Goodbye, MacBook Pro. The New MacBook Air Is That Good.
techcrunch.com
techcrunch.com
Joking aside, it's a very nice little machine, but I could not imagine developing software on it without hooking it up to a full sized keyboard and screen which would defeat most of the purpose of owning one in the first place.
The mac Air series is so thin that when I saw one the first time I couldn't believe it was a real functional computer until they turned it on for me!
I remember a number of times being attracted to the ultra-portable Fujitsus and Sonys of the world a few years ago and being totally unable to type effectively on them because the keys were so close together that my fingers kept getting in the way of each other when typing.
Personally, I loved the keyboard on my T23 Thinkpad.
[1] Since it's a first-gen metallic unibody, it's technically a Macbook, but they now call this machine a Macbook Pro.
The size of the keyboard has never been an issue for me, IMHO it comes down to screen real estate -- which is why my last machine isn't a MacBook at all, but an iMac 27" (my iPad provides most of the portability I need).
Here's the problem, though: Siegler and I can't talk about intense applications. I don't know if it can't handle RAW file editing in Lightroom/PS, Starcraft II on high settings, or developing in Xcode. The benchmarks Siegler quotes show the Air is worse than the 13" Pro at handling these intense apps (Handbrake, PS, VM software). [1]
Someone cracked about how Siegler's activities consist of "blogging and scrolling through Twitter." For anyone who does that (i.e. your average college student), this thing will be great for years.
For more intense apps? I have my doubts. And the Air might be fine right now, but what about upgrading two years from now? What if system or available memory become an issue?
[1] http://www.macworld.com/article/154596/2010/10/macbookair_be...
Gaming? Why would you be doing that on a laptop?
Development machine? What are you developing? I think it could handle the average web developer's work load just fine. If you're writing something intensive enough that hardware is a real issue - why are you doing that on a laptop?
EDIT: sorry, you didn't downvote me.
Seriously, I value portability. A lot. I don't like being chained to a desk any more than necessary.
I don't edit photos, but there are other people like me who want a powerful machine on the go. See this HN thread for about 100 examples:
And if you ever get the chance to sail around Hawaii with those models, well, you couldn't take your desktop with you. That is, if you actually planned on working...
Outside of Apple PCs you can get a far better quality machine, and for my purposes a far better operating system in the form of Ubuntu. Quicksilver/Gnome-do, Safari/Chrome, Flash/Flash, nice fonts/nice fonts it's all even or Ubuntu with a slight edge until you get to apt-get which just slaughters OS X. Then there is freedom to tinker, the price difference and matching deployment/server OS. The reason apt-get is so far ahead of OS X is that OS X only has a tiny community, and for good reason considering how they have often treated it and that many of them are more focused on "striking gold" with an iPhone app. Nothing wrong with that necessarily, but it's a sub-standard system with loads of tinkering instead of the "just works" experience of Linux. Good luck finding blogs/documentation/help when something goes wrong with OS X too. Perhaps Textmate/Ruby-on-Rails has first class support as a stack, but in so many other areas it's a wasteland.
I suppose I am saying that yes fair enough it's a good machine, but just because you haven't used an SSD before and/or are attached to OS X for money don't try to imply, as is usually done, that Apple is lightyears ahead. It's behind in many areas and hardly worth the hype that is attached to the release.
I am sorry to say that, but I never had such an experience (and i had to use Linux quite a lot in the past).
The overall experience on laptops with Linux was horrid. Constant problems with drivers, upgrades and miscellaneous crap. The only truly good experience has been on the Mac with OS X.
I have no trouble using all my familiar unixy tools and installing packages, but I do not spend my time with time wasting activities (oh, why doesn't the network driver work right now?(1)) and spend more on development.
Overall, the Macs have been the most efficient machines I've used.
Here's the thing: I'm not an Apple fan boy, I'm an effectiveness fan boy. The Macs win. Just last night I was programming a GSM/GPS module connected to my MacBook Pro via USB emulating a serial port. Module had to be programmed in Python and communicated with using AT commands. No problem at all using EMACS, Python, Tcl/Expect, make, etc. to get things working.
(1) The usual response to that criticism is that its the hardware manufacturer's fault if there aren't open drivers for their device. As a user who needs to get stuff done, I simply don't care. The machine needs to work. Macs do.
edit: You don't say anything about a thinkpad in your reply, so I guess you haven't used Linux on a quality laptop in some time. Even at 5 years, that's still quite a way out. I am open to criticism that things have changed since my 2007 experience too, please point anything out.
edit: The machine I installed it on was a Fujitsu Lifebook. I don't recall the actual model number but it was absolute top of the line machine when I bought it. In recent years (2009, 2010) I've used Linux on a couple of Acer machines which we have in the office. The user experience does not appear to have improved when it comes to dealing with annoying problems.
Your other point that I take issue with is that you can get substantially better hardware outside of apple for the same price. In my experience, a laptop with similar power, battery life, weight, size, and build quality is not a great deal cheaper.
Please note that I say this as a lover of linux in many ways. It's a fantastic desktop/server OS, and I think apple's desktop offerings are poor value in comparison, but I can't say I've ever had a good experience with linux on a laptop.
(1) Couldn't agree more here. This "manufacturers need to make open drivers" is just a bunch of whiny noise. Grownups who have things to do don't have time to worry about that crap.
But the comment "if you pick your chipsets sensibly" - frankly most people don't want to have to do that sort of research. There are enough variables in the basic specification / vendor decisions without having to drop down to this level.
You see, right there is the problem. I don't have to think about that when using a Mac. The drivers are always there, and they always work.
Despite your claims, Ubuntu and the other linuxes out there do not "just work". I have not yet met a linux laptop that didn't do weird things when I close then reopen the lid. I have yet to meet a linux laptop that deals with finding itself on different networks in an elegant manner.
To put my comments into perspective, for my day job I write userland applications for a Gentoo-derived system, and I do my dev work on a Fedora laptop. At home, I develop for my own company on a Mac, targeting Mac applications. I like to think that I have a reasonable handle on the pros and cons of the two environments. About the only time I find linux compelling is when I want to use an open source package that isn't available on MacPorts. But then, I usually just go and grab a gentoo ebuild for configuring the package in question, create a ruby script to replicate the ebuild, and then install from tarball... It's not a big enough pain to justify sacrificing all of those yummy Apple APIs. If you're an app writer, Cocoa blows GTK out of the water.
I had a problem with sound with Ubuntu 7.10 on my laptop (It came with Vista which was slowing it down). When 8.04 came out, the problem vanished. I haven't had any hardware issues since then. Ubuntu has also worked flawlessly on the 3 or 4 machines I've installed it on since then.
I can come up with 3 or 4 reasons why Ubuntu is irritating to use, but "headache with drivers" really comes near the bottom of the pile nowadays. Certainly, the ability to install it on any piece of hardware and put in nearly any peripherals and see it work is a huge bonus.
Your second point (about building software on Mac) seems to be from an entirely Ruby-based perspective. I work with a mac server at work, and it was an insane adventure to get Django functional for a web project; as opposed to the 5 minutes (apt-get + config apache) it took to get it functioning on Ubuntu.
(The problem was mostly around installing python-mysql on a Mac Server; the solution was on Apple's site and involved downloading an additional set of header files, in case you ever run into that)
I'm glad that you enjoy the Mac platform; but I don't think the cost-benefit ratio is quite there for me. (It won't be until I'm making 3 or 4 times my current salary.)
It is when I have no way of testing what I've researched, and no guarantee that I made the correct choices. I'm willing to pay a little more for such a guarantee.
I then had to add an extra parameter to my kernel boot line according to some forum posts to make sure it would let me get the installer (nomodeset or some shit like that), after that it installed correctly but Ubuntu 10.10 does away with Grub in any way shape or form so the next time it booted after install I couldn't change that line so I had to boot into a live CD.
Then changing /mnt/etc/default/grub.cfg doesn't let me write that out to disk since update-grub tries to look for the currently mounted partition you want to modify in mount and won't find one with a LiveCD it can modify and as such that goes out of the window. You have to modify /mnt/boot/grub/grub.cfg and they have made an ungodly mess out of that file.
After I finally figured that out the system still didn't work correctly, so I install the proprietary nvidia driver using their tool, and yet at boot it still does the wrong thing because the nouveau driver is still installed. Finally remove that and Pulseaudio causes my kernel to crash randomly, especially when watching Flash video content. At least I assume it is Pulseaudio, it is the last thing mentioned in /var/log/messages EACH and EVERY time.
Since I needed an OS that could run Boxee (it really is too bad it doesn't work on FreeBSD) and didn't cost me any money I finally just grabbed Arch, installed X11 with the nvidia driver, installed Boxee and it works. It hasn't crashed at all since install.
Linux doesn't just work, and ultimately I was getting really frustrated with the whole thing. I own multiple Windows machines (two Lenovo's, absolutely fantastic), I run FreeBSD as a gateway machine (and have used it for years as a Desktop machine), OpenSolaris as a server and xVM machine, and own one MacBook Pro. I can clearly say that Linux still has a long WAY to go before it is as easy as Mac OS X, and has the same "just works" features. I've had less issues using PC-BSD on the same hardware as Linux, and FreeBSD the underlying OS generally doesn't have the support from vendors for hardware drivers as Linux does.
Disclaimer: I am a big fan of FreeBSD - if you think linux is bad on laptops.....
Some laptops are stamped with Linux support - something like Suse professional and they are more likely to work.
It's a bit of a gamble at the end of the day, and I'd say the same for Windows running on a laptop. If every thing just works, praise the lamas - keep it. A bit of homework certainly helps before going out and buying something.
I have OSX Tiger on an old power book. Free quality apps are few and far between. Though I like the OS. Loads of apps on Windows, but I don't like the UI.
OSX and W7 users can always just place Linux in a VM if they wanted to and have the best of both worlds. Ideology and small touches in Gnome keep me wedded to Linux.
I still blame the hardware vendors...
There are certainly faults with my aging Powerbook both with the hardware and software.
Yes, I run FreeBSD on various laptops I own...
True, but easier said than done.
First you have to find out what chipset a given laptop has. The salescritter won't know, the advert doesn't say. The manufacturer's website might have the info, but it won't be easy to find.
Now you have to figure out if the chipset is supported. That's non-trivial because the "supported" lists don't necessarily use the same chipset names as the manufacturer. Sometimes minor variations don't matter but sometimes they do.
That pretty much ended that little escapade into trying to get that working... I don't want to tinker with my machines. I want to set them up and have them go for months if not years. Just set up Boxee on ArchLinux, don't plan on touching that for a long time. It does what it is supposed to do (play movies and tv shows) and that is that.
So what's wrong with macports?
Fair enough if you have but that's not the standard configuration that was linked.
Also, I have never experienced this just works experience on Linux, Ubuntu included.
ThinkPad construction stands up to a whole lot, and the keyboard is fantastic. I have a five-year-old X40 that is still chugging along wonderfully - I'd like to get a new laptop, but I just can't justify it.
I have only had one issue running Linux on it: because I use Debian, the non-free wireless firmware must be downloaded separately. I have never had a problem with Ubuntu, even the early versions I tried, because they include it. Intel has put a lot of work into getting all of their stuff supported in Linux, and it shows.
I hear the Sony Z series has a similar story: similar size/weight/price, better hardware and battery life.
http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CategoryD...
If people are questioning the Air's price, they'll absolutely hate the Z's price. The cheapest Z has an i7, an optical drive, and a $500 premium over the base 13" Air.
(Oh, and the keycaps rubbed off the keyboard inside 18 months. Not just the letters, but the silver finish, all the way through to grey plastic. They did not build it for the long haul.)
If Sony were to focus on quality of after-sales service for the high-end laptops, and maybe ditch the bloatware installs, they could probably compete with Apple. Their design aesthetic is there. But they fall down on the whole experience thing once you get it home (or in the office).
I like the the dark look (inspired from a Bento Box: http://lenovoblogs.com/designmatters/?p=72 ).
For 1480$, I got:
Core i7-640LM @ 2.13ghz, 2*2GB DDR3, Intel GMA 5700MHD
12.1" WXGA+ (1440 x 900) LED Backlit Widescreen
320GB HDD (that will be replaced with an SSD)
3 Year International Warranty
A machine that will last years, that works well with Linux, and that I can plug in a nice Docking Station.
I switched to VirtualBox and ever since, I have been struggling to maintain a resolution of 1650x1080 on Ubuntu, fighting with xrandr, cvt and xorg.conf all the time. Applying any kind of upgrade implies a strong possibility that my screen resolution will be set back to 800x600.
I will admit that with the latest set of patches this month, I was able to fix my resolution back from 800x600 to 1650X1080 relatively painlessly , cvt, xrandr new, xrandr add, unlike previous occasions. However, the mouse integration with th host OS broke for some reason. I might need to re-install the drivers.
A VirtualBox VM is fairly standard piece of virtual hardware and if Ubuntu can't deliver a decent experience on such a standard piece of hardware, it is hard to take statements like "it just works" seriously.
Having said that the hassle free upgrade from version to version and the ease of use of apt-get is certainly unmatched on any other platform.
Installing Ubuntu server or desktop on Virtualbox/Windows was a 2-day nightmare the first time I did it (3 months ago), and reminds me of why I moved to Macs. Clearly this configuration is not being tested.
If I can't install Ubuntu on Virtualbox, there is no way in hell I am going to buy a Thinkpad for Linux instead of a Mac and hope everything will 'simply work'.
Virtual machines have their own ideas about graphic hardware, and by default they show generic VESA to guest.
In the VMWare world, there is a "VMWare Guest Daemon", that combined with vmware driver adjusts the guest resolution according to VMWare settings (fit to window, etc).
In VirtualBox world, there should be something similar. Quick googling shows, that VBoxLinuxAdditions provides custom display driver.
Also note, that if a) you install guest tools without package manager and b) these guest tools do not support dkms (though VirtualBox should support it), then you will have rebuild kernel modules after each kernel upgrade! This may be your "integration broke for some reason, I need to re-install". Just use dkms and let the operating system worry about reinstalling drivers.
Regarding VirtualPC, it is broken in it's own, special ways. Sometimes I wonder that it works at all. Microsoft does not support other guest systems than Windows.
Yes of course, it is my fault that the software I installed did not "just work" and reported the issues when someone claimed "it just works". Using one of the most popular open source VMs is just wrong!
> Quick googling shows, that VBoxLinuxAdditions provides custom display driver.
The first thing I do is install the custom drivers. It still does not update the available set of resolutions. And using xrandr etc too has been a hit or miss until recent updates. Infact the last set of helpful information about dealing with this issue is a Ubuntu forum discussion from 2006.
> these guest tools do not support dkms
So, it cannot be disputed that "Linux just works". Linux does not have built-in drivers for widespread hardware such as Virtualbox. And why do we need to rebuild kernel modules after every incremental monthly kernel revison. Certainly does not sound like "it just works".
>Regarding VirtualPC, it is broken in it's own, special ways.
The keyboard driver error was reported by users on real hardware. Not just VirtualPC. I just happened to run into the error on VirtualPC. Ubuntu did not pick up a fix for this for 6 months, when the Linux kernel mainline already had the fix 6 months ago.
> Sometimes I wonder that it works at all. Microsoft does not support other guest systems than Windows.
You are wrong. You seemed to have missed the entire fiasco around the Novell-Microsoft "partnership" around Virtualization.
Saying that Ubuntu/Linux just works and if it doesn't it is the users fault, is plain misleading and completely misses the point of "it just works". Every piece of software "just works" if all non-working situations can be conveniently blamed on the user. I don't get the defensiveness around some particular piece of software.
Despite this, VirtualBox is not "supported hardware". Did you see any claim about Ubuntu support on VirtualBox site (no, only "Linux 2.6") or VirtualBox support in Ubuntu materials? Exactly.
VirtualBox is not one of most popular open source VM. It is a popular VM among desktop users that want it for free. That's different.
Even VMWare is not supported by Ubuntu (but Ubuntu is supported by VMWare).
Supported systems work out of the box. For example, when installing Ubuntu on Intel based system, the experience is smooth as a butter. On unsupported systems, it is matter of luck - when 10.10 came out, I've installed it on Toshiba Tecra M7. Everything except fingerprint reader worked out of the box - Nvidia graphics, Intel Wifi, Bluetooth, SD card reader, even the softmodem and Wacom digitizer (it is a tablet).
> So, it cannot be disputed that "Linux just works". Linux does not have built-in drivers for widespread hardware such as Virtualbox. And why do we need to rebuild kernel modules after every incremental monthly kernel revison. Certainly does not sound like "it just works".
Nice omission of "if". I'm not expert on VirtualBox (and I don't want to be). It is on the vendor/maintainer of the modules to make it. Nvidia binary modules for example do support it, so normal user is not aware of the rebuilding when booting with new kernel.
And again, VirtualBox is not widespread hardware.
> You are wrong. You seemed to have missed the entire fiasco around the Novell-Microsoft "partnership" around Virtualization.
That's Virtual Server. Different product, that still does not support Ubuntu (only SLES).
I never said that problems with VirtualBox is a users fault. I said that making two products work that in the way that their vendors do not support is not for the faint of heart. Have you ever tried to run OSX client under any VM? Thought so.
The premise is absurd, because ubuntu's website does not sell itself as an OS that "just works"
http://www.ubuntu.com/desktop/why-use-ubuntu
Nor does it insist on any particular hardware configuration.
But instead, what we have here are fanboy comments on how Ubuntu just works and if it doesn't work, how the hardware is not up to a certain spec unavailable on Ubuntu's website, how it is so awesome for you and silly challenges to install OSX on a VM.
> Have you ever tried to run OSX client under any VM? Thought so.
I just don't understand why "OSX under VM" line is being trotted out all the time. I have never used OS X. I am merely disputing the statement "Linux/Ubuntu just works"
Haha, I missed this line. If its free then its popularity doesn't matter.
The article actually mentions that his MacBook Pro (which he's comparing it to) does have an SSD so this isn't really a valid criticism of the article.
As for OS X, it also "just works" and has a strong community, with plenty of high-quality documentation available from multiple sources. Apt-get is brilliant, but Apple's Software Update is also outstanding, and MacPorts can rival apt-get when it comes to managing FLOSS packages.
I will probably not buy a ThinkPad or a comparable other non-Apple laptop in the next few years, though. Many people seem often puzzled by that. Isn’t the ThinkPad cheaper? Sure! Doesn’t it have comparable or better specs? Of course! Why would you …? Because I like the way a MacBook looks and feels!
While that might be a perfectly valid reason for buying the 300€ more expensive coffee table that doesn’t seem to work with computers and I honestly don’t know why. I would have no second thoughts about buying the otherwise identical but 300€ more expensive laptop just because I like how sleek it is.
This comment is in no way intended to refute anything of what you said. I can understand that some people prefer to only look at the specs and they should probably not buy any computer from Apple. I’m like that with some other things, too. It’s just to provide an additional perspective and to explain why I personally (and maybe other people) buy laptops from Apple even though competitors offer cheaper alternatives with better specs.
1) Sleep/suspend/resume
2) Hardware-accelerated OpenGL
3) Compiz/fusion or whatever it's called nowadays
4) Support for external monitor
5) No random crashes once per week with 1-4 enabled
6) Hardware-multiplexed sound output in all programs
7) No two months of tinkering to get 1-6 working
I had this issue in the past on my MacBook. It was very notable: on Linux the total battery time was about 60-70% of what I had with MacOSX.
I did some debugging and while the kernel itself also consumed slightly more than MacOSX, the biggest problem where the applications, esp. the window manager (tested both Gnome and KDE). They do a lot of stuff and mostly prevent the CPU from going into low-power mode or wake it up all the time.
Better now that it was a couple of years back (I still use Windows at work) but still some way to go.
It's a point of pride to me that my Win7 box at work is so slick and well-tuned, compared to other peoples' Windows machines. But for the life of me I can't make my MacBook look any better than my Mom's. Nothing makes me happier than being able to be brutally effective on my cool-looking Ubuntu box at home that uses customized window managers and a dozen productivity hacks. But you don't even have to be nerdy to use a Mac well. Where's the fun in that?
This comment is only half tongue-in-cheek.
But as I got older and my free time shrank it just felt like an overhead and time I'd rather spend doing other stuff.
I also prefer built-in software to 3rd-party alternatives – Safari over Chrome/FF, Terminal over iTerm, Spotlight over Quicksilver, etc. It took a while to adopt Apple's way of thinking, but it has made my life easier in the long run and saved tons of time to do more important things (eg. spend time with my kid^H^H^H^H^H^HHacker News).
nocturne - invert or dim the screen, helps your eyes stay relaxed in different lighting situations: http://http://code.google.com/p/blacktree-nocturne/
divvy - quick window management, surprisingly handy, spaces becomes more useful with this as well: http://www.mizage.com/divvy/
visor - system-wide terminal via a hotkey: http://visor.binaryage.com/
I agree with you that getting Linux to work on laptops can often be frustrating, but if you check compatibility prior to purchase (Ubuntu forums are great for this), then you'll get a good idea of what to expect before you buy.
http://www.system76.com/product_info.php?cPath=28&produc...
You need to update to the SSD, but it still makes it below the starting point of the MBA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacBook_Air#Issues
Hopefully things have changed.
OSX users spend loads of time tinkering with the system? Really?
You are either completely detached from reality or a troll.
That said, you're right about the X200. It's an excellent machine. I had one for a while before this MBP, and after Mac OS X jumps the shark, I plan on heading back to Lenovo in the unlikely event their quality still matches the X200. I definitely prefer that hardware over the MBP.
The only thing stopping me is my current preference for Mac OS X, and I'm too busy to be screwing around with hackintoshing a Thinkpad. Great, great machines, though.
If I ever have to attend a lot of meetings/conferences/presentations or finally find the time and money to travel the world, this looks pretty neat. Gives the Thinkpad X Series a run for its money.
I love the Air but need a better reason, than current to pick one up, which is quite difficult every time I find myself playing with them in the Apple store.
I'm not a frequent traveller - maybe once a month - but by the time I add a laptop to all the other stuff I tend to have in a shoulder bag (not to mention the fact that I'd possibly be carrying my 16 month old daughter) and it's pushing what's practical to carry it for any sort of extended period.
When I was looking at the possibility of replacing my current 4 year old MacBook I asked myself what had irritated me about the current machine that I would change. The performance is still basically fine (I code a bit, edit a bit of video and the odd photo but nothing where the performance is really getting to me) and I came to the conclusion it was weight and start up time which means that the MacBook Air rather than a new MacBook or MacBook Pro was the logical choice.
It seems to me they use Core 2 Duo SL9400 (1.87 GHz, 1066 FSB)(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_2_microproce...). Not exactly record-setting for low power, judging by 17W TDP, but when everyone is measuring battery life at mostly idle CPU, and with process enhancements over the years (I heard that later Core 2's of the same model consume less power than rated) I think they might show close to their rated battery life. I think Apple must have worked hard squeezing the unnecessary volume and weight with the new design to give place for more battery too.
It's hard to expect much of tech journalism when so little of it is actually journalism. We've collectively ceded the territory formerly occupied by professional journalists to fanboys and bloggers, many of us celebrating the fact along the way.
Having said that, it's only right that Apple's marketing downplays specs, part numbers, and benchmarks (with some notable exceptions). Macs are great computers for the people who like them because of a combination of clever industrial design, polished software, and good hardware. Specs and benchmarks don't begin to tell you what it's like to use a Mac. Think qualia, not quantity.
It's not technical. It's an industry gossip blog article about a lifestyle consumer electronics company's latest product.
So I'm thinking that iOS's desktop legacy might be a bit bigger than just weird scroll bars and a cool app launcher.
I'd like to get a new machine, but this one's as good as new apart from the drive which I replaced with a 1Tb one earlier this year
"My i7 iMac with 8 GB of RAM takes something like 2 minutes. My i7 MacBook Pro takes at least 30-45 seconds, and it has an SSD drive."
and then realised that anything further on was a waste of my time.
Summary: man who spends more on upgrading to latest macs than I can afford to spend on IT equipment in 10 years think the Air is awesome.
the thing i can't stand is how people are perceiving the dump of the optical drive as something revolutionary. a) the old macbook air didn't have one (a gripe for many) and b) neither do netbooks.
a little off-topic but one thing that really kills me about apple is how they're seemingly refusing to add a blu-ray option even though the standard is well-established. i would really like to have one in my mbp17. not just because i have a res (1920x1200) on the lappy that supports it, but because i also have a 27" panel that i hook my laptop into.
and this move towards "no optical drives" (likely so they can sell more HD content) is only going to solidify that among their lines in my assessment.
hmmmph.
i would wager there are plenty more films available on DVD than on downloadable format. sure the reasons for this may be stupid ... but they're reasons nonetheless [for now].
The vast majority of people have neither the inclination nor the technical wherewithal to rip DVDs to disk.
Until every DVD that Netflix stocks has a "Play" button next to it, DVDs are going to continue to be very relevant. And even then Netflix is very US-centric, only very recently expanding into Canada, not to mention the rest of the world.
In theory I could buy movies on iTunes, but I frankly don't trust anything I buy on iTunes to still work in ten years, whereas I'm pretty sure I'll still be able to get my Blu-Rays to play.
I agree that the state of marketplaces is not there yet but I also think that it won't stay this way for too much longer.
I'm over physical media. Discs are messy, damage prone, and usually they just sit collecting dust.
Don't get me wrong -- I had a great time collecting a massive amount of movies and I still spend at least 3 hours in a quality bookstore when I have the chance.
BluRay adoption is very much why the format is doomed a laserdisc/betamax death. You're somewhat lucky though -- because the encryption is compromised fully so you'll be able to extract your data to a better format down the road.
You included DVD in that list? One of these things is not like the other... I think I have six devices in this room right now which can play a DVD.
Piracy aside, what's the alternative to Blu-Ray? It's Apple or Apple, and an opportunity to have a file which plays only by the grace of Apple. No thanks.
To play things I have stored digitally it's just a matter of using the remote to access thousands of movies/tv shows stored on my network.
How long did it take you to set all that up? Do you think a less technically inclined person is going to be able to set up something like that?
Also, were all these thousands of movies and TV shows acquired legally? If not, it's hardly a solution for the average law-abiding person. If so... wow, that sounds really expensive!
You mostly only pay for what you use and the clients (AppleTV's or other media players) are rarely much over $100 each.
Storage is incredibly cheap for the things you have yourself.
It's much like the movie Gran Torino where Walt has a garage filled with tools. He aquired them over time. That is the way I have aquired media that now resides on my server.
but your analogy is well-founded. convenience usually wins. and after all, laserdiscs looked much better than their competitors and still didn't survive.
The perfect netbook for the masses.
Total world domination.
One of the lovely things about the Mac laptops is that you never have to turn them off. Close them and they go to sleep in a few seconds. Open them up and you're ready to work immediately.
The uptime on my laptops tends to be a few months.
10:11 up 36 days, 1:16, 2 users, load averages: 1.07 1.19 1.22
browsing Twitter and writing blog posts?
for somebody who runs a traditional dev stack (eclipse/netbeans + 2+ browsers + compiler/vm + httpd + photoshop + database +++), or a gamer, or a student, a 10 or even 5% performance delta makes a big diff.
What, exactly, do you think people use laptops for? If you're doing something remarkably intensive like encoding video or writing massively scalable ETL code, and you're doing it on a laptop, you have failed at computers.
I want my laptop to be small, lightweight and have a long (3-4 hour) battery life, with performance as a low priority. Netbooks are a good compromise but their limited screen size/smaller keyboard are a bit of a hassle.
They're still too pricey for my blood though. The previous Air I saw was listed at ~$1800 (USD), and even though $999 is significantly better, I can't see myself spending that much on (what would be for me) a secondary machine.
That being said - tax season is coming up. =) Is it a pain to get linux running on these things?
For my last business trip, I quickly copied my iTunes library to my business Macbook (in a hurry, the evening before). On the remote site I switched on the audio book that I recently started and got the message: this computer is not authorized ...
Get my point?
For the rest, you are right, it is possible to carry a drive. But then we are back to the clutter on the desk that we had in the 80s and 90s and just got rid of. This is progress? Without an optical drive works only properly, if you download the data or get them on non optical media.
I would be fine though, if I could download movies and music to an external storage and the DRM would be on that storage, not on a computer. A storage with at least the same possibilities that we have with CDs and DVDs today (import to iTunes without DRM!). As long as that is not possible, the Macbook Air remains a pretty good second computer IMHO.
Handbrake FTW
My 2 year old MacBookPro gets boiling hot after an hour.
Happily, the reviews I've read of the Air have universally said that fan noise and heat are both minimal.
They had an older MBA sitting in a corner, which was hot enough on the bottom that I nearly dropped it.
The newer ones, which people had been using all day, were no warmer than my iPad gets (and significantly cooler than the iPhone tends to get).
Hard to tell about the noise. The store was too loud.
My favorite line:
"This thing boots up in less than 15 seconds, ready to go. My i7 iMac with 8 GB of RAM takes something like 2 minutes."
As if RAM had anything to do with boot time.
And my Core 2 Duo boots up in less than 2 minutes, so I'm not really sure what his problem is. (If he wants fast, maybe he should try Linux.)
"Thanks largely to Apple themselves, we live in a world where we have digital music, photos, movies, and TV shows that take up dozens, if not hundreds of gigabytes of storage."
Ah nope. Fawning, not trolling.
He forgot to add indoor plumbing, the internal combustion engine, modern medicine, etc, to the list.
He demonstrates ignorance in that article, by first mistaking his personal experience with technology for the experience of everybody else in the world.
And second by mistaking his own ability to pay $200 more for an Air over a Macbook for the ability of everybody else in the world to afford the extra money.
(It reminds me of the Reagan "If I listen to Dukakis long enough" quote - except it is "If I read MG long enough, I would be convinced that Apple..")
The disk has always been the bottleneck, Apple was smart enough to put a fast disk in the Air, and now this guy praises it.
This computer loads faster than the MBP because you've spent the past 6 months loading it with programs, guy. Format the MacBook Pro and it will be just as fast... Sure, the Air might be a great little computer, but for a $999 pricetag, I could get 3 netbooks instead.
"The new MacBook Air is amazing. It starts at $999 and I have been using the top-of-the-line 13" for a week! (of course not mentioning that it costs $1,599)"
I would love to see a tech person use the $999 version and see their review. The price-point, when actually comparing the usable one, is ridiculous!
EDIT: Full comment is here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1834157
Do you have any support for that claim?
Is this some sort of specific SSD fragmentation issue you're referring to? There are SSD issues of that type but I'd be surprised to see them in six months unless you're absolutely caning the drive.
General fragmentation wouldn't cause that sort of problem inside six months though. I've spent four years loading my MacBook with stuff (and uninstalling stuff, reinstalling stuff and so on) with no significant performance degradation. In that time I've never reinstalled the OS, never defragged or done any sort of significant maintenance other than keeping it patched and it's still basically as fast as it was on day one.
My Windows machine on the other hand...
I ask because in four years with my MacBook using it for a whole range of stuff (including development, multimedia, general admin,, and installing whole loads of software I've bought in bundle sales) I've honestly never seen this problem.
I'm not saying it can't happen but from my experience you'd really have to be going for it to build up that sort of accumulation of stuff in just six months.
My anecdotal evidence from helping friends and family is that Macs don't suffer from "Windows rot" [1] the same way that PCs do. My hypothesis: due to differences in the developer communities for each platform.
If you have a faster CPU, more (of the same speed) RAM and a faster SSD then it doesn't make any sense for it to be slower. Given that both are in a 64bit environment.
There is nothing magical happening! Get a new 900MB/s SSD and it'll be faster again, then I guess you'll move back.
Didn't Apple have the first music store? Doesn't apple let you rent movies or TV shows? Didn't Apple create one of the first popular MP3 Players?
Though yes, Apple did do a huge part for boosting people's music collections. But let's not even pretend for movies and TV shows. That "honour" goes to some completely different groups... cough.
What Apple did, is they boosted the average person's music/tv/movie collection. People like my mom and sister. There's 1,000 of them, for every DCCing/Torrenting one of us.
Those "People" would actually be called teenagers, and I never met one who didn't know how to use Napster or Kazaa back when I was one of them.
Why did I buy a larger clunky gen 1 iPod from Apple when I had a Windows machine? Because I had a pile of music on my computer and the flash player I had before then (a Rio?) fit about 16 songs.
And lets be honest, people have multi-GB collections of music becasue of Napster, Kazaa, and bittorrent, not because of iTunes.