New MacBook Air's newness lies within
The latest MacBook Air masks a lot of new electronics under an old skin.
To me, the new MacBook Air (MBA) is truly a second-generation product despite its unchanged appearance. But before I explain why, let me clarify where I am coming from.
I have been using an MBA for the last eight months. Why the over-priced Air? I am a minimalist when it comes to computers (though not necessarily when it comes to spending money on computers). The more spartan the laptop is, the better. In a well-executed design this translates to more portability, which, for me, takes priority over performance and ports.
And this is especially true for the Air. The economy of design dictates lower performance and fewer connectors than mainstream laptops.
Updated MacBook Air has new processor, chipset, graphics, and solid state drive
(Credit: Apple)Having said that, the new Air seems to have made significant gains in performance. (Again, this is a preview, so only benchmarks will bear this out.) The Air uses Intel's newest Penryn-architecture low-power mobile processors, not the older Merom processors--which were, let's be honest, already dated even way back in January when Apple launched the Air.
Penryn-class processors come with 6MB (versus the Merom's 4MB in the previous Air) of cache memory and faster front-side bus speeds (1066MHz versus 667MHz). Of course, other MacBooks use Penryn chips too but it is significant that these powerful mobile processors are now being squeezed into the Air's form factor.
The widely reported use of Nvidia's GeForce 9400M graphics is another big plus. This is a step up from Intel's integrated graphics, which for too long has really been the only choice for subnotebooks and ultraportables. Better game playing and the ability to drive Apple's new 24-inch LED Cinema Display as well as the 30-inch Cinema HD Display are other benefits. (More on the GeForce 9400M here.)
And let's not forget memory. The Air uses DDR3 memory versus the DDR2-specified chips of the previous Air. DDR3 delivers better bandwidth and lower power consumption than DDR2.
Storage. Generally speaking, solid-state drives are faster than hard disk drives, especially when reading data. The Air and the ThinkPad X300 legitimized SSDs. The new Air takes this to the next level with a larger 128GB solid-state drive (versus the previous model's 64GB SSD). The newer 128GB (and larger-capacity) solid-state drives are based on multilevel cell technology. MLC allows larger capacities at lower cost. But MLC-based drives typically don't deliver the performance of single-level cell (SLC) drives. Dell, for example, offers its Latitude E4200 ultraportable with both high-performance SLC drives and lower-performance MLC SSDs.
Last but not least is price. OK, so $2,499 is not a steal (for the 1.86GHz model with a 128GB SSD). But look at it this way, you get a lot more for the same price as the previous Air. You get a faster processor, better graphics, speedier memory, and a larger solid state drive. Though I wouldn't call this a great deal by any means, Apple could have priced it higher. (Apple has been known to push the envelope on pricing.)
Longstanding Issues
Let me also address some longstanding issues I've had with the Air. I currently use one of the original models--launched back in January--that comes with a 1.8GHz processor and 64GB solid state drive. The Air's aluminum body is wonderful, but it hasn't maintained the tolerances that it had at first. Specifically, the seams just below the keyboard sometimes creak (for lack of a better word) and, at times, noticeably expand and contract. Let me be clear: this is not a big issue and is noticeable only occasionally. Most users probably wouldn't notice this.
Heat. I hesitate to cite heat as an issue because every laptop I have ever owned has had heat issues--some much worse than the Air's. It's a little like complaining about your car's engine block getting warm. But because the aluminum body itself acts as a heat sink of sorts, excessive heat can become an issue when the Air is pushed to its limits. That is, a lot of open applications and a heavy workload.
Screen response time. This could be subjective to some extent but the LCD's response times seem to be slower than, for example, the response times I get from my other laptop: the 3.3-pound HP 2510p. In other words, whenever I go back to working on the 2510p after working on the Air for a while, I feel that the screen response times are better on the 2510p.
But overall the Air is an amazing piece of engineering and a delight to use.
(For another MacBook review, go here.)
Brooke Crothers has served as an editor at large at CNET News, an editor at Dow Jones' Asian Wall Street Journal Weekly, and a senior editor at InfoWorld. His CNET blog covers chip technology and computer systems, and how they define the computing experience. He also contributes to The New York Times' Bits and Technology sections. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure. Follow Brooke on Twitter @mbrookec. 
what are you doing on this page????? why are you reading about the air??? you are happy man with your $479.00 contraption, keep it!
Comparing a $500 computer to a $2500 computer is just stupid. And haxoring the Mac OS is a violation of the End User License Agreement. But I doubt a "haxor" like yourself care about such things. Twit.
I suppose it's because that's the only point on which those systems win on.
I understand everybody has different needs when it comes to computers, but if you're going to compare an ASUS eee pc1000HA with a macbook air, let's keep it real for a moment. Let's for $479, I get a weaker processor (Atom vs. core 2 duo), less screen real estate (10" vs. 13"), half the RAM (1GB vs. 2 GB), no SSD option, weaker wireless (G vs. N), much weaker video graphics capability. I could go on, but I think you get the gist. I'm not saying the Macbook Air isn't without it's flaws, but I do wish people would think things through a little bit. Comparing these two machines is like comparing a Kia Rio to a Lexus LS. Think about it.
1. Media shouldn't concentrate too much on them. They are high end. They are not for everybody. But well made products always attract attention. How many have Ferraris as their desktop wallpaper?
2. Make the people visit Apple shop. I converted couple of people this way. Working with Mac for 15 minutes could help people understand what for the Apple Tax is.
"The economy of design dictates lower performance and fewer connectors than mainstream laptops."
"I wouldn't call this a great deal by any means, Apple could have priced it higher."
This pretty much says it all.
I would suggest one of the new mac book pros. I absolutely love it. You can even slap windows and linux on it to have a multi-platform system. Mac OS for all my media, Windows for gaming (unless it works on the mac platform) and Linux for just messing around (mostly because I am a linux noob). I never understood why people have to be mac or pc users though. Just seems silly. I use both platforms on a regular basis.
- by myles taylor October 22, 2008 11:27 AM PDT
- Just thought I'd post my reply to bob1xxx here as well:
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(17 Comments)Well I guess someone bought into Microsoft's propaganda about the "Apple tax". While I agree with some of the points made, most, if not all of them, can be attributed to Microsoft and/or PC manufacturers products as well. I don't pay a "tax" for my Apple but I see many of my customers come in who have paid their "Windows tax" to Norton or some other subscription anti-virus software. Heck, we (the ISP I work for) have a service for yearly cleaning of PC's. For you who say "well Macs can get viruses too!" well, you're right. The point is, I've been using Mac OS X for 5 years online and I've never got a virus and I don't have to be smart about it. If you're not smart about it on a PC, you will get a virus. Whatever the reasons, (market share and all that) it's a fact of using computers. There is a PC tax and it's higher than any Apple tax.