Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

New MBAs can't be fanless

fanless MBA would be a ARM based one...

consider that the iPads and iPhones of today have specs similar to MacBooks just a few years ago and that iOS is OS X, I would think a fanless Air would be a merger between a tablet and a low-spec Mac (not supporting a lot of normal Mac software directly, but might support a bunch of iOS apps)
 
poobear said:
Wait what? I always use my iPad outside on sunny days, I haven't even heard that they could overheat
Click to expand...

Don't worry, it won't be ruined. What happens first is that you will see a message saying that the iPad is too hot, and then it will automatically shut down. If you haven't seen this message then your tropical climate isn't tropical enough. ;)
 
motrek said:
Don't worry, it won't be ruined. What happens first is that you will see a message saying that the iPad is too hot, and then it will automatically shut down. If you haven't seen this message then your tropical climate isn't tropical enough. ;)
Click to expand...

Also happens in cool climates when its too cold.
 
I know you (thread starter) think it can't happen, but I'm pretty sure it will. The point of the new CoreM chips is for fanless laptops and 2in1's. This is Apple's thing. It's very "Jobsian" in my opinion. Simplicity and elegance was his thing--and Ive's as well. A fanless Air would be more simplistic and probably thinner and perceived as more elegant, I would think.

I, for one, am all for it. I want thinner and quieter. Every ounce matters to me; I carry my Air everywhere I go throughout the day. And I'm sorry, but if you want to game or do high end computing, then get a rMBP.

And the port argument... Apple is usually the first to go with new ports and the first to kill those still in use. They will force the market to go USB-C and, yes, we will all suffer for a while with adapters until the rest of the world catches up. Very, very Apple.

My two cents.
 
happyslayer said:
... I, for one, am all for it. I want thinner and quieter. Every ounce matters to me; I carry my Air everywhere I go throughout the day. And I'm sorry, but if you want to game or do high end computing, then get a rMBP. ...
Click to expand...

I don't know how much thinner and lighter and quieter you think you're going to get simply by removing a fan.

Notice that e.g. the Acer Aspire S7 is significantly thinner than the MBA and it has two fans.

To listen to you guys talk, you make it sound like the fan must be an inch tall and weigh a pound and it's the only thing keeping the MBA from being the size of a sheet of A4 paper.

Also, in terms of being quiet, I could *barely* hear my old MBA when sitting in front of it in a dead quiet room and that was spinning at 2k RPM. With my current MBA, the fan spins at 1200 RPM and I can't hear it unless I put my ear within about 3 inches of it. And I have extremely good hearing. Is this something that really bothers you guys?
 
The first one probably will have throttling/performance issues - standard Apple model is the first version of a new line is a proof of concept, but not really a well-rounded consumer product.

iPhone - no 3G
iPad - too slow
MBA - too slow/thermal issues
iWatch - too big, not many sensors

I think they're laying out a new product category and a couple of years-worth of processor development/model refinement will deliver the goods - like the iPhone 3GS, iPad 2 etc
 
happyslayer said:
A fanless Air would be more simplistic and probably thinner
Click to expand...

And would bend even more than iP6 Plus. :D

But seriously, do you want it to cut your fingers or something? I wouldn't be comfortable holding the MBA on it's corner if it was any thinner cause simply I would be afraid to deform it.
 
Last edited:
I think this is a very complex subject at the semiconductor level. As Intel drives down the geometry of their devices in theory, by making the transistors smaller, it is possible to increase performance and decrease heat generation. Smaller transistors use less current when switching on and off.

In addition it may not be necessary to have the entire CPU run faster. There may just be a few paths through the CPU that need to run faster to improve the overall performance of the device.
 
steve1960 said:
I think this is a very complex subject at the semiconductor level. As Intel drives down the geometry of their devices in theory, by making the transistors smaller, it is possible to increase performance and decrease heat generation. Smaller transistors use less current when switching on and off.

In addition it may not be necessary to have the entire CPU run faster. There may just be a few paths through the CPU that need to run faster to improve the overall performance of the device.
Click to expand...

Yup, it is complicated. For a long time, smaller transistors meant less power usage. Then it got to a point where "leakage current" made transistors take relatively more power. That was maybe 10-12 years ago. If memory serves, AMD addressed it first by switching to a copper process. Recently Intel has made a big advancement to reduce leakage current with their 3-D "tri-gate" transistors.

Other power reducing techniques are used too, like clock gating. Originally chips had a big network of circuits that distributed the clock signal all over, so all the parts of the chip could be synchronized. But that also meant that they were also "on" all the time. So clock gating divides the chip up into sections that can basically be turned off if they are idle, i.e., they don't receive the clock signal.

Of course processors also vary their voltage and clock speed these days according to what you're doing with them, temperature, etc.

All of this stuff results in a 30% reduction of power with Broadwell vs. the current Haswells... very impressive stuff, bravo to Intel, but still not enough that a Broadwell can run for an extended period of time without a fan and still deliver the same level of performance as a Haswell with a fan.
 
motrek said:
Yup, it is complicated. For a long time, smaller transistors meant less power usage. Then it got to a point where "leakage current" made transistors take relatively more power. That was maybe 10-12 years ago. If memory serves, AMD addressed it first by switching to a copper process. Recently Intel has made a big advancement to reduce leakage current with their 3-D "tri-gate" transistors.

Other power reducing techniques are used too, like clock gating. Originally chips had a big network of circuits that distributed the clock signal all over, so all the parts of the chip could be synchronized. But that also meant that they were also "on" all the time. So clock gating divides the chip up into sections that can basically be turned off if they are idle, i.e., they don't receive the clock signal.

Of course processors also vary their voltage and clock speed these days according to what you're doing with them, temperature, etc.

All of this stuff results in a 30% reduction of power with Broadwell vs. the current Haswells... very impressive stuff, bravo to Intel, but still not enough that a Broadwell can run for an extended period of time without a fan and still deliver the same level of performance as a Haswell with a fan.
Click to expand...

I agree leakage is still a big issue to overcome and your right Broadwell is not the answer even at 14nm where Moore's law still seems to be effective. TSMC has announced a 10nm road map in conjunction with ARM. That could be interesting :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back