Jobs was right the first time when he said that anything less than 13" really wasn't ideal. I agree.
Those little screens are a hassle for a number of reasons.
FWIW, the 11" keyboard doesn't extend to the edge, so that will also be a little tight.
13"
He did sorta backtrack on his position. However, he did get the full-sized keyboard in there which is more important than the display size in my opinion.
I think the 13" is the way to go, but I'm still not sure. I just feel that the 11 inch will be too slow. Between the slower processors, and the slower system bus and 50% L2 cache it will be noticeable for the more advanced tasks which inevitably come up. Then there is the issue of pricing. Upgrade the 11" to 4GB, with the fastest processor and 128GB (necessary, I think), you're up to $1,399. This is the same price as the 13" with the same specs and faster processor. I think the extra speed, larger screen, and SD slot make up for the slightly greater footprint and weight.
Still, the 11" is very slim and attractive. And probably fast enough for most things.
I will need to see them in person to really decide.
I don't believe "slow" will be the way most describe the 11.6" MBA. At least not the people that actually buy and use it.
People have been distorted by Intel's marketing. A 1.4 GHz CPU sounds slow if you think about the alternative hardware in older machines with those CPUs. However, the 11.6" MBA has NAND Flash which is going to make it so much faster than an old machine with 1.4 GHz CPU and 4200rpm HDD. In addition, it has a rocking 320m GPU that can drive a 30" ACD.
I think the problem here is just that we cannot differentiate that all of the other features are what truly make computers fast for the vast majority of users. Even for heavy CPU usage apps, there's still huge gains when it comes to the NAND Flash, L2 and when it's being used heavily NAND is so much faster access, GPU, instant-on software, more and faster RAM, and a system really made for speed via non-CPU methods.
What I mean is that most computer companies take Intel's marketing and roll with it. Sure, you can buy a Sony with a Core whatever CPU, but the MBA will run circles around it for everyday users. Unless you're a power user running super CPU intensive apps and treating the 11.6" MBA like it's a Mac Pro maxed, the MBA and its 1.4 GHz CPU are going to feel like a Wowee super Core i-whatever. Apple has really innovated here and put together a true speed demon for average users doing average things. No, it's not going to run certain apps like a Core i7 3 GHz with 4 GHz boost, but it's going to be so much faster than the other 1.4 GHz systems that you're comparing it to...
I think anyone who is thinking of using the MacBook Air as their main computer is going to be disappointed in either models after using it for a few weeks.
I am a photographer and I use a 17-inch MBP as my main computer but I also use an 11.6-inch Samsung netbook for image storage & review while I am on location. I will have to play with both of the new MB Air offerings, before I can make up my mind, but I have a feeling that the 11.6 (with a 128MB upgrade) will probably be the best choice for me.
My biggest concern though is the lack of needed ports, like a direct ethernet connection and firewire. I really wish that Apple would stop trying to be an award winning fashion house and concentrate on a good computer user interface instead.
Reading my post I am pretty sure that I will probably end up making the MBP 13-inch my next Mac purchase. Just waiting for the next processor upgrade.
Your uses don't seem to be the "norm" to me. I have been using MBAs since originally released as my main systems which I use over 90% of the time if not more. I have never thought the v 2,1 MBA with 1.86 or 2.13 GHz couldn't be my primary computer.
However, you need some of the features many do not. Most of us love WiFi and don't want Ethernet tying us down anywhere. The vast majority of peripherals use USB not FW. If you're using a 17" high-resolution display, sure a smaller display will feel cramped in comparison, but many of us use the MBA's display only when away from a desk. When connected to a 27" LED ACD, the MBA feels like a desktop to me.
To many of us, we don't have the same needs you do. Otherwise, we would probably be using MacBook Pros. It seems to be what you need, if you need FW, Ethernet, and etc. If I had your needs, I wouldn't buy an MBA. So maybe what you need to consider is you're not really the targeted market buyer of an MBA, and that's why you don't find it acceptable to be a primary computer for you... but most of us that would consider the MBA wouldn't need anything more than the MBA offers.
Quite honestly, if I believe the 13.3" MBA is faster and provides a better overall user experience than the 13.3" MBP. The MBA has a high-resolution display which is not available in the 13.3" MBP. The MBA has much faster NAND Flash than the MBPs (all of them whether BTO SSDs or STD HDDs), so the MBA user is going to have a system that does the common tasks a lot faster which means less wasted time waiting on the Mac with spinning beach balls. Those two features mean a better workspace and more efficient use of time via the performance of the NAND Flash.
So if you're the targeted market buyer for the MBA, you're much more likely to believe the MBA could be your primary Mac to when you're not the targeted market buyer for the MBA... like you who needs FW, Ethernet, more port selection, and etc.
Thanks. I definitely going to max out the 11.6, but even if I maxed out would it run youtube HD video, VM Fusion, Boot Camp and Remote Desktop SMOOTHLY.
Anyone who has the 11.6 please comment.
Thanks in advance.
Absolutely, when the software is using the 320m with h.264 it's going to be completely capable with videos. It will probably be a lot more capable when running Windows 7 than when running OS X though. However, I still don't think it would have stuttering problems like the original experienced.
I would love to see some reviews and stats come in to backup my thoughts on what the experience should be. I haven't ordered these myself yet either. I am still waiting for the big picture and details to come in, but I expect the vast majority to be really happy with the Nvidia 320m GPU.
