Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'MacBook Air' started by solmaker, Jan 15, 2008.
That is exactly right.
It is a niche product in search of a niche.
Actually it won't. I was at Macworld today and played with it. The flip down cover is very solid, it's a not a cheezy port cover.
>Uh - solmaker - how are you figuring the Air has a bigger footprint
>than the MB? They have the same exact width & depth.
Close but no cigar (according to the specs at www.apple.com):
Macbook: width = 12.78"; depth = 8.92"
Macbook Air: width = 12.80"; depth = 8.94"
That's in inches; the dimensions in millimeters are the same, but that's less precise than hundredths of an inch.
>What I cannot accept, however, is the 13.3" footprint. Especially
>with the grotesquely large size of the Macbook and Macbook Air's LCD
>bezels, it just makes it an impossibility to use it on an airline
>fold-out tray table. This absolutely kills the deal for me. The
>thinness and light weight are all very well... but it's not an
>ultraportable. That is my dealbreaker.
>Too bad... I would've been sold with an 11.1" or 12.1".
I agree completely with your analysis, which is why bezel was my #1 deal-breaker. The lack of matte option was a very close #2 for me, but I recognize that's an idiosyncratic preference on my part that many people wouldn't care about.
In retrospect, the lousy 4200-rpm 80GB hard drive is the MBA's most surprising drawback. It would have cost Apple practically nothing to have shoved in a 160GB drive, and even 320GB would not have been out of the question (the WD Scorpio is only 0.374" high). And consider the usability and wow factor for advertising! The MBA could have tapped into the iPod market and iTV market, positioned as the one portable place to hold all your stuff and for video on the go. But with slow 80GB, it can barely hold a half-dozen movies.
Just like the iPhone, I am gonna wait for the second generation of the MBA.