MBA getting case redesign possible intel LV processors?

[thinkdesign]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; IEMobile 7.11) Sprint PPC6850SP)

(reply to Soph's reply) -- IMHO thermal management for the 'Air' probably has to involve cobbling together a little improvement from here, a little from there, etc. adding it all up, to do the best possible to have these gains in heat shedding add up to enough. I suspect that the total benefit gained from all available techniques/details may still fall SHORT of what's needed, so I would hope the designers do NOT assume that anything's ruled out for visual reasons. ----- BTW, convection isn't everything. One of the 3 ways that thermal energy can be transferred is "radiation". (Conduction can be ruled out, unless the 4 rubber feet can be replaced with, I don't know what.) The idea of the Air's alum. mass operating as a heat sink is dubious, more a description of the problem, than of a solution. A stone tabletop can act as a heat sink. A pound or 2 of aluminum? Not so much. Heat shedding must be maximised. ----- I suspect that a certain indy Mac shop near me has actually replaced 2 (4?) of their demo model 'Air' with taller rubber feet, to improve the convection a bit. Every little bit helps! LOL. Maybe next: Build 'Mac" display tables of perforated steel, for better air circulation. And sell a line of similarly-made Apple desks. )

 

[skate71290]

here you go, I just took out all the ports, but I'm sure thats fine

Dude that is sweet

 

[dongmin]

What if...

-The MBA got a smaller screen, say 11", to save on battery life

-And the form factor changed to a more boxy design for a more efficient internal space utilization and reducing the overall footprint.

My guess is that Apple has improved their laptops' battery technology quite a bit since the MBA was introduced in 2008. It's not just the bigger batteries that's help Apple get 2x the battery life out of the MacBooks. So a longer-lasting battery at the same capacity and weight is not out of the question.

I tend to agree with most that a price drop paired with more RAM and faster GPU could be enough to make these attractive enough for buyers looking for the latest and greatest.

 

[Scottsdale]

What if...

-The MBA got a smaller screen, say 11", to save on battery life

-And the form factor changed to a more boxy design for a more efficient internal space utilization and reducing the overall footprint.

My guess is that Apple has improved their laptops' battery technology quite a bit since the MBA was introduced in 2008. It's not just the bigger batteries that's help Apple get 2x the battery life out of the MacBooks. So a longer-lasting battery at the same capacity and weight is not out of the question.

I tend to agree with most that a price drop paired with more RAM and faster GPU could be enough to make these attractive enough for buyers looking for the latest and greatest.

Apple isn't going to minimize the display on the MBA. Its whole selling feature is it provides the user the same exact 13" display and full-sized keyboard as the MacBook. It saves weight and is thinner but it provides a MacBook-like experience. Apple's goal is to minimize the loss of the experience by providing the same experience to the end user but in an ultraportable "Air" form.

Apple has stated that netbooks and smaller notebooks don't provide the user with a quality experience. That is why Apple didn't create a small MBA instead of the iPad. The iPad attempts to maximize the iPhone rather than miniaturize the MBA. Apple doesn't want to "ruin" the Mac user's experience by limiting the keyboard size or reduce the price to limit profits. I really do not see Apple making a smaller MBA. In addition, it basically makes the MBA compete with netbooks vs. competing with ultraportable notebooks. Would someone buy a luxury ultraportable or a netbook for the price of a luxury ultraportable? The MBA would truly be seen as a netbook if it reduced the display size down to a standard netbook's display size.

I do see Apple trying to maximize the battery performance. I just hope whatever they do that they do not limit the performance characteristics we can now find in the MBA to get the mythical 10-hour battery found in the MB. I know that the difference between the MBA and 13" MBP or MB is the weight and thickness of the battery and optical drive. The optical drive weighs almost nothing and is very thin. The battery is gigantic in the MB and MBP and weighs half what the MBA weighs. We cannot have a 10-hour MBA without giving up to a heavier and thicker MBA or completely limit its performance. I believe the 10-hour MBA already exists and is marketed as the 13" MBP. I really hope Apple informs people that this is the truth in the situation and just shoots for a 5-hour battery for the MBA.

 

[ahilal]

IMHO they don't need to up the processor performance any. I would be happy if it stayed flat if battery life could go up, or if maybe they put together a great deal on the SSD option. The Air is pretty sweet as it is, for what it does. Compare it to the iPad, which is not far off, and it seems possibly even overpowered.

 

[flynz4]

IMHO they don't need to up the processor performance any. I would be happy if it stayed flat if battery life could go up

There are number of opposing factors that need to be traded off against each other: Performance, size, weight, battery life.

We heard from a number who want more performance, and care less if it affects size and weight. Others like desire more battery life.

It is like squeezing a balloon... each design element affects others, and there is no free ride.

My personal priorities are: 1) Weight and 2) Size. As technology advancements continue... that is where I want reap the benefits.

Hence... for example, if there was more efficient battery technology, it would have the maximum benefit to me if the MBA could be made lighter and thinner, rather than increasing the battery life. Likewise, I can think of no possible reason why I would want the replacement machine to be any thicker than the current MBA.

/Jim

 

[dongmin]

Apple isn't going to minimize the display on the MBA. Its whole selling feature is it provides the user the same exact 13" display and full-sized keyboard as the MacBook. It saves weight and is thinner but it provides a MacBook-like experience. Apple's goal is to minimize the loss of the experience by providing the same experience to the end user but in an ultraportable "Air" form.

There's nothing holy about the 13"-screen form factor. You could get the same 1280x800 resolution in a 11" screen. The PPI (pixel per inch) would go up, but it's not anything radical; Apple already offers a similar PPI in the 15" HD screen.

As for the keyboard, Apple managed to put in a full-sized keyboard into the 12" Powerbook. I wouldn't miss the 1" border around my 13" MacBook Pro, if Apple decided to trim it.

If reducing the screen size from 13" to 11" has significant impact on the battery life, say 15-20%, I would take that trade off. The smaller form factor would also be a bonus in my opinion.

There are number of opposing factors that need to be traded off against each other: Performance, size, weight, battery life.

Well, Apple managed to make a faster, longer-lasting MacBook Pro while keeping the same size and weight so I don't believe that trade-offs are always necessary. No one thought a 10" IPS screen that plays 720p video for 11 hours straight was possible until the iPad came out. I have no doubts that Apple has more tricks up its sleeve to squeeze more battery life out of the MBA.

 

[Scottsdale]

There's nothing holy about the 13"-screen form factor. You could get the same 1280x800 resolution in a 11" screen. The PPI (pixel per inch) would go up, but it's not anything radical; Apple already offers a similar PPI in the 15" HD screen.

As for the keyboard, Apple managed to put in a full-sized keyboard into the 12" Powerbook. I wouldn't miss the 1" border around my 13" MacBook Pro, if Apple decided to trim it.

If reducing the screen size from 13" to 11" has significant impact on the battery life, say 15-20%, I would take that trade off. The smaller form factor would also be a bonus in my opinion.



Well, Apple managed to make a faster, longer-lasting MacBook Pro while keeping the same size and weight so I don't believe that trade-offs are always necessary. No one thought a 10" IPS screen that plays 720p video for 11 hours straight was possible until the iPad came out. I have no doubts that Apple has more tricks up its sleeve to squeeze more battery life out of the MBA.

Hey, Apple can make the MBA 2" narrower and save another 1.5" from the depth (assuming height is thickness). All it has to do is remove the wasted bezel space. There is an equal amount of wasted space around the keyboard. We could have an MBA with a 13" LED full-size display, a full-size keyboard, and an MBA with a much smaller footprint. In my opinion, this is what makes a heck of a lot more sense for the MBA. I actually see this as a possibility because Apple has recently used a thicker more uniform size with the iPad and new iPhone HD. I believe we could have a half-an-inch thick MBA throughout with a smaller footprint with only a "bead" of aluminum around the display instead of the wasted bezel.

Apple could follow up the MBPs with the same type of update later in 2010. This could be the "next level" sir Stevie talks about. Imagine Macs that eliminate the optical drives, and all get much smaller footprints with same sized displays. The 15" MBP would be about the size of the 13" MBP. The 17" MBP would be the same size as the 15" MBP. By removing the optical drives, Apple could further add battery capacity or discrete GPUs in the 13" models.

So there's no reason to give Macs smaller displays to reduce their footprints and make the user experience WORSE instead of better.

 

[Mhkobe]

Hey, Apple can make the MBA 2" narrower and save another 1.5" from the depth (assuming height is thickness). All it has to do is remove the wasted bezel space. There is an equal amount of wasted space around the keyboard. We could have an MBA with a 13" LED full-size display, a full-size keyboard, and an MBA with a much smaller footprint. In my opinion, this is what makes a heck of a lot more sense for the MBA. I actually see this as a possibility because Apple has recently used a thicker more uniform size with the iPad and new iPhone HD. I believe we could have a half-an-inch thick MBA throughout with a smaller footprint with only a "bead" of aluminum around the display instead of the wasted bezel.

Apple could follow up the MBPs with the same type of update later in 2010. This could be the "next level" sir Stevie talks about. Imagine Macs that eliminate the optical drives, and all get much smaller footprints with same sized displays. The 15" MBP would be about the size of the 13" MBP. The 17" MBP would be the same size as the 15" MBP. By removing the optical drives, Apple could further add battery capacity or discrete GPUs in the 13" models.

So there's no reason to give Macs smaller displays to reduce their footprints and make the user experience WORSE instead of better.

I completely agree that an 11" display is a step in the wrong direction. I would also love a thinner bezel, but that I am sure won't happen. All of apples products (set aside iPhone) have the bezel, and the folks at Apple believe that it makes it easier to open and close or something.

 

[Scottsdale]

I completely agree that an 11" display is a step in the wrong direction. I would also love a thinner bezel, but that I am sure won't happen. All of apples products (set aside iPhone) have the bezel, and the folks at Apple believe that it makes it easier to open and close or something.

You actually think the bezel is there for opening and closing Macs??? huh???

 

[thinkdesign]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; IEMobile 7.11) Sprint PPC6850SP)

Since the 2 halves of the hinged "book" close edge-to-edge... trimming the bezel also means reducing the volume in the lower part where the battery is. No way to balance energy supply with energy demand. Now, to keep everything about the Air's design the same (for sake of discussion; I know this is apostasy), except swap the screen from 13" to 12" ... would tend to lower screen's energy demand while NOT shrinking the battery, and so would tilt the design in the direction of a longer running time. But then, how to make the shrunken screen palatable or explainable? Make it a touch screen! ------ ? Do touch screens use the same anount of energy per square inch, as the Air's current screen?

 

[soph]

IMHO thermal management for the 'Air' probably has to involve cobbling together a little improvement from here, a little from there, etc. adding it all up, to do the best possible to have these gains in heat shedding add up to enough. I suspect that the total benefit gained from all available techniques/details may still fall SHORT of what's needed, so I would hope the designers do NOT assume that anything's ruled out for visual reasons.

One of the core abilities that made Apple so big is the ability to combine what's important physically with beauty. I have faith in Apple's designers

BTW, convection isn't everything. One of the 3 ways that thermal energy can be transferred is "radiation". (Conduction can be ruled out, unless the 4 rubber feet can be replaced with, I don't know what.)

Fully agree with you, but I hope we will not see a unibody design that will make the aluminium act effectively as a radiation heat transfer device

The idea of the Air's alum. mass operating as a heat sink is dubious, more a description of the problem, than of a solution. A stone tabletop can act as a heat sink. A pound or 2 of aluminum? Not so much. Heat shedding must be maximised.

Aluminium has a relative high heat capacity (compared to, say, steel), but I agree it wouldn't be enough (and the experiences with the early MBA prooved theory). A quick calculation says that 1kg aluminium would heat up 160 degC (sorry, I'm fully metric) if all the energy stored in the battery went into creating heat in the unibody.

I suspect that a certain indy Mac shop near me has actually replaced 2 (4?) of their demo model 'Air' with taller rubber feet, to improve the convection a bit. Every little bit helps! LOL.

Sure, I've done wonders with my kids' building bricks under a (not-Apple) Laptop . Not so very ergonomically though ..

Maybe next: Build 'Mac" display tables of perforated steel, for better air circulation. And sell a line of similarly-made Apple desks. )

With strategically applied thermal paste

 

[thinkdesign]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; IEMobile 7.11) Sprint PPC6850SP)

Since that Apple patent I mentioned showed that at least a few people at Apple are thinking thermally... hopefully management keeps them working on it. It just occurred to me that LOCATING the heat source in the center of the keyboard half of a laptop, is thermally THE WORST PLACE for it. Near the edge would be better, in a corner or 2 even better, located up in the screen's case - which is up in the breeze - even better. So, divide the chip in 2, and locate the halves in the upper L and R corners of the screen housing! It does require cooperation of a chip-maker, though. Or owning one. Unless it becomes an industry-wide trend! --- Now, how about a home dock for the user like me who wants to use a big monitor AND big ergonomic keybd. ... the dock should avoid closing the "book" all the way, to preserve some ventilation. Maybe sneak in a fan there, because one can lessen the noise - by distance?

 

[gwsat]

One of Apple's Dirty Little Secrets is that virtually all of their products run hot. Even my 17 inch MBP, which doesn't have anywhere near the heating problems the MBA has, gets so hot when I am, for example, doing a bunch of file transfers, I keep a square soffa pillow on my lap to prevent my legs from getting too hot. I did the same thing with my old Powerbook G4. My Time Capsule, Airport Express units, and Apple TV are also very warm, even when they are not being stressed.

 

[Scottsdale]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; IEMobile 7.11) Sprint PPC6850SP)

Since that Apple patent I mentioned showed that at least a few people at Apple are thinking thermally... hopefully management keeps them working on it. It just occurred to me that LOCATING the heat source in the center of the keyboard half of a laptop, is thermally THE WORST PLACE for it. Near the edge would be better, in a corner or 2 even better, located up in the screen's case - which is up in the breeze - even better. So, divide the chip in 2, and locate the halves in the upper L and R corners of the screen housing! It does require cooperation of a chip-maker, though. Or owning one. Unless it becomes an industry-wide trend! --- Now, how about a home dock for the user like me who wants to use a big monitor AND big ergonomic keybd. ... the dock should avoid closing the "book" all the way, to preserve some ventilation. Maybe sneak in a fan there, because one can lessen the noise - by distance?

Who knows if Apple has anyone working on anything other than iPhone OS 4 right now. It sure seemed with the MBP updates that Apple hasn't touched the MBP in a year in terms of innovation.

I hope Apple is working on improving the innovation used in some new MBAs introduced at WWDC. It would be great to know Apple still gives a damn about its Mac users. Lately, there is so much innovation on iPhone OS products, and Apple has truly let its Macs fall out of relevance compared to the innovation presented in the past with these Macs.

I often wonder why Apple cannot use part of its $40b to create two divisions at Apple... one that is Mac computing and one that is consumer electronics. I read the news that Apple has quit work on OS X 10.7 to get everyone possible working on iPhone OS 4 until it's introduced. That is terrible strategy in my opinion. Apple's competitive advantage with ALL of the Macs it sells is that it has OS X which competes well vs. Windows. With the latest version of Windows 7, Microsoft considerably closed the gap on OS X. I believe it's more important than ever that Apple work on INNOVATION with OS X 10.7. It's sickening that Apple would stop work and stop innovation to put all hands on iPhone OS 4. I understand the strategy IF Apple didn't have plenty of money in the bank. Certainly it's easier to expand sales in a growing market like the smartphone and tablet markets, but to stop innovation on Macs and OS X 10.7 is disgusting and will come back to haunt Apple if it fails in the smartphone business.

 

[gwsat]

Apple's competitive advantage with ALL of the Macs it sells is that it has OS X which competes well vs. Windows. With the latest version of Windows 7, Microsoft considerably closed the gap on OS X. I believe it's more important than ever that Apple work on INNOVATION with OS X 10.7. It's sickening that Apple would stop work and stop innovation to put all hands on iPhone OS 4. I understand the strategy IF Apple didn't have plenty of money in the bank. Certainly it's easier to expand sales in a growing market like the smartphone and tablet markets, but to stop innovation on Macs and OS X 10.7 is disgusting and will come back to haunt Apple if it fails in the smartphone business.

I agree that Apple built its cult following because of the remarkable superiority of OS X's user interface over Windows', as well as its brilliantly designed hardware. As you noted, though Windows 7 has closed the gap significantly. What worries me most is the synergy created by the combination of the iPhone, iPod, iPad, and iTunes. That combination has turned in to a cash cow, which Apple will be loath to ignore, for obvious reasons. That could certainly mean that Apple will continue to largely ignore OS X and the Macbook lineup for some time to come. I hope it doesn't happen but it is, indeed, a matter of real concern.

 

[soph]

Since that Apple patent I mentioned showed that at least a few people at Apple are thinking thermally... hopefully management keeps them working on it.

Who knows if Apple has anyone working on anything other than iPhone OS 4 right now.

If there's one thing we can be glad about in this situation, it's that thermal engineers are usually lousy at OS programming so if anyone's half intelligent he'd better refrain from that idea.

Other than that I see this "throw each and every progammer at this one project" in companies that panick. I had thought Apple better organised than that.

 

[Scottsdale]

If there's one thing we can be glad about in this situation, it's that thermal engineers are usually lousy at OS programming so if anyone's half intelligent he'd better refrain from that idea.

Other than that I see this "throw each and every progammer at this one project" in companies that panick. I had thought Apple better organised than that.

Look at the value of potential from earning NEW market share. The iPhone OS products have incredible growth in smartphone and tablet markets. Apple learned with its OS that it cannot allow one company to dominate and then earn back share later. Look at the Mac now at 8% market share. Think that the smartphone market is growing substantially and will be for several years. So each Mac converted usually comes from Windows. Each new iPhone OS product buyer probably didn't own a product in that market category before.

I certainly understand what Apple is doing. I cannot say I disagree with putting as many people as possible on iPhone OS 4 and its products. However, with as much money as Apple has why not leverage that into building Macs and consumer i-electronics at the same time? My point is if they need every current employee possible on iPhone OS 4 and its products, then Apple needs to grow fast! I read something the other day about Apple making the most of its acquisitions and investments, but I see it differently. Cash is a waste that Apple is making very little from. Why not invest that money and do the things it needs to with both iPhone OS and products AND its long standing Mac market segments?

I know AAPL is worth $255 per share, but why not grow faster and make it bigger AND make their customers happy at the same time? How can Mac Pro or MBA customers be happy buying products so outdated? How about ACDs, and maybe most importantly AppleTV? With Apple's whole strategy not having a relevant and current AppleTV is a joke. The AppleTV ties all Macs together. Anyone that has an iPod, iPhone, iPad, or Mac is probably using iTunes... why not make a new AppleTV that better integrates everything and gets users into their home entertainment systems. I believe with the iPad and iPhones, that Apple is seriously missing the AppleTV target. Apple is missing many target markets right now, and that is the main point in my argument. There is no reason not to have every product updated, current, and relevant against competitive products RIGHT NOW! I see Apple as missing so many opportunities and focusing too much on this one market segment. Apple needs to remember what got it here, and use ALL OF ITS RESOURCES to ensure AAPL and Apple customers get the most value and leverage for their investments into AAPL and Apple, Inc. products.

 

[thinkdesign]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; IEMobile 7.11) Sprint PPC6850SP)

This fascinating stuff does get into a realm in which we have very little info. Even if software engineers were "all" put on the 4th phone, I suspect that in a huge company, a few non-software thinkers are still assigned to each computer. And probably Jon Ive keeps the Air in the back of his mind, when the "mobility" of his Aston Martin inspires him. ---- I read that Apple's doing a lot of construction on its campus. Perhaps when that's done, staffing levels will increase? Then... ? ---- The biggest unknown for me is -- is there a specific PURPOSE in mind for the cash hoard? (My theory... wait 'till Sprint is as cheap as possible, and if/when another suitor sniffs around... Apple pounces and outbids them. No more need to haggle with Verizon!) I think it's the current Fortune that says -- one of these years soon, Apple will have a year, like Dylan's worst album. IMHO, Jobs has to accept more input from consumers.

 

[calsci]

I'm intrersted to see how they can update the case design.

 

[Scottsdale]

I'm intrersted to see how they can update the case design.

The thing is Apple doesn't historically update its Mac designs very often... definitely not every two-and-a-half years. I believe I read that it's around every five years to major product changes. Like it was five years for al. MBP design. Now it will be five years with unibody design on MBP. It was more than five years for the plastic MB. Now it's a plastic unibody MB. We could be another two plus years away from an MBA case redesign.

I have to say that I absolutely LOVE the MBA's current design. However, what I really see Apple doing with its products is eliminating or reducing the tapering designs and going with a one depth/height design. Look at the iPad or iPhone HD to see what I mean. It makes a lot of sense. The MBA design really wastes space. However, Apple does shape the internal design really well on the MBA to shape as close to the tapering as possible.

However, the tapering on the MBA makes it feel less thick than it actually is. At the same time, I have realized that what makes the MBA truly incredible to me is the weight. I love the 3 lb. MBA. It makes all the sense in the world to me. The big problem lately is MBP/MB owners that say they want a 10-hour battery in the MBA. The weight and thickness of the MBP/MB allow such a heavy battery, while the MBA couldn't fit its size nor be a 3 lb. Mac with a 1.4 lb. battery in it.

So maybe Apple eventually changes the case design??? I would prefer Apple eliminate almost all of the bezel, or better yet, just put the maximum display possible in the current MBA with a 1/4" "bead" of aluminum in place of the bezel. This way we don't waste space and we get an even better experience. I don't get the bezel and I don't believe it's there for opening and closing Macs.

If we get a case redesign, I just hope Apple sticks with a uniform design that looks about as thick as the iPad from the side. But more than anything, I want Apple to keep the MBA at no more than 3 lb. I would much prefer a 5-hour battery in the MBA weighing in at 2.5 or 3 lb. to a 10-hour battery weighing in at 3.5 or 4 lb. I think a 10-hour battery is ridiculous waste of space and weight that I don't want to carry around. I would bet the vast majority of those with 10-hour Mac batteries rarely ever need to use more than 5 hours (meaning they might use up the battery, but they probably had power available at some point within 5 hours).

 

[Mhkobe]

I have to say that I absolutely LOVE the MBA's current design. However, what I really see Apple doing with its products is eliminating or reducing the tapering designs and going with a one depth/height design. Look at the iPad or iPhone HD to see what I mean. It makes a lot of sense. The MBA design really wastes space. However, Apple does shape the internal design really well on the MBA to shape as close to the tapering as possible.

I love the tapering, it makes typing dreamy... I hate it on thicker computers (if they did it on an MBP, I would hate it).

 

[Scottsdale]

I love the tapering, it makes typing dreamy... I hate it on thicker computers (if they did it on an MBP, I would hate it).

I agree. But if we could remove the tapering and make it 1.5" narrower and 1" shallower, at 1/2" thick all at 3 lb. or less, I could be even happier. I see the MBA's footprint as too big compared to the display size. I either want a 15" display in the same footprint (or as close to it as possible) or make the footprint as small as possible for a 13.3" display. I just see the bezel as wasted space. If the space can be utilized by a larger display, even better.

 

[pharmx]

Look at the value of potential from earning NEW market share. The iPhone OS products have incredible growth in smartphone and tablet markets. Apple learned with its OS that it cannot allow one company to dominate and then earn back share later. Look at the Mac now at 8% market share. Think that the smartphone market is growing substantially and will be for several years. So each Mac converted usually comes from Windows. Each new iPhone OS product buyer probably didn't own a product in that market category before.

I certainly understand what Apple is doing. I cannot say I disagree with putting as many people as possible on iPhone OS 4 and its products. However, with as much money as Apple has why not leverage that into building Macs and consumer i-electronics at the same time? My point is if they need every current employee possible on iPhone OS 4 and its products, then Apple needs to grow fast! I read something the other day about Apple making the most of its acquisitions and investments, but I see it differently. Cash is a waste that Apple is making very little from. Why not invest that money and do the things it needs to with both iPhone OS and products AND its long standing Mac market segments?

I know AAPL is worth $255 per share, but why not grow faster and make it bigger AND make their customers happy at the same time? How can Mac Pro or MBA customers be happy buying products so outdated? How about ACDs, and maybe most importantly AppleTV? With Apple's whole strategy not having a relevant and current AppleTV is a joke. The AppleTV ties all Macs together. Anyone that has an iPod, iPhone, iPad, or Mac is probably using iTunes... why not make a new AppleTV that better integrates everything and gets users into their home entertainment systems. I believe with the iPad and iPhones, that Apple is seriously missing the AppleTV target. Apple is missing many target markets right now, and that is the main point in my argument. There is no reason not to have every product updated, current, and relevant against competitive products RIGHT NOW! I see Apple as missing so many opportunities and focusing too much on this one market segment. Apple needs to remember what got it here, and use ALL OF ITS RESOURCES to ensure AAPL and Apple customers get the most value and leverage for their investments into AAPL and Apple, Inc. products.

Hey Scottsdale, I'm not sure if you saw this already or not, based on your comments regarding AppleTV.

 

[theappleguy]

I agree. But if we could remove the tapering and make it 1.5" narrower and 1" shallower, at 1/2" thick all at 3 lb. or less, I could be even happier. I see the MBA's footprint as too big compared to the display size. I either want a 15" display in the same footprint (or as close to it as possible) or make the footprint as small as possible for a 13.3" display. I just see the bezel as wasted space. If the space can be utilized by a larger display, even better.

I'd rather see a bigger screen in the same size case than the footprint shrinking. The reason is because when I look at where my hands sit comfortably on the palm rests, they are generally near the outer edge of the case anyway. This may vary depending on the person, but I suspect many people would be similar to me.