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

Two new MBA's for Sept, this rumor seems more credible? What's your guess?

macbook123 said:
I don't really have a problem with the smaller widgets and UI fonts (and neither do the 10 Million people who have bought iPhones so far, I know this argument is flawed, but oh well..). All I care about is being able to use my laptop for work, and with the current 13" displays it's impossible.
Click to expand...

I love high resolution, too. On Windows and IOS. But IOS is resolution independent, and MacOS is not. A lot of Mac users above the age of 40 are grudgingly running their screens in "blurry mode", at a lower resolution than they are meant to be.
Most applications do not offer an opportunity to adjust UI fonts either.

Who knows, maybe Apple gets around to resolution independence in a couple years? Then we are going to see "retina" displays in all their laptops.

On the other hand, I do not understand what your problem is with 13". Apple offers two size above that if you need them, and you can always connect a stationary 30" in your office or home.
 
Gruber said:
I love high resolution, too. On Windows and IOS. But IOS is resolution independent, and MacOS is not. A lot of Mac users above the age of 40 are grudgingly running their screens in "blurry mode", at a lower resolution than they are meant to be.
Most applications do not offer an opportunity to adjust UI fonts either.

Who knows, maybe Apple gets around to resolution independence in a couple years? Then we are going to see "retina" displays in all their laptops.

On the other hand, I do not understand what your problem is with 13". Apple offers two size above that if you need them, and you can always connect a stationary 30" in your office or home.
Click to expand...

I meant the CURRENT 13" displays, i.e. I don't mind if it's 13", as long as it has a decent number of pixels. Sorry for the misunderstanding. I agree that the number of pixels on the 17" MBP squeezed on the 13" one like the Air would be too much given the lack of resolution independence in OSX. The pixel density of the 17" is great, and I think it should scale to something like 1440x900 on a 13" display. With that resolution, I'd buy a 13" MBA in no time, but the current resolution (like that of the 13" and the low resolution 15.4" MBP's) is just too low. I moved to 17" just because of it (that was before they started offering high res for the 15.4" one), as I'm getting eyestrain reading blotchy fonts on the low res screens.

Who knows, maybe Apple will offer high res on the new Air's for half its customers and low res for the other, just as they do with the 15.4" MBP?
 
11.6" screen? Not likely

I don't see an 11.6" screen coming to the Macbook Air. Watch the video below, especially from 1:30 - 2:30:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvfrVrh76Mk

If Apple felt then that the 11-12 inch screen size was a compromise, why would they reverse course and embrace the small screen size just a couple years down the road? Not to mention, the smaller the screen the better the chances of eating into the iPad market.
 
macbook123 said:
I moved to 17" just because of it (that was before they started offering high res for the 15.4" one), as I'm getting eyestrain reading blotchy fonts on the low res screens.
Click to expand...

Come on. I've heard plenty of people complaining that the small font of higher resolution strains their eyes...but eye strain from BLOTCHY fonts? When "blotches are present", which is rare, they are hardly noticeable unless the screen is so close to your face that your nose is touching it or you are using a magnifying glass.

Have you been using computers since before fonts higher than 1440x900 were standard? If so I guess you had a headache all of those years on every single computer you used : /
 
ozreth said:
Come on. I've heard plenty of people complaining that the small font of higher resolution strains their eyes...but eye strain from BLOTCHY fonts? When "blotches are present", which is rare, they are hardly noticeable unless the screen is so close to your face that your nose is touching it or you are using a magnifying glass.

Have you been using computers since before fonts higher than 1440x900 were standard? If so I guess you had a headache all of those years on every single computer you used : /
Click to expand...

I find it interesting when people are telling others that their experience is wrong and trying to dictate them what they should be experiencing ;-)

Font (for standard settings and at standard viewing distance) on the 15" MBP with low res display is clearly blotchy to my eyes, so is the 13" MBP and MBA font, as well as the 24" cinema display font. The ppi is too low for me. If not for you, great!

And no, I haven't had a display with lower ppi than my old 15.4" MBP in the 8 years I've been using laptops. The 17" is the first to have a ppi that allows me to fit enough information on the display while still being able to enjoy what I read&see. I would have been equally happy with the 15.4" with high res, I think, but that wasn't out when I bought my 17".

So, while you may be happy with lower res, I will buy a new Air IF it has ppi comparable to the 17" MBP or higher, that being somewhere around 1440x900 for 13" I guess.
 
This is my first post here. I hope all of you are doing well.

I think 11.6" is a decent screen size for an extremely potable machine. My biggest concern though is if they tack on a Core i3 ULV, as that would be crippling for performance. They would need to at least use a Core i5 ULV with 4 GB of memory to stay competitive.
 
All this 11.6 or 13.3 screen size...

What about Apple changing the ratio so it's Wide-Screen like the new desktops/monitors/iPods?

Less bezel at the sides, maybe a little more top and bottom so more space in the lid to shave that 'nth of a mm off the thickness...

Personally, I'd just like a 2nd USB port, better graphics, double the RAM, bigger drive, and to make it stand out from the uni-bodys, anodised black case! :cool:
 
ninjaslim said:
This is my first post here. I hope all of you are doing well.

I think 11.6" is a decent screen size for an extremely potable machine. My biggest concern though is if they tack on a Core i3 ULV, as that would be crippling for performance. They would need to at least use a Core i5 ULV with 4 GB of memory to stay competitive.
Click to expand...

I don't see big difference between i3 ulv and i5 ulv. They are both 1.2GHz and since turbo boost on i5 is extremely dependent on internal thermal level. I assume when performing consistent heavy tasks like gaming on i5 ulv, the heat generated internally by both CPU and GPU would prevent turbo boost on and eventually lead to the same performance as i3
 
I doubt there will be a total redesign. That would mean the MBA will be ahead of the MBP's... not a chance. Wouldn't redesigning the MBA mean a redesign in MBP? the design is still fairly fresh.
 
onne2slick said:
I doubt there will be a total redesign. That would mean the MBA will be ahead of the MBP's... not a chance. Wouldn't redesigning the MBA mean a redesign in MBP? the design is still fairly fresh.
Click to expand...

Well if you look at all the big features, the MBA was the first to introduce them (all aluminum, black keyboard, tapered edges, large one button trackpad). Someone already mentioned this, but I see the MBA as Apple's experimental machine where they can try new ideas. If there is a new MBA, my guess is that it will be a new kind of laptop that is totally different from the rest of the macbooks.
 
I'm not sure

I think if they want a successful MacBook Air with am 11" screen it would have to distinctly show that it's not a clunky old net book but a fast portable notebook because that was their reason for the iPad, not making cheap net books. Also this can be the last stake in the wireless world if they still don't include a DVD slot or that many USB ports. Personally though for lightweight portable computing I think the iPad does the job and I'm not sure about a new smaller MBA running Snow Leopard slow.
 
No way, apple is going to do 11.6 inch screen. Steve Jobs said that most netbooks compromise with small Screen. If they go with 11.6 inch screen, then they are going against their own policy. If I were apple, I would still go with 13 inch screen.
 
I just like that John The Gruber is trolling around in here. Daring Fireball kicks A$$, and your posting on the Dell Streak was dead center. Who in the he11 is buying a 550.00 5" pad from Dell? Even better, who is running the business unit that thought it was going to be successful?

Namaste Gruber. I celebrate the place where Dell's garbage and your flame become one.
 
I still don't understand the 11.6" version. I know it is smaller, etc. But I thought the point of the MBA was being lighter WITHOUT losing screen size, etc.
 
Hisdem said:
I still don't understand the 11.6" version. I know it is smaller, etc. But I thought the point of the MBA was being lighter WITHOUT losing screen size, etc.
Click to expand...

This is what I've been saying!! Seriously, go back and watch SJ's keynote when he introduced the Air. 10-12 inch screens are labeled a "compromise." The point of the Air is that it is light, highly portable, yet offers a "full-size" screen. Why would Apple want to make an 11.6" Air and "compromise" on the full-size screen?
 
gwsat said:
The 320M would easily provide enough graphics power for my purposes. Whether 4Gb of RAM would be enough for me, though, is an open question. I know from personal experience that 6Gb of RAM allows me to run several Windows apps and several more OS X apps simultaneously from the OS X desktop under VMware Fusion in Unity mode. I also know that 2Gb is woefully inadequate for such a use. I have been trying for some time to get a definitive answer from other posters whether 4Gb would be enough. Alas, I have yet to receive an unequivocal recommendation either way.
Click to expand...

Well to be honest 2gb is barely enough in my opinion it just leaves very little wiggle room for multi-tasking and vmware. I used a mac mini with 4gb of ram for a while and I found it quite adequate, and if its adequate for us then it meets the needs of 95% of the general public I would guess.
 
Gruber said:
Because some people prefer a different compromise?
Click to expand...

Did you hear Kevin Rose on the latest Diggnation episode? He was talking about the air being his perfect machine for traveling, and then Alex said it needed more power and he says "Well they just did that! They kept the design the same but upgraded the CPU and stuff..." Like it had already happened.

The dude is usually pretty plugged in on Apple.

Im thinking design stays the same, we see i5lv, 4 gigs of ram and a GeForce 320M. Price probably stays the same or drops 100.00
 
With only a couple of months left before Sandybridge arrives, why would they upgrade with old parts?

Sandy will bring better graphics, speed and battery life all critical for the small space available in the Air.
 
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