So you're saying we should all be using CoreDuo 1.83 MacBook Pros with Adobe CS2 running in Rosetta? 'Cause we all got along with it fine back in 2006?
I'm not saying anyone should do anything, just pointing out that things haven't changed that much for your day-to-day apps, and they probably won't for some time to come. Obviously software changes and demands more and more of your computer. But it just doesn't change
that fast anymore. Browsing 4 years ago isn't that different from browsing now. Four year old computers can still run new browsers just fine. Same goes for most of Apple's software. The newer versions of all the iLife and iWork apps still run fine, albeit a bit slower.
These days people watch 720p or 1080p on YouTube and Netflix. The MBA as it is barely handles those thing. Yes, people should be buying a different machine if they want 1080p, but in 4 years, do you think YouTube will still be at 320x240? I sincerely hope not. And the SU9400 CPU won't be cutting it (even with 720p) in 4 years, imho. The video will be more compressed and the processor will be more taxed.
The MBA can handle 1080p just fine when it goes through the GPU, not the CPU. Flash videos on OS X cannot, as far as I know, use the GPU yet, so everything needs to go through the CPU. Try playing it on an i7 MBP, its CPU usage will spike just the same and it'll get crazy hot. The GPU can handle these things just fine, if you use an application/format that actually uses the GPU.
But apart from that, yes, needs change. And that's where my earlier "If your needs don't change" comes into play. Future-proofing your system is basically impossible. Maybe for a year, or two. But 4-5... too much changes. So yes, if you want to watch videos on double the resolution in 5 years than you're doing now, or play new video games that come out in a couple of years, you will obviously notice that a MBA that you buy now can't handle it anymore. But that's something everyone needs to decide for themselves. Many people out there really don't need all that much power. And if that doesn't change, you can use a current MBA for many years to come.
With the caveat that demands *will* increase, and even if one is using, say, 25% of their processor power these days, by Lion and the next OSX, they may be using much more.
Recall that Tiger only needed a G3 and 265MB of RAM. That was in 2005/2006. Leopard needed a G4 867Mhz in 2007 and Snow Leopard in 2009 (less than 4 years later) only supported Intel processors.
Looking back at when Leopard was introduced, instead of forcing you to buy a new computer, for many (with the more recent models at that time) it was actually a huge improvement over Tiger, speed-wise. Even for the CoreDuos that were sold in 2006. Snow Leopard only improved the speed even more. I don't know what Lion will bring, but judging on what I've seen so far I don't expect that the core will be that much heavier. If anything, it'll be lighter, faster, improved and more efficient. And all the eye candy like Mission Control can easily be handled by today's MBA due to its GPU.
Anyone who bought a G5/G4 in late 2005 was SOL less than 4 years later for System Updates. Sure those systems will still run Leopard. But most new software requires Snow Leopard/Intel and those who bought those systems hoping for 4 years from them are... disappointed to say the least.
Well, that's a good point. The shift to Intel changed a lot, especially for legacy support in the years that followed. But that's the world of technology. However, can we expect change like that any time soon? I don't know, but I'm guessing we can't.
But again, I'm not saying that you will be able to run everything forever on any device. Things will slow down eventually. But the whole discussion here is about how the C2D CPU is suddenly this ancient piece of tech that can't handle anything anymore. And since every CPU nowadays can handle most things just fine, and the real speed comes from the combination of all the components that each excel in different areas, everyone needs to realize that it's not all that black and white, and shouldn't obsess too much about not having the Sandy Bridge CPU.
This is marginally true at best.
Barefeats did a test, and the RAM is about 20x faster than the SSD on the 2010 MBA. That's nothing to sneeze at. Of course the Page-Outs feel faster than with a 4200rpm HD in the older Airs. But the SSD is still nothing compared to the RAM.
You're absolutely right. But this is the big difference between benchmark numbers and how you experience it in real life situations. Sure, 20 is more than 1. But if you don't notice this when you're multi-tasking and doing some work, who cares? There is a huge difference between having your computer slow when it runs out of RAM, and not really noticing any of this because of the SSD. Either way, I don't see a lot of laptops out there with 6 or 8GB of RAM.
Apple simply looks at what most people can use more, and that's upgrading one of the slowest components of today's computers, the hard drive, to an SSD. And that it'll help a lot with your computer's speed when the RAM runs out, is only a good thing. But of course, if you can, buy as much RAM as possible.
AKA: If you're not a power-user and you want to use the Air as a simple, portable machine for light use (email, surfing, Word processing) and you get 4GB of RAM, the machine should suit you for a few years (as long as your needs to increase).
Just to add to the list of things you can do with the Air: they go far beyond browsing and Word processing. Many people always assume that they suddenly need a quad core CPU to process their vacation videos. There is quite a lot the C2D can easily handle, even if you're more serious about video editing or photography, do a great deal of multi-tasking, work with VM ware, etc. And the SSD comes in real handy here too.
