Simply put, the 11" MacBook Air is the best computer I've ever had. I've always appreciated small and light laptops as I travel quite a bit, but this one takes portability to a completely new level. The laptop weights only a kilogram, and is small enough to fit pretty much any bag.
I also hate the display adapters Apple forces us to buy and carry around. I give a lot of presentations, and this is another piece of equipment to accidentally leave home. Why not just go VGA or HDMI?
HDMI is almost the same size as the Mini DisplayPort. Apple just loves their own connectors, unfortunately. I was shocked when I noticed the VGA adapter wasn't included in the package.
Luckily I realized this before my first conference presentation with the new computer ;-)
> HDMI is almost the same size as the Mini DisplayPort.
Not it's not. HDMI is almost the same size as full DisplayPort (and nowhere near as good a format for computers).
An HDMI Type A connector is 13.9mm x 4.45mm, a mini-DP connector is 7.4mm x 4.5mm. The mini-DP connector is half as wide.
> Apple just loves their own connectors, unfortunately.
You are aware mini-DP is now under VESA and has been integrated by a number of laptop manufacturers right? (and again, that DP in general is a much better A/V interface than HDMI for computers)
* It's both internal and external, so in a laptop you can drive both the laptop's own screen and the external A/V plug with the same display interface (instead of having an internal LVDS interface and an external HDMI one for instance)
* It's backwards compatible with DVI-I (and HDMI for that matter): you can carry DVI-I or HDMI signals on a DP cable and only need a passive adapter (although that is limited to single-link on both DVI and HDMI, there aren't enough pins in the DP connector to handle dual-link DVI and HDMI via passive adapters)
* It's packet-based and includes arbitrary pure data transfers (ignoring Thunderbolt) so you don't need a separate data cable to have your screen act as a HUB (USB or 5-in-one for instance), HDMI is TDMS and has no data stream (it comes from TV analog cables)
* It includes a Direct Drive Monitor spec (allows for controller-less monitors which are directly driven off of the displayport signals, although this puts limits on the panel's resolution and color depth)
* DP 1.2 includes independent video streams (to daisy-chain multiple monitors without the need for multiple connectors or a hub), though AFAIK no monitor handles daisy-chaining so far.
* DP includes a mini-connector (mini-displayport) with roughly half the footprint of the full-size one, a boon for ultra-portables (it was developed for Apple, and Apple gifted it to VESA) available under the same royalty-free license-free terms as DP itself (mini-DP was folded into the DisplayPort 1.2 spec)
HDMI is a good A/V standard for TVs, but DP is far superior for computers (and it's driven by computer manufacturers). There is probably a future for both (that's VESA's own party line), but I'd much rather find all my computer video output available as DP first and foremost (with HDMI as an option if they want to).
If by "almost" you mean "over twice as big", sure. (I happen to have an HDMI connector sitting next to my MBP's Thunderbolt (nee Mini-DisplayPort) port.
Edit: They have "mini-HDMI" out, which is an entirely different beast than the mini-HDMI adapters included on many Android smartphones. A mini-HDMI port would require similar adapters to connect to anything useful.
A normal "type-A" HDMI port is a sizeable connector, larger than a USB port.
Several mobile phones have HDMI out. For me that is "small enough". I think HDMI would even make the ports on different sides more balanced, as the size is more similar to the magsafe adapter
>I also hate the display adapters Apple forces us to buy and carry around.
This could turn into an advantage if the next MBA revision adopts Thunderbolt as its display connector — then you'll have incredibly high-speed access to external storage, which would make the MBA much more practical as a single machine.
I'm also thrilled with my MacBook Air 11" running Debian. The installation and configuration took some time though. Since I manage it all in Puppet it's easy to reproduce.
Thank you -- if I may ask, what are in the network::interfaces::wireless and keyboard::apple classes? I'm strongly considering switching my MBA over to Debian in the near future.
I get only about 2.5 hours when running Arch Linux compared to almost double when I used to run OS X on my MBP 5,3. I rarely use my laptop unplugged though so it doesn't make a huge difference to me.
I think a large part of the difference on my machine is that you are forced to use the 9600GT for video as opposed to the more efficient 9600M that is available in OS X.
It's probably better to say that OSX power management is better on Apple hardware than all the rest. I was getting about 40% less time when using Windows XP than when I was using OSX.
I concur with authors opinion of MBA. The 13in MBA is the best computer I've ever owned. My current Mac Lineup consists of:
* Latest gen 13in MBA
* 17in MBP (~1yr) work paid for it
* 13in Black Macbook (loved this one too!)
* Mac Pro (totally pimped out) work paid for it
* 3rd gen mac mini
The only machine I use now is the MBA. It is everything a Web Dev needs, great resolution, fast, travels well. It even plays Minecraft quite well. The only thing I'd ask for in the 3rd gen models is a back-lit keyboard. Love this machine.
Same here, 13" 4GB MBA, bought after my neighbor's apartment fire forced me to get a new system for the 4.5mos without my old computers. Got it all back eventually. I use my MBA constantly, at work and home (hooked up to a 24" at home). I have a W7 quadcore w/ 3 monitors that I only use for Photoshop/server stuff.
I don't understand this obsession for backlit keyboards I've been reading about a lot lately on forums. It definitely looks nice but its just a battery drain and I assume most HN people don't look at their keys. I always keep mine off for the sake of my battery.
backlit keyboard aren't just for looking nice. they're for working at night in dark rooms. before touch typing you need to glance quickly at your hand's position above the keys, to make sure your hand position isn't transposed slightly up, down, left, right--which happens easily when you're blinded by a monitor in the dark, and the key bed is pitch black. yes, you can fold down your monitor till the light illuminates the keys, squint while you orient your hand, then raise the monitor to eye-level...but that is a distraction to workflow when hacking at night. way too much effort just for checking hand orientation. backlit keys solve that problem, which is one of the most serious 1st world problems facing rich people with nice computers today.
That's why the F and J keys have small bumps you can feel so you can position your hands for touch typing. The 5 key in the numeric keyboard also has one of these.
The backlight can be useful for the function keys or whatever, but touch typing does not need any light.
people who work in the dark, but have not achieved total union with the keyboard, appreciate the backlight. forced battery drain isn't an issue: turn off the light if you don't want.
do f and j bumps enable you to touch transcribe this string?
>}[\|:{%^&?`~]*();"'!@_+-=#$,./<
not for me. these keys are the bottlenecks that break my flow and force me to think for a few moments about where things are.
your tactile union with your keyboard may be 100%, but mine is more like 80%. congrats if you've mastered chopsticks, but fork is a no-brainer. i admire the simplicity of those little f and j bumps, but they're just no match for a glance.
why not a choice: a backlight to turn on if you want, off if you don't? i don't want a backlight on all the time either. if i'm banging out email, no need. but if i'm coding, or something else that requires lots of special characters and finger-fu, then a backlight is handy.
Have you measured the battery life difference? I'm pretty sure each lit key has a fibre optic lead, with all the keys going to a single white LED. That should be a draw of about 120mW, which is pretty tiny compared with the couple of watts the rest of the computer is drawing.
I pretty much love my current laptop, but I still do miss the backlit keys of my old powerbook.
Rumors abound of a Sandy Bridge- based Air hitting later this year, along with Thunderbolt — if a Thunderbolt to GigE adapter comes out, it will remedy this issue.
This. In a corporate environment wifi just isn't allowed. We have it in our office but it is stunted beyond reproach. You need to be plugged in to access stuff.
Not all large corporations are like that. Here at Cisco most employees are given only laptops (Thinkpad or MBP) and the wireless here is usually fantastic as one would expect. Now if only I could get my hands on a Cius...
802.11n can be pretty fast and I doubt you'd notice a difference vs a 10/100 network. Many gigabytes of video files get transfered OTA every day in my office.
The bigest complement about my MBA is I love(d) my iPad, I took it everywhere, but I gave it to my mum at the weekend because I don't use it anymore since I getting a base 13" Air.
I use MBA (4GB RAM upgrade, 128GB SSD) for doing a lot of XCode development. XCode4 runs very smoothly and I've never had any speed issues with running the iOS Simulator. It's light, doesn't heat up, and is very stable. I gave up my http://chir.ag/stuff/5lcd.jpg setup for a single MBA and I couldn't be happier (my electric bill went down by $125/month).
From personal experience I know that I'm more productive on 5 LCD than on 3 LCD or 2 LCD setup. However, I spend a lot more time working on my MBA than I ever did on my desktop and though I work slower, the end result is that I'm overall producing more.
I'm the only one in our company not using any external monitors. The added screen real estate would be nice, but the downside is that then you have a different setup in the office and on the road. I rather get used to a single screen I always have with me.
You can plug in an external screen into your laptop. Sometimes I use just an external display with my laptop; sometimes I use it as a second (primary) monitor.
I also do not use an external monitor for this reason. I like being able to work from anywhere with the same setup. I wanted my productivity to be identical wherever I am.
Not using a monitor, I also don't use an external keyboard or mouse. I have an unused monitor on my desk at work I do no plug into.
I'm in the office (with external monitor) half the time and working from home (without external monitor) the other half. It always takes me about a day to get used to the switch. But generally those 2 straight weeks of working on a bigger monitor are worth the acclimation time.
edit: 5 minutes (and -$10) later, I now have a portable third monitor that I can bring with me anywhere in the house. Plus I can easily test my iPhone app in the simulator using real touch gestures, without building to a device (not every gesture is working, but this is still awesome).
This is basically a disguised VNC display. I test drove this app(or its clone) last year and it was noticeably laggy. Maybe things have changed since then...
I'm the same way. I actually have an external monitor on my desk; it sits unused. I used to use it but over time I became so used to a single screen, and context switching within it, that I don't bother plugging it in any more. Ditto my external keyboard, though I confess to occasionally reaching for my bluetooth mouse.
I have co-workers who are the exact opposite; 3 or 4 screens, it's never enough, but I just feel like it's not necessary for me any more. You can only look at one thing at a time. Whether switching your view between monitors, or switching between programs, it's basically the same thing - the difference is, I can do the latter anywhere, and be just as productive in a coffee shop or on a plane.
Exceptions would be monitoring a large number of logs, or programs that require large GUIs (Photoshop, music sequencers). There, screen real estate is important. But for programming? Not for me.
I use an external monitor at home on my MBA and I used to find it really annoying to resize all my windows every time I connected or disconnected my 24" monitor. Then I found Stay:
This $15 app remembers window positions and sizes for each application and display setup (and even combos with multi monitors). It'll even restore window positions when you connect/disconnect external monitors.
I have had a few issues where it can't figure out TotalFinder and Terminal (because of the tabs) window positions and sometimes it can't figure out which Chrome window is which, but overall it's made switching between external monitors a whole lot less painful.
Pretty much exactly my experience, except that I'm running a lot more compiles and a lot less photoshop on this 13" MBA.
In particular, if you're upgrading from a machine without SSD, the speed advantages you'll see for things like emacs or compiles of large projects -- things which access lots of small files -- are huge.
This machine replaced a MacBook Pro which was technically its equal in processor speed, but it feels faster in every way (and is a heck of a lot more usable on the train).
You could always just chuck an SSD into a macbook pro on your own - my aging late-2009 macbook pro got a fantastic speed boost when I dropped an Intel x25m G2 SSD in - a bit short on space compared to before (which forces me to keep things backed up and synched, which is a good thing) and the speed difference is night and day.
'Enough'? Understatement. It's practically perfect. Sure it's not your gaming rig or fit for Final Cut Pro, so that could change things if this sounds like you... but as a developer it easily trumps every machine I've ever owned.
My MBA is my favorite computer also: for running IntelliJ, Emacs+Lisp, Rails development, etc., it is great to use. I do still use a MBP for one customer's work because I need a ton of services running during development.
It's really too bad there is not a matte option for it. I agonized over the MBA vs MBP decision for about a year, and finally got the High-End 15" 2011 MBP model with the matte screen upgrade. Couldn't be happier. Yeah, it's a big hulking beast, but the extra real estate and matte screen are really nice. I don't think I can go back to glossy ever again...
I had a glossy 15" and now the semi-glossy 11". It's really not very glossy at all. I barely ever notice my ugly mug staring back at me. Really, the best of both worlds.
X-25M. It's not the latest and greatest, but I got it for $170 after a sale and mail-in rebate.
If you've got more cash to spend, you may want to look at the new 310, or 510. There are other great SSD makers, but I chose Intel based on the price and general high reviews.
Wow, that's apparently a great deal on the X-25M--they were retailing for $220 at NewEgg.
I'm waiting to see what comes out in the next few months, as apparently OCZ and Intel are building drives with the new SandForce chipset. Don't know if the improvements will be significant, though...
I'm in the process of abandoning my desktop and switching to laptop full time, and after weeks of figuring out the best laptop setup, I've come to the same conclusion - 13" MBP i5, 8GB, SSD = best of all worlds. Only left is to make sure I can dual boot some linux distro on it without issues (the HD3000 gfx drivers for linux may be an issue, but appear solved in Ubuntu 11.04).
I'm using my MBA (no upgrades, lowest end model) for my daily routine as a designer, and it's holding up perfectly well. I am mostly just running Photoshop, Illustrator, Textmate, and a few browsers. Hell, I was even able to play Portal 2 on this thing. It's definitely the best $1,000 I've ever spent on tech, and I'm a Windows guy.
The only downsides are if I have a bunch of large files open in Photoshop and Illustrator, I might have to save and close some to keep things running smooth. When I'm plugged into a 27" display, some things are not quite as smooth.
So yeah, I'd rather be working on a faster desktop system (though the benefits would be minimal), but I can close this, bring it home, and continue working with the same workspace.
And the monitor is better than my Dell 22" I have at home.
I've been slugging it out at work with my 5 year old Macbook at work with an external display and I will continue to until it dies.
When it does go though, I intend to make a choice between a Macbook Air and a Macbook Pro. I already have an iPad 2, but the lightness and mobility of the MBA might make it the better machine for me.
I got the early 2011 MBP 15" because i wanted a single machine i work on in the office and at home. I am using it with an external screen though, mostly for ergonomical reason. Working Laptop-only hurts you, dont do it all day!
But the most annoying thing currently is that its fans speed up so quickly during work. Because of this i regret buying it and not going for a MBA11 + iMac.
I've never attempted this myself, but you might want to google around for ways to underclock your MBP to keep it cool. I'm guessing it's either impossible due to firmware restrictions, or there are tools out there that make it crazy simple.
My MacBook Air was $1,799 and the equivalent MacBook Pro (top of the line 15″, because why would you buy the 13″?) would cost me just over $3,200 (adding 3rd party SSD, Apple 8GB RAM and the Hi-Res screen).
Man, this is disingenuous. 8GB RAM? As if you can't get it cheaper (or the MBA even offered 8GB RAM as an option)? Or as if the 15" MBP doesn't blow the Air out of the water in every other aspect? I bought a 13" Pro because (a) it's smaller and lighter than the 15" and (b) I don't play PC games.
13" MBA with 256GB SSD, 4GB RAM, 2.13 GHz C2D -- $1799
Sure, I don't have a Hi-Res screen (the one Pro feature I wanted on the 13"), but I can actually upgrade my computer in 3 years when 4GB RAM becomes a bottleneck. Now that's a low year-over-year computing cost.
The MacBook Air is an awesome machine, to be sure, but it's awesome because of the built-in SSD--not because of the value it provides.
I think that point is that if he were buying a MBP that it would not be able to justify the purchase to himself without maxing everything out. So that price comparison is really only applicable to him.
Right, but even then that's not a clear comparison. Maxing out a 15" MBP makes no sense for him--he bought a 13" MBA, so he clearly believed that 256 GB SSD + 4GB RAM would cover his needs.
Does he have to always max out his Apple equipment purchases?
I feel that it makes sense. When weighing the options I came to the exact same conclusion as the author, except my notebook is < 1 year old so I'm not actually upgrading soon, though I would like to shed weight.
If I were to buy a Pro it'd be the 15" for its resolution, and I definitely want 8GB of memory. However the 13" Air is compelling because of the size & weight. If it were available with 8GB of memory that would be the way to go, but it's not.
Personally I'm holding out for the 15" Air. Ideally with a faster CPU (Core i3 or i5 is fine), up to 8GB or 16GB of memory, and a resolution of 1680x1050. While I'm wishing it should also have a matte option. The Air is nice but it's not a portable workstation replacement, yet.
I think that the point is that if you can survive with a MBA with 4GB, then you can survive with a MBP with 4GB and just save the money. The same for the other specs that he was maxing out. He then went on to conclude that the lower specs meant that he might have to replace his laptop sooner, but the lower price meant that wasn't much of an issue. This side-steps the fact that if you lower the specs on the MBP you could say the same thing (lower specs == replace sooner, but lower cost offsets this).
No argument there. However as you start cutting things from the 15", driving the price down, it gets less and less compelling when compared to the 13" Air. The upgraded specs are the only reason to prefer the 15" over the Air at the same price, the Air is 1/2 the size & weight. Of course this is only my opinion, and it's merely a coincidence that I share it with this particular author. I'm not sold on the Air yet though, I think it needs a couple of iterations before it'll be a great Pro replacement and not just a passable one.
If you take the base 15" and add a 128GB SSD to make it as cheap as possible it's $1999. Unless you really care about the CPU, graphics card, optical drive, or FireWire (which I don't, but others do) you're paying $200 more for a larger, heavier machine. With less storage. If you add the 256GB SSD it's $2399, which makes it even less compelling. I'd rather put that $600 towards a 27" display and still have a 256GB SSD.
The only reasons for me to prefer the 15" are greater resolution or memory capacity, without those I only benefit for the faster CPU. Again this is very much my opinion and I don't expect everyone to agree. I'm not baffled that we disagree, people value different things based on their usage patterns.
It is easy for the comparison to come out either way depending on personal preferences because the specs are pretty close.
I did the exact same assessment as you 4 months ago and bought the MBA 13" because a) I cared about the high-res screen more than the processor speed, and b) I only expect it to last 2 years so 4GB RAM is enough (insofar as you can ever have enough RAM.)
Very true. I've used an Air as my only development and design machine for 2 years now; I love it; the thing has only 2Gb of RAM and it's still blazing fast for most everything. This is completely due to the SSD, which wasn't standard when I bought it, but seemed worth splurging for. I sleep better at night with less moving parts. When I sleep. Which I don't.
> Sure, I don't have a Hi-Res screen (the one Pro feature I wanted on the 13"), but I can actually upgrade my computer in 3 years when 4GB RAM becomes a bottleneck. Now that's a low year-over-year computing cost.
You can also upgrade your MBP RAM cheaply today (or tomorrow) to 8GB.
Not only does the MB Air not support 8GB, it's soldered on, so you can't upgrade.
Are you sure you want to own your MacBook for 3 years?
The depreciation on Apple laptops is low enough that you can resell it and trade up to the latest refresh once a year for the same cost as trading up once every 3 years. If you're interested in the best bang-for-your-buck and can put up with the hassle, you should definitely think about it.
I'm at 3.5+ years on my current white macbook, and finally about ready to get a new one. Use it most of the day, most days for web and misc development.
Thinking a macbook pro with SSD & 8GB has a chance of lasting even longer.
Oh, without a doubt— I'm on the third year with this MBP, and I ran my old iBook even longer than that. They're great machines, and they do last forever.
The point is more that rather than running one machine into the ground until it's thoroughly obsolete (three years give or take) and then paying full price for a new one, one could resell a year later when it's still worth nearly what you paid for it and upgrade to the newest model. The price per year works out to be more or less the same, but you have cutting-edge hardware year after year rather than spending two years out of three in comparative obsolescence.
3 years here, still working great - though I put in a bigger, 7200rpm HDD a year ago. It hurts on AAA modern games, but I don't play them anyway - indie stuff usually runs flawlessly.
The only thing I use my DVD drive for is movies (but I recently got Netflix), and a recent troubleshooting round on a 1st gen MBA. And I made an install USB stick, so I don't need the drive any more anyway.
This has easily been the longest-lasting computer I've purchased, especially in the laptop realm. I'm thrilled with what it cost me.
Like the poster below says, its lighter, thinner, and has a nicer screen. My MBP has a DVD drive (yes, I still use Netflix discs because no, their instant doesn't have everything), better graphics, and a killer CPU by comparison.
It really is about tradeoffs. My MBP is my only computer, and I need the above.
I'm always surprised by people that don't see 13" screens as having a utility value - portability. I've recommended people get 13" laptops when their needs require this portability (eg: tertiary students). Those that said "no, I want a big screen!" for the e-peen value later regretted lugging a 15" screen around. Big screens are awesome... unless you're moving around a lot.
I was seriously entertaining the idea of getting a top-end MBA earlier this year (refurbed for $200 off) but then the new MBP's came out and I couldn't justify a 13 inch screen and a Core 2 duo when for almost the same price I could have the 15 inch screen and a Sandy Bridge Core I7. I got the MBP and truly love it. I imagine the lightness of the air goes a long way towards what makes it so popular but I don't really travel that much, I just carry my MBP to coffee shops and tech events so it's not that big of a deal to me.
IMO the SSD is what puts the MBA over the MBP when deciding between the two. The big benefit is the battery life. The MBA is the first laptop I've ever seen where a programmer can work for what amounts to a full day on a single charge without any qualification.
I agree to a point. All of my regular-use apps (Eclipse, Xcode, Textmate, Chrome, Terminal, Echofon) all start up really quickly. I don't really ever find myself sitting around waiting for things on it.
I've owned the original 12" Powerbook G4, and the first-gen MacBook Air (no SSD). With both of those I ended up with some buyers remorse about six months later, feeling like I was making some huge performance tradeoffs for the portability that ended up biting me later on. The 12" G4 was just plain slow, while the first-gen Air was hamstrung with crappy GMA950 graphics and a really slow disk. From what I've read the SSD on the original Air was on an IDE interface
and wouldn't have made much of a difference anyway.
I bought the new 13" Air the week after launch and absolutely love it for a dev environment. XCode runs nice and smooth and it now seems to me that an SSD is nearly essential to make Eclipse feel usable.
We're coming up to the 6 month point where with those older laptops I would think "oh God why did I spend $1800 on this," and I still think this is the best computer I've ever owned.
Tangential question: I've got a MacBook Air and a first gen (of the current design) white plastic MacBook that stores all my music/video (300GB music, 100GB video, with a bunch more video on external USB drive). My issue is that it is very slow these days, and I feel like it is IO bound with my big, kinda slow HD. I'm considering replacing the optical drive with the OWC SSD hack. Then, the OS & apps can live on the SSD, music and video on slow HD. Thoughts on performance? Anyone else try this?
I suppose if money were no object I'd probably get a MBA but the fact is that the 13" MBP I ended up getting is more than enough for what I use it for and was 25% cheaper. And when every dollar counts, that's important.
I've owned the 11.6" MBA for a couple of months now and it works great. It's portability is fantastic because I have to take it with me to several locations where I don't have a lot of work space. It's fast and the battery life is decent enough so that during the day I really don't require a power cord (but I don't go online much with it during the workday).
The only time I see it slow down a little is when I'm accessing my Yahoo email in Outlook.
Interesting that I seem to be the only 17-inch fan here. I can see the attraction of an MBA, but I prefer having a screen big enough that I can do everything on it without an external monitor, and I don't mind lugging it around at all.
There's a difference between "I dont mind lugging it around" and "I lug it around a lot". I had a 17 inch once and realized that, even though I could move it, the weight and size made it inconvenient. It ended up sitting on the desk all day.
I'm 3.5 years into owning a 17" MB Pro, and my next laptop will be the 13" Air. I wanted the screen real estate when I bought it (coming from a Toshiba that could only do 1024x768). While I love the performance and all the pixels, it's just not portable. The higher resolution on the Air is good enough, and the weight is very appealing.
For me it's less the lugging (though that's a factor), but more the easier ability to use the machine in cramped quarters, like at some coffee shops, and in economy-class plane seating.
17"MBP here too, and after 2 years its been a great machine, still decent specs by today's standards. But the size is starting to wear on me. I've entertained the option of upgrading to a new 15"MBP but it doesn't seem like a big enough jump to justify the cost.
I hope Apple has a 15" Air in the works because that would feel like an upgrade in multiple dimensions - cpu, ram, display, weight, thickness, portability.
I travel between three offices every day on foot / bike. I tried the 13" MBP on my back for a while, but in the end it caused more pain than it was worth. I can only imagine the 17" being far worse.
For now I use a Lenovo x200, but it's about the same as the MBA 13". So while sure I could "lug" the 17" around, I'd much rather loose some screen space and save my back. But I will say, I am quite jealous when traveling of the screen space the 17" provides.
The difference in weight is much more than it sounds.
Work had issued me a Lenovo Thinkpad T61p with a large extended battery pack to make it last closer to 4 hours. It weighed about 7.5 pounds. After just 15 minutes, my shoulder would become sore from lugging my bag around.
I handed them their laptop back and bought a 15" MacBook Pro with my own money. Just that 2 pound difference means that instead of my shoulder being sore after 15 minutes, it takes about an hour for it to become sore.
If I didn't need the memory and the CPU (I do data warehousing work, and need to run VMs almost all the time) I would certainly have gotten a 13" MacBook Air to shave off another 2.5 pounds. Heck, I'd probably get an even smaller bag just to shave off another 1/2 a pound. It's absolutely worth doing.
211 comments
[ 4.2 ms ] story [ 260 ms ] threadI also hate the display adapters Apple forces us to buy and carry around. I give a lot of presentations, and this is another piece of equipment to accidentally leave home. Why not just go VGA or HDMI?
That wouldn't really go together :)
Luckily I realized this before my first conference presentation with the new computer ;-)
Or they knew where they were headed with Thunderbolt...
Not it's not. HDMI is almost the same size as full DisplayPort (and nowhere near as good a format for computers).
An HDMI Type A connector is 13.9mm x 4.45mm, a mini-DP connector is 7.4mm x 4.5mm. The mini-DP connector is half as wide.
> Apple just loves their own connectors, unfortunately.
You are aware mini-DP is now under VESA and has been integrated by a number of laptop manufacturers right? (and again, that DP in general is a much better A/V interface than HDMI for computers)
* It's backwards compatible with DVI-I (and HDMI for that matter): you can carry DVI-I or HDMI signals on a DP cable and only need a passive adapter (although that is limited to single-link on both DVI and HDMI, there aren't enough pins in the DP connector to handle dual-link DVI and HDMI via passive adapters)
* It's packet-based and includes arbitrary pure data transfers (ignoring Thunderbolt) so you don't need a separate data cable to have your screen act as a HUB (USB or 5-in-one for instance), HDMI is TDMS and has no data stream (it comes from TV analog cables)
* It includes a Direct Drive Monitor spec (allows for controller-less monitors which are directly driven off of the displayport signals, although this puts limits on the panel's resolution and color depth)
* DP 1.2 includes independent video streams (to daisy-chain multiple monitors without the need for multiple connectors or a hub), though AFAIK no monitor handles daisy-chaining so far.
* DP includes a mini-connector (mini-displayport) with roughly half the footprint of the full-size one, a boon for ultra-portables (it was developed for Apple, and Apple gifted it to VESA) available under the same royalty-free license-free terms as DP itself (mini-DP was folded into the DisplayPort 1.2 spec)
HDMI is a good A/V standard for TVs, but DP is far superior for computers (and it's driven by computer manufacturers). There is probably a future for both (that's VESA's own party line), but I'd much rather find all my computer video output available as DP first and foremost (with HDMI as an option if they want to).
It is a lot easier to find screens and beamers with HDMI input than mini-DP. Before that changes it is practically "Apple's own connector"
Edit: They have "mini-HDMI" out, which is an entirely different beast than the mini-HDMI adapters included on many Android smartphones. A mini-HDMI port would require similar adapters to connect to anything useful.
A normal "type-A" HDMI port is a sizeable connector, larger than a USB port.
A normal "type-A" HDMI port is a sizeable connector, larger than a USB port.
This could turn into an advantage if the next MBA revision adopts Thunderbolt as its display connector — then you'll have incredibly high-speed access to external storage, which would make the MBA much more practical as a single machine.
Here is the high level Puppet code to configure everything to my liking: http://paste.pocoo.org/show/379663/
Are you pretty much always at high CPU utilization, or is Ubuntu's power management of Mac hardware that poor?
[1]: http://www.anandtech.com/show/3991/apples-2010-macbook-air-1...
I think a large part of the difference on my machine is that you are forced to use the 9600GT for video as opposed to the more efficient 9600M that is available in OS X.
That was the only thing that really surprised me.
Of course, with a sub-2.13Ghz C2D it will definitely struggle on higher bit-rate content, so I wouldn't be surprised at all.
How does it handle 720p contents?
Edit:
Best accessory I've purchased http://www.luxurylapdesk.com/index.php
Best purchase I've made in a long time, that MBA.
That's why the F and J keys have small bumps you can feel so you can position your hands for touch typing. The 5 key in the numeric keyboard also has one of these.
The backlight can be useful for the function keys or whatever, but touch typing does not need any light.
>}[\|:{%^&?`~]*();"'!@_+-=#$,./<
not for me. these keys are the bottlenecks that break my flow and force me to think for a few moments about where things are.
your tactile union with your keyboard may be 100%, but mine is more like 80%. congrats if you've mastered chopsticks, but fork is a no-brainer. i admire the simplicity of those little f and j bumps, but they're just no match for a glance.
why not a choice: a backlight to turn on if you want, off if you don't? i don't want a backlight on all the time either. if i'm banging out email, no need. but if i'm coding, or something else that requires lots of special characters and finger-fu, then a backlight is handy.
I pretty much love my current laptop, but I still do miss the backlit keys of my old powerbook.
Does it?
I have always considered the poor execution of the backlight an embarrassment to the otherwise very polished exterior.
The light-bleed is uneven. It gets the job done, but I'm sure apple could do better if they wanted.
[1] http://allnewmac.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/7e79c_macbook_p... [2] http://mygadgetnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/Alienware... [3] http://www.thinkdigit.com/FCKeditor/uploads/alienware%20hand... [4] http://farm1.static.flickr.com/92/211947046_c3c234a2da.jpg
I transfer every day large files between my mac and my pc or NAS and the transfer rate would kill me.
From personal experience I know that I'm more productive on 5 LCD than on 3 LCD or 2 LCD setup. However, I spend a lot more time working on my MBA than I ever did on my desktop and though I work slower, the end result is that I'm overall producing more.
Not using a monitor, I also don't use an external keyboard or mouse. I have an unused monitor on my desk at work I do no plug into.
edit: 5 minutes (and -$10) later, I now have a portable third monitor that I can bring with me anywhere in the house. Plus I can easily test my iPhone app in the simulator using real touch gestures, without building to a device (not every gesture is working, but this is still awesome).
I have co-workers who are the exact opposite; 3 or 4 screens, it's never enough, but I just feel like it's not necessary for me any more. You can only look at one thing at a time. Whether switching your view between monitors, or switching between programs, it's basically the same thing - the difference is, I can do the latter anywhere, and be just as productive in a coffee shop or on a plane.
Exceptions would be monitoring a large number of logs, or programs that require large GUIs (Photoshop, music sequencers). There, screen real estate is important. But for programming? Not for me.
https://cordlessdog.com/stay/
This $15 app remembers window positions and sizes for each application and display setup (and even combos with multi monitors). It'll even restore window positions when you connect/disconnect external monitors.
I have had a few issues where it can't figure out TotalFinder and Terminal (because of the tabs) window positions and sometimes it can't figure out which Chrome window is which, but overall it's made switching between external monitors a whole lot less painful.
http://www.matrox.com/graphics/en/products/gxm/th2go/
In particular, if you're upgrading from a machine without SSD, the speed advantages you'll see for things like emacs or compiles of large projects -- things which access lots of small files -- are huge.
This machine replaced a MacBook Pro which was technically its equal in processor speed, but it feels faster in every way (and is a heck of a lot more usable on the train).
I have a 24" monitor at my office, and a 27" iMac (my wife's) that I use as a second display for my MBP.
Best of both worlds. Speed, mobility, and big screens when I need 'em.
If you've got more cash to spend, you may want to look at the new 310, or 510. There are other great SSD makers, but I chose Intel based on the price and general high reviews.
I'm waiting to see what comes out in the next few months, as apparently OCZ and Intel are building drives with the new SandForce chipset. Don't know if the improvements will be significant, though...
The only downsides are if I have a bunch of large files open in Photoshop and Illustrator, I might have to save and close some to keep things running smooth. When I'm plugged into a 27" display, some things are not quite as smooth.
So yeah, I'd rather be working on a faster desktop system (though the benefits would be minimal), but I can close this, bring it home, and continue working with the same workspace.
And the monitor is better than my Dell 22" I have at home.
When it does go though, I intend to make a choice between a Macbook Air and a Macbook Pro. I already have an iPad 2, but the lightness and mobility of the MBA might make it the better machine for me.
But the most annoying thing currently is that its fans speed up so quickly during work. Because of this i regret buying it and not going for a MBA11 + iMac.
Man, this is disingenuous. 8GB RAM? As if you can't get it cheaper (or the MBA even offered 8GB RAM as an option)? Or as if the 15" MBP doesn't blow the Air out of the water in every other aspect? I bought a 13" Pro because (a) it's smaller and lighter than the 15" and (b) I don't play PC games.
When we run THAT comparison, well:
13" MBP with 256GB Crucial SSD [0], 4GB RAM, 2.3GHz Core i5 -- $1699
13" MBA with 256GB SSD, 4GB RAM, 2.13 GHz C2D -- $1799
Sure, I don't have a Hi-Res screen (the one Pro feature I wanted on the 13"), but I can actually upgrade my computer in 3 years when 4GB RAM becomes a bottleneck. Now that's a low year-over-year computing cost.
The MacBook Air is an awesome machine, to be sure, but it's awesome because of the built-in SSD--not because of the value it provides.
[0] http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148...
Does he have to always max out his Apple equipment purchases?
If I were to buy a Pro it'd be the 15" for its resolution, and I definitely want 8GB of memory. However the 13" Air is compelling because of the size & weight. If it were available with 8GB of memory that would be the way to go, but it's not.
Personally I'm holding out for the 15" Air. Ideally with a faster CPU (Core i3 or i5 is fine), up to 8GB or 16GB of memory, and a resolution of 1680x1050. While I'm wishing it should also have a matte option. The Air is nice but it's not a portable workstation replacement, yet.
If you take the base 15" and add a 128GB SSD to make it as cheap as possible it's $1999. Unless you really care about the CPU, graphics card, optical drive, or FireWire (which I don't, but others do) you're paying $200 more for a larger, heavier machine. With less storage. If you add the 256GB SSD it's $2399, which makes it even less compelling. I'd rather put that $600 towards a 27" display and still have a 256GB SSD.
The only reasons for me to prefer the 15" are greater resolution or memory capacity, without those I only benefit for the faster CPU. Again this is very much my opinion and I don't expect everyone to agree. I'm not baffled that we disagree, people value different things based on their usage patterns.
I did the exact same assessment as you 4 months ago and bought the MBA 13" because a) I cared about the high-res screen more than the processor speed, and b) I only expect it to last 2 years so 4GB RAM is enough (insofar as you can ever have enough RAM.)
If you're doing lots with VirtualBox or VMWare, then 4GB isn't quite enough. 6GB is pretty comfortable, though.
You can also upgrade your MBP RAM cheaply today (or tomorrow) to 8GB.
Not only does the MB Air not support 8GB, it's soldered on, so you can't upgrade.
The depreciation on Apple laptops is low enough that you can resell it and trade up to the latest refresh once a year for the same cost as trading up once every 3 years. If you're interested in the best bang-for-your-buck and can put up with the hassle, you should definitely think about it.
Thinking a macbook pro with SSD & 8GB has a chance of lasting even longer.
The point is more that rather than running one machine into the ground until it's thoroughly obsolete (three years give or take) and then paying full price for a new one, one could resell a year later when it's still worth nearly what you paid for it and upgrade to the newest model. The price per year works out to be more or less the same, but you have cutting-edge hardware year after year rather than spending two years out of three in comparative obsolescence.
I owned my white, 1st-generation MacBook for 5 years. To be fair, I wasn't coding then, so I might take your advice for this new laptop.
The only thing I use my DVD drive for is movies (but I recently got Netflix), and a recent troubleshooting round on a 1st gen MBA. And I made an install USB stick, so I don't need the drive any more anyway.
This has easily been the longest-lasting computer I've purchased, especially in the laptop realm. I'm thrilled with what it cost me.
It really is about tradeoffs. My MBP is my only computer, and I need the above.
Personally, I love my little 12" thinkpad :)
If you do, the prices are a lot more equivalent (ie, MBP+SSD is not cheap).
I bought the new 13" Air the week after launch and absolutely love it for a dev environment. XCode runs nice and smooth and it now seems to me that an SSD is nearly essential to make Eclipse feel usable.
We're coming up to the 6 month point where with those older laptops I would think "oh God why did I spend $1800 on this," and I still think this is the best computer I've ever owned.
Needless to say I replaced it with a 27" iMac.
I hope Apple has a 15" Air in the works because that would feel like an upgrade in multiple dimensions - cpu, ram, display, weight, thickness, portability.
For now I use a Lenovo x200, but it's about the same as the MBA 13". So while sure I could "lug" the 17" around, I'd much rather loose some screen space and save my back. But I will say, I am quite jealous when traveling of the screen space the 17" provides.
Work had issued me a Lenovo Thinkpad T61p with a large extended battery pack to make it last closer to 4 hours. It weighed about 7.5 pounds. After just 15 minutes, my shoulder would become sore from lugging my bag around.
I handed them their laptop back and bought a 15" MacBook Pro with my own money. Just that 2 pound difference means that instead of my shoulder being sore after 15 minutes, it takes about an hour for it to become sore.
If I didn't need the memory and the CPU (I do data warehousing work, and need to run VMs almost all the time) I would certainly have gotten a 13" MacBook Air to shave off another 2.5 pounds. Heck, I'd probably get an even smaller bag just to shave off another 1/2 a pound. It's absolutely worth doing.