|
|
26-04-2008, 05:13 PM
|
|
Regular
Group: Regulars
Location: Jakarta (formerly Melbourne)
|
Did you think the same back in 2006 when the MacBook Pros were updated in May after their February release?
MacBook Air still uses the Merom chips which is being phased out by Intel. New Penryn chips and corresponding boards are coming next month and Apple won't wanna miss out on those.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26-04-2008, 05:14 PM
|
|
Regular
Group: Regulars
Location: Melbourne
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunderstruck
Did you think the same back in 2006 when the MacBook Pros were updated in May after their February release?
MacBook Air still uses the Merom chips which is being phased out by Intel. New Penryn chips and corresponding boards are coming next month and Apple won't wanna miss out on those.
|
You're probably right, just have to wait and see I guess.  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26-04-2008, 05:16 PM
|
|
It's a cruel, cruel summer
Group: Regulars
Location: NSW
|
They [original Core Duo MBP] were announced in January, but released in February.
Then yes, they were bumped up to 2.0 and 2.16GHz (originally 1.83 and 2.0) in May.
I think they did that just because the faster chips were available AFTER they had made the announcement in January at Macworld, then they knew they were going to come out with the MacBooks and so the MacBooks should be getting 1.83 and 2.0 (which they did).
I could be wrong, but I reckon the MBA is going to remain the same for a while yet. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26-04-2008, 05:16 PM
|
|
Regular
Group: Regulars
Location: Jakarta (formerly Melbourne)
|
If you decide to wait for June and I get proven wrong then by all means grab one ASAP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26-04-2008, 05:17 PM
|
|
It's a cruel, cruel summer
Group: Regulars
Location: NSW
|
That is 2 months of waiting... if they need it immediately, there's no reason to wait. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26-04-2008, 05:18 PM
|
|
Regular
Group: Regulars
Location: Jakarta (formerly Melbourne)
|
That's why I said if  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26-04-2008, 05:19 PM
|
|
It's a cruel, cruel summer
Group: Regulars
Location: NSW
|
That's why I said if (well... later)
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26-04-2008, 06:49 PM
|
|
Regular
Group: Regulars
Location: Sydney, Australia.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galumay
its not just the weight that makes it a better choice, the screen is better, the case is miles better, not to mention the design!
i only carry mine from the desk to the couch and outside on a day to day basis, i guess that is 'carrying it around every day' but its not like i am commuting with it or anything.
|
I was under the impression that they had the same screen, besides the backlight of course.
I don't know, everyone can spend their own money how they like I guess :P. For me, I don't know why I'd spend $1,000 more on a less powerful/featured machine/(thinner/lighter) especially considering as a secondary computer it won't receive that much attention.
__________________
| eMac G4.Leopard | iMac G3.Tiger | 4G iPod Photo | 16GB iPhone 3G |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26-04-2008, 07:01 PM
|
|
Motorbikes - lazy mans Zen
Group: Regulars
Location: Castlemaine area.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by dolbinau
I was under the impression that they had the same screen, besides the backlight of course.
|
Sitting the MacBook Air next to the MacBooks at home the Air screen looks brighter and definitely better.
As for not using a secondary computer that much... well it depends.
The iMac at home is our primary 'house' computer but it actually gets used *less* than the MacBook Air (although I use my MacBook Pro more than both).
__________________
Al MacBook 2.4GHz | iMac C2D 2.4GHz 20" | MB Pro C2D 2.16Ghz 15" | MB C2D 1.83GHz | MB Air 1.6GHz | iPhone 3G 8Gb | iPod Nano 8Gb
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26-04-2008, 07:10 PM
|
|
Beware the Robot Mafia
Group: Administrators
Location: St. Albans, Melbourne
|
The Air's LCD is really nice and bright - much better than the MBP I have now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26-04-2008, 07:14 PM
|
|
Regular
Group: Regulars
Location: Melbourne
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by decryption
The Air's LCD is really nice and bright - much better than the MBP I have now.
|
What was probably the main reason you sold your MBA? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26-04-2008, 07:22 PM
|
|
It's a cruel, cruel summer
Group: Regulars
Location: NSW
|
I believe the reason was that he wanted more beef and the 4200rpm with built in RAM was a limitation in performance.
i.e. 4GB of RAM, a real graphics card, 5400 and 7200rpm drives were tempting.
And I have had my MacBook next to my gf's MBA. The screen is much better (LED backlit) on the Air than on my 2.16 MacBook. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26-04-2008, 08:08 PM
|
|
Regular
Group: Regulars
Location: Adelaide, SA, 5085
|
MacBook Black hands down.
I mean I find it insulting paying the retail on a iPod Classic in either size.
why therefore would i go for a cmputer based on one and that has had so much removed for form?
__________________
AfterBurner_1
PC: C2D E6600 l 2GB Corsair XMS2 DHX l 8800GTS 320MB x2 l XP Pro and Vista Ultimate 64-bit l Alienware Workstation Case l WD500AAKS x2 Laptop: 12" iBook l G3 PowerPC 750 l 10.3.9 Laptop II: PowerBook G4 Ti DVI 1Ghz l 10.4.11
Wanted: 24" LCD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26-04-2008, 08:15 PM
|
|
Regular
Group: Regulars
Location: Jakarta (formerly Melbourne)
|
Because some prefer having a computer with a much better screen (LED vs LCD) and lack of weight is a premium they're willing to pay for in return for full blown performance.
People still chug along well with their 12" PowerBook and iBook G4's, this is for those who need portability more than power.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26-04-2008, 08:17 PM
|
|
It's a cruel, cruel summer
Group: Regulars
Location: NSW
|
PowerBook 12" was excellent at 2.1kg.
I've used an iBook and it felt a little chunkier (at 2.2kg).
MacBook is bigger/wider but thinner so it's more spread out but the compact size of the PowerBook was fantastic. Very portable, but slow (compared to the MacBooks these days). |
|
|
|
|
|
