of two (e.g., 2^30 = 1GB), and that memory (RAM, Flash) has a collection of these chips (usually a power of two number as well, e.g., 2^3 = 8 chips = 8GB).

Why is the memory a power of two? Because it's a 2D array of memory cells, each cell holding 1 bit (actually some flash can store 2 or 4 bits per cell, at a speed trade-off, and vice versa really-fast static RAM uses 6 cells per bit) computers like powers of two so there could be 2^12 rows of 2^21 cells = 2^33 bits = 2^30 bytes = 1GB.
 
I'm wondering how reliable the 1.8' drives will be?

Back in the day I used to use my ipod (with a 1.8") hard drive to install and test new versions of mac os x.

That drive used to get mega hot. Are they even designed to be used like a normal drive?
 
Can someone please enlighten me... So this SSD RAM, what's the point in it? OK, so no moving parts, much quicker read/write speads blah blah blah... But seriously, are ppl gona pay the extra $1000 (or whatever it is), especially in a machine that is supposed to be for less intensive apps (ie Office/iLife/Safari/iWork) as opposed to top end photoshop/video editing apps - surely those are the kind of apps where you will notice the benefit of having flash-based RAM. Or am I completely wrong? And also, how can some ppl say optical drives are gona die out like the floppy did... BluRay/HDDVD is on its way in... Lack of optical drive is the sole reason I'm not buying me a MBA...

SSD has very low latency, so it's very fast for booting up, for example - not that anyone does this often with their Macs given that sleep works so well. Also no moving parts is less room for failure although Flash memory does wear out (time to wear out depends on price of memory - cheap 4GB USB keys might only do 10k writes, expensive 64GB SSDs can do millions).

However I agree, for most people the 80GB hard drive will be sufficient. Of course 1.8" hard drives are quite slow, even compared to their 2.5" brethren, but I doubt it will be a big deal to most users.

BluRay is on the way in, and it's scalable in terms of layers, burning was a core design feature so there are burners, and the price is dropping quickly. It truly is the proper next generation optical media. At least with the MacBook Air there's a chance that Apple will create an external BluRay drive. However I suspect that it might require more power than even Apple's hacked up USB port can supply (why didn't they have a Firewire port! They have so much more power available...). However for file backup and transportation USB keys could be seen as just about the simplest and widely supported option in a year or two.
 
BluRay is on the way in, and it's scalable in terms of layers, burning was a core design feature so there are burners, and the price is dropping quickly. It truly is the proper next generation optical media. At least with the MacBook Air there's a chance that Apple will create an external BluRay drive. However I suspect that it might require more power than even Apple's hacked up USB port can supply (why didn't they have a Firewire port! They have so much more power available...). However for file backup and transportation USB keys could be seen as just about the simplest and widely supported option in a year or two.
A little off-topic, but the lack of optical drive does give flexibility for Apple to add a BluRay external drive later on. That said, I personally do not think BluRay (assuming it does kick HD-DVD out for good as is looking likely) will be anywhere near as big as DVD has become.

At the end of the day, it simply holds more space, while still having all the limitations of an optical disc. Although I do believe that even Apple knows that the optical drive still has long to go yet, I think the MacBook Air is Apple's ever-so-subtle way of saying the writing is on the wall for optical media, even if there is plenty of time yet left.

In fact, when, in his keynote this year, Steve pointed out how to get around the lack of an optical drive for watching movies (iTunes rentals), backup (Time Capsule), installing software (remotely), etc, he might as well have got the famous coffin that he put Mac OS 9 into all those years ago. Even though we are not ready for that stage yet, he was showing us how little we will actually need our discs in the future.
 
One would think that an army of extremely well-paid engineers would be able to find a way to get another 3mm out of that design.

The good news is that the price of flash memory is continuing to plummet, and will probably be in the reasonably-affordable range within a couple years. Just in time for the first major rev of the MBA, I reckon.

I'm sure it's not that easy, however I still wish Apple had strived to make the "best" travel notebook in the world rather than have the "thinnest" seemingly for the sake of holding that title.
 
Does anyone else get the impression that the Air was really engineered around the SSD drives, but they just didn't get cheap enough fast enough, and the engineers backpedaled to a small HD relatively late in the design cycle?

I think you are right there, the Sony Vaio VGN-UX1XN is one of its nearest competitors and is still running only 32GB. A friend of mine bought one, but it is too small to read!!
It is still only available with 32 GB, at about the same price as the 64gb MBA
 
Does anyone else get the impression that the Air was really engineered around the SSD drives, but they just didn't get cheap enough fast enough, and the engineers backpedaled to a small HD relatively late in the design cycle?

You're probably right, it could be a $3,000 laptop, which they're offering cheaper now.
 
Seconded...

If my PB would die today I would buy a used 12" PB tomorrow. :mad:

I couldn't agree more. 802.11n is no match for FW400. There's an organisation somewhere that'd upgrade a 12PB G4 to the 1.67GHz speed. It's be very hot, but damn quick :)

F
 
A Better Design

I think a better design would have been to shrink the keyboard and display. If it only has 1 USB and forced to use the smallest version of the Core 2 and flattest drive possible, it makes sense to shrink it to a pound and just have a nice ultra portable.

It is like having a Mac Pro case to hold a Macbook motherboard and drive.
 
Learn your powers of two. The understanding will follow when you consider that memory chips have capacities that are a power of two (e.g., 2^30 = 1GB), and that memory (RAM, Flash) has a collection of these chips (usually a power of two number as well, e.g., 2^3 = 8 chips = 8GB).

Why is the memory a power of two? Because it's a 2D array of memory cells, each cell holding 1 bit (actually some flash can store 2 or 4 bits per cell, at a speed trade-off, and vice versa really-fast static RAM uses 6 cells per bit) computers like powers of two so there could be 2^12 rows of 2^21 cells = 2^33 bits = 2^30 bytes = 1GB.

To add to the confusion, though, most of those SSDs (like other Flash storage devices such as SD cards) are also advertised in terms of a base-10 gigabyte.

To be sure, it would be very unlikely to find a 64 GB SSD that contains exactly 64,000,000,000 bytes, just as it would be extremely unlikely to find a 120 GB hard drive containing exactly 120,000,000,000 bytes. It would undeniably be false advertising (no matter what your position on the "definition of giga" debate) for it to contain fewer bytes than that, but in most cases it almost certainly has more.

Note that Flash memory, unlike RAM, is physically arranged and written to in equal-sized blocks, very much akin to sectors on a traditional hard drive. Just as in hard drives, these blocks are often laid out in powers-of-two (or slightly-larger-than powers-of-two) sizes, which don't lend themselves very well to hard cut-offs at exact powers-of-10 drive sizes.

Of course, the actual drive capacity available to hold data after formatting will be diminished from the advertised physical capacity due to filesystem overhead. That is true regardless of whether the size is advertised in base-2 gigabytes or base-10 gigabytes.

There is also another place where some memory may go - the SSD, like hard drives, likely has some additional blocks set aside to act as stand-ins in the event of other blocks wearing out. These blocks are set aside by the drive controller circuitry, are invisible even on an unformatted drive, and are above and beyond any relocatable blocks that may be set aside as spares during drive formatting.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/4A93 Safari/419.3)

How much of the aesthetics of the MBA will carry over? I feel like whenever Apple spends a lot of time on a certain technology ( ie touch) we see it become a part of more than just the first product to utilize the technology.

Now the touch is in the MBA and will be in the mbp, but will they utilize the thinness factor they used in the air with tapered edges and everything?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.