Worth it?

Discussion in 'MacBook Air' started by lavadranzer, Mar 4, 2009.

  1. lavadranzer macrumors newbie

    May 23, 2008
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 2_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/525.18.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.1 Mobile/5H11 Safari/525.20)

    Is it worth buying?
    I have the new unibody MacBook.
    But I need a more portable laptop sometimes. Is it slow? I'm usually gonna load iTunes and Photoshop. Those are my top apps. Can the MBA load it quickly? Not freaking fast, but like, it's not too long of a wait. I need to know this for my decision.
  2. Eidorian macrumors Penryn


    Mar 23, 2005
    I'd get a MacBook and install a 7200 RPM drive in it if you're that concerned.
  3. frogcat macrumors member

    Nov 9, 2007
    I don't think that's relevant to what the OP was asking.

    It seems like you want to make a switch because of portable reasons.
    If that is the only reason than I highly advise you rethink your decision.

    The macbook is only 1.5 pounds heavier. You barely really feel it. After I got my air, I ended up adding more stuff to my bag, since I had extra space. It doesn't exactly help.

    Now when it gets to design in day-to-day functionality, and aesthetics, the decision is a no brainer. I left my alumbook for the Air and I couldn't be happier. I use it for compiling code with Visual Studio, and SQL Server, running VMWare. I'm doing all this while running iTunes and Firefox as well. Mind you, I also have to do this stuff on the go. And putting the air in and taking the air out of my messenger bag is like cutting (cake?) butter. Setting it down and picking it up is also an experience I appreciate each time. It really gives you the feel like you're using a piece of paper.

    It's really not slow at all. Only thing I was disappointed about was not being able to seamlessly run HD quality movies on my 20" monitor. Maybe that will get fixed with snow leopard though. Oh and another thing, sometimes bootup of applications is faster on the Air since it has that 6MB cache (this is considering if you had already booted the app once before). That's something to keep in mind if you only sleep your laptops.

    Good Luck on the decision.
  4. Veinticinco macrumors 6502a


    Feb 25, 2009
    I had the uni-MB last year - Head 1 Heart 0 - or so I kept telling myself.

    But I couldn't stop thinking about the MBA. Long story but Lady Fortune stepped in and I had the opportunity to re-order a new Apple laptop. I already have a workhorse and much-loved PBG4, and need power with portability, so did what I should have done months ago. And I've never looked back. It was both the Heart AND Head decision. I love using it, christ I love LOOKING at it too! Whereas the MB just bored me.

    Plenty of horses under the hood, you'll be fine with PS and iTunes no problem at all. As a certain global sweatshop-supporting footwear and sporting company would say...."just do it" ;)
  5. Doju macrumors 68000

    Jun 16, 2008
    Great idea, that'll help with the portability.

    I'm in your boots as well, and I think I'll switch to a MBA as soon as I have the cash. MBs sell amazing second hand, so I'll have no problems with waiting a bit.

    But all in all, if you're willing to go for the SSD, you'll likely, unless video encoding or editing, notice a dramatic INCREASE in speed. Plus, the portability is great, and the screen blows it out of the water.

    Can't go wrong with it. I don't even use USBs anymore (Bluetooth ftw), and I install or add media using an optical drive maybe once a year. Old tech.

    So yeah, go for it. Brilliant machine.
  6. GoCubsGo macrumors Nehalem


    Feb 19, 2005
    Funny I never saw the new MB as not being portable. Yes the Air is lighter and thinner, but the MB isn't exactly a beast.
  7. Scottsdale macrumors 601


    Sep 19, 2008
    The revised MBA or new MBA or MBA v2 or rev B MBA, however you want to say it, YES the new MBA is worth upgrading from a unibody MB.

    Basically, the new MBA is a more portable unibody MB. The main components are the same except CPU. While the MBA's CPU's clock speed is slightly slower, the MBA has 6 MB L2 cache, while the MBs only has 3 MB... it actually makes a huge difference.

    Also, my MBA is the fastest Mac I have ever owned. It's not the 1.86 GHz CPU that is making it my fastest Mac, as I have owned 2.33 MBP and 2.4 MB. It is the SSD that makes the MBA seem so very fast.

    I highly recommend the MBA to anyone that wants extreme portability. However, I recommend the high-end MBA to anyone that wants power, speed, and portability. And I recommend the 24" LED ACD if you want your MBA to seem like an instant desktop.

    I absolutely hated my original MBA. When the new MBA was announced, I didn't think I would ever give an MBA a chance again, as I had a miserable experience with my original MBA. So, when the unibody MB and new MBA were announced, I went with a new unibody MB. It was about three weeks later that people started receiving their new MBAs. And all of the changes Apple made had completely changed the capabilities of the MBA. Finally the new MBA was the MBA that Apple promised all along but could not deliver with the original MBA.

    A lot of people can make the refurbished original MBA work for them by installing Cool Book. However, I would say based on your post, that the only MBA that will make you happy is the one that made me happy. The revised MBA with 1.86 GHz CPU and 128 GB SSD. And if you want to use it as a primary computer and at a desk, definitely buy the 24" LED Backlit Apple Cinema Display. The two together are absolutely INCREDIBLE!

    Best wishes with your decision.
  8. Doju macrumors 68000

    Jun 16, 2008
    *sigh* Try to read the post, as hard as it may be. :rolleyes:

    The problem is that it isn't portable ENOUGH. There's no questioning it's more or less portable, but compared to the MBA it's a whole different thing. 1.5lbs might not seem like a lot, but damn do you notice it.
  9. Doju macrumors 68000

    Jun 16, 2008
    Could you explain to me what's the big deal with the L2 cache? By no means do I doubt you, just curious.

    Oh, and could you add your experience with the MB? Was the change to the MBA a lot better for you? Why?

    And lastly :)p) do you think any other display would work (adapter)? You seem fanatic about the ACD, just curious why.

    Thanks Scott, you're incredible. :D
  10. Scottsdale macrumors 601


    Sep 19, 2008
    I am not an expert in L2 cache, but I can say that 3MB vs 6MB of L2 cache makes a difference. It does because the L2 cache is the memory of the CPU. The CPU can use its memory faster than accessing the computer's main memory, but it's constantly swapping so that exactly what you are currently doing is being read/written there. Small amounts of L2 cache used to make huge differences. I used to know a little more about it. Anyways, 6 MB is DOUBLE the cache size. I know that a 1.86 GHz CPU with 3 MB L2 cache wouldn't be as fast as a computer with 6 MB L2 cache. But, I truthfully don't know about current benchmarks and all of that between the two.

    I actually liked my MB, but I loved the size and form of my original MBA, and wished that it could actually perform. Had the MBA been released at the same time as the MB, I would have just bought the MBA. I would have known better than to buy the MB. It was that delay of the MBA when I bought the unibody MB. The unibody MB performed well. Its display was definitely not as nice as the display on the MBA. And, I use my Mac as my work computer. So, for work purposes, I wanted a Mac that was light for travel and portability, but I wanted the speed and power too. So, the MBA with SSD fit all of the needs. When I started seeing the xBench marks of the new MBA, I was impressed. I used several of my friend and colleagues rev B MBAs, and I was always so impressed.

    So, I finally switched to the MBA. I wish I would have never bought the unibody MB. It is not that it isn't nice, it just does the same things as the MBA, and it is a lot heavier than the MBA. It is a lot bigger than the MBA. The MB may not seem like a huge computer, and it may not seem very heavy on paper, but when you actually hold and use an MBA, there is no turning back.

    The MBA is a luxury. It is meant for people who can afford the extra price. It is meant for people who want ultra portability. It is meant for people that work on their computers and want a nicer display to look at.

    Lastly, the 24" LED ACD shows just how powerful the MBA really is. Working on an MBA with an ACD feels like using a Mac Pro. No matter what "other" monitor I look at, NONE compare to the quality of the ACD. And, the 24" ACD was made to be like a docking station for the MBA (all Mac notebooks). I never have to pull out the battery charger while at home. Just plug the three cables from the ACD to the MBA, and it takes care of charging it, transferring the display, and I use the ACD to plug in all of my USB peripherals. And, I use the Apple Wireless Keyboard and Logitech Silver BT Mouse.

    I always like having the power of a desktop. And yet, I always want to just have one computer with all of my programs and files. And I also travel a lot, and I take my MBA to client offices daily. For everything I need and use it for, the MBA while away from my desk is perfect. And the MBA while at my desk is powerful.

    It's not for everyone, but if you want one computer, the MBA with a 24" ACD attached meets all of the needs I have of my Mac.
  11. Doju macrumors 68000

    Jun 16, 2008
    Thanks, I really appreciate your responses on not only this thread, but the others as well. You're a real advocate, and I'm sure have caused Apple to get quite a few more sales. Thanks greatly sir.

    But, out of curiosity, you don't have ANY other Mac to use as a powerhouse? I was thinking a MBA + iMac may be a nice set up.
  12. Doju macrumors 68000

    Jun 16, 2008
    Oh, and do you find the speakers bad? (Or at least worse than the MB's)?
  13. darngooddesign macrumors G3

    Jul 4, 2007
    Atlanta, GA
    My understanding of the L2 cache is its a place to keep data that is much faster than reading it fresh from the drive. What I mean is if system keeps accessing the same info, launching an app a second time for example, it will do this quicker if its from the L2 cache. Having twice the cache means that more of the info the system uses is accessed quicker therefore speeding up the over-all system performance.
  14. Scottsdale macrumors 601


    Sep 19, 2008
    Actually, I think the CPU first goes to cache, then to main memory, then to the drive. And whatever working on is in the cache, and secondly memory, and third drive.

    So, anything currently doing will be in cache and faster, and in memory second. Stuff on the drive takes longest to pull up. That is why the SSD is so much faster though for the computer. It finds and reads data so much faster than spinning a hard drive to find it. The SSD is more like memory.
  15. Olvenskol macrumors member

    Feb 20, 2008
    I have a Macbook Pro and an iMac in addition to my Air. The MBP performs an important role catching dust that would otherwise land on my desk. The iMac has storage for all the family photos and gets the fancy backup system.

    All my real work is done on my MBA.

    It is a little slower starting things up after a cold boot. But I only do that about once a month or so when upgrading software. Otherwise the speed is fine, and I only have the revision A model.

    I haven't used Photoshop, so can't speak to that, but running office-style applications (Word, Excel, Keynote) and the other usual suspects all work great. I also occasionally bring up Windows for some Visual Studio sessions.
  16. Olvenskol macrumors member

    Feb 20, 2008
    Ah, the speaker is pretty weak, and not stereo. Pretty worthless for music IMO. Headphones, of course, work fine.
  17. Scottsdale macrumors 601


    Sep 19, 2008
    I also own a Unibody MB aluminum 2.4 GHz with 7200 rpm HDD and 4 GB RAM. It seems much slower. I haven't used it since bought the MBA. If I remember right, speakers were a little nicer on it. Really since I got the great deal on the MBP, I should just sell the MB, but I told myself I would never sell my Macs again after my last selloff. I sold a black MB, my MBP, and my MBA and bought the unibody MB. Also sold two Windows machines.

    I also own a 2.33 GHz MBP. Bought it a month ago as a replacement for the one I sold and wished I hadn't sold. It has a 320 GB 7200 rpm HDD, 256 MB Dedicated graphics, and 4 GB RAM. It actually has a much nicer display (glossy but not glassy) than the 2.4 GHz MB. Both seem very similar in speed. Video playback is much nicer on the MBP. I have not used the MBP for anything other than Internet and to play kids games and movies on. Basically the MBP is the kids gaming/entertainment machine and I use it for a Windows client application one day per month.

    Absolutely positively, my MBA is 35% faster at anything than either of the other two Macs. And for booting and application opening, it's even faster. My apps don't open instantly on the MBP. Booting takes longest on MBP.

    I use my MBA for everything. The vast majority of my work is in Word, Keynote and Excel. I am a management consultant. However, I do some Internet development stuff on the side. I use my MBA for everything from Dreamweaver to Photoshop. I also do a lot of video stuff and photo stuff of my kids most in iMovie 09 now and iPhoto 09. I do a little coding. And finally, I do Internet, email, and writing.

    Not that I am too hard on the MBA, but everything it does is much faster than the MB or MBP. Has to be the SSD.
  18. Doju macrumors 68000

    Jun 16, 2008
    Not that I'm doubting you, but how is it so much faster for everything else as well? :confused:

    I was under the impression that the SSD only helps in read and write speeds, which would really only help application openings and boot up and shut down speeds. Everything else would be hindered by the MBA's (I don't want to say "weak" but "inferior" seems to work well) processor.

    Could you explain to me how it is faster, and what exactly it is in? And how long are we talking for application opening and boot-up/down times?

    Again, thanks Scott and everyone. Before I drop the cash, I'm sure you understand I want as much information as possible, and I apologize if this is a hindrance. I'll be sure to help myself when I purchase one. :p
  19. jimboutilier macrumors 6502a

    Nov 10, 2008
    I've used a Rev A MBA 1.6/2gb/80gbHD for about 8 months as a primary (but not only) machine. I'd class its CPU speed as good, its graphics as fair, and its disk as poor. The new Rev B 1.86/2gb/128gbSSD improves the MBA in all these areas but I can't speak to how much. The maximum capacity drive is still only 126gb though and thats not much space by today's standards. No ethernet port and only one USB port can also be a little tough to live with long term. Average battery life, non removable battery, and a very slow charge time means you have to stick close to a plug as well.

    On the other side the MBA is a true joy to travel with, and use within its limitations. It fits in a smaller lighter bag and can be used with smaller lighter accessories saving considerably more with than just that of the machine. Its just SO easy to carry around and travel with.

    The new unibody MB is a bit thiner and lighter than previous MB's. Its speed and capacity (well beyond a MBA) means it can be a great "only" machine for most people. Its still small enough and light enough to travel with and a faster charging, higher capacity, user changeable battery means it can serve road warriors. After living with the Air its capacity seems huge and blindingly fast. I miss the excellent screen of the MBA but I think I can live with the good screen of the MB.

    On the other hand a half inch of thickness and pound an a half difference in weight does not sound like much but it really is. That makes the MB almost twice as thick and 50% heavier than the MBA. And you feel it. While the air was a joy to travel with and you could live with its capacity and performance the MB is a joy with respect to performance and capacity and you can live with its portability.

    The bottom line is they are both fine machines, you just have to decide what's more important to you.
  20. kinkster macrumors 6502a

    Sep 15, 2008
    The next spec update on the MBA should make it a better option for using as a stand alone computer. mainly thinking of storage, I wouldn't expect ports to get any better.

    Snow Leopard should help it to be more viable as a primary computer too.
  21. Maks macrumors member

    Feb 26, 2009
    CPU cache is memory that is *much* faster to access than traditional memory located across the bus. It's also very expensive. CPUs can make intelligent decisions about what to place in cache so that the most frequently accessed data is in there. There are also things like branch prediction to aid in populating the cache w/the data that is likely to be needed next. In most cases more cache = better, but not always. The CPU will always check its L2 cache prior to fetching the data from memory, so if you are getting a low cache hit rate in a large amount of memory, you are actually getting worse performance than if the CPU went to the main memory immediately.

    The CPU will never directly request data from a hard drive as it is simply too slow for a CPU. The OS controls what is placed into RAM so that the CPU can fetch what it needs.
  22. entatlrg macrumors 68040


    Mar 2, 2009
    Waterloo & Georgian Bay, Canada
  23. Scottsdale macrumors 601


    Sep 19, 2008

    Hey, the new MBA has a 45 NM Penryn CPU with DOUBLE the L2 cache of the MB CPU. It is same 45 NM CPU as MB and MBP. The clock speed is lower and it is an SSF CPU, but it is anything but hindered.

    I think you are thinking of the original MBA's CPU. It was a 65 NM problematic overheating and troubled chip to start with in a small case trying to drive a worthless Intel graphics chip. The two together were problem. Add in the old PATA technology, even to SSD, and you get slow everything. I would use one app at a time on my old MBA. I would close email, wait ten seconds. Open Safari, wait 20 seconds. Browse, couldn't scroll too fast. I really could NOT open two apps at the same time without serious consequences to the time... 30 seconds between apps.


    Incredible Boot speeds. Especially if you tune it and remove anything slowing start process.

    The new MBA has one capable CPU. I always hear or read people bashing it, and I think man this thing is fast.

    Ok, it's a 1.86 GHz in mine, and I would be the CPU's ability to calculate is equivalent to the 2.4 GHz MB CPU. Same chip. Lower clock speeds. Double the cache. I don't know what actual benchmarks are, but I have used a HDD MBA rev B and it wasn't a fast booter, and it didn't open apps very quickly, but it wasn't slow compared to the MB with a 7200 RPM drive and 4 GB RAM. It was slightly slower, but overall it was very capable.

    I know my SSD is distorting a lot, but people, this new MBA has a capable CPU. It's a Penryn with same 45 NM process as the MB and MBP. It uses lower voltage and a small form factor, but the capabilities are the same. The only thing is the slightly slower clock speeds. Seriously, 140 MHz slower than the lowend MB. That isn't slow. And everyone says the 400 MHz faster MB isn't worth it for very little difference in speed.

    I know there is no way to benchmark the 1.6 or 1.86 GHz MBA against the MB without calculating things like SSD and what the HDD differences are and what the RAM is doing differently and etc. But, go pull some xBench results and you will see that the revised MBA with SSD outperforms or is very similar to all of the MBs and even the MBPs without SSD. Seriously.

    AND, check out the original MBA with an SSD and 1.8 GHz, then check out the 1.6 GHz revised MBA with HDD. The revised SLOW LOW END MBA beat the original MBA that cost $3099 less than a year ago. This is FACT!
  24. Scottsdale macrumors 601


    Sep 19, 2008
    Did I say anything contradictory. Actually, my understanding, from the past knowledge from say 10 years ago when 128 KB of cache was an incredible boost... is that the CPU is accessing the L2 Cache. If L2 Cache doesn't have it the RAM is queried and all info flows into L2 Cache. Yes, if the RAM doesn't have it, whatever is queried is sent to RAM. Then CPU asks for it and immediately cached. This process is about L2 asking RAM and data quickly being moved, near instantly, from RAM to cache. And from Disk to RAM. And from RAM to cache. And so on and so on and so on.

    Now, it could have changed, but the metrics are the same as far as I know. CPU works between L2 cache and RAM. That is why it's fast. Everything from HD is queried by RAM. We have to realize how fast this is truly all happening. Like LIGHTSPEED.

    This is why USUALLY, more L2 cache will make a BIG difference. This is also why after L2 cache, MEMORY makes a big difference. And after memory, the HD data transfer rate makes a BIG difference.

    A lot of people don't realize that SSD in the original MBA was still controlled by a PATA drive controller. This was a constraint. So, people seem to think that the old SSD solves ALL of the problems... NOT TRUE AT ALL. In fact, people thought the problem was that the HDD is PATA and the SSD must not be affected, but it most certainly was. Even the original MBA with SSD was limited severely by the PATA drive controller's technology. The new MBA uses SATA-II technology. So, yes if you buy a revised MBA you may get an SSD, but the reason why it's so much faster then the original MBA is there is a SATA-II controller on the new MBA.

    Apple does a great job of making people think you only are buying PATA if you buy the HDD on the original MBA. It only stated SSD for the drive, which was true. But the drive was limited by the drive controller.

    This is also why the new MBA benchmarks out much faster by software such as xBench, as an HDD 1.6 GHz new MBA versus an original MBA with 1.8 GHz and SSD.

    Problematic... There are lots of little bits and pieces that affect everything. But the whole point is Apple definitely learned its lesson. Unfortunately the early adopters, like me, really got the shaft again from Apple. It has a history of selling new technology that isn't quite right on its first release. The MBA is a perfect example. Apple learned its lesson, and had huge return rates. Incredible problems with the original MBA. The problems were so massive and on every level of the original MBA, that Apple had accepted so many back that it had to lower the price on refurbished (high-end) from $3099 to $1299 in LESS THAN EIGHT MONTHS! That is a big lesson. The problem is people like me who bought it thinking it was a Mac... No, the original MBA was the piece of junk Steve Jobs says Apple could not make for less than $1000. My thinking is Apple sold a lot of us the JUNK it said Apple would never build NOT for $1000 but rather for $1799 to $3099. That really hurt Apple's reputation.

    I have bashed the original MBA more than anyone. And I have taken a LOT of heat for it. But I bought the original. It was JUNK. It could NOT do anything any other Mac on the market could do. It had problems with everything and not just video. It was a series of poor choices to use cheap and older technology components rather than the lower voltage chips and the SATA drive and the Nvidia GPU the revised MBA got.

    Look, the MBA is alive and well. But can you imagine had Apple never goofed up so badly and just released the new MBA? It would have saved Apple a lot of grief and bad publicity. We all believed Jobs when he told us the original MBA was so great. Did Apple really not test it? Did it really think that those components were not going to equal the trouble it did? Did it think it would be able to rewrite a lot of software like it did with Quicktime to make it easier for the MBA to run videos? Was there quality control problems with thermal paste on the CPUS? Why was it so bad for so many people?

    Cool Book has been the ONE THING that I have noticed from reading here that has made the original MBA as a refurbished unit far more successful. AND, the idea people have about not expecting much from the original MBA because they paid for the extreme portability and gave up all of the power. They could use it for very light web surfing, email, and as a Word processor. It did ok for those three things. But it was the WORST MAC EVER as far as being a Mac and running OS X and being able to run the programs and videos that people expected in 2008. Cool Book has allowed a lot of people to use the MBA after buying it for a super cheap price of a $1800 discount for many. And being able to buy it for $999 was just really enticing to people. However, those people for the most part, expected nearly nothing from their MBA. And they were happy in the end because of Cool Book and lowered expectations, NOT by the performance of the original MBA and its inability to perform common basic tasks any Mac user would expect.

    The revision B has NO PROBLEMS running HD video. I have run HD video on my MBA using a DUAL DVI cable $100 to an external 30" Apple Cinema Display and the picture was stunning. Looked just like a Mac Pro was driving the display. I have run all types of programs and never had my rev B MBA overheat. NOT ONCE. I use an external ACD with it all of the time. The technology is absolutely amazing. EVERY COMPONENT was upgraded from the original to the revised MBA... and it worked. The revised MBA is a true full blown out Mac capable of running all of the iLife software like video and photo editing. Capable of running Photoshop well. Capable of HD video. Capable of extreme multitasking. Capable of INSTANT app opening when I can recall my original MBA taking 20 seconds to open Safari. I can remember loading CS 3 on my original, and I removed it 20 minutes later, as it could NOT run it at all without lock ups freezing the computer. Without super delays in trying to do ANYTHING with even Dreamweaver.

    The revised MBA is for real. If anyone is having problems with their revised MBA it has to be a quality control issue of thermal paste or a damaged component. And maybe some of the larger files have problems opening or playing for the 4200rpm HDD version. But, for the 1.6 GHz or 1.86 GHz with SSD, they absolutely do it all. Everything a MacBook Pro can do.

    Only thing you give up is PORTS! From all of the other Macs you lose FireWire, Express Card, multiple USB, Ethernet, and Mic... but you can hook up a 24" ACD and you get three USB ports on the back, and it charges your MBA while you go. It's really like a docking solution. And you also have severely limited drive space compared to the common 320 GB drives currently used by all of the people with lots of huge entertainment files.

    And I am so sure many of you are going to rip me on bashing the original MBA. For many the original MBA worked. For most, it did not. Definitely not as a primary Mac. But the new MBA is fully capable of being probably 90% of peoples primary Mac.

    Cool Book definitely helps people run the original MBA too. Some people have different experiences with Cool Book I know. But I have to shout out to all of the refurbished buyers that they made a different decision then us original MBA buyers. We thought we were getting a real Mac, and we didn't. The problems were sorta corrected by software changes. But the original MBA could not perform like all of the others in the Mac lineup. However, Cool Book has allowed many to get a $10 application and make their $1299 or $999 MBA run much more like a Mac than had ever been possible before. That is a better decision, because MOST are using as a secondary computer and for some the MBA can do the job when used lightly.

    I want to use my MBA just like I would a MBP, and that is exactly how I use it. It costs a lot of money, I know. But it is truly worth every penny in the long run if you can afford a rev B MBA with SSD. Fully capable if you can live with the limited ports.

    In all fairness, I use an external 24" LED Backlit ACD, that adds $999 to the price. I also use an AirPort Extreme Base Station with an attached Hard Drive for storage. I cannot fit everything on the 128 GB of drive space, although most non-media enthusiasts probably could. I also spent money on AppleCare, and I do have a backup machine running Windows as I could not waste any space from my MBA with Windows. So, it really does limit me from having one computer like I want. BUT, I only use the other computer one day per month... and my kids get use out of the other. And it's for business so I cannot complain.

    So, anyways, I would say, the revised MBA is worth every penny. The SSD is worth every penny if you want speed and power. The 24" ACD is worth every penny if you like to use your MBA like a desktop, and it does the job really amazingly. It really feels no different than a Mac Pro while sitting at the desk. And the AirPort Extreme Base Station is worth every penny, as well as the drive attached. So, it is a big expense, but I think the MBA could be a primary Mac for most people for many years. And the ACD will last longer than the MBA.

    So, it it worth it all, yes. For me it's all worth it. But it's also a business expense for me too.

    Best wishes to everyone out there. And by all means, if you want a secondary computer, look into the problems with the original MBA, and see if Cool Book is right for you to be able to buy an original MBA for a huge discount and only pay $999 to $1299. The original MBA is better now then ever. With Cool Book and the changes Apple has made, it can work for some as a secondary computer and even other light users as a primary. It all depends on your usage.


    There goes an hour of my life when I could have been sleeping. Oh well. Hope it helps at least one person buy an MBA.

Share This Page