Next MacBook Air Refresh is a Game Changer

[warfed]

i'm just responding to the poster's claim above that it is air competition. i agree with you. like i said, i don't think it is competition. it weighs twice as much as the air (according to leaks), but i don't think it is being sold yet.

I never said it is competition to the air, I did disagree with the person stating it is competition to the MPB, last year that would have been the VAIO F. I was also talking about Z which came out before the Oct. MBA. It weights a few ounces more and has got A LOT more power.

 

[palpatine]

I never said it is competition to the air, I did disagree with the person stating it is competition to the MPB, last year that would have been the VAIO F. I was also talking about Z which came out before the Oct. MBA. It weights a few ounces more and has got A LOT more power.

i never said you said it was competition to the air. i was talking about this post by maven1975

Well, here's their PC competition. Introducing the Sony Vaio Z21

http://benyouhui.it168.com/thread-1675661-1-1.html

Dedicated GPU and Blu-Ray / DVD RW off board via Thunderbolt.

I hope Apple takes note to this and follows their lead.

 

[FX4568]

if you want to play games, buy an xbox 360, PS3, Wii, or go for the Macbook Pro i guess. Macbook Air is perfect for the causal computer user (web, music, light photo, word processing) and thats that. If you "hardcore" gamers are complaining, tough *****.

Apple has designated "pro" models and then there is the air/macbook line for a reason. They are not stupid and I am sure they hire people to read forums just like this one. Despite the complaining I assure you they are not trying to market an "all in one"... YET... The most we will get is a new processor, thunderbolt, and MAYBE (hopefully) BL keys.

I finally got a hook on my late 06' MBP for $600 on CL (CJS studios might flag me for this) and cannot wait to pick up a new 11" Air.

If you want to code, go buy a giant desktop.
People like you are hypocrites. One side, you are saying that macbook air is not meant for gaming but you want a processor faster than the already good enough for your use core2duo.
Core2duo and 320m is balance. is what the average user needs. not a Thunderfail port that is not even out in the market.
Am I saying the progress is bad? definitely not, but you must see that we are sacrificing GPU.
Apple has become more of a "lets use the latest tech to buy customers" instead of waiting to give the perfect combination with the least amount of tradeoffs.

 

[DenisK]

I think people are more likely to buy a computer based on the processor than anything else. Intel has done a good job over the years convincing people that the processor is king. If you look at the competition, everyone else is using a Core i3, i5, or i7. People might not distinguish between a Nehalem Core i5 vs. a Sandy Bridge Core i5 (because Intel hasn't changed the name), but they'll certainly notice a Core 2 Duo, because that's likely the same processor as in the 3 or even 4 year-old notebook they are looking to replace.

The 2010 MacBook Air was able to "get away" with using the older processor because the price dropped considerably and Apple made a big push to link it technologically to the iPad (i.e. get people to notice the flash storage and what difference it can make). In mid-2011, however, it's beginning to look old, particularly compared to the 13" MacBook Pro.

Agree to disagree. People who have a Core 2 duo are the ones that are *least* likely to be seeking to replace their systems, as the newer ones do not deliver any significant improvement, anything one can notice. As to the alphabet soup of names you mentioned, heck, I am of course just an advanced user, but I have no clue which is better/why, and if i was computer shopping now from scratch, I would likely have to go online, find some sort of a timeline to understand the most recent evolution. (and thats coming from someone who built his own systems from scratch a decade ago). What I am trying to say is that the entire segment of portables is stagnant, and the new refresh of the MBA is anything but a "game changer". It is not. The alphabet soup of newer processors has no meaning to MBA shoppers, who do not care or want to learn anything about this. To illustrate this point in a different way: give me one specific example of operating my MBA with 2.13 GHZ and 4 gigs of RAM and SSD, that would be visibly different (better) from that of the upcoming one? (differences of OS, or ability to mount a thunderbolt device do not count) If I hear you say "none" I guess we have arrived to a common ground.

 

[FX4568]

Agree to disagree. People who have a Core 2 duo are the ones that are *least* likely to be seeking to replace their systems, as the newer ones do not deliver any significant improvement, anything one can notice. As to the alphabet soup of names you mentioned, heck, I am of course just an advanced user, but I have no clue which is better/why, and if i was computer shopping now from scratch, I would likely have to go online, find some sort of a timeline to understand the most recent evolution. (and thats coming from someone who built his own systems from scratch a decade ago). What I am trying to say is that the entire segment of portables is stagnant, and the new refresh of the MBA is anything but a "game changer". It is not. The alphabet soup of newer processors has no meaning to MBA shoppers, who do not care or want to learn anything about this. To illustrate this point in a different way: give me one specific example of operating my MBA with 2.13 GHZ and 4 gigs of RAM and SSD, that would be visibly different (better) from that of the upcoming one? (differences of OS, or ability to mount a thunderbolt device do not count) If I hear you say "none" I guess we have arrived to a common ground.

Core2duo chips are 4 years old, so actually, no. Core2duo users are the ones that are *most* likely to be seeking to replace their old systems. Also, the newer ones DO deliver lots of significant improvement. The leap from a core2duo MBP to a SB MBP was humongous.

I do agree that new MBAs will not be a game changer. I mean, those who wanted an MBA bought it in october, and perhaps those in the fence might feel that little push from the transition from c2d chips to SB.
You kidding? MBA shoppers are actually the non "latest-to-tech" people, and are actually to some level educated about their purchase. So far, I have never seen a "skinny blonde girl" (what people would typically consider a MBA carrier) with any kind of MBAs, but so far all ive seen are men who do business, or students (like me) who KNOW that any extra power is overkill and rather would like to switch the extra power for portability and thinness. Also, of course you could feel the difference. The heat, ability to perform processor heavy tasks easier, and the lack of GPU makes other GPU intensive tasks much slower.

I chose the oct 2010 MBA over the Feb 2011 MBP why? GPU is little worse, has an HDD, and 2x faster processor which I dont even need.

 

[DenisK]

Core2duo chips are 4 years old, so actually, no. Core2duo users are the ones that are *most* likely to be seeking to replace their old systems. Also, the newer ones DO deliver lots of significant improvement. The leap from a core2duo MBP to a SB MBP was humongous.

I do agree that new MBAs will not be a game changer. I mean, those who wanted an MBA bought it in october, and perhaps those in the fence might feel that little push from the transition from c2d chips to SB.
You kidding? MBA shoppers are actually the non "latest-to-tech" people, and are actually to some level educated about their purchase. So far, I have never seen a "skinny blonde girl" (what people would typically consider a MBA carrier) with any kind of MBAs, but so far all ive seen are men who do business, or students (like me) who KNOW that any extra power is overkill and rather would like to switch the extra power for portability and thinness. Also, of course you could feel the difference. The heat, ability to perform processor heavy tasks easier, and the lack of GPU makes other GPU intensive tasks much slower.

I chose the oct 2010 MBA over the Feb 2011 MBP why? GPU is little worse, has an HDD, and 2x faster processor which I dont even need.

I disagree: most ordinary folks (meaning, those not obsessed with *having to have* the latest processor name inside of what they're typing on) can address all of their needs with pre dual core chips in a laptop, provided it has sufficient ram (say, upwards of 1.5 gigs for Windows XP). Thats probably light years in the past for you, and it is definatley pre- dual core chips. Intel's mantra about chips was relevant in that period of history, but at this stage, a shift from one flavor to the next is by hundred times less significant in terms of real usage performance boost than it was when, say, 3rd Pentium was replaced with 4th. AT some point, it just started to become moot, and the trend continues. It is becoming less noticeable or significant, for many reasons. Out of all of the macs that I've owned in the past 4 years, I hardly see any significant performance difference, with one exception: ability to play/edit HD footage from a DSLR. My former 2.4? Santa Rosa MBP with ATI with 128 Video ram would choke on it, while the current MBA plays it very nicely. MBA has twice video ram. Also, SSD makes a quicker startup, other than that I cant see any reason for owners of what you call "old" chips seeking to upgrade: none. Should I have opted for half a gig MBP three years ago, I would probably still have it: matte screens were default, and I liked the silver lighted keyboards much better.

 

[Young Spade]

I disagree: most ordinary folks (meaning, those not obsessed with *having to have* the latest processor name inside of what they're typing on) can address all of their needs with pre dual core chips in a laptop, provided it has sufficient ram (say, upwards of 1.5 gigs for Windows XP). Thats probably light years in the past for you, and it is definatley pre- dual core chips. Intel's mantra about chips was relevant in that period of history, but at this stage, a shift from one flavor to the next is by hundred times less significant in terms of real usage performance boost than it was when, say, 3rd Pentium was replaced with 4th. AT some point, it just started to become moot, and the trend continues. It is becoming less noticeable or significant, for many reasons. Out of all of the macs that I've owned in the past 4 years, I hardly see any significant performance difference, with one exception: ability to play/edit HD footage from a DSLR. My former 2.4? Santa Rosa MBP with ATI with 128 Video ram would choke on it, while the current MBA plays it very nicely. MBA has twice video ram. Also, SSD makes a quicker startup, other than that I cant see any reason for owners of what you call "old" chips seeking to upgrade: none. Should I have opted for half a gig MBP three years ago, I would probably still have it: matte screens were default, and I liked the silver lighted keyboards much better.

Very interesting writeup, thanks for that Well right now I'm thinking about selling my upgraded BlackBook for something a little more modern; if I were going for either the MBP or MBA as my next machine, how much money saved do you think would warrant the C2D over the new Sandy Bridge?

As in, how low would I have to go on a C2D machine before the differences between SB and C2D were met? I love saving money as much as the next guy but this new machine might be my last for a while. I only do some light editing and I'd play a game or two on it, but overall nothing that serious.

I know the C2D machines work great for what I want to do but I don't know if it's worth the jump to SandyBridge when I can save a couple hundred bucks getting a refurbished or used old one.

Thanks

 

[Davidkoh]

Very interesting writeup, thanks for that Well right now I'm thinking about selling my upgraded BlackBook for something a little more modern; if I were going for either the MBP or MBA as my next machine, how much money saved do you think would warrant the C2D over the new Sandy Bridge?

As in, how low would I have to go on a C2D machine before the differences between SB and C2D were met? I love saving money as much as the next guy but this new machine might be my last for a while. I only do some light editing and I'd play a game or two on it, but overall nothing that serious.

I know the C2D machines work great for what I want to do but I don't know if it's worth the jump to SandyBridge when I can save a couple hundred bucks getting a refurbished or used old one.

Thanks

Im thinking of buying the current 13" MBA right now so I can buy it directly from the online Apple Store at a 10% student discount price, so I wouldn't even be saving money compared to waiting.

I've read loads of benchmarks right now between 13" MBA (2010) and 13" MBP (2011), and while the MBP tears up the MBA when it comes to encoding and CPU intensive tasks it gets its ass handed to it when it comes to gaming performance. Except that gaming in OS X seems to have less of a difference in some games and the 13" MBP (2011) might win a fight or 2 there, most likely because of bad drivers and the CPU working more in OS X. It does seem though that the Nvidia 320m in the MBA gives a more stable FPS, the average is higher than for the HD3000 in the MBP. And for higher settings even in OS X the Nvidia 320m seems to be able to keep the FPS in the playable region of 30+ FPS, while for the HD3000 might go down to 23 as an average.

The MBA is close to the 2010 version of the 13" MBP, which is what I currently have and do not come close to ever "maxing out" (except for gaming maxing my GPU). I never found the CPU too slow though.

I find it really unlikely that the SB MBA would somehow be better graphics wise then the SB MBP, this isn't something that is going to happen. So since the 13" MBA (2011) beats the 13" MBP (2010) in windows gaming benchmarks by a bit we can be quite sure the same will hold true for the 2011 MBA that comes out.

That said I will most likely get the older version right now since it is not a big change from what I have now (which is more then enough CPU wise).

I would say everyone should ask themselves what they need. People who are mostly encoding videos/music, doing big CPU intensive stuff in Photoshop and so on are more dependent on CPU will most likely get a HUGE boost.

But for people like me who mostly just surf the web, watch a movie or 2 and maybe boots up a game now and then the current version I think will be better.

 

[Sounds Good]

I would say everyone should ask themselves what they need. People who are mostly encoding videos/music, doing big CPU intensive stuff in Photoshop and so on are more dependent on CPU will most likely get a HUGE boost.

But for people like me who mostly just surf the web, watch a movie or 2 and maybe boots up a game now and then the current version I think will be better.

What about people that mostly just surf the web (etc) but OCCASIONALLY edit videos or use Photoshop? Which one are they best off with?

 

[Davidkoh]

What about people that mostly just surf the web (etc) but OCCASIONALLY edit videos or use Photoshop? Which one are they best off with?

Thats up to them, if they don't game any then then its only CPU they need, which is the new one. Ill post some of the tests i've read and everyone can make their own mind up.


Test of 2010 Air: http://www.macworld.com/article/155224/2010/10/macbookairbto_benchmarks.html

Test of 2011 MBP: http://www.macworld.com/article/157893/2011/02/2011macbookpro_benchmarks.html

2010 MBP vs 2011 MBP: http://www.techyalert.com/2011/02/25/macbook-pro-2010-vs-macbook-pro-2011/

 

[nutjob]

It's a game changer because the main objection the average consumer might have to the current version is the old processor. The graphics card is important to hard core gamers, but for most people, the Intel HD 3000 is "good enough."

Arguably, the late-2010 version was the "game changer," but the Sandy Bridge version builds on that momentum. Heck, Intel even came out with an "ultrabook" spec based on the success of the MacBook Air.

Like the average consumer has any idea what a processor is, let alone which is better. It's all just the mandatory drivel the people spout about Apple products. It's a marginal upgrade at best, Apple probably won't even announce it.

Next you'll tell me that the iPad is a "magical" product.

 

[palpatine]

Like the average consumer has any idea what a processor is, let alone which is better. It's all just the mandatory drivel the people spout about Apple products. It's a marginal upgrade at best, Apple probably won't even announce it.

Next you'll tell me that the iPad is a "magical" product.

pretty low opinion of the average consumer there nutjob. "intel inside." we all know what a processor is. the processor name is written on a sticker on most computers, staring everyone in the face every day.

mandatory drivel? the air has gotten impressive reviews over the years, and sales back up its good reputation.

it is a marginal upgrade, compared to the current unit, yet it far exceeds most of the other computers in its category. that ought to tell you something.

is the mba or the ipad magical? steve puts ground-up unicorn horns and pixie dust into each and every unit. if that isn't magical, then i don't know what is.

as for the question of whether to buy a new one, i'd say it will probably be well worth it. if it's only a hundred or two hundred dollars difference, you're getting a lot of additional power per dollar spent. you'll be able to sell it for more in the future, so the price gap may not be as bad as it looks at first.

if you are thinking about upgrading, i'd say you ought to wait a bit longer if you are still working within the parameters of your machine. it seems like it would be better to wait for a complete overhaul.

 

[drewyboy]

You gotta be kidding me. Last year the Z was in a league of its own. Weights 3lb (and still has a disc drive) has a 1080p screen, 8GB of ram, quad RAID SSD, full powered i7 processor, dedicated video card. There was (and still isn't considering the screen) anything like the Z on the market.

And it's battery life is... just enough to run and plugin in, in a different outlet*, but even that isn't recommended

*Computer may shut down if not plugged into outlet. It is not meant to powered by battery alone. Use battery power only in case of emergency.

 

[Smileyboy]

That figures, I just had to replace my 11 inch cause it got stolen. I bought it almost a week ago today. I hope the new one comes out soon.... Then I can return this model.

 

[gguerini]

I just hope I can have more than 4GB on the next MBA refresh. The i5 cpu with more than 4GB would make me sell my current MBP13 and buy a new BMA. Let's see...

 

[hcho3]

Non sense... MBA is not designed for power users. I don't expect 8GB Ram on MBA with this update.

MBA update isn't worth it for me because I am not willing to take a hit on GPU to improve CPU. I want both to improve. I will wait for Intel's IVY bridge.

 

[DenisK]

What about people that mostly just surf the web (etc) but OCCASIONALLY edit videos or use Photoshop? Which one are they best off with?

Frankly, my personal favorites for what you mention, are those pre-unibody 15 MBPs, with 256 or 512 of video ram. (I had one with 128 and it was choking on HD video playback from my Canon DSLR). I feel sorry Apple ditched the design so quickly, as aesthetically they were superior to the current breed of unibodies in my personal view, not to mention they had Matte screen almost till the very last moment they were produced. I had one for years, stuck a fast 7200/500GB HD in it and it was running sweet, despite the chip that is considered "oh, so old" by some here! If it was not for the slim Video ram I had the mistake of purchasing I would still have it. They could be had now for a fraction of what they used to cost, the biggest trouble is finding one in a good clean state, with that much of video ram. These were and still are being used in TV production. Photoshop and LR ran fabulously even on my second generation Black Book, not to mention the very last and fastest reincarnation of Black Books. Raw HD video did not play perfectly like it does on my current iMac and MBA.

 

[warfed]

And it's battery life is... just enough to run and plugin in, in a different outlet*, but even that isn't recommended

Emm... 7 hours idle, 5 hours with use and 4 hours watching a Blu-Ray. I'd say that's pretty good especially since the battery is user removable. And no, not Sony's number but user tested numbers. And keep in mind that laptop has a lot more power than the MBA.

I don't understand why people have to make up **** about other manufacturers just to feel better about theirs...

The Vaio Z is not perfect, but it is a very impressive machine.

 

[KnightWRX]

Non sense... MBA is not designed for power users.

What's a power user to you ? I have a MBA, it's my only personal computer and I think I qualify as a power user, unless you're trying to redefine what a power user means.

(It doesn't mean gadget freaks would don't have the first clue how to use the damn thing but watch 1080p blu-ray rips btw).

 

[Skika]

Frankly, my personal favorites for what you mention, are those pre-unibody 15 MBPs, with 256 or 512 of video ram. (I had one with 128 and it was choking on HD video playback from my Canon DSLR). I feel sorry Apple ditched the design so quickly, as aesthetically they were superior to the current breed of unibodies in my personal view, not to mention they had Matte screen almost till the very last moment they were produced. I had one for years, stuck a fast 7200/500GB HD in it and it was running sweet, despite the chip that is considered "oh, so old" by some here! If it was not for the slim Video ram I had the mistake of purchasing I would still have it. They could be had now for a fraction of what they used to cost, the biggest trouble is finding one in a good clean state, with that much of video ram. These were and still are being used in TV production. Photoshop and LR ran fabulously even on my second generation Black Book, not to mention the very last and fastest reincarnation of Black Books. Raw HD video did not play perfectly like it does on my current iMac and MBA.

Only problem is 8600gt is a ticking bomb.

 

[Capt Underpants]

It will be re-branded as the new Macbook. That's pretty game changing.

 

[tbobmccoy]

Thats up to them, if they don't game any then then its only CPU they need, which is the new one. Ill post some of the tests i've read and everyone can make their own mind up.


Test of 2010 Air: http://www.macworld.com/article/155224/2010/10/macbookairbto_benchmarks.html

Test of 2011 MBP: http://www.macworld.com/article/157893/2011/02/2011macbookpro_benchmarks.html

2010 MBP vs 2011 MBP: http://www.techyalert.com/2011/02/25/macbook-pro-2010-vs-macbook-pro-2011/

These tests have assuaged my nervousness over the HD3000. Sure, it's not the best chip, but it'll be serviceable for what I will do with it, plus a few light (older) game titles that I'll play as well. Thanks, I'm even more excited about the 2011 MBA!

 

[Davidkoh]

These tests have assuaged my nervousness over the HD3000. Sure, it's not the best chip, but it'll be serviceable for what I will do with it, plus a few light (older) game titles that I'll play as well. Thanks, I'm even more excited about the 2011 MBA!

Yeah, im not trying to tell people it's a bad chip. But it seems to be quite a step down from the 320m. But if you do not really play games then it's nothing to worry about. I play a bit of CSS and so on so I need a better one.

 

[tbobmccoy]

Yeah, im not trying to tell people it's a bad chip. But it seems to be quite a step down from the 320m. But if you do not really play games then it's nothing to worry about. I play a bit of CSS and so on so I need a better one.

CSS plays just fine on my 9400m, which is what I use on my 15" most of the time because I'm too lazy to switch chips. I think that the HD3000 will do just fine for it as well.

 

[Davidkoh]

CSS plays just fine on my 9400m, which is what I use on my 15" most of the time because I'm too lazy to switch chips. I think that the HD3000 will do just fine for it as well.

I wouldnt mind a better chip than the 320m I got in my MBP. I wouldn't want to go too much down from it. But to each his own.