Which 11.6 version to get?

[Dammit Cubs]

I'm torn between which 11.6 to get. I don't want to spend too much as I have some credit card debt to kill but I am getting a bonus in the next couple of days.

Do you think i can last with just 64GB?

• Option 1: Default $999 version (2gb, 64GB)
• Option 2: 1099 - for 4GB ram and 64GB storage
• Option 3 - 1199 for 2GB ram and 128GB Storage
• Option 4 - 1299 for 4GB ram and 128 storage
• Option 5 MAX OUT

I also have a 50 dollar gift card from apple. But it seems like if i want to save money, i should use macmall or amazon to save money on tax. What do you think?

Since I"ll still have a macbook with large storage sitting at home. I wonder if I'll ever use more than 64GB. But because i'm a video whore, I can do it if I try. I don't want to be shot in the foot because everything is soldered. but at the same time, if I truly never use them...it's just a waste of money.

 

[Adidas Addict]

If it's gonna be your main computer go for option 4. If it's an 'extra' got with option 2.

 

[b11051973]

I went with the $999 version. I've only used my MacBooks for web surfing from the couch for years. I have a desktop as my main computer. So, the $999 version suits me perfect. If the MBA had to be more than a couch surfer, I would have gotten a more powerful one. Probably would have gone with the 13" as well.

For my needs, I love my new MBA.

 

[Eclipse278]

another happy 64gb user here.

it's hardly my main computer though. I have a good NAS and stream everything from it, so the air is perfect.

 

[biosci]

I think option 4 (Which I ordered) is $1399

 

[J400uk]

I went for the $999 version and I'm pretty happy with it. The extra RAM is only worth it if your using it for very demanding things or planning on keeping it for a long time, 2GB is fine for most average uses. The SSD makes it feel very rapid. The 128GB upgrade is overpriced for what it is however. I think the standard model is the sweetspot. You could expand storage using microSD cards with one of these tiny readers that fit inside the USB socket:

 

[southnc]

I would go for the 4GB option; although that would limit you to an apple store purchase and possible wait. The extra memory should enhance performance on number-crunching intensive apps and the extra cost is fair.

I agree the additional 128GB option is both over-priced and unnecessary. 64GB is plenty for it's purpose.

 

[gwsat]

I think option 4 (Which I ordered) is $1399

Correct.

 

[sbehr]

Correct.

I respectfully disagree. Option 4 specifies 4GB RAM and 128GB of storage, without the upgraded 1.6 GHz processor, which puts it at $1299 before tax. I assume OP means for option 5 ("MAX OUT") to include the 1.6 GHz processor, which would put it at $1399 before tax.

Unless mine eyes deceive me...

 

[gwsat]

I respectfully disagree. Option 4 specifies 4GB RAM and 128GB of storage, without the upgraded 1.6 GHz processor, which puts it at $1299 before tax. I assume OP means for option 5 ("MAX OUT") to include the 1.6 GHz processor, which would put it at $1399 before tax.

Unless mine eyes deceive me...

Could be, maybe the OP will let us know what he had in mind.

 

[sbehr]

Could be, maybe the OP will let us know what he had in mind.

Indeed, indeed.

Your sig is a bit humorous, by the way, when you consider that "Gb" is usually used to denote "gigabit".

 

[Scottsdale]

If you're going to do it, go all the way. You cannot upgrade the RAM nor CPU later for sure. I say max both no matter what. If one cannot afford both upgrades, the RAM is definitely more important in the long-run.

Order of importance, in MY opinion...
1. RAM upgrade (really need this as a long term necessity to future proof it)
2. CPU upgrade (going to do anything just slower with the 1.4 than 1.6)
-. NAND Flash (it all depends on the user's needs)

However, the NAND Flash might just be offered by third-party suppliers in the future. Figure a Runcore or Photofast company could do this, but if it ends up in all Macs, as it should, the list of suppliers will grow. Even if it's a proprietary port, I believe we will see others replicate it, and offer faster controllers and larger storage options.

 

[Cat5e]

I went for the $999 version and I'm pretty happy with it. The extra RAM is only worth it if your using it for very demanding things or planning on keeping it for a long time, 2GB is fine for most average uses. The SSD makes it feel very rapid. The 128GB upgrade is overpriced for what it is however. I think the standard model is the sweetspot. You could expand storage using microSD cards with one of these tiny readers that fit inside the USB socket:

Do you know who makes this?

 

[Bokes]

The 1.6 really give you much more than 1.4?
Since I would only use this as a writing/business document/web surf/fun laptop:
I would actually go for the extra space for music and movies.

Any heavy lifting is done with the Macpro.

 

[robeddie]

I bought option 3 and love it.

I'll go against the conventional grain to say that for me, internal hard drive space was the most important to max out. For the programs i use and what i do with my laptop, i always have a need for more storage. I think the upgrade from 1.4 to 1.6ghz processor would be hard to notice much in real world usage , and since i dont run 8 programs at once or do massive photo or video work, i NEVER come close to even usimg the full 2gigs of ram.

I occassionally will check my ram usage with system monitor and i usually have at least a half gig of ram free - usually more.

 

[IscariotJ]

I'm holding on to see more performance figures before I press buy on a maxed out 11.6". It'll be my travel machine ( along with an iPad ). Hoping that it'll be powerful enough to run StreamToMe/ServeToMe.....

 

[gwsat]

Indeed, indeed.

Your sig is a bit humorous, by the way, when you consider that "Gb" is usually used to denote "gigabit".

I think that you are right in a technical sense but I am not so pedantic that I am bothered by it. I'll be sure to let you know, though, if I need your advice.

I might add that it seems to me a forum such as this one is far better served by posters who stick to trying to provide helpful information or ask questions than it is by those who play "Gotcha!" over minutiae. As a newbie who has posted to MacRumors only 4 times you might want to think about that.

 

[InsightsIE]

I'd still get the 128GB because with the OS installed it will be 118GB available.

 

[andyd409]

Everyone has different computing requirements, that is why there are so many to choose from.

Some folks can get by just fine with min config.

I like to hedge my bets. In this case, for me I think that the 64GB is a little cramped. I also like more RAM, so, for me the 4GB is a better choice.

A poll on what other's are getting may not help you, it will just show you what others think and are getting.


Andy

 

[coelacanth]

The 1.6 really give you much more than 1.4?
Since I would only use this as a writing/business document/web surf/fun laptop:
I would actually go for the extra space for music and movies.

Any heavy lifting is done with the Macpro.

https://www.macrumors.com/2010/10/25/early-benchmarks-on-the-new-13-inch-and-11-inch-macbook-air/

Scores:

11" with 1.4GHz = 2026
11" with 1.6GHz = 2031

Unless you need 128GB SSD, $999 model ($1099 with 4GB RAM in my case) is the better deal IMHO.

 

[hsl]

11" with 1.4GHz = 2026
11" with 1.6GHz = 2031.

that's the old 13.3 macbook air (ssd-less 1.6 & rev A)
I ordered a 1.6 with 128gb and 4gb ram

 

[coelacanth]

that's the old 13.3 macbook air (ssd-less 1.6 & rev A)
I ordered a 1.6 with 128gb and 4gb ram

I stand corrected. The score of 1.4GHz is the 11" new MBA, and the 1.6 was the old one. Anyone seen direct comparison of the new two? I guess it needs another couple days for BTO users/testers to receive their 1.6GHz.

 

[gwsat]

I stand corrected. The score of 1.4GHz is the 11" new MBA, and the 1.6 was the old one. Anyone seen direct comparison of the new two? I guess it needs another couple days for BTO users/testers to receive their 1.6GHz.

I would love to see some numbers comparing all four versions of the new MBA with the 2.4Ghz 13 inch MBP. I know that such comparisons need to be taken with a grain of salt but it would be a start.

 

[robeddie]

I would love to see some numbers comparing all four versions of the new MBA with the 2.4Ghz 13 inch MBP. I know that such comparisons need to be taken with a grain of salt but it would be a start.

But again, those numbers are strictly a measurment of max cpu power. If u keep an eye on system usage, i would contend that you almost NEVER are using 100% of your cpu, whether its a 1.8ghz machine, or a 3ghz machine. For that reason i would contend all this myopic focus on cpu numbers is way overrated for real world usage, especially when you factor in the MUCH faster mba hard drive, which is multiple times faster than the hdd on even the fastest mbp.

It's like we all have this hardon for cpu numbers, and its a habit formed years ago when it really mattered a lot more - back in the days when cpu's were 300mhz, then 500mhz, etc. Nowadays cpu speeds far far exceed most peoples needs. And more important is gpu numbers and hard drive numbers. But old habits are hard to break and we still look at cpu numbers and get a hardon.

 

[KPOM]

How much credit card debt do you have? The first question is do you need a new computer or can you keep your existing one longer?

If you truly need a new computer, and it's your only one, I'd go with 4GB and the 128GB SSD. 1.4GHz should be sufficient. More RAM and storage will help "future proof" it more than 200MHz of processor speed.