Samsung has me sold on the idea of a 15" ultraportable after seeing their new Series 9. If Apple is able to and I'm sure they can get anywhere near 3.3 lbs and in a case that is slightly smaller than a 14" like the Samsung is, then a 15" Air will be on the top of my list when I have to purchase a new laptop.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
What's the Point of A 15" Ultrabook?
- Thread starter OS X Dude
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'll cast in my vote here.
I have a 2010 MBP 15" and I would sell it and purchase a MBA 15" as soon as it comes out.
My top reasons:
1.) I need the 15" screen space with hi-res (1650x1080).
2.) I have only used my Superdrive twice in the 2 years I've had it. I would love to drop the optical drive and have a lighter notebook.
3.) SSD. I couldn't normally afford upgrading my HDD to an SSD. Having the SSD built into the MBA really gives good value.
4.) Lastly, I can use it to slice bread.
I have a 2010 MBP 15" and I would sell it and purchase a MBA 15" as soon as it comes out.
My top reasons:
1.) I need the 15" screen space with hi-res (1650x1080).
2.) I have only used my Superdrive twice in the 2 years I've had it. I would love to drop the optical drive and have a lighter notebook.
3.) SSD. I couldn't normally afford upgrading my HDD to an SSD. Having the SSD built into the MBA really gives good value.
4.) Lastly, I can use it to slice bread.
Thanks for your replies
If people wanted the bigger screen, why not just get the current 15" Pro? As I said, it's not like it's thick or heavy,
Well, speaking as someone who has both a 13" MBA and a 13" MBP (actually my gf's), yes, the MBP *is* heavy and thick compared to the MBA. It feels like a brick.
It's one of those things that when you read the weight on a spec sheet, you just shrug and wonder what the big deal is, but when you actually feel the difference, it is significant.
Whether or not this is important to a buyer is another question entirely. I don't know what the specs and pricing combo of an unreleased potential device are, but some current points of differentiation between MBA and MBP are as follows:
MBA has higher res screen
MBA is faster for most tasks due to SSD, and putting it in a MBP jacks the price up 200$ past the MBA (base models)
MBA is lighter to good effect
MBA looks better design-wise (I know this may seem dumb, but some people really do care about this)
So some future MBA may or may not have all or some of these points of differentiation.
Things like weighing less I would imagine only increase in importance as you are looking at devices increasing in size (15").
As far as the screen and SSD, I could see Apple transitioning to a higher res for all their laptop product lines, as well as SSD, but again, we just don't know.
I'd assume you haven't used the 13" MBA?
There are some problems...
1) The screen has lower color gamut, and thus not as vibrant/contrast as the Pro line. I'd assume the same thing to happen to the 15" MBA if it ever comes out.
2) The lighter and thinner body of the MBA 13" comes at the expense of a solid construct. I can easily bend and flex the thing... anywhere... even when it's closed. It only doesn't flex if I use a case, but then that negates the thin and light idea completely. A 15" MBA would be even worse, as it spreads even wider than the 13" Air. The flexing problem makes the Air feel flimsier and less stable than it actually is, which was why I switched back to a 15" Pro when I had the chance. Didn't want an accidental bending of a MBA on my conscience. Is it that easy to flex a MacBook Air? Yes, it is.
3) You can try something like the Seagate Momentus XT for the best of both worlds.
4) It's not razor-sharp thin, despite belief. Cutting stuffs with an Air is ridiculously hard, and yes, I tried. Not to mention the thing flexes, but I think I actually did mention that.
As I mentioned above, it's quite easy to flex the MBA 13". Perhaps it's due to the density of material, or Apple's attempt at lowering weight, or... whichever it is, the machine is extremely easy to flex. I had one for an extended period of time, and without a case, the screen would be pressed into the keyboard, leaving marks afterward. It could get to a point where the keyboard and trackpad would scratch the screen. But the bottom line is... it's just not as "solid" as a MacBook Pro.
And I think you meant to say 1.5kg without the optical drive? The current MacBook Air 13" weighs almost at 3lbs (1.25kg). There's no way a 15" Air would weigh half that.
Apple indeed never marketed their products as "sturdy", but that doesn't mean they didn't build their products well. It wasn't until the MacBook Air that there was a serious concern with build quality and long-term durability, all because the body is way too thin to hold itself up. The 13" MBA really shows the limits of what Apple can do with aluminum. I suspect they'll have to use carbon fiber if they were to make a 15" Air.
Last edited:
I've got friends who are waiting for a 15" Air to upgrade their 15" pro. It's the tiny weight and the super thin feeling that makes it feel like something truly special. Combine the SSD's speed in there, and suddenly the macbook pro seems like an out-dated beast dragging around "dead weigh" that isn't helping it preform.
Don't get me wrong -- the macbook pro's certainly pull their own weight, but my own previous macbook pro, a 15" 2.66 i7 w/8GB ram and the 500GB 7200rpm drive didn't out pace my new macbook air, a 1.8 i7 with 4GB ram and the 256GB SSD... and the friend I speak of has the same unit I previously owned. The only major advantage is the screen space he's got, and really, the 13" air has the same pixel count as his standard-res 15". I think a 15" with the high-res display and a slightly lower speed i7 and the SSD would probably feel incredibly fast for its weight, and thus the market for said unit is drawn. I can't even pickup a 13" macbook pro anymore without thinking "oh my goodness... I remember when I used to think this was a small and light computer....".
----------
I don't think this is a major difference... judging by my previous ownership of the 15" High-res matte display (from 2010)... and my friend's ownership of the standard 15" glossy, and my personal ownership of the 27" iMac.... I must say, I feel like my 11" Macbook Air really holds its own on colors and contrast. I know it isn't as contrasty as the iMac, but that's because the glass in front of the iMac makes it appear more contrast yet (like matte vs glossy paper when printing photos)...
I honestly prefer my 11" Air's representation of color for most occasions when I compare to my printed photos, and don't believe this will be something to hold anyone back.
Besides; if someone is a professional in an industry, I'm sure they've got their own calibrated displays they use besides their laptop screens which are not a final stop for anyone working with color.
Don't get me wrong -- the macbook pro's certainly pull their own weight, but my own previous macbook pro, a 15" 2.66 i7 w/8GB ram and the 500GB 7200rpm drive didn't out pace my new macbook air, a 1.8 i7 with 4GB ram and the 256GB SSD... and the friend I speak of has the same unit I previously owned. The only major advantage is the screen space he's got, and really, the 13" air has the same pixel count as his standard-res 15". I think a 15" with the high-res display and a slightly lower speed i7 and the SSD would probably feel incredibly fast for its weight, and thus the market for said unit is drawn. I can't even pickup a 13" macbook pro anymore without thinking "oh my goodness... I remember when I used to think this was a small and light computer....".
----------
I don't think this is a major difference... judging by my previous ownership of the 15" High-res matte display (from 2010)... and my friend's ownership of the standard 15" glossy, and my personal ownership of the 27" iMac.... I must say, I feel like my 11" Macbook Air really holds its own on colors and contrast. I know it isn't as contrasty as the iMac, but that's because the glass in front of the iMac makes it appear more contrast yet (like matte vs glossy paper when printing photos)...
I honestly prefer my 11" Air's representation of color for most occasions when I compare to my printed photos, and don't believe this will be something to hold anyone back.
Besides; if someone is a professional in an industry, I'm sure they've got their own calibrated displays they use besides their laptop screens which are not a final stop for anyone working with color.
I think people want a thinner and lighter 15" MacBook Pro. It doesn't need to be as thin or as light as the MacBook Air. If Apple can make a notebook with quad core i7 ivy bridge and dedicated graphics (AMD 7xxx) that is 0.7-0.8" thick and weights less than 4.5 lbs than they have a winner. To achieve this target weight and thickness apple must remove the optical drive as well as use flash storage SSD instead of traditional hard drive. Here is my prediction:
2012 15" MacBook Pro
2.6GHz Intel Core i7 Ivy Bridge
4GB 1600MHz
256GB flash storage
AMD Radeon HD 7750M with 1 GB GDDR5
Built in battery (10 hours)
Height: 0.7"
Weight 4.5 lbs
Make it happen Apple and you got my 2000 dollars
2012 15" MacBook Pro
2.6GHz Intel Core i7 Ivy Bridge
4GB 1600MHz
256GB flash storage
AMD Radeon HD 7750M with 1 GB GDDR5
Built in battery (10 hours)
Height: 0.7"
Weight 4.5 lbs
Make it happen Apple and you got my 2000 dollars
Thanks guys, you've helped me to somewhat see the point of them - but I realise they're not for meI find it amazing people want a thinner 15" than what's already out - I just looked and mine's the size of it's Ethernet port (less the thin-ass monitor). I guess some people really want portability, though.
I reckon they will release a 15" Air alongside the current Pro, just as they have with the 13" Air. After a few years, the Pro line will dissolve and there will just be the Air-style left. My 5p/2c
I agree, and the first Pro to go will be the 17"
I dont know WTF you're talking about. I've traveled all over the world with my MBA 13" and it's sturdy as a rock, and it doesn't flex an iota.
My impression is that the screen quality has significantly deteriorated on the MBA from Rev.B to the current 2011 model. I can't compare them side by side unfortunately, as i sold my Rev.B prior to getting the new one, but from memory the picture quality on the Rev.B was at least one magnitude better...
If I hadn't just recently bought my 13" which I'm super happy with, I'd definitely consider a 15". The advantage for me would be added screen size but in a package which is still thin and relatively portable. My iPad takes care of my day to day portability needs, but when I go on longer trips abroad, which I do quite often for work, I need something that allows me to work comfortably with two apps side by side, large documents and excel sheets, and so on. At the same time, I want something that isn't super heavy (which is why my Dell laptop doesn't go anywhere with me - it's great for home use and very powerful, but really heavy to drag around).
I guess it's just a matter of personal preference, but to me, the difference was major. I had a MBA 13" 2010 model with Samsung screen, and it still paled in comparison to my new MBP 15" 2011.
Also, my dad's matte 17" MBP still has higher color gamut and contrast than my Air, so I don't think it was because of the glass vs transparent plastic. It was more a problem with the screen.
While it's true that professionals usually have a better monitor handy, if they travel a lot, they wouldn't want to lug that monitor around. If they don't travel a lot, I suspect they wouldn't even notice the MacBook Air, wouldn't you agree?
Close the laptop, hold it by the sides with two hands, then twist your hands slightly. I have tried that with every MBA 13" I can get my hands on: my own, my friends', store displays (in 3 different stores at least), and they all flex and bend quite easily.
The only remedy that I found was to snap a Speck case on, which was hard enough to keep the whole computer from flexing, but the display assembly was still flexing even with the case on.
I'm sure you can ask around MacRumors, and many people will respond with the same experience.
I'm not sure about Rev.B, but Anandtech's test shows that the current 2011 model is very slightly behind the 2010 model:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4528/the-2011-macbook-air-11-13inch-review/7
Just curious ... what are you using to distinguish the difference.. just comparing photos from one screen to the next I assume.. ?
Also of note, the matte screen isn't plastic. It's still glass, but it has a layer applied to it that scatters the light and changes the texture... think like the difference of anodized aluminum vs. bead-blasted & bright dipped aluminum. Same metal, but the change in finish makes a world of difference on how it looks / feels!
Wasn't the 2010 model the one with the price cut? The first models were placed in the high price range and as Apple doesn't like to cut on its margins, chances are they saved on some components - with the screen being a promising candidate...
I actually did own both a MacBook Air (base model 13" 2010) and a MacBook Pro (base model 15" 2011) and so I did a comparison side by side... with multiple other Macs. Even among MacBook Pro, there was a marked difference in color gamut and contrast ratio. But the MacBook Air simply did worse than all of the Pros. To be more precise, I compared the Air to a MacBook Pro 15" 2007 w/ matte display, a MacBook Pro 13" 2010 w/ glossy, a MacBook Pro 15" 2011 w/ glossy, and a MacBook Pro 17" 2010 w/ matte. The Air did worst, followed by the 15" 2007 Pro, then the 13" 2010 Pro, then the 15" 2011 Pro, and the 17" 2010 Pro w/ matte had the best screen.
As far as the matte screen being plastic, I know that for a fact because I actually cleaned my dad's MBP 17" 2010 model many times, and the matte layer was actually just a thin plastic film in an aluminum frame, much like the Air. The only difference is that the coating on the Pro reflects less. I also had a 2007 MBP 15" with matte screen, and that one was definitely plastic, too. How do I know that? Because the screen is not a solid surface. It's soft like the White MacBook, if you have ever seen any of them. Or if you have an Air, then the similar plastic is used in the Pro, just with a matte finish instead of the semi-gloss finish of the Air.
I'm not sure where you get that the matte screen is a matte layer on top of glass. It's not. And other MacRumors members have already reported that it's not... a few years ago:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/931357/
The plastic layer is obviously less sturdy than glass, and it's harder to clean, too. Also it's easier to scratch, especially with matte.
The 2010 model was indeed the one with a price cut, but they went with a redesign as well, and the CPU component was drastically less expensive than what Apple had to pay for the original iteration of the MacBook Air.
Regarding the screen material, I actually would gladly give up on the MBP's extra color gamut in order to keep it 100% matte (as it is right now).
Why? Because the MBA is a mobility-orientated laptop, and thus it should be optimized for on-the-road usage (Starbucks, airport waiting lounge, etc), and in those situations a glossy screen is simply a deal breaker.
If I had to choose between color gamut and matte screen, I'd pick matte screen ANY day of the week.
Why? Because the MBA is a mobility-orientated laptop, and thus it should be optimized for on-the-road usage (Starbucks, airport waiting lounge, etc), and in those situations a glossy screen is simply a deal breaker.
If I had to choose between color gamut and matte screen, I'd pick matte screen ANY day of the week.
Neither matte nor glossy would do good under direct sunlight.
If both screens are displaying bright images (with a lot of whites) and not plain black, then you wouldn't be able to see reflections in either most of the time. If the ambient light is too intense, then you'd see some reflections in both screen, with the matte simply blurring the reflection instead of blocking it off completely. When both screens show black, or are completely off, then matte would show less reflection than glossy, but that condition is very extreme, and only photographers who work extensively in applications with dark themes (Lightroom 3) which emphasize their photo viewing experience should care about such a thing. I don't think the general public would notice. Plus matte has problems displaying plain black at higher brightness. Black on matte at higher brightness is more like gray.
On a side note, the screen of the Air is not matte. It's slightly less reflective than glossy (because it's not glass), but it's definitely not matte. So you are giving up both matte and color gamut.
They seem to be referring to the glass over the entire bezel of the machine -- There isn't a layer of film that you should be able to see. I've replaced the matte screen multiple times on my 2006 15" MacBook pro (it had a few drops...Let's just say that), as well as the 12" Powerbook's screen, 12" iBook and several other older PC screens.
Yes, this surface does scratch more easily. From what I've been told the Air, as well as the old MacBooks and much older glossy MacBook Pros, is the same glass that the matte treatment process would be applied to, without any treatment.. but it is in fact glass. If it is plastic, I'm quite curious what kind of plastic apple uses that doesn't scratch without effort and is treated with an anti reflective coating. I suppose that's my cue to do more research.
Apple Expert said:
That last quote is what I was trying to bring up before.. it's something that has always bothered me about the glass/glossy displays ... things "look" more vibrant, but they aren't.
As for the matte 2010 display winning your test... that's interesting. Don't get me wrong, I love my matte 2010 15", but my friend who owns the same model with a glossy front looks more contrasty and vibrant (and it drives me nuts). It all comes down to personal preference I suppose...
I want a slightly larger notebook with a discrete video card, no optical drive, and that is not a loud nuclear pile at load.
The point of a 15" Air is that Apple thinks it will sell. If an individual can't imagine why another consumer would select a larger screen size it only suggests a lack of imagination on their part.
Laptops are making a slow transition to ultrabook form factors while retaining almost all core functionality, so we'll see screen sizes in the future that directly mirror Pro offerings. The distinction between ultrabook/netbooks and laptop/notebooks is relative (and probably doesn't even exist in the minds of most consumers)--the Air brand is at the forefront of further blurring that line.
Laptops are making a slow transition to ultrabook form factors while retaining almost all core functionality, so we'll see screen sizes in the future that directly mirror Pro offerings. The distinction between ultrabook/netbooks and laptop/notebooks is relative (and probably doesn't even exist in the minds of most consumers)--the Air brand is at the forefront of further blurring that line.
I think you are referring to the display panel inside rather than the top case assembly (bezel + display panel + WIFI antenna + camera + glass if glossy).
I have tried to remove the antiglare coating on top of the display panel of a 15" MBP 2007 (I had to replace the display, and I thought I would try it on the broken display). It wasn't easy, but I could peel the antiglare layer off of the display panel, and it was in fact plastic. The glass layer underneath is the display itself. If you break that glass, the display is officially dead.
On the glossy screen, yes, there is a glass layer over the whole bezel, but that's the point. The screen underneath is protected. The screen on the matte and the Air is less protected.
There is another case of matte, by the way. You can apply the same thin plastic matte film on top of the glass layer of the glossy display, and it'll give the same matte effect. So with glossy, you can convert to matte any time, but you can't convert from matte to glossy (not the easy way, I tried to remove the matte film, and since it dealt directly with the display panel, it was extremely hard).
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm in the market for a new laptop in the next 2-3 months.
I currently have a 13" MBP and when you have to carry it too and from work every day, the weight is noticeable.
When I first heard rumours of the possible 15" MBA/Ultrabook I was pretty excited. I beg to differ with those who say a 15" MBA isn't portable due to the size, but to me - weight has greater affect to portability. Namely once I've thrown the laptop into my back pack, it's not the dimensions I'm feeling carrying it down the road it's the weight!
That said - screen real-estate is something I like and 13" seems to be the sweet spot for me. So till recently I've been contemplating moving from my 13" MBP to a 13" MBA.
But one thing of particular interest to me is this supposed rumour of pixel increase? If true I wonder which models would be likely to benefit?
If they doubled the pixel count of the 11" MBA up to 2732 x 1536 I'd buy it on day 1.
I currently have a 13" MBP and when you have to carry it too and from work every day, the weight is noticeable.
When I first heard rumours of the possible 15" MBA/Ultrabook I was pretty excited. I beg to differ with those who say a 15" MBA isn't portable due to the size, but to me - weight has greater affect to portability. Namely once I've thrown the laptop into my back pack, it's not the dimensions I'm feeling carrying it down the road it's the weight!
That said - screen real-estate is something I like and 13" seems to be the sweet spot for me. So till recently I've been contemplating moving from my 13" MBP to a 13" MBA.
But one thing of particular interest to me is this supposed rumour of pixel increase? If true I wonder which models would be likely to benefit?
If they doubled the pixel count of the 11" MBA up to 2732 x 1536 I'd buy it on day 1.
lol
Well I do seem to carry all sorts of other heavy crap in my bag at any one time so any weight loss is a good thing - although admittedly I don't lay up nights wishing my laptop was anorexic.
Why not carry a desktop with you if the weight doesn't matter? 4.5lb is 4.5lb, it's definitely noticeable.