Report: Apple Orders 380K Sandy Bridge MacBook Airs
macobserver.com
macobserver.com
The only major downside of the MBAir is that it is so competitive a form factor for an iPad, it becomes hard(er) to justify getting the iPad - the MBair does 90% of the stuff that I use my iPad for, resulting in much less usage of the iPad, therefore, to some degree, you can say that purchasing a MBair will result in those people who own an iPad from getting less value from that iPad.
Back handed compliment I guess.
Though it is a shame that Apple has a gimped touchpad driver in Windows. The touchpad in OS X and Windows isn't even comparable.
However, I'm still not sure if I like the non-discrete video. Anyone with an MBP'11 that only has Intel HD video care to tell me if it's any good for gaming?
At least the current MB Air has discrete video.
Aside from weight, which isn't a real concern for me in a MBP 13", if I decked out a MBP 13" w/ an SSD, is there a compelling reason to still go with an MBA? One of my main concerns is that the MBA can only go to 4GB of ram while the MBP can theoretically go to 16GB. Seems more future proofing etc.
Just so you know, I do mostly iOS, Android, and Web dev (Ruby, Python, JS and Erlang).
I also have several Ubuntu instances up at all times if I'm doing iOS or I run Ubuntu the majority of the time if I'm doing other stuff (Ubuntu is still a better dev environment, IMO, but that is for a different post :) )
It's the best computer I've ever owned. And it's my first Mac, I'm not much of a fanboy.
MBA's stay icy cold.
* size
* weight
* screen resolution
* nvidia graphics in the air supposedly perform better than the intel graphics in the mbp
* air uses core2duo, pro uses corei5/i7 (would change with hardware refresh)
* i have heard (unsubstantiated) that the mbp can get fairly hot, while the air seems to remain a bit cooler.
* hard drive and ram are user replaceable on the mbp. not so in the air.
* air comes with onboard ssd (default build). mbp does not (upgradeable)
* mbp has firewire, thunderbolt, sdxc reader, superdrive, backlit keyboard
If (when) the air does get a hardware refresh to include the i5/i7 series processors, I do wonder where that leaves the 13" mbp model.
From a market segmentation standpoint, I don't see why two models that are so very similar continue to be offered. I can see why they still offer the non-pro 13" macbook (low end / entry level), and the larger pro models, but the 13" air and the 13" pro offer a potentially confusing choice to customers, and I would think this is a bad thing -- the "i can't decide so I will get neither" syndrome. Perhaps apple is waiting until they get thunderbolt onto the air before killing off the 13" pro.
In addition to segmentation, I would think it is advantageous to apple to prefer 'sealed' machines like the air, ipad, iphone, ipod, etc. These sealed machines put you on a faster upgrade cycle, because you have to refresh to replace or upgrade the ram/hard-drive. I would think this forced early upgrade cycle, along with the lean towards more utility computing, would move apple in this direction.
I am sure apple has historical metrics to support their offerings though, having had similar models offered in the past. So I am probably just 'talking out my ass' on the market segmentation issue....
note: edited for formatting
Can anyone tell me if it's true that Windows on boot camp doesn't take advantage of all of the power saving features, and so doesn't last as long? And if so, how big is the difference?
http://www.winsupersite.com/article/windows-7/macbook-air-wi...
Ubuntu is limited as well. I'm not sure if this will change with Window 7's ability to boot from EFI or with GRUB2 now supporting EFI. If I recall there are several bits of the Apple/MBP EFI implementation that causes things to not work as smoothly as they should... some things that Apple either cut corners with or did intentionally to force you to keep OS X on the hard drive, not sure which.
With the i5/i7 processor and 8 gigs of ram, I haven't noticed a large difference in performance between running windows in bootcamp vs the VM. This was not the case on my old core 2 duo macbook. I only use windows on my laptop for development work though, if you are looking to run windows for games, obviously the performance won't be the same in a VM.
Much unlike HDCP which virtually all computers have nowadays and actually does inhibit normal functionality.
I don't see anything there that would prevent me from easily choose Sandy Bridge, despite not really liking the idea of DRM.
I don't know why people are surprised by this. I try to explain how the DRM components of Netflix work and why they're able to be used in Linux devices with hardware security. Android has DRM providers that are backed all the way to hardware, I'm assuming this Netflix Chrome extension will leverage some new DRM framework that will be part of Chrome (maybe, maybe not Chromium). And really, in terms of everything, I think it's reasonable.
DRM is like those websites which forbid you from right clicking on a picture, and incidentally break tabbed browsing. It's a stupid idea in principle to give someone else control over my computer so they can forbid me from doing something.
I understand why they want it, I don't understand why I want it.
Consider the present: text arrives on your computer, you can copy it, paste it, edit it. Unless you have Microsoft Office DRM modules, then the document author decides what you can do with it and to whom you can email it. Consider the future: Every email, document, website, video stream becomes an extension of the sender or author and your computer is reduced to a dumb view-only device.
Also, there's the argument that the current state is (people who pay, who are hassled by DRM) and (people who don't pay, who avoid the DRM hassles).Criminals get the better experience, people who pay get things they practically can't backup and use on other devices or sample to quote, even in jurisdictions where they have those rights.