Dare we pit an Atom against the G4? That's truly sacrificing performance for low power and heat.
Not to mention all the other CULV and ULV processors. Please do tell how with 45 and 32nm we're getting hotter hardware and worse performance.
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.
New MacBook Air Slower Than Older Model?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not to mention all the other CULV and ULV processors. Please do tell how with 45 and 32nm we're getting hotter hardware and worse performance.
You left out overpriced for the Macbook Air.
Underpowered for email, web surfing, picture viewing, listening to music and word processing ? How much power do you need to type ? And for $250-$400.
They are excellent for those uses, which is why they are so popular, except to Cupertino cultists, who feel obligated to defend Apple's refusal to create a product for a market segment.
What's really quite surprising is that you can do a certain amount of audio and video editing. Here's my 1.86Ghz SSD Rev B model running logic - I sometimes need to touch up a project in After Effects too. Now the main computer is a Mac Pro but still the Air can be quite useful out and about.
Am I the only one that thinks these "code names" are just plain overhyped and stupidly confusing? In the end, the overall performance gains for most of these "evolutions" is, like, 10% over the previous "generation"...yet people love to quote Intel's roadmap for no objective reason...
The next one after Sandy Bridge is what? Lackawanna County? Or perhaps LAKSHADWEEP?
And now, Victor, your vaunted logic has failed you. I enjoy your posts because you bring intelligence and discrimination and rationality to the party.
Alas. You've now fallen for the "it doesn't make sense to me, so it must be fallacious" emotional argument that all the high school kids here like to post.
(and no offense to intelligent high school kids... I use the characterization loosely).
The Air has its place for some, else we wouldn't have the computer in the first place; and this forum wouldn't exist. And, yes, both size and weight matter. To some. Else we'd all still be toting around Compaq luggables.
Physical strength isn't the issue. I'm 6' 2" and 180lbs and will be leaving in a few minutes to go climb on my 800lb Harley. Having a wisp-thin notebook option - even if it means giving up some other things - is a good thing.
Just because I prefer a crisp, 3lb trigger break on my rifles doesn't mean I'm challenged when handed one with a 6lb trigger.
It ain't about strength.
And it's not about system capability - which exists on a continuum and which every prospective purchaser of the Air has presumably evaluated.
Thanks for bringing some sense to this discussion. The MBA exists for a purpose and is the best notebook in its category, period.
Fair enough.
I do believe the primary point was valid, however.
Obviously, it has a market.
This I suppose was the point that I could have made more succinctly ... if performance was of any true consequence, is the extra 2lbs (or whatever it is) really enough to nullify that gain in performance?
At this point in time, Core2 is really all their is.
As the form factor shrinks, this will impose a hardship on this line of CPU's ... including making faster CPU's ... slower.
Were a 10% performance difference of any consequence to a mobile user, I remain perplexed as to why someone wouldn't get a laptop.
"Normal" Mac laptops are already incredibly thin, and offer a great deal more performance with a comparatively negligible gain in size.
I'm not sure what the "ultra-thin" form factor accomplishes (again, they don't make computer bags that small), but I concede that people like it. For whatever reason.
I understand 3lbs vs. 20lbs, but 3lbs vs. 5lbs with the performance hit it entrails ... well, to each their own.
What becomes apparent, however, is that MBA users place thinness above all else.
Thinness = thermal issues.
Thermal issues = slowness, longevity, and stability in some cases.
Yet, you have MBA users in utter disbelief (to the point that they blame the axis of the earth) about this simple "impossible" test that shows what very well could be a thermal related slowdown.
If people are truly concerned about performance, I do remain someone surprised that they don't go ahead and get a whopping 1" thick Macbook Pro which can give them more power for less money.
I don't think people truly realize how negligible the size difference is in every, single, solitary situation practical situation.
I've never really seen it addressed before here.
Unless you really need to slip the computer under a door, there is simply no situation in which a MBA would "fit" but a MB wouldn't.
They are equally as portable, IMHO.
I don't think it's unreasonable to opine that people who are concerned with performance may want to evaluate whether or not they are truly getting anything in return for the thermal limitations which will be omnipresent on a device such as the MBA.
The "impossible" things they see happening are a natural consequence of this form factor, and the "ultra-thin" marketing, as interesting as it may be, may not have any practical advantages in any real-world situation whatsoever.
This is not fact, but sheer opinion. Sometimes I have one.
If one guy on the planet says "you know, he's right, they MBP's are really small ... and the paper thin computer has never really worked to my advantage in any real way ... I think I'll get a faster machine which is still tiny", then hey ...
That's the whole point of the post.
I really don't think I'm going to convert anyone, but I think the observations are legitimate.
It's good to see that other people use logic and keep emotion out of their replys.
Then again, he did say "period", which I am pretty sure satisfies the scientific method to ascertain fact.
Face it. On the Internet:
Pro what I like = sense
Anything else = heresy born out of demonic possession and a rabid hatred of our lord and Savior Steve Jobs who died for our sins and built an iPod powered time machine to go back and inseminate Eve thus giving birth to the human species.
Critique is fair, but it's only intellectually honest if it is equitable.
I'd offer that - for me - the Air is vastly more portable than my 15" MBP. It's far less about its thinness than about weight and its overall size.
Is it my first choice for a primary computer? No, absolutely not. That's why I have a MBP.
But as a second computer I find the Air... sublime. Somewhere along the way it's weight and form factor crossed that subconscious threshold of "it's inconsequential to carry this with me". While my MBP remains very much on the other side of that line.
Which means I'll carry the Air, when I wouldn't have carried the MBP.
And that's the whole point. For me.
Is it my first choice for a primary computer? No, absolutely not. That's why I have a MBP.
But as a second computer I find the Air... sublime. Somewhere along the way it's weight and form factor crossed that subconscious threshold of "it's inconsequential to carry this with me". While my MBP remains very much on the other side of that line.
Which means I'll carry the Air, when I wouldn't have carried the MBP.
And that's the whole point. For me.
Make the screen 12", the SSD about 32GB and then you have a truly "secondary" machine. The Air doesn't have enough bang to do much of anything but the lightest work, so why bother with a big hard drive and 2GB of RAM? Or the graphics card?
Its another indicator of how Apple's "DNA" won't allow them to make anything thats not designed to appeal to posers with too much money.
Who is the fool with two laptops? Why do you ever buy a Macbook Pro as your main machine and then not carry it around? You could have got a mini or an iMac with better specs.
Its another indicator of how Apple's "DNA" won't allow them to make anything thats not designed to appeal to posers with too much money.
Who is the fool with two laptops? Why do you ever buy a Macbook Pro as your main machine and then not carry it around? You could have got a mini or an iMac with better specs.
I guess the real issue I am having with the MBA is not its speed, but its weight. For a laptop that thin/small and sparse on ports and stuff it still kind of heavy, when you start comparing it to other 13in and even fully loaded 12in machines. I know the selling point is osx, but if this is only for word, email, and a few other light task ubuntu(or some flavor of linux) should be sufficient on some of these PC that are lighter, and/or more powerful. Man I must be the only one that found the MBA heavy for a computer with its dimensions, and I am not even out of shape, or weak as use to carry around a 15in MBP for the longest time with out an issue.
For example, the Sony Vaio Z(specially the 700 line) that just came out weighs the same as the MBA. Why is that a machine that has same cpu as the MBP, intel graphics & nvida graphics, is over an 1in thick, and has dvd/blu-ray drive weigh the same as the MBA? Does the aluminum on the MBA vs what the Z is made of(plastic & carbon?) make it weigh the same despite spec in balance. For the sake of it we add the price in they both start around the same price(I know the Z can go up to 4k, but that for a decked out model with the all option ticked). Now maybe if the MBA became a little lighter, or had more features at the same weight it would be a more justified purchase vs the 13in MBP IMHO. So, what if can't fit in a manila envelope, not a big deal to me as the extra power and cost saving is a better trade off.
For example, the Sony Vaio Z(specially the 700 line) that just came out weighs the same as the MBA. Why is that a machine that has same cpu as the MBP, intel graphics & nvida graphics, is over an 1in thick, and has dvd/blu-ray drive weigh the same as the MBA? Does the aluminum on the MBA vs what the Z is made of(plastic & carbon?) make it weigh the same despite spec in balance. For the sake of it we add the price in they both start around the same price(I know the Z can go up to 4k, but that for a decked out model with the all option ticked). Now maybe if the MBA became a little lighter, or had more features at the same weight it would be a more justified purchase vs the 13in MBP IMHO. So, what if can't fit in a manila envelope, not a big deal to me as the extra power and cost saving is a better trade off.
I've had both a Rev. A & B and that's not entirely true. The MBA may be lacking in some ways but it can handle a lot more than people give it credit for. I thought I needed another computer for when the Air would be overburdened but can honestly say that it rarely is.
I have an air, and must say it is the perfect second computer. I also agree with others that it is no slouch either and is perfect for a small amount of heavy work [that's what the mac pro is for].
It must not be considered as a primary usage computer but more of a companion computer. I use mine everywhere as it is always in my bag and is so light you hardly notice it.
My previous notebook was a 13" mac book [aluminium] and the difference is very noticeable.
God knows how you can lumber a 17" macbookpro around............
Each to their own!!!!
It must not be considered as a primary usage computer but more of a companion computer. I use mine everywhere as it is always in my bag and is so light you hardly notice it.
My previous notebook was a 13" mac book [aluminium] and the difference is very noticeable.
God knows how you can lumber a 17" macbookpro around............
Each to their own!!!!
Actually fairly easily.
http://www.spireusa.com/products/laptop-bags.htm
All of the current Spire backpacks fit the MBP 17". Put the weight, 3-7 lbs, in line with the rest of weight of the upper half of your body (30-100+ lbs) and the difference is not that large of a percentage.
Dropped onto one shoulder or tugging on one arm. Yeah that would be more noticeable , but there is no technical reason to carry either weight (3 or 7) that way.
If don't pack the Volt to the gills with stuff can fit in under the seat in front on even smaller regional jets where the overhead bins are very cramped.
The Mac Book Pro 17" is thinner/lighter than many Windows PC 17" implementations. But, yes is it bigger/heavier than an Air. It is more a question of how much "power" need when portable. If relatively lightweight stuff then an a Air is OK. If need to bring your Mac Pro job to the field.. then MBP 17" is going to be closest can get (with an Apple product).
http://www.spireusa.com/products/laptop-bags.htm
err, I don't think so. How can you buy a mac then buy one of those bags........
However, I think my point was that I don't need a macpro in the field 99% of the time. I have been down this route before with a macbookpro 15", and I feel now that having an air and a macpro is the perfect solution for me.
I can't see me buying a larger laptop again.....
err, I don't think so. How can you buy a mac then buy one of those bags........
However, I think my point was that I don't need a macpro in the field 99% of the time. I have been down this route before with a macbookpro 15", and I feel now that having an air and a macpro is the perfect solution for me.
I can't see me buying a larger laptop again.....
So is the Air a second machine or not? It doesn't seem to fit any niche except expensive luxury.
I have lots of machines. The Air is my main computer. I've only used my MBP for handbraking movies and a few other tasks where I was shuffling cd's back and forth and had multiple graphics programs open. I have used handbrake on my Air and it does work. My MBP is more a luxury. If I HAD TO, I could get by 100% with my Air. I never use ethernet. Wifi 100%. USB works fine. It drives a 24" display easily. Battery life is good and it's light. I travel a lot and the convenience of carrying the computer for extended times as well as the ease of throwing it in the bin at the Airport more than makes up for the things I use less frequently than I thought when I bought it.
It handles it just fine. Gets hot as hades but don't they all? I've actually HB'd from DVD and if I remember correctly it gets around 30FPS at 80ºC+/-. Not speedy but okay. It can be a workable situation if it's all you got. I choose to just set up the MBP with onboard optical for HB'ing.
I agree with Vic on most pts. If u have the money for the Air, why not get one of the new 13" MBPs. Surely the difference in wt and portability is even more negligible.
My 15" is ported all over the house with no issues and when I take it on a trip, I don't think, " wow wish I had that Air, this 15" is killing my back ".
The Air is for the WOW effect. Simple as that. I thought about the Air in every single situation and could not for the life of me justify it over any of Apple's other notebooks. The only reason I came up with.... was the WOW effect. It would be nice to show it off. Honestly, thats all that crosses my mind when considering the Air and how cool i'll look in a coffee shop or book store with it. Braging rights etc.
My 15" is ported all over the house with no issues and when I take it on a trip, I don't think, " wow wish I had that Air, this 15" is killing my back ".
The Air is for the WOW effect. Simple as that. I thought about the Air in every single situation and could not for the life of me justify it over any of Apple's other notebooks. The only reason I came up with.... was the WOW effect. It would be nice to show it off. Honestly, thats all that crosses my mind when considering the Air and how cool i'll look in a coffee shop or book store with it. Braging rights etc.
Surely you jest.
The 17" is .98" inches thick (that's less than one inch) and weights 6.6lbs.
This is 1.1lbs heavier than a 15", and 2.1lb heavier than a 13", and the same thickness.
It fits in my laptop bag perfectly.
The extra whopping two pounds gives me a full 1920x1200, discrete graphics, a large hard drive, an optical drive, and it can stand in as a complete desktop if need be. I used it for 9 months as a primary.
Does only God himself know how I lug two extra pounds from a strap that hangs off my shoulder?
Only the Lord Christ himself knows this?
I mean ... REALLY?
Unless you are just as sensitive as the Princess and the Pea, you don't notice the two pounds.
Scratch that. *I* don't notice it.
I have bowel movements that weigh more than two pounds. If I drink a bottle of Evian I carry more than two extra pounds. Given the thin-ness of the 17" MBP, aside from $$$, I don't know why anyone would go for a lessor size.
It's of almost zero size consequence. Because they make them so small, I will likely never get smaller than a 17" again ... if I can afford it.
It's all about personal preference, and I get that ... but I do not believe that only a deity can carry a sub 1" thick laptop.
Unless you are implying that I, myself, am equivalent to our Lord and savior Steve Jobs (who died for our sins) himself, in which case -- I'm flattered.
I'll try to get Snow Leopard out soon, in addition to ridding the world of plagues and violence.
LOL, but the code names are so mysterious, they must portend great new revolutionary things!!!
The current lineup is already very powerful, and will get incrementally more powerful in each generation (sometimes more than others.) But the way these code names are described, sometimes it makes you feel your brand new 2.5 GHz is going to be a piece of crap in a year.
Frankly, the biggest changes to Apple's lineups lately have been stuff other than the CPU.
