I currently have the macbook air Rev A 1.6 Ghz. I'm planning to sell it for $740 dollars to get a macbook pro 2.5 ghz 13 inch. I had my MBA for 20 months now it's time for me to upgrade. I know that the macbook pro would be a much powerful and faster machine compared to my MBA however my only gripe is the size and the weight. I don't know if the thickness and the extra 1.5 lb would make a difference so I'm asking anybody's opinion on this one especially those who own both the MBA and MBP or bought the new unibody MBP after owning the MBP. Also I'm wondering if the portability of the MBA is worth its less powerful specs considering the fact that netbooks are becoming popular nowadays. thank you very much
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.
Selling my macbook air for a macbook pro
- Thread starter Heavenkittykat
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Hello, Heavenkittykat. This was my experience. Hope it helps.
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/8556974/
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/8556974/
You will miss the portability of the Air.
In fact, my wife upgraded from a rev A to rev C and immediately said the rev C was heavier. Using a scale I found it was 15 grams heavier. If 15 grams is noticeable, then 1.5 lbs will be shocking -- until you get used to it.
Whether or not it's worth it or not really depends on you.
If you carry your laptop around a lot and the Air is powerful enough for what you do with it almost all the time, then the portability of the Air is worth it.
If you usually leave your laptop on the desk or need to run CPU or RAM hungery apps then you need to get the MBP (at least).
Assuming you don't have the SSD model of the Macbook Air, you might consider upgrading to an SSD -- either for your rev A or by upgrading to a rev C. It makes a huge difference in how responsive the computer is. That way you'd be able to keep the portability and still have a more powerful laptop.
By the way, I have an older 15" MBP. Not exactly the comparison you were looking for, so maybe this isn't the perspective you are looking for.
Good luck.
In fact, my wife upgraded from a rev A to rev C and immediately said the rev C was heavier. Using a scale I found it was 15 grams heavier. If 15 grams is noticeable, then 1.5 lbs will be shocking -- until you get used to it.
Whether or not it's worth it or not really depends on you.
If you carry your laptop around a lot and the Air is powerful enough for what you do with it almost all the time, then the portability of the Air is worth it.
If you usually leave your laptop on the desk or need to run CPU or RAM hungery apps then you need to get the MBP (at least).
Assuming you don't have the SSD model of the Macbook Air, you might consider upgrading to an SSD -- either for your rev A or by upgrading to a rev C. It makes a huge difference in how responsive the computer is. That way you'd be able to keep the portability and still have a more powerful laptop.
By the way, I have an older 15" MBP. Not exactly the comparison you were looking for, so maybe this isn't the perspective you are looking for.
Good luck.
Do you carry your laptop around a lot with you? I wasn't sure about whether to buy my fiancée a MacBook Air or a 13" MacBook Pro a couple of weeks ago. My mind was quickly made up in a store when I tried lifting each machine up with just one hand, you can definitely notice the difference. I couldn't help but thing the 13" MBP looked seriously chunky in comparison - particularly from the front when the lids were closed. She loves her new machine and loves the weight of it.
If you don't carry your laptop around all that much then maybe you should consider a 15" MBP with a dedicated graphics card. I don't think it would feel as much of a compromise then because you'd know you'd be getting a far more powerful machine and a far larger display etc which would make the jump in weight easier to deal with.
I certainly love the weight of the MacBook Air but I prefer having the larger screen and dedicated graphics on my 15" Unibody MacBook Pro. Torn between a 13" MBP and a MacBook Air, however, I'd tend towards the air. Torn between a 15" MBP with dedicated graphics or an MBA, I'd tend towards the MBP.
If you don't carry your laptop around all that much then maybe you should consider a 15" MBP with a dedicated graphics card. I don't think it would feel as much of a compromise then because you'd know you'd be getting a far more powerful machine and a far larger display etc which would make the jump in weight easier to deal with.
I certainly love the weight of the MacBook Air but I prefer having the larger screen and dedicated graphics on my 15" Unibody MacBook Pro. Torn between a 13" MBP and a MacBook Air, however, I'd tend towards the air. Torn between a 15" MBP with dedicated graphics or an MBA, I'd tend towards the MBP.
One thing I love about my MBA is when I have it in it's case (a thin envelope type case), nobody knows I have a laptop with me. Sometimes it feels a bit pretentious carrying a laptop, but with the MBA, it appears to only be a black leather folders with papers.
I had a MBA RevA 1.6/2/80 and was extremely happy with it as my primary but not sole computer. It simply did not have enough capacity (ram and storage space) to meet my needs as an only computer though.
So after tiring of not having all my data with me all the time and keeping multiple computers in sync, I transitioned to a unibody Macbook (same size and weight as 13" MBP) and it has plenty of capacity as my sole computer.
My uMB is only about half an inch thicker on average but thats still twice the average thickness of the MBA. My uMB is only about 1.5 pounds heavier, but thats 50% heavier than the MBA.
There is an enormous portability difference between the two machines and while the uMB is a great machine and still very portable it not nearly as pleasing or as special feeling when mobile as the MBA.
I chafe at the bit daily hoping for a MBA with 4gb or ram and a 256gb SSD. I try and rationalize a revC with 128gb SSD to get that wonderful combination of extreme portability and all day usability back. But I know my real needs and I'll make do with my uMB until a suitably configured MBA is released.
That said, not everyone will find a 13" uMB or MBP that much different from the MBA. You'll ultimately have to decide for yourself, but beware the thickness and weight numbers bear more significance than they would seem.
So after tiring of not having all my data with me all the time and keeping multiple computers in sync, I transitioned to a unibody Macbook (same size and weight as 13" MBP) and it has plenty of capacity as my sole computer.
My uMB is only about half an inch thicker on average but thats still twice the average thickness of the MBA. My uMB is only about 1.5 pounds heavier, but thats 50% heavier than the MBA.
There is an enormous portability difference between the two machines and while the uMB is a great machine and still very portable it not nearly as pleasing or as special feeling when mobile as the MBA.
I chafe at the bit daily hoping for a MBA with 4gb or ram and a 256gb SSD. I try and rationalize a revC with 128gb SSD to get that wonderful combination of extreme portability and all day usability back. But I know my real needs and I'll make do with my uMB until a suitably configured MBA is released.
That said, not everyone will find a 13" uMB or MBP that much different from the MBA. You'll ultimately have to decide for yourself, but beware the thickness and weight numbers bear more significance than they would seem.
MBA (rev. B and C) was the most disappointing Mac I have ever owned. The MBA overheated constantly, video playback stuttered, the screen was painfully yellow, battery life was abysmal, and it was the first mac that I experienced kernel panics on a regular basis (both B and C).
I now have 15" uMBP and am MUCH happier with it. I carry my 15" around all the time, and weight difference is hardly noticeable (Granted I carry a bunch of other stuff). To save 1.5lb (from the 13" MBP), the MBA just makes too many sacrifices for my needs.
I now have 15" uMBP and am MUCH happier with it. I carry my 15" around all the time, and weight difference is hardly noticeable (Granted I carry a bunch of other stuff). To save 1.5lb (from the 13" MBP), the MBA just makes too many sacrifices for my needs.
Any particular reason you want to shift over to the MBP? Are feeling that you need more power or storage or dissatisfied with the MBA in general?
If you feel that you are happy with the MBA, there is no reason why 20 months should be a "deadline" for an upgrade. I would wait it out and maybe get the next generation Air, if I were you.
I am saying this because I do own both a Macbook Air and Pro (2.5, 15"). Well, I do not technically own the MBP, the office does. Having received the new MBP a month or so ago, I feel the MBA is a much better computer for my needs. I end up just leaving the MBP at the office, and it ends up serving like more of a desktop for me.
Being a writer, I really don't have the need for power, so of course, the MBA is the obvious choice for me. The weight/portability seems trivial, but believe me, once you have both in your hands, you'll know it's not.
I am in the same position (MBA Rev A 1.6 with HDD), and I am planning to update with the next MBP/MBA revision. I will either buy the current revision if the update has integrated Intel crap graphics or I will buy the new revision if it retains discrete graphics.
Regarding my MBA vs 13" MBP debate, I went out and bought some cheap lead ankle weights. 1 pound a piece, and tossed them in my laptop bag. I can just barely tell the difference with the extra 2 lb, I doubt 1.5 lb will make a difference to me. I then went to the Apple store to test the current rev performance on HD playback. The best MBA could just barely handle a single YouTube HD vid. Any of the 13" MBPs could handle two simultaneous videos (after a complete download to ensure none of the slowdowns were due to buffering.) The high end 13" mbp could almost handle 3 simultaneous YouTube HD vids.
Since my biggest complaint about the MBA is video performance (YouTube hd, Hulu, Pr0n etc) I will likely go with the MBP unless there are significant improvements in the MBA video performance.
Just a few random thoughts from
-pod
Regarding my MBA vs 13" MBP debate, I went out and bought some cheap lead ankle weights. 1 pound a piece, and tossed them in my laptop bag. I can just barely tell the difference with the extra 2 lb, I doubt 1.5 lb will make a difference to me. I then went to the Apple store to test the current rev performance on HD playback. The best MBA could just barely handle a single YouTube HD vid. Any of the 13" MBPs could handle two simultaneous videos (after a complete download to ensure none of the slowdowns were due to buffering.) The high end 13" mbp could almost handle 3 simultaneous YouTube HD vids.
Since my biggest complaint about the MBA is video performance (YouTube hd, Hulu, Pr0n etc) I will likely go with the MBP unless there are significant improvements in the MBA video performance.
Just a few random thoughts from
-pod
I found significant improvements to Flash after installing the new 10.1 beta release. I hardly see my CPU go over 50% even when I'm surfing YouTube. That and in combination with a copper mod, my air rarely hits 6200RPM unless I'm running something intensive.
ayeying - you went from a 17" MBP to the MBA, right? How's it going so far?
My MBA 1.86/128ssd works surprisingly well for playback... side by side with a 13" MBP single video viewing they where about the same. The 13" MBP I compared it with is the high end model with 256ssd.
My complaint about the MBA for video use is the noise from the fan contstantly running.
I ran some tests and then updated my Flash to 10.1 and reran them. Here are the results.
This is a stock Rev. A MBA 1.6 with the 80 gig HD. No modifications, ie thermal paste, Coolbook etc. I did a completely clean installation of Snow Leopard when it came out so no extraneous junk cluttering up the system. I gave the computer at least 45 minutes to cool down between tests and rebooted before running each test. The only programs running were the browser, Activity Monitor, and Temp monitor. The computer was fully charged and on a power supply.
I tested the FPS with this link
http://www.craftymind.com/factory/guimark/GUIMark_Flex3.html
and I used the Youtube HD version of the Mythbusters Pancaked Car for the test video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWJU6sbf8Ng
Test A
Flash 10,0,32,18 in Safari 4.0.3 under Mac OS 10.6.2
Starting Temp 56 C
Starting FPS 12
After 3 minutes of video when the slightest stuttering started
Temp 85 C
FPS 7.76
CPU utilization 150%
After an additional 2 minutes, kernel task kicked in and video became unwatchable.
Temp 73
FPS 5.5
CPU Utilization 112%
Test B
Flash 10,1,51,45 in Safari 4.0.3 under Mac OS 10.6.2
Starting Temp 58 C
Starting FPS 9.7
After 3 minutes of video when the slightest stuttering started
Temp 85 C
FPS 5.5
CPU utilization 140%
After an additional 2 minutes, kernel task kicked in and video became unwatchable.
Temp 65
FPS 4.78
CPU Utilization 101%
Now the thing that should really embarrass Apple is the following. Reboot into Win XP under boot camp for test 3 without even waiting for the computer to cool down. I don't have a temp monitor or a Activity Monitor equivalent so I just have the FPS result
Flash Win 10,0,32,18 in IE 6.0
Starting FPS 24
After 3 minutes of video with the video still smooth
FPS 22
After an additional 5 minutes of video and a switch to the Zombieland trailer with video still playing smoothly (doing the switch to Zombieland in OSX results in instant kernel task and unwatchable video)
FPS 20
Immediately reboot into Mac OSX with Flash 10,1,51,45 in Safari 4.0.3 and re-run the FPS test gives 8.4 FPS.
Apple really should be ashamed of themselves for not seeing to it that Flash implementation is streamlined in their OS. IMHO this is Apple's fault, even if it is due to Adobe dragging their heels. As much as I hate Flash, it is a major component of the web today and the end user experience is impaired by this suboptimal implementation. Apple should be banging down Adobe's door insisting that it be improved and opening up whatever is required by Adobe to improve the performance. Instead we get the pass the blame game from Apple.
I have a great piece of hardware that is more than capable of functioning in today's multimedia web environment as evidenced by the boot camp test. It is strictly due to the OS/ plugin that functionality is reduced. I should not have to resort to workarounds and hacks (or a Windows reboot) to get such a simple, integral part of the web to work. If it was simply a hardware limitation, I would not be so annoyed. I knew when I purchased this machine that it has significant limitations. The increased portability was worth it. I was even ok with poor Flash implementation under Leopard as it can take time to optimize an OS for a new machine. But, it is 2 years later and we have a new OS and now a new version of Flash with no improvement. Also, Flash complaints are not only limited to the MBA.
- pod
This is a stock Rev. A MBA 1.6 with the 80 gig HD. No modifications, ie thermal paste, Coolbook etc. I did a completely clean installation of Snow Leopard when it came out so no extraneous junk cluttering up the system. I gave the computer at least 45 minutes to cool down between tests and rebooted before running each test. The only programs running were the browser, Activity Monitor, and Temp monitor. The computer was fully charged and on a power supply.
I tested the FPS with this link
http://www.craftymind.com/factory/guimark/GUIMark_Flex3.html
and I used the Youtube HD version of the Mythbusters Pancaked Car for the test video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWJU6sbf8Ng
Test A
Flash 10,0,32,18 in Safari 4.0.3 under Mac OS 10.6.2
Starting Temp 56 C
Starting FPS 12
After 3 minutes of video when the slightest stuttering started
Temp 85 C
FPS 7.76
CPU utilization 150%
After an additional 2 minutes, kernel task kicked in and video became unwatchable.
Temp 73
FPS 5.5
CPU Utilization 112%
Test B
Flash 10,1,51,45 in Safari 4.0.3 under Mac OS 10.6.2
Starting Temp 58 C
Starting FPS 9.7
After 3 minutes of video when the slightest stuttering started
Temp 85 C
FPS 5.5
CPU utilization 140%
After an additional 2 minutes, kernel task kicked in and video became unwatchable.
Temp 65
FPS 4.78
CPU Utilization 101%
Now the thing that should really embarrass Apple is the following. Reboot into Win XP under boot camp for test 3 without even waiting for the computer to cool down. I don't have a temp monitor or a Activity Monitor equivalent so I just have the FPS result
Flash Win 10,0,32,18 in IE 6.0
Starting FPS 24
After 3 minutes of video with the video still smooth
FPS 22
After an additional 5 minutes of video and a switch to the Zombieland trailer with video still playing smoothly (doing the switch to Zombieland in OSX results in instant kernel task and unwatchable video)
FPS 20
Immediately reboot into Mac OSX with Flash 10,1,51,45 in Safari 4.0.3 and re-run the FPS test gives 8.4 FPS.
Apple really should be ashamed of themselves for not seeing to it that Flash implementation is streamlined in their OS. IMHO this is Apple's fault, even if it is due to Adobe dragging their heels. As much as I hate Flash, it is a major component of the web today and the end user experience is impaired by this suboptimal implementation. Apple should be banging down Adobe's door insisting that it be improved and opening up whatever is required by Adobe to improve the performance. Instead we get the pass the blame game from Apple.
I have a great piece of hardware that is more than capable of functioning in today's multimedia web environment as evidenced by the boot camp test. It is strictly due to the OS/ plugin that functionality is reduced. I should not have to resort to workarounds and hacks (or a Windows reboot) to get such a simple, integral part of the web to work. If it was simply a hardware limitation, I would not be so annoyed. I knew when I purchased this machine that it has significant limitations. The increased portability was worth it. I was even ok with poor Flash implementation under Leopard as it can take time to optimize an OS for a new machine. But, it is 2 years later and we have a new OS and now a new version of Flash with no improvement. Also, Flash complaints are not only limited to the MBA.
- pod
I'm sorry, but you either have a lemon or you do not know how to run a computer.
I've been using my MacBook Air (In sig) for 6 months now for both professional use & home and it has been FANTASTIC.
I have only recently upgraded the drive to a RunCore Pro and any previous slow down issues have gone.
For it's size, it's an incredible machine - if you are telling me you do not see the difference between carrying a 1.4KG and a 2.5KG Laptop, then you aren't carrying it around enough which also means you shouldn't have purchased the Air in the first place.
I agree that their is a significant weight penalty to going with the 15", but the weight penalty of going to the 13" from the MBA is negligible. Like I mentioned previously, drop a couple of cheap ankle weights in your bag and see if you notice a difference.
My MBA goes everywhere with me which is why I purchased it in the first place. Now that the 13" exists, the only reason I would stay with the Air is the weight. It is looking less and less likely that I will stick with the MBA as IMHO the thinness serves no practical purpose and the 13" is thin enough for me.
- pod
My MBA goes everywhere with me which is why I purchased it in the first place. Now that the 13" exists, the only reason I would stay with the Air is the weight. It is looking less and less likely that I will stick with the MBA as IMHO the thinness serves no practical purpose and the 13" is thin enough for me.
- pod
You will notice a 13" MBP is much heavier in your bag than a MBA for SURE.
From the weight of a 13" MBP to a 15"MBP not so much, but an Air to a 13" MBP oh yeah, there's a noticeable difference.
I want the 17" back... well, that's gonna be the system after this. I think I'm done with the whole thin-ness craze now...
I'm not saying the air's bad or anything. It's just a personal preference that I'm developing. And photo editing is just crap on such a small screen.
The weight is just amazing. Don't even feel it in my bag. I bring the charger along just in case and it hardly adds any weight on it. It's thin enough that I can stuff an extra folder or book without any issues. It's not fragile at all... I found my old Dells to be more fragile. And yeah...
Otherwise, the air handles almost all of my applications and games that I throw at it. With the exception of Virtual Machines and GTA4 (which runs like crap) I find the air to be very capable and very powerful, especialyl for something this small. I remember I had an old HP Pentium 4 laptop that was 2 inches thick, 3 fans running all the time and battery life of about 45 minutes even when new. The only good side was the screen was 1400x1050 for a 15".
Yea, I'm with you on the weight department, it is nice not just for travel even around the house or on your lap.
Bigger screen is always better ... the thing I dislike most is when I have my Air with me I don't have all my files with me ... it's more of an issue of juggling between 2 actually 3 computers ... Syncing or not one machine is just much easier, imo.
I have the Mac Pro for when I (rarely) feel like working at a desk, it gets used well for server, back up, storage, heavy video/photo editing but for the most I like to work from a notebook.
That's left me deciding to keep the 15" MBP / MBA combo I have now, or I've thought of a 13" MBP with ACD set up ... I dunno ...
Bigger screen is always better ... the thing I dislike most is when I have my Air with me I don't have all my files with me ... it's more of an issue of juggling between 2 actually 3 computers ... Syncing or not one machine is just much easier, imo.
I have the Mac Pro for when I (rarely) feel like working at a desk, it gets used well for server, back up, storage, heavy video/photo editing but for the most I like to work from a notebook.
That's left me deciding to keep the 15" MBP / MBA combo I have now, or I've thought of a 13" MBP with ACD set up ... I dunno ...