The apple MBA site says, "The next generation of MacBooks". I don't think you can read too much into that....which may well happen soon.
You are correct. Nothing definitive was said. But just because Jobs said "we think" doesn't mean they don't have plans. I think it's logical that it means Apple notebooks will take a sleeker form and that they will be lighter. What else might the statement mean? That notebooks will all be named MacBook Air? That they will all have 11" and 13" screens? Not likely.
I agree with you that Apple isn't going to be able to put a processor like the quad core i7 into the current MacBook Air case. But I bet in the next couple of years, they're going to try. And that by the end of 2012 all MacBooks including the high end models will be much thinner and lighter. And that they'll all lose the optical drive and spinning hard drive. After all, isn't the company called Apple Thin, Inc?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
MacBook air speculation about future...
- Thread starter mayhone1
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That's too bad. Lack of a backlit keyboard is one of the only things that turns me off to the air.
You don't need 4 gigs of RAM to run the OS. I was running Tiger, Leopard, and Snow Leopard just fine on just 1 GB of RAM for a long time.
totally agree...
but i bet... the air gets a tiny bit thinner, it would not surprise me! not much but maybe a few millimeters (mm).
it will add to the weight, its all about making the air feel like they float on the end of a balloon
Thread on CPU speculation for MBA
If you want to check out some of the CPU speculation on the MBA, check out https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1103979/
If you want to check out some of the CPU speculation on the MBA, check out https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1103979/
When it probably costs Apple ~$10* to use 2x2GB RAM vs 2x1GB RAM, that's quite a large profit... especially after millions** of orders ($90x$1,000,000 = $90,000,000). I'd call that a bundle.
*Not sure how much they get RAM for, but I mean, the average consumer can get 2x2GB RAM online for in the $30s... surely Apple gets some nice wholesale prices (and 1/3rd isn't exactly unimaginable)
**No idea how many MBAs have been sold
Apple plays the upgrade game all the time, and quite successfully. People are convinced they must have x feature and will pay much more than it's worth to "future proof" their Macs.
Since before the days Apple put combo drives in their low end Macs, when Superdrives were the industry standard, and cheap, Apple has been doing it time and time again.
I just won't bite, unless a feature is absolutely necessary. I nearly always buy the low end Mac and sell it at a small loss in a year or two. Then I buy the low end again, which is much better than last year's high end. I save a "bundle."
Since before the days Apple put combo drives in their low end Macs, when Superdrives were the industry standard, and cheap, Apple has been doing it time and time again.
I just won't bite, unless a feature is absolutely necessary. I nearly always buy the low end Mac and sell it at a small loss in a year or two. Then I buy the low end again, which is much better than last year's high end. I save a "bundle."
I just won't bite, unless a feature is absolutely necessary. I nearly always buy the low end Mac and sell it at a small loss in a year or two. Then I buy the low end again, which is much better than last year's high end. I save a "bundle."
I feel the same way mostly, but I'm considering upgrading the memory from 2GB to 4GB. Having to buy a new computer more and more frequently would end up costing a lot too. Paying an extra $100 now isn't going to future proof my mac, but maybe it will keep it relevant for an extra year. The question isn't whether I want to spend money or not, it's whether spending a little more now will save me a little more down the road. Here's a generalized example:
I can spend $1,000 every three years on a new base macbook, or spend $1,100 every four years. After 12 years, the first option will cost me $4,000, while the second option will only cost me $3,300.
Now of course some upgrades will be more expensive and will do less for the life of a computer, but doubling the RAM for $100 seems like a good investment (or as good as we're going to get from Apple).
Don't forget resale value which after four years would likely be much less than after three years. But your point is a good one. Generally I find I can't, or don't want to wait four or even three years for a new computer. So trying to future proof usually seems a waste of my money (although resale value might come into that too).
Absolutely, if you need the memory or if you think you might before you replace the computer, go for it. If you don't, then it might just be a waste of money. I take issue with those who think upping the price of a MacBook Air by 10% is always a good idea for everyone, explaining that it's only a little bit of money.
No chance of a dedicated gfx card anytime soon. Better integrated graphics for ivy bridge though.
That's why you never buy
RAM, case in point 16 GB RAM at OWC is $207 for an iMac, wants $600, if you don't know any better you buy it.The $100
wants additional for 4GB is reasonable, sure it adds up, but that's called business and profits, you can't hold the fact that that fact is multiplied by all MBA sold, fact of life, profits add up