Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'MacBytes.com News Discussion' started by MacBytes, Feb 28, 2008.
Link: X300 vs Air
Posted on MacBytes.com
Approved by Mudbug
I can't believe I wasted my time reading that.
Meh, each will find its userbase - it will more or less come down to the OS question, not the points illuminated upon in that review.
I think I've finally learned the pattern: article from NZ = Apple-bashing.
I'll save you the click and share some gems:
"Air's Leopard is cute, and secure, and its back-up software is very 2001: A Space Odyssey. But we prefer to live in the wider world opened by the X300's Windows Vista."
(They then mention that you CAN run Windows on the Air but that you shouldn't for "best performance." Utter fiction. In fact, the Air is FASTER than the X300, which is only 1.2 Ghz.)
So forget security and backups--instead enjoy the "wider world" of Vista Which by all reports is NOT the OS you want to run on only 1.2 Ghz. Other slow ultraportables use XP--for a reason.
They consider input to be a tie score because the multitouch trackpad and lighted keys, together, are matched by the delight of the trackpoint nub
One might almost think they were fishing for ANY reason to prefer the thicker, slower X300: they've created a category "disaster-friendliness" in which the X300 beats the Air. Why? Because it has holes (as does the Air) in the bottom of the case... this allowing spills to drain out (!) and because the plastic that they THEMSELVES found flimsy is claimed to be stronger than magnesium laptops by Lenovo. So they believed the manufacturer instead of themselves... and completely failed to compare to the rigidly-curved aluminum (not magnesium) of the Air. So, both have holes (?) and the Air is super-rigid while the X300 "didn't feel especially tough"... yet the X300 wins that category.
since when did the x300 have wi-max???
Also I like how the x300 is cheaper than air and you would have to add a 500GB drive - um wouldn't that be needed on the x300 too
Now I'm not saying the air is perfect its far from it but blimey, that review isn't half biased
what a waste!
I never learn, do I?
I just wasted another 4 minutes of my life reading that cr@p!!
Why can't I ever remember....
someone, please help me...
The Air's 1.6/1.8 GHz processor is hardly any faster. There's so little real world difference between 400/600 MHz that it's hardly noticeable.
Is the guy a joke?
Is that guy seriously? $5k for an MBAIR? Not even the maxed out with Applecare, superdrive, ethernet, magline safe port charger, .mac, etc comes up to $5k....
And Vista over Leopard? hahaha! even Vista users know that Leopard is a killer. The guys hasnt used a Mac in his lifetime.
If people dont have evidence to back up their beef at Apple, please dont post them.
hahaha i'll go ahead and buy me 100 GB hard drive for $700... Wait, that was how many years ago?
Don't you love the way the reviewer compares weight X300 without the extra battery but adds the extra battery when run time is evaluated. Its so much fun watching PC fan boys contort themselves to make Apple products look bad.
Not every $ is US$
Even though the reviewer does make some other mistakes, please keep in mind that it is an article from New Zealand, so the prices are in New Zealand Dollars. $5000 in NZD is about $4000 in USD, so his pricing is correct.
That's funny... considering Vista has been found to run faster on a Mac than PC.
That guy is a joke...
Right, but the article says the Air is too SLOW to run Vista--while they like Vista on the slower X300.
And from tests I've seen of Vista on a 1.2Ghz Sony vs. Vista on an Air, that 50% additional speed on the Air 1.8 is noticeable.
Wrong. It ran faster on the Macbook Pro as reviewed against other laptops, it doesn't run faster full stop.
In any event it's been superseded.
Also, not seeing what the whining is about. The Air wins the points it should, the X300 the ones it should.
I think where people are getting a little upset is where they said they'd rather have Windows Vista than Leopard. His points about Vista aren't very valid and are quite full of crap, such as where the author comments in a response to someone else's comment below the story where he says Vista is a fast OS. That is complete and utter crap! As a person who works on both PCs and Macs all day long, any PC that comes into the place where I work with Windows Vista on it complains about the same thing, it runs slow. And these are new PCs fresh out of the box. Mostly because they don't ship with enough RAM (because 1GB isn't enough!). So you need to upgrade your system before you even get to use it. At least Leopard is useable with 1 GB easily for a regular person. (that is a person who doesn't have specific needs like graphics, using parallels/fusion, etc.)
I was rather amazed to see that Vista ran almost unbearably slow on my Mac Pro. When my XP partition got cooties, I first installed Vista, was amazed at how crappy it ran, so I used a VLK verison of server 2003 to run my PC apps. Runs brilliantly, and doesn't have any of the annoying features that were imbedded like deer ticks into even XP Pro.
I would hold the press on a comment like that until I saw some numbers. How much L2 is in the 1.2 GHz ULV processor? also, 1.8 GHz is 1.5 times--50%--more computational power than 1.2 GHz. That may not make a very significant difference ALL the time, but you can darn well bet that will make a HUGE difference if you ever want to play an encoded HD video.
I want to see some benchmarks of this ULV processor in regular tasks before I believe anything like "600 MHz is hardly noticeable." I have a feeling that I would miss it a lot--a heck of a lot more than the "option" to tote 2 extra $100 batteries and a firewire port.
True, but the Lenovo ships with a minimum of 2GB so it's a moot point.
Vista will run natively on a MacBook Air. So I really don't understand that.
How multi-touch can be compared to some irritating little ball is beyond me.
My opinions maybe, but this article is pretty biased. They appear to be looking for reasons to squeeze as many points out for the Lenovo whilst glossing over good points on the Air.
That was hilarious! If he had given an honest, unbiased review, I would have thought the X300 was a nice little alternative setup for Vista fans who find bootcamp overwhelming. But now, after reading all the blatantly obvious bias and disproportionate comparisons, I have to question the authors credibility, and ethics.
To me, it really does make you realize something. I think there are a lot of people that would like you to think that the fact that the X300 has a DVD drive and a removable battery means it's automatically better--not to mention the spare ports. But for whatever reason, this guys didn't seem to think that was enough--he realizes that the MacBook Air is actually STILL better. Had to make up false stuff to make it seem worse. Nice.
I think he really likes the design of the Air, but has no idea when it comes to OS X. After all, notice he did give a "sex appeal" category, which he could have taken out if he was completely biased toward Lenovo.
Also note that the review's unstated conclusion is that anyone who doesn't care for the clitoris on the X300 and who isn't braindead enough to realize Leopard > Vista will give the "Input" and "OS" categories to the Air, making it the clear choice winner.
You really can't say what's better because it's all prefernce if you prefer either os then it could go either way and while I disagree performance wise I think that if it had 4GB's of ram it really go the other way clock speed isn't everything. The Screen is also better now LED is nice but not essential but the higher Res really makes things nicer.
They both have the same Hard Drives, so no difference their but the CD drive is what really makes it nice for the Lenovo. now some people would never notice the difference and some people would but it's the option that's nice. I think apple went a little too far with the Thickness or "thinness", which ever you like but It's just too limited for the average person. I think.
Exactly, not to mention that Vista's performance is crap anyway... which is the only OS that the X300 runs natively.
haha.all it came down to...was bias.
like literally.x300 only won because the writer prefers windows over mac.understandable since he works for pc world...
so really, these to machines are equals.
if you like mac, get air..if you like windows...get x300.
no big fuss.
Wrong. Macs run Windows better than some machines - which, given their Intel architecture and high end components you would expect - but by no means all of them. As for Leopard being better than Vista, for individual use, yes at the moment, for business, no.
In any event, since you cant get an XPS M1330 weighing just under 4lbs with a 2.5GHz Penryn chip both the Air and the X300 are a bit pointless now.