Exactly, the new MBA is not significantly more portable than the 13" touchbar MBP, it's mostly there to occupy a price point, and be a general purpose machine for those who do not want to pay $1800, basically the function of the nTB MBP before this week.
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.
Who in their right mind would buy a MacBook after today?
- Thread starter Killerbob
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Exactly, the new MBA is not significantly more portable than the 13" touchbar MBP, it's mostly there to occupy a price point, and be a general purpose machine for those who do not want to pay $1800, basically the function of the nTB MBP before this week.
13" Retina MacBook Air
1.6 GHz dual-core i5 (Y series), with Turbo to 3.6 GHz
16 GB
512 GB SSD
2.75 lb
11.97" x 8.36"
$1799
13" Retina MacBook Pro (non-TB)
2.3 GHz dual-core i5 (U series), with Turbo to 3.6 GHz
16 GB
512 GB SSD
3.02 lb
11.97" x 8.36"
$1899
Hmm... I think I might take the MacBook Pro in that context.
However, I prefer the 12" MacBook:
12" Retina MacBook
1.3 GHz dual-core i5 (Y series), with Turbo to 3.2 GHz
16 GB
512 GB SSD
2.03 lb
11.04" x 7.74"
$1799
I bought the base model MacBook with 16 GB though, so a bit cheaper:
12" Retina MacBook
1.2 GHz dual-core m3 (Y series), with Turbo to 3.0 GHz
16 GB
256 GB SSD
2.03 lb
11.04" x 7.74"
$1499
Let's compare that to a similarly confirmed MacBook Air:
13" Retina MacBook Air
1.6 GHz dual-core i5 (Y series), with Turbo to 3.6 GHz
16 GB
256 GB SSD
2.75 lb
11.97" x 8.36"
$1599
I see the possibility that the 12" MacBook drops in price by $100, and gets updated at the same time. They may also end up selling a 128 GB model, to further drop the price by $200.
I'm not sure if we'd lose the 13" Pro (non-TB) completely, leaving the MacBook Air to fill that role, because there'd be a price gap:
12" Retina MacBook Core m3 dual-core / 8 GB / 128 GB - $999 (seems too optimistic)
13" Retina MacBook Air Core i5 dual-core / 8 GB / 128 GB - $1199
13" Retina MacBook Air Core i5 dual-core / 8 GB / 256 GB - $1399
13" Retina MacBook Pro Core i5 dual-core / 8 GB / 256 GB - $1499
13" Retina MacBook Pro TB Core i5 quad-core / 8 GB / 256 GB - $1799
1.6 GHz dual-core i5 (Y series), with Turbo to 3.6 GHz
16 GB
512 GB SSD
2.75 lb
11.97" x 8.36"
$1799
13" Retina MacBook Pro (non-TB)
2.3 GHz dual-core i5 (U series), with Turbo to 3.6 GHz
16 GB
512 GB SSD
3.02 lb
11.97" x 8.36"
$1899
Hmm... I think I might take the MacBook Pro in that context.
However, I prefer the 12" MacBook:
12" Retina MacBook
1.3 GHz dual-core i5 (Y series), with Turbo to 3.2 GHz
16 GB
512 GB SSD
2.03 lb
11.04" x 7.74"
$1799
I bought the base model MacBook with 16 GB though, so a bit cheaper:
12" Retina MacBook
1.2 GHz dual-core m3 (Y series), with Turbo to 3.0 GHz
16 GB
256 GB SSD
2.03 lb
11.04" x 7.74"
$1499
Let's compare that to a similarly confirmed MacBook Air:
13" Retina MacBook Air
1.6 GHz dual-core i5 (Y series), with Turbo to 3.6 GHz
16 GB
256 GB SSD
2.75 lb
11.97" x 8.36"
$1599
I see the possibility that the 12" MacBook drops in price by $100, and gets updated at the same time. They may also end up selling a 128 GB model, to further drop the price by $200.
I'm not sure if we'd lose the 13" Pro (non-TB) completely, leaving the MacBook Air to fill that role, because there'd be a price gap:
12" Retina MacBook Core m3 dual-core / 8 GB / 128 GB - $999 (seems too optimistic)
13" Retina MacBook Air Core i5 dual-core / 8 GB / 128 GB - $1199
13" Retina MacBook Air Core i5 dual-core / 8 GB / 256 GB - $1399
13" Retina MacBook Pro Core i5 dual-core / 8 GB / 256 GB - $1499
13" Retina MacBook Pro TB Core i5 quad-core / 8 GB / 256 GB - $1799
When they start clearing out the MacBooks at $800-$900, I'll take it under advisement! ;-) As in, I'll pick up a Space Grey for traveling with... I'll use my MBP for my photo editing and heavy work.
QQ since you seem to know a ton about these chips. Do the 8th gen Y chips all include TB 3 onboard?
I know the 8210 includes it, because it's present in the new Air. For reasons I've stated above, I don't expect apple to use the 8210 in the Macbook--I expect the other Amber Lake Y chips, which seem to be drop-in replacements for the MacBook. But does Amber Lake Y include thunderbolt "on die" or is that just the custom 8210?
Nevermind, I just did a quick look myself. Apparently it's not included.
Unfortunately, I think you're right. If Apple's going to hit the sub-1k price point, it's going to be by going 128GB on the low end.
Last edited:
I have to say Apple has really messed up the product line, it's the worst I've ever seen. So there's a MacBook Air now, which is possibly (?) lighter than the MacBook and has pretty similar specs and does a similar job. And there's the baseline MacBook Pro, which also has the same specs and dimensions for the same job!
I know they are probably different, but having to go to the specs sheet just to find out what differentiates them is ridiculous. Should have been:
Air - light, portable, long battery
Macbook - what the "PRO" lineup is now
MacBook Pro - thicker, more ports, SD cards slot, MagSafe, better thermals, longer battery, no gimmicky touch bars/breakable keys, better GPU - basically a proper PRO machine
I know they are probably different, but having to go to the specs sheet just to find out what differentiates them is ridiculous. Should have been:
Air - light, portable, long battery
Macbook - what the "PRO" lineup is now
MacBook Pro - thicker, more ports, SD cards slot, MagSafe, better thermals, longer battery, no gimmicky touch bars/breakable keys, better GPU - basically a proper PRO machine
The lineup is pretty simple really.
There’s a 12” super portable MacBook range.
There’s a 13” general computing MacBook Air range.
There’s a more powerful 13” MacBook Pro range.
There’s a most powerful 15” MacBook Pro range.
I don’t really think they need another range above the 15” MacBook Pro that is basically MacAlienware.
There’s a 12” super portable MacBook range.
There’s a 13” general computing MacBook Air range.
There’s a more powerful 13” MacBook Pro range.
There’s a most powerful 15” MacBook Pro range.
I don’t really think they need another range above the 15” MacBook Pro that is basically MacAlienware.
Not really, the lineup is:
12'' super portable Macbook
13'' equally super portable but more powerful MacBook Air
13'' equally super portable but more powerful MacBook Pro, which is still nowhere near being powerful without a discrete GPU .
15'' sort-of-kind-of if you have no idea about graphics cards or thermal throttling-powerful 15''. It's not on the level of a GTX 1050 even, and could only dream about anything more powerful. And obviously, all the "PRO" features have been stripped down to make it even more thin.
Do you actually own any of those? I might be willing to argue whether the MBA and the MBP could be considered similarly portable, even though the MBP is still heavier. But I would not agree on them being “super portable” (even though there is not concrete definition for that), when there’s the 12” MB.
If you consider the 12” MB “equally (super) portable” to an Air and even the Pro, you most probably never commuted regularly or traveled with “light luggage”. The 12” screen in a compact body and the significant less weight set the 12” clearly apart from its 13” brothers.
Agreed.
I’ve got a 12”MacBook and my partner has a 13”MBP. They are not equally super portable. There’s almost half a kilo difference and the MBP is bigger in every direction. On a plane the 12” is so much easier to use.
The market for workstation replacement “laptops” is very niche. It’s understandable Apple doesn’t bother with it.
Go buy a 3KG Alienware bohemoth and be happy with it.
I’ve got a 12”MacBook and my partner has a 13”MBP. They are not equally super portable. There’s almost half a kilo difference and the MBP is bigger in every direction. On a plane the 12” is so much easier to use.
The market for workstation replacement “laptops” is very niche. It’s understandable Apple doesn’t bother with it.
[doublepost=1541302784][/doublepost]
Go buy a 3KG Alienware bohemoth and be happy with it.
The MacBook Air is about 9% faster than my 2017 i5 MacBook. And it’s 35% heavier. No thanks. I’ll keep my MacBook.
[doublepost=1541304381][/doublepost]
[doublepost=1541304606][/doublepost]
[doublepost=1541304699][/doublepost]
[doublepost=1541304381][/doublepost]
That “7th Gen” is virtually identical to the “8th Gen” in the MacBook Air. Intel raised the clock speed. That’s it.
[doublepost=1541304606][/doublepost]
Because the MacBook is much smaller and has a processor that is pretty similar.
[doublepost=1541304699][/doublepost]
Because if they updated it with Amber Lake the 12” MacBook with i7 would have been faster than the Air.
Main reason I got the MacBook: fanless operation.
I lost interest in the new MacBook Air after hearing it still uses fans.
YMMV.
I lost interest in the new MacBook Air after hearing it still uses fans.
YMMV.
Exactly. Here's what I said in another post announcing the death of the MBr..
Here's how I liked to see Apple's current notebook lineup from lowest to highest price.
- MBr - ultra portable with solid performance.
- MBA - portable and great performance
- MBP - portable enough with killer performance.
That being said, I do think the MB needs either a spec bump or a price drop as the model has not been updated in over a year.
[doublepost=1541452612][/doublepost]
excellent post. Thanks for doing the work of comparing models by actually using data!
To me the line-up is clear, like the list above. The current pricing overlap with the MBA and MB isn't a true one. Soon as 256GB models are compared the MBA is 150 more expensive, you do get value for that difference but you really do lose an element of portability.
The elephant in the room is the A12X bionic, 18000 Geekbench and allegedly comparative to Xbox One S graphics. It would fit in a Macbook 12, ultra portable and killer performance....
Problem would be the lack of compatibility, though. So a good portion of that power would need to go into an emulation during a transition phase.
That said, if Apple would do it right (think “Rosetta”), it could prove to be a good change.
The reviews are out and the Air underwhelms.
Basically the Air takes the lower class performance of the MacBook line and melds that with lower portability of the Pro line while keeping the fan. The Air also has shorter battery life than the MacBook, and it costs more than both a refurb MacBook and a refurb Pro.
Who in their right mind would buy a MacBook Air after today?
Basically the Air takes the lower class performance of the MacBook line and melds that with lower portability of the Pro line while keeping the fan. The Air also has shorter battery life than the MacBook, and it costs more than both a refurb MacBook and a refurb Pro.
Who in their right mind would buy a MacBook Air after today?
It's seems like the refreshed MacBook Air that everyone clamored for was actually already here; disguised in the MacBook 12 and the MacBook Pro nTB.
Um...anyone who wants a MacBook with a 13" screen that's who.
Forum bubble mentality might complicate thought patterns, but the Air is both lighter and cheaper than the 13" MacBook Pro. I went to the Apple store yesterday to pick up my iPP and there was a table with the 12" MacBook, 13" MacBook Air, 13" MacBook Pro and 15" MacBook Pro all sitting side by side. IMO the MBA form factor is nicer than the MBP.
If you're after a general computing laptop who in their right mind would spring for the 13" MacBook Pro?
The 13" MBP only makes sense to me if you have a specific requirement for software that places a continual load on the CPU, such as Logic...and then, its only once you get to the quad core that the real power is delivered.
To me the nTB MBP looks like the dud option out of all of them.
Actually one of my main points was that the 13" Pro refurbished is significantly cheaper than a similarly configured Air, but with higher performance. And performance is not just with the CPU, but the GPU as well. The Pro also has a superior screen which is both wide colour gamut and much brighter.
Yes the Air is lighter, but it's only by 9%, and ironically, is actually slightly thicker than the Pro.
Here is the pricing:
Refurbished 13.3-inch MacBook Pro 2.3GHz dual-core Intel Core i5 with Retina display - Space Gray
Originally released June 2017
13.3-inch (diagonal) LED-backlit display with IPS technology; 2560-by-1600 native resolution at 227 pixels per inch
8GB of 2133MHz LPDDR3 onboard memory
128GB PCIe-based onboard SSD
720p FaceTime HD Camera
Intel Iris Plus Graphics 640
$1099
Refurbished 13.3-inch MacBook Pro 2.3GHz dual-core Intel Core i5 with Retina display - Silver
Originally released June 2017
13.3-inch (diagonal) LED-backlit display with IPS technology; 2560-by-1600 native resolution at 227 pixels per inch
8GB of 2133MHz LPDDR3 onboard memory
256GB PCIe-based onboard SSD
720p FaceTime HD Camera
Intel Iris Plus Graphics 640
$1269
The pricing of the Air (for now) is $1199 and $1399 respectively.
I would have provided pricing for the 16 GB 256 GB Pro model, which I considered the most interesting "base" model, but it's now sold out on the US refurb store. It was available just the other day, but now that the Air and its pricing have come out, it seems a lot of people are buying the non-TB Pro.
---
tl;dr:
It's actually cheaper to buy the 2017 non-TB Pro (as a refurb) than it is to buy the Air, if similarly configured.
However, the Pro has higher CPU performance, higher GPU performance, and a better screen in terms of both brightness and colour. The Air is lighter, but only by 9%.
Last edited:
Pitting refurb prices vs brand new is cheating.
It’s also cheaper to buy a second hand MacBook Pro from Craigslist than it is a brand new MBA from the Apple store. But that’s not a fair comparison either.
To claim the MBA is thicker is also fake news. You can’t just measure the thick end like that’s the whole computer LOL
[doublepost=1541648349][/doublepost]
[doublepost=1541648533][/doublepost]Who in their right mind would buy the nTB MBP is my thought though.
Not compact. Not cheap. Not powerful.
The quad core MBP on the other hand makes sense. At least it’s powerful.
It’s also cheaper to buy a second hand MacBook Pro from Craigslist than it is a brand new MBA from the Apple store. But that’s not a fair comparison either.
To claim the MBA is thicker is also fake news. You can’t just measure the thick end like that’s the whole computer LOL
[doublepost=1541648349][/doublepost]
[doublepost=1541648533][/doublepost]Who in their right mind would buy the nTB MBP is my thought though.
Not compact. Not cheap. Not powerful.
The quad core MBP on the other hand makes sense. At least it’s powerful.
Hahaha, you answered a rhetorical question. The OP asked ignorantly "Who in their right mind would buy a MacBook after today?" The collective said: perhaps, anyone who wants a lighter, fanless, more compact 12" MacBook, that's who. Then flipped the question. Thanks for playing.
It's not cheating at all, and is nothing like Craigslist. These are products straight from Apple with the same warranty, and the same eligibility for Apple Care too.
I tell people to get refurbs all the time, and do the same myself when possible. In fact, I think it's foolish to demand "brand new" when the same refurb is available from Apple at 15% less. It's just a waste of money.
The MacBook Air needs a quad core option. Should be possible since it has a fan. Also, it is 2018, every other laptop of the same form factor now comes with a quad core. My guess is even the iPad Pro with the A12X could destroy it in multi-threaded workloads right now. It makes no sense. Apple are just afraid of cannibalizing MacBook Pro sales.