Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I just don't get people's problems with products that don't suit your needs. If the MBA is not for you, move on to something that is. There must be a reason Apple is selling it, it makes them money, it may not be their biggest seller but it's making them money somehow. I've seen a few of them around so people must be buying them.
 
Redbird,

Can you elaborate on your photoshop use on the Air (do you have the SSD)?

I posted in another thread (for NC Macguy) about editing a 39mp 16bit raw. I'd be curious to hear how the new Air handles such a large file...so if you have the time...I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on PS on the new Air.

I'm *dreaming* and salivating about ridding my life of heavy mbp's and if the Air runs as great as everyone says...and the 7200.4 500gb drives come out soon, mmmm, what a yummy combo-platter...

David

The file is here:
http://www.jirvana.com/raw_large/p45...5_CF000103.TIF

My other post:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/593227/

I have SSD. I would *not* use this as my only PS machine. I shoot with a Nikon D300 w/ 10MP+ files. The MBA is fine for on the road PS use, but real PS work is done in a Mac Pro 2x 2.8Ghz quad core with dual monitors, 4 G RAM and 1 TB storage.
 
So, including "footprint" in the definition of an ultraportable is not sensible?
I don't really understand why there's so much picking on the Air's footprint.

The MacBook Air's footprint is about the size of a piece of paper. It fits into an envelope, remember? So it fits easily into anything I carry my usual paperwork around with. Even more portable are things which can go into my pants pockets That would be the iPhone then. But I cannot see at all why an in-between footprint would be better than the Air's. The interface elements (keyboard, screen, touchpad) would have to be smaller, thus less user-friendly - yet it wouldn't be any more portable ...unless, of course, you're a woman carrying a petite purse/handbag ;) But otherwise, into what would you put a smaller notebook, that the Air can't go into?

Would be nice though if the Air were a tad lighter...
 
I don't really understand why there's so much picking on the Air's footprint.


http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Subnotebook&oldid=213684413

Subnotebooks are smaller than laptops but larger than handheld computers and ultraportables. They often have screens that are 26,5cm = 10.4″ (diagonal) or less, and weigh less than 1 kg; as opposed to full-size laptops with 30,5cm =12″ or 38cm = 15″ screens and weighing 2 kg or more.

So, if a "subnotebook" has a 10.4" screen or less, and if a "subnotebook" is larger than an "ultraportable", and if a 12" notebook is "full-size" - then how can a 13.3" notebook be an "ultraportable"?

____

Not picking on the footprint per se, just the idea of using the term "ultraportable" for a large-screen laptop.
 
Removing the huge tapered bezel/border round the laptop would probably convince me it was an 'ultra portable' and not quite so much a machine that's designed to look thin in photos - it would probably look too much like an overpriced macbook though.
 
So, if a "subnotebook" has a 10.4" screen or less, and if a "subnotebook" is larger than an "ultraportable", and if a 12" notebook is "full-size" - then how can a 13.3" notebook be an "ultraportable"?

____

Not picking on the footprint per se, just the idea of using the term "ultraportable" for a large-screen laptop.

For most here the correct answer is because Apple said so. :)
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?...ldid=213684413

Subnotebooks are smaller than laptops but larger than handheld computers and ultraportables. They often have screens that are 26,5cm = 10.4″ (diagonal) or less, and weigh less than 1 kg; as opposed to full-size laptops with 30,5cm =12″
I'm a bit perplexed . Why do you link to an old and outdated revision of the wikipedia entry? Well, because it supports your point, I might guess?! ;)

I have two gripes about that definition: Firstly, they do not "often" weigh less than 1 kg (not even the 9" Asus EEE PC really do), secondly, I would certainly not call 12" notebooks "full-sized". Neither would most people I know, and neither most wikipedia authors, it seems. Let's look at the current revision:

"Subnotebooks are smaller than laptops but larger than handheld computers. They often have smaller-sized screens, usually measuring from 7 inches (17.7 cm) to 13.3 inches (33.78 cm), and a weight from less than 1 kg (2.2 lbs) up to about 2 kg (4.4 lbs)"

So, if a "subnotebook" has a 10.4" screen or less, and if a "subnotebook" is larger than an "ultraportable"
Well... the current revision of the wikipedia suggest "subnotebook" and "ultraportable" are synonyms. But these definitions are a bit subjective and arbitrary anyway. I'd agree with your notion of "ultraportables" being smaller than subnotebooks. The "ultra" suggests so. I'd say:

subnotebook = smaller and / or lighter than traditional notebooks/laptops.
ultraportable = smallest / lightest devices in the marketplace which can run traditional desktop OS (windows)

Agreed, the MacBook would be a subnotebook but not ultraportable. ;)
 
Rdf

I'm a bit perplexed . Why do you link to an old and outdated revision of the wikipedia entry? Well, because it supports your point, I might guess?! ;)

...I'm glad someone noticed that. Wikipedia is fluid and mostly unpatrolled - it's not uncommon for an older version of a page to be more accurate than the latest, or at least useful to help understand the history and background of the page.

It's not that
Apple calls the MBA an ultraportable because the current Wikipedia entry says that a 13.3" is the upper limit for ultraportables
it's that
the Wikipedia article was changed (probably by Apple fans) to match what Apple was calling an ultraportable.​

That's the strongest reality distortion field of all - when Apple can arbitrarily redefine the words to mean what she wants! :eek:

Like when Apple said "first 64-bit desktop computer" when she really meant "Even though 64-bit desktops have been around for over 10 years, this is Apple's first desktop computer with a 64-bit processor, even though it's utterly incapable of executing 64-bit applications or OS with our software".

Brilliant...
 
the Wikipedia article was changed (probably by Apple fans) to match what Apple was calling an ultraportable.​
Just for curiousity's sake: Has Apple ever called the MacBook Air "ultraportable". If so, when?

Like when Apple said "first 64-bit desktop computer" when she really meant "Even though 64-bit desktops have been around for over 10 years, this is Apple's first desktop computer with a 64-bit processor, even though it's utterly incapable of executing 64-bit applications or OS with our software".
The PowerMac G5, once touted as the world's fastest "personal computer"?

Frankly spoken, I found the the notion of a "personal computer" highly questionable. These used dual-CPU configurations like workstations, but unlike other PCs, they even used water cooling in default configurations. Default graphics aside, these machines were essentially small workstations. And as far as I know, they were also priced accordingly.

Apple, however, billed these things as "personal computers". And they made a big fuss about how fast these "PCs" were, compared to other PCs (especially ones with the less than enthusing Pentium IV). Yet on the other hand, Apple shied away from making proper comparisons with rather similar workstations (Dual Xeon, anyone?).
 
Just for curiousity's sake: Has Apple ever called the MacBook Air "ultraportable". If so, when?


Now ;)

http://www.apple.com/macbookair/

The new MacBook Air is still ultrathin, ultraportable, and ultra unlike anything else.

http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_mac/family/macbook_air?mco=639BD6F7

the new MacBook Air offers smooth video playback, a great ultraportable gaming experience...

MacBook Air sets new standards for ultraportable computing — without the usual ultraportable compromises.


http://www.apple.com/fr/macbookair/

Le nouveau MacBook Air demeure ultra-fin, ultra-portable et ultra-différent de tout le reste.


http://www.apple.com/es/macbookair/features.html

Ningún otro ultraportátil ofrece un rendimiento gráfico de nivel discreto en un procesador integrado.
 
Just for curiousity's sake: Has Apple ever called the MacBook Air "ultraportable". If so, when?
Oddly enough, Lenovo's screwing up the word too, using it with their 13.3" X300 and all. Bastards!

Lenovo's amazing new ThinkPad X300 ultraportable notebook is the thinnest ThinkPad ever – less than 0.73''at its thinnest. It's light, too, starting at just 2.93 lb.
http://shop.lenovo.com/us/landing_pages/thinkpad/2008/X300

(If anyone needs to see the same quote in six different languages, let me know and I'll go through their international sites)
 
Yes, it is a very nice system. We use ThinkPads at work. I like 'em a lot! :)

So I just noticed that Sony's marketing their 13" laptop as "ultraportable" also.

Next generation computing is yours for the making with the uncompromising, ultra-portable VAIO® Z
http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs...Id=10151&langId=-1&LBomId=8198552921665468412

Same with Dell.

Latitude Ultra-Portables are now available! Choose from the E4200 and E4300 Ultra-Portable Latitude Options.
(search their site for the term ultra-portable .. the E4300 is a 13" laptop)

So it appears that pretty much every major notebook manufacturer is using the term "ultra-portable" in regards to their 13" models, which (IMO) makes the Wikipedia reference seem fairly correct (in terms of how the phrase is currently being used).
 
All things being equal, I don't think you're comparing Apple to Apples.
Air = Proc. better. Graphics better. 2 X RAM. Faster bus. Larger L2 cache. Double SSD capacity.

Granted the Lenovo is same screen size and higher res. but the Air has it beat in performance hands down for basic model. Or it would seem on paper.

Price w. "extras" to get closer comparison & add optical drive gets near $4K!!

Extras:
Genuine Windows Vista Ultimate with Windows XP Professional Downgrade**** [add $149.00]

2 GB PC3-8500 DDR3 SDRAM 1067MHz SODIMM Memory (2 DIMM) [add $40.00]

128GB Solid State Drive [add $400.00]

Ultrathin DVD Burner [add $225.00]
 
What do I have to do so that my MBP shows the fan RPM and the heat in the top bar like on this picture

154024-mbavsmr_400.jpg
 
Seriously?

What do I have to do so that my MBP shows the fan RPM and the heat in the top bar like on this picture

154024-mbavsmr_400.jpg

Not to be mean, but we've talked about it before on this thread... iStat Menus will do just about anything you could want displayed in the menu bar. :)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.