ECUpirate44
Mar 25, 11:11 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8C148)
Yes, ipad3 will run os x lion! MBA will have a touch screen!!
God no to both of those!
Yes, ipad3 will run os x lion! MBA will have a touch screen!!
God no to both of those!
dernhelm
Aug 7, 04:11 PM
Maybe not in a client type computer but it exists in Windows Server 2003 and it is called Volume Shadow Copy.
Of curse it doesn't look as nice !
You're the closest so far, except that it is by turns both not as sophisticated as a Snapshot, and in some sense more sophisticated. A snapshot allows you to "capture" the current state of a disk at a particular point in time - further new updates do not impact the snapshot. This assures a consistent backup as of a given point in time. This is not what Apple is doing here, as they are simply storing the old version of the file on the backup system.
However, in Time Machine, "snapshots" are not deliberate actions, they occur everytime something is changed. It would be tedious/near impossible to restore your entire disk back to a certain known good point using Time Machine - but that's a SysAdmin thing. It is almost simplicity itself to restore a given file or set of files back to what they were 30 minutes ago. And that is something that "everyman" needs a lot. If your choices are your current corrupt version, or the version as of the last snapshot, that is often a choice between bad and worse.
Of curse it doesn't look as nice !
You're the closest so far, except that it is by turns both not as sophisticated as a Snapshot, and in some sense more sophisticated. A snapshot allows you to "capture" the current state of a disk at a particular point in time - further new updates do not impact the snapshot. This assures a consistent backup as of a given point in time. This is not what Apple is doing here, as they are simply storing the old version of the file on the backup system.
However, in Time Machine, "snapshots" are not deliberate actions, they occur everytime something is changed. It would be tedious/near impossible to restore your entire disk back to a certain known good point using Time Machine - but that's a SysAdmin thing. It is almost simplicity itself to restore a given file or set of files back to what they were 30 minutes ago. And that is something that "everyman" needs a lot. If your choices are your current corrupt version, or the version as of the last snapshot, that is often a choice between bad and worse.
SuperCachetes
Feb 28, 08:45 PM
No because heterosexuality is the default way the brain works
...And the Oscar for "Greatest Generalization In An Online Forum" goes to...
You.
:rolleyes:
...And the Oscar for "Greatest Generalization In An Online Forum" goes to...
You.
:rolleyes:
hcuar
Sep 19, 11:50 AM
Except that:
...
(2) Those of us that buy Macbook Pros are throwing down $2500+ for top-of-the-line laptops. Sub-$1000 laptops have had a better processor than Apple's flagship laptops for nearly a month now. If you can still defend Apple after this, do a reality check on the fanboyism.
Umm... No... your not throwing down $2500+ for a "top-of-the-line laptop". Your throwing down $2500+ for a Macbook Pro. Seriously... quit comparing a PC laptop merely because it has a "better" processor. It's still a Winblows machine.
That being said... fine... go buy a PC laptop. Have fun with all the ******** that comes with that.
...
(2) Those of us that buy Macbook Pros are throwing down $2500+ for top-of-the-line laptops. Sub-$1000 laptops have had a better processor than Apple's flagship laptops for nearly a month now. If you can still defend Apple after this, do a reality check on the fanboyism.
Umm... No... your not throwing down $2500+ for a "top-of-the-line laptop". Your throwing down $2500+ for a Macbook Pro. Seriously... quit comparing a PC laptop merely because it has a "better" processor. It's still a Winblows machine.
That being said... fine... go buy a PC laptop. Have fun with all the ******** that comes with that.
Yebubbleman
Apr 6, 03:35 PM
Disagree, the Air is a niche product, and there is a noticeable difference in weight. 2KG 13" Pro is exactly 50% heavier than 1.3KG Air, and if you lug the laptop around all day long such weight difference is noticeable. It might be added that most Air users are never gonna need the extra computing power of the MBP. If your work requires a MBP you're never going to get an Air anyway.
If you don't need the power of a MacBook Pro, then a white MacBook is the best bang for the buck. Period. The only two reasons why an Air would be desirable over a white MacBook are superficial aesthetic preferences (please people, these are computers, not fashion accessories) and weight, which brings me to...
I am going even further - I like the featherweight of the 11" and the fact that after the update it is going to be a very serious machine is not to be neglected.
After the update, it'll still be the slowest Mac in the line-up. Serious machine? Perhaps compared to a Core 2 Duo machine, but then again, at that point, they'll all have Sandy Bridge and will thusly all be serious compared to the Core 2 Duo Macs in every respect (save for the IGP in tow, of course). Featherweight? Sure, but at that point, do I really want to be editing my Microsoft Word documents or Photoshop files on a computer with an 11.6" screen? And for the same cost as a full featured Mac laptop (white MacBook)? No thanks.
Last but not least, those 2 pounds you're talking about can be crucial when deciding what to take in your hand luggage when traveling by plane. I've been up to such a decision when I had to take my 2.8kg PC laptop. That's where I guess the name of the computer comes from - Macbook Air, designed for use on an Airplane.
A 13" MacBook Pro wouldn't make travel THAT much harder. Seriously. I've traveled with a white MacBook for quite a while, and honestly, an Air would make the bag lighter, but not to the point where I'd take it over a white MacBook or a 13" MacBook Pro. Were I doing constant walking with the thing, maybe. As it stands I don't have that kind of mobile computing lifestyle, nor do I know many people that do.
The integrated Intel HD 3000 seems to be about equal to the integrated GeForce 320M when Barefeets did their tests on vidoe games.
On Portal, the HD3000 was 68FPS and the 320M was 65FPS.
On X-Plane, the HD3000 was 38FPS and the 320M was 43FPS.
Certainly worth moving to SB processors.
http://www.barefeats.com/mbps04.html
The 4Gig RAM limit is more critical than the change in graphics.
For every test that the HD 3000 beat the 320M or matched it, the CPU was largely at play. Jus' sayin'. Though really of the four Macs that ship sans a discrete GPU, the only one where it is sorely missed is the 13" MacBook Pro. For everyone else, the difference between the 320M and the HD 3000 won't matter at all.
I think you need to define very simple, because the MBA can run about everything. Lets face it, computers have been capable of running pretty much anything for the last decade, the upgrades stopped being as meaningful as they used to be quite some time ago.
I'm a Unix sysadmin, the MBA is my only computer. I do casual gaming on it, I use it to do graphics for my website using CS5, I use it for my work (using a VM), I use it to do my hobby coding, I use it to watch TV series and Anime in 720p. It has the upside of being light and small, so carrying it around on the motorcycle for when I'm on stand-by is less of a pain than 15" MBP or even a 13" MBP (which I had before, when it was called the Unibody Macbook).
Call me bat-**** crazy or my needs "simple", but it works for me as a stand-alone computer.
By "run everything", you can't possibly mean run games at "higher than medium" settings, nor edit lots of HD footage in something like Final Cut Pro. Though that's not what YOU use YOUR MacBook Air for, and really that's fine. I'm not trying to invalidate your purchase decision, man. I'm saying that on the whole, unless ultraportability ABSOLUTELY HAS TO BE A CONCERN, it's not the best of buys in an already over-priced Mac market. If you handed me $1000 and told me to buy a Mac laptop, I'd buy the white MacBook over the 11.6" Air every time. But that's a difference in opinion and frankly, I'd rather not argue difference in opinions.
If you don't need the power of a MacBook Pro, then a white MacBook is the best bang for the buck. Period. The only two reasons why an Air would be desirable over a white MacBook are superficial aesthetic preferences (please people, these are computers, not fashion accessories) and weight, which brings me to...
I am going even further - I like the featherweight of the 11" and the fact that after the update it is going to be a very serious machine is not to be neglected.
After the update, it'll still be the slowest Mac in the line-up. Serious machine? Perhaps compared to a Core 2 Duo machine, but then again, at that point, they'll all have Sandy Bridge and will thusly all be serious compared to the Core 2 Duo Macs in every respect (save for the IGP in tow, of course). Featherweight? Sure, but at that point, do I really want to be editing my Microsoft Word documents or Photoshop files on a computer with an 11.6" screen? And for the same cost as a full featured Mac laptop (white MacBook)? No thanks.
Last but not least, those 2 pounds you're talking about can be crucial when deciding what to take in your hand luggage when traveling by plane. I've been up to such a decision when I had to take my 2.8kg PC laptop. That's where I guess the name of the computer comes from - Macbook Air, designed for use on an Airplane.
A 13" MacBook Pro wouldn't make travel THAT much harder. Seriously. I've traveled with a white MacBook for quite a while, and honestly, an Air would make the bag lighter, but not to the point where I'd take it over a white MacBook or a 13" MacBook Pro. Were I doing constant walking with the thing, maybe. As it stands I don't have that kind of mobile computing lifestyle, nor do I know many people that do.
The integrated Intel HD 3000 seems to be about equal to the integrated GeForce 320M when Barefeets did their tests on vidoe games.
On Portal, the HD3000 was 68FPS and the 320M was 65FPS.
On X-Plane, the HD3000 was 38FPS and the 320M was 43FPS.
Certainly worth moving to SB processors.
http://www.barefeats.com/mbps04.html
The 4Gig RAM limit is more critical than the change in graphics.
For every test that the HD 3000 beat the 320M or matched it, the CPU was largely at play. Jus' sayin'. Though really of the four Macs that ship sans a discrete GPU, the only one where it is sorely missed is the 13" MacBook Pro. For everyone else, the difference between the 320M and the HD 3000 won't matter at all.
I think you need to define very simple, because the MBA can run about everything. Lets face it, computers have been capable of running pretty much anything for the last decade, the upgrades stopped being as meaningful as they used to be quite some time ago.
I'm a Unix sysadmin, the MBA is my only computer. I do casual gaming on it, I use it to do graphics for my website using CS5, I use it for my work (using a VM), I use it to do my hobby coding, I use it to watch TV series and Anime in 720p. It has the upside of being light and small, so carrying it around on the motorcycle for when I'm on stand-by is less of a pain than 15" MBP or even a 13" MBP (which I had before, when it was called the Unibody Macbook).
Call me bat-**** crazy or my needs "simple", but it works for me as a stand-alone computer.
By "run everything", you can't possibly mean run games at "higher than medium" settings, nor edit lots of HD footage in something like Final Cut Pro. Though that's not what YOU use YOUR MacBook Air for, and really that's fine. I'm not trying to invalidate your purchase decision, man. I'm saying that on the whole, unless ultraportability ABSOLUTELY HAS TO BE A CONCERN, it's not the best of buys in an already over-priced Mac market. If you handed me $1000 and told me to buy a Mac laptop, I'd buy the white MacBook over the 11.6" Air every time. But that's a difference in opinion and frankly, I'd rather not argue difference in opinions.
Machead III
Sep 19, 08:05 AM
Engadget have the situation nailed. (http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/19/so-where-the-hell-are-our-core-2-duo-macbooks/)
Bill McEnaney
Apr 29, 01:04 PM
Would you start a new thread about this please? You've really taken this off course.
As to your second point, it's pointless. I called you out on your assertion that liberals do more of the name calling.
I'll start a new thread. I wasn't talking about liberals in general. I said that most of the name-callers I knew of were liberals.
As to your second point, it's pointless. I called you out on your assertion that liberals do more of the name calling.
I'll start a new thread. I wasn't talking about liberals in general. I said that most of the name-callers I knew of were liberals.
shawnce
Sep 13, 12:04 PM
Whilst true in that regard, BeOS also had threads for event queues too if you used BLooper, which could also be overused.
Mac OS X has runloops which are flexible event processing constructs that can be run per thread. So nothing really unique in regards to BeOS in that regard.
Mac OS X has runloops which are flexible event processing constructs that can be run per thread. So nothing really unique in regards to BeOS in that regard.
shawnce
Aug 26, 07:10 PM
From the looks of it PPC based Mac's have MUCH fewer issues. Did you notice that the site was started on June 7th 2006? What do you think it will be skewed towards?
(anyway talk about a site designed for farming ad link related revenue)
(anyway talk about a site designed for farming ad link related revenue)
ChickenSwartz
Aug 26, 06:18 PM
I have just ordered a mbp :( It wasn't supposed to ship until Monday but it shipped early :( If the rumors are true will I be able to send it back and get the new one? Has anyone had any experience in returning unwanted stuff to apple as time is not on my side (leave for uni on the 16th Sept)
I never have but I hear it is pretty easy if you DON'T OPEN THE BOX.
The only change is likely to be the cpu. The rest of the MBP will probably be kept the same and if you look at the yonah vs merom benchmarks at places like AnandTech, it probably isn't worth sending it back.
It has been rumored that there might some minor changes to the computer such as easilly removable HD, differnt latch, as said above. But more importantly, I hope they bump the clock speeds and include 1GB RAM as standard on lowest MBP model for the same price.
I never have but I hear it is pretty easy if you DON'T OPEN THE BOX.
The only change is likely to be the cpu. The rest of the MBP will probably be kept the same and if you look at the yonah vs merom benchmarks at places like AnandTech, it probably isn't worth sending it back.
It has been rumored that there might some minor changes to the computer such as easilly removable HD, differnt latch, as said above. But more importantly, I hope they bump the clock speeds and include 1GB RAM as standard on lowest MBP model for the same price.
Gugulino
Apr 6, 01:00 PM
The quality of a blu ray film is superior to all forms of digital distribution over the internet, like iTunes for example and it is a huge improvement over DVD. I can't understand why people still stick with DVD. Like Apple! Macs have no blu ray disc tray, only DVD. I can not understand that!
When you have all these great HD Camcorders and great movie editing software on a Mac why you should burn a DVD and loose most of the quality. Sure, you can upload HD movies to YouTube or Vimeo directly from iMovie, but it is not the same quality as, if you would burn a blu ray. At least the Mac Pro should have an option for a blu ray disc tray and DVD Studio Pro should support blu ray authoring.
I hope Apple will do a step in this direction with the new FC Studio.
When you have all these great HD Camcorders and great movie editing software on a Mac why you should burn a DVD and loose most of the quality. Sure, you can upload HD movies to YouTube or Vimeo directly from iMovie, but it is not the same quality as, if you would burn a blu ray. At least the Mac Pro should have an option for a blu ray disc tray and DVD Studio Pro should support blu ray authoring.
I hope Apple will do a step in this direction with the new FC Studio.
MacRumors
Aug 16, 10:33 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Barefeats provides (http://www.barefeats.com/quad06.html) benchmarks comparing the Quad 3GHz Mac Pro (Xeon) vs the Quad G5 2.5GHz Power Mac (G5). This represents the new top of the line vs the old top of the line Mac.
They provide benchmarks for both non-Universal and Universal applications between the Mac Pro 3GHz, Mac Pro 2.66GHz and PowerMac G5 Quad 2.5GHz.
The top-end Mac Pro performed well compared to the Quad G5 with both Photoshop CS2 and After Effects 7.0 despite running under Rosetta emulation on the Mac Pro. Universal upgrades to these applications should provide additional performance boosts.
Meanwhile, Universal applications iMovie HD 6, Final Cut Pro 5, FileMaker Pro 8.5 and Cinebench 9.5 generally showed substantial improvements even in the 2.66GHz Mac Pro vs the 2.5GHz PowerMac.
There's no doubt that both versions of the Mac Pro are faster than the G5 Quad-Core running Universal Binary apps like iMovie, Final Cut Pro, etc. As you can see from the four UB tests we ran in this session, the Mac Pro 2.66GHz was as much as 62% faster than the Quad-Core G5/2.5GHz. The Mac Pro 3.0GHz was as much as 85% faster.
Barefeats provides (http://www.barefeats.com/quad06.html) benchmarks comparing the Quad 3GHz Mac Pro (Xeon) vs the Quad G5 2.5GHz Power Mac (G5). This represents the new top of the line vs the old top of the line Mac.
They provide benchmarks for both non-Universal and Universal applications between the Mac Pro 3GHz, Mac Pro 2.66GHz and PowerMac G5 Quad 2.5GHz.
The top-end Mac Pro performed well compared to the Quad G5 with both Photoshop CS2 and After Effects 7.0 despite running under Rosetta emulation on the Mac Pro. Universal upgrades to these applications should provide additional performance boosts.
Meanwhile, Universal applications iMovie HD 6, Final Cut Pro 5, FileMaker Pro 8.5 and Cinebench 9.5 generally showed substantial improvements even in the 2.66GHz Mac Pro vs the 2.5GHz PowerMac.
There's no doubt that both versions of the Mac Pro are faster than the G5 Quad-Core running Universal Binary apps like iMovie, Final Cut Pro, etc. As you can see from the four UB tests we ran in this session, the Mac Pro 2.66GHz was as much as 62% faster than the Quad-Core G5/2.5GHz. The Mac Pro 3.0GHz was as much as 85% faster.
Kevin Monahan
Apr 6, 02:20 PM
Unless you have an extreme PC...Adobe makes no sense (unless you are using the Quadro nVidia cards in a Mac Pro). Sure, the Merc engine increases performance for a few transitions and filters....but rendering is still necessary in MOST cases!
Premiere Pro makes sense in a lot of cases for Mac users. It makes the most sense for After Effects artists, like yourself, as you can dynamic link directly to After Effects from the Premiere Pro timeline. As you pointed out, Macs work great with Premiere Pro and the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 card. More and more cards are being supported as time moves forward. Want a certain card to add Mercury Playback engine hardware acceleration? Make a request here: http://www.adobe.com/go/wish
Not sure what you mean by "unless you have an extreme PC, Adobe makes no sense?" Yes, you need more RAM and a decent NVIDIA card to make Premiere Pro really fly on a PC-it's a 64 bit application-but even modest PCs do just fine with Premiere Pro. If Apple puts out a 64 bit application, you can bet that you should be looking at upgrading your Mac with a lot more RAM, more cores on the GPU, etc., as well. Need more info on tuning your system with Premiere Pro? Watch this: http://tv.adobe.com/watch/learn-premiere-pro-cs5/optimize-a-computer-for-mercury-playback-engine/
You wrote that rendering is still necessary in most cases. Really? What kind of system are you on? I've never had to render, even on my '09 MacBook Pro with no NVIDIA card and the Mercury Playback Engine in software mode.
You say that CUDA accelerates only a "few" video filters and transitions? There are a lot more than that! Upgrade to Premiere Pro 5.0.3 and you'll see the following GPU accelerated effects:
- Alpha Adjust
- Basic 3D
- Black & White
- Brightness & Contrast
- Color Balance (RGB)
- Color Pass
- Color Replace
- Crop
- Drop Shadow
- Extract
- Fast Color Corrector
- Feather Edges
- Gamma Correction
- Garbage Matte (4, 8, 16)
- Gaussian Blur
- Horizontal Flip
- Levels
- Luma Corrector
- Luma Curve
- Noise
- Proc Amp
- RGB Curves
- RGB Color Corrector
- Sharpen
- Three-way Color Corrector
- Timecode
- Tint
- Track Matte
- Ultra Keyer
- Video Limiter
- Vertical Flip
Letters and Sounds PowerPoint
letters Letters+and+sounds
phase sounds cat letters
Letters+and+sounds+phase+5
Letters+and+sounds+phase+2
Letters+and+sounds+phase+5
Premiere Pro makes sense in a lot of cases for Mac users. It makes the most sense for After Effects artists, like yourself, as you can dynamic link directly to After Effects from the Premiere Pro timeline. As you pointed out, Macs work great with Premiere Pro and the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 card. More and more cards are being supported as time moves forward. Want a certain card to add Mercury Playback engine hardware acceleration? Make a request here: http://www.adobe.com/go/wish
Not sure what you mean by "unless you have an extreme PC, Adobe makes no sense?" Yes, you need more RAM and a decent NVIDIA card to make Premiere Pro really fly on a PC-it's a 64 bit application-but even modest PCs do just fine with Premiere Pro. If Apple puts out a 64 bit application, you can bet that you should be looking at upgrading your Mac with a lot more RAM, more cores on the GPU, etc., as well. Need more info on tuning your system with Premiere Pro? Watch this: http://tv.adobe.com/watch/learn-premiere-pro-cs5/optimize-a-computer-for-mercury-playback-engine/
You wrote that rendering is still necessary in most cases. Really? What kind of system are you on? I've never had to render, even on my '09 MacBook Pro with no NVIDIA card and the Mercury Playback Engine in software mode.
You say that CUDA accelerates only a "few" video filters and transitions? There are a lot more than that! Upgrade to Premiere Pro 5.0.3 and you'll see the following GPU accelerated effects:
- Alpha Adjust
- Basic 3D
- Black & White
- Brightness & Contrast
- Color Balance (RGB)
- Color Pass
- Color Replace
- Crop
- Drop Shadow
- Extract
- Fast Color Corrector
- Feather Edges
- Gamma Correction
- Garbage Matte (4, 8, 16)
- Gaussian Blur
- Horizontal Flip
- Levels
- Luma Corrector
- Luma Curve
- Noise
- Proc Amp
- RGB Curves
- RGB Color Corrector
- Sharpen
- Three-way Color Corrector
- Timecode
- Tint
- Track Matte
- Ultra Keyer
- Video Limiter
- Vertical Flip
notabadname
Mar 22, 03:45 PM
iPad: 1024x768
7.76� x 6.82�
45.2 square inches
PlayBook: 1024x600
3.54� x 6.04�
21.4 square inches
7.76� x 6.82�
45.2 square inches
PlayBook: 1024x600
3.54� x 6.04�
21.4 square inches
bedifferent
Apr 27, 08:56 AM
For the paranoid people who don't understand the issue and believe everything our media tells us to fear (coughFoxNewscough), here's something amusing for the mindless:
"Meat with eyes" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNGWn-aWn5g)
"Meat with eyes" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNGWn-aWn5g)
nonameowns
Apr 6, 02:59 PM
ahem
the people want a ipad, not a tablet.
same when they want a ipod, not a mp3 player.
Basic marketing there folks.
the people want a ipad, not a tablet.
same when they want a ipod, not a mp3 player.
Basic marketing there folks.
Pez555
Apr 11, 12:54 PM
grrrr stop posting this macrumors, i want the iphone 5 in june!
patp
Mar 22, 02:56 PM
Isn't this just a big game of catch up amongst the others (Samsung, RIM etc)?
Apple is so far ahead in the game it's kind of sad to see the other companies scramble like this.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Apple is so far ahead in the game it's kind of sad to see the other companies scramble like this.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
asiayeah
Aug 25, 06:14 PM
In US, people get free shipping for their new batteries.
In Hong Kong, we have to visit the service providers in person TWICE! First we have to go there and give up our old battery for registration. Then we have to wait for at least 10 days and visit the service providers AGAIN to get the new battery.
It's simply poor service from Apple!
P.S. The Apple HK support staff actually told me they just know about the news on the same day as me. They also incorrectly told me that only MacBook's batteries replacements have free shippings...
In Hong Kong, we have to visit the service providers in person TWICE! First we have to go there and give up our old battery for registration. Then we have to wait for at least 10 days and visit the service providers AGAIN to get the new battery.
It's simply poor service from Apple!
P.S. The Apple HK support staff actually told me they just know about the news on the same day as me. They also incorrectly told me that only MacBook's batteries replacements have free shippings...
grue
Apr 12, 12:56 AM
I like Motion, just wish the timeline was a little better.
People actually use Motion, for actual work?
Motion is a lot like After Effects, if After Effects' mom got drunk, did some crank and tossed herself down a flight of stairs every Friday night during her pregnancy, and then delivered a breech baby with the cord wrapped around its neck.
and then dropped it.
twice.
People actually use Motion, for actual work?
Motion is a lot like After Effects, if After Effects' mom got drunk, did some crank and tossed herself down a flight of stairs every Friday night during her pregnancy, and then delivered a breech baby with the cord wrapped around its neck.
and then dropped it.
twice.
mightymike107
Aug 26, 09:06 PM
when will the Apple retail stores reflect the changes to the product line?
-mike
-mike
Yebubbleman
Apr 6, 03:35 PM
Disagree, the Air is a niche product, and there is a noticeable difference in weight. 2KG 13" Pro is exactly 50% heavier than 1.3KG Air, and if you lug the laptop around all day long such weight difference is noticeable. It might be added that most Air users are never gonna need the extra computing power of the MBP. If your work requires a MBP you're never going to get an Air anyway.
If you don't need the power of a MacBook Pro, then a white MacBook is the best bang for the buck. Period. The only two reasons why an Air would be desirable over a white MacBook are superficial aesthetic preferences (please people, these are computers, not fashion accessories) and weight, which brings me to...
I am going even further - I like the featherweight of the 11" and the fact that after the update it is going to be a very serious machine is not to be neglected.
After the update, it'll still be the slowest Mac in the line-up. Serious machine? Perhaps compared to a Core 2 Duo machine, but then again, at that point, they'll all have Sandy Bridge and will thusly all be serious compared to the Core 2 Duo Macs in every respect (save for the IGP in tow, of course). Featherweight? Sure, but at that point, do I really want to be editing my Microsoft Word documents or Photoshop files on a computer with an 11.6" screen? And for the same cost as a full featured Mac laptop (white MacBook)? No thanks.
Last but not least, those 2 pounds you're talking about can be crucial when deciding what to take in your hand luggage when traveling by plane. I've been up to such a decision when I had to take my 2.8kg PC laptop. That's where I guess the name of the computer comes from - Macbook Air, designed for use on an Airplane.
A 13" MacBook Pro wouldn't make travel THAT much harder. Seriously. I've traveled with a white MacBook for quite a while, and honestly, an Air would make the bag lighter, but not to the point where I'd take it over a white MacBook or a 13" MacBook Pro. Were I doing constant walking with the thing, maybe. As it stands I don't have that kind of mobile computing lifestyle, nor do I know many people that do.
The integrated Intel HD 3000 seems to be about equal to the integrated GeForce 320M when Barefeets did their tests on vidoe games.
On Portal, the HD3000 was 68FPS and the 320M was 65FPS.
On X-Plane, the HD3000 was 38FPS and the 320M was 43FPS.
Certainly worth moving to SB processors.
http://www.barefeats.com/mbps04.html
The 4Gig RAM limit is more critical than the change in graphics.
For every test that the HD 3000 beat the 320M or matched it, the CPU was largely at play. Jus' sayin'. Though really of the four Macs that ship sans a discrete GPU, the only one where it is sorely missed is the 13" MacBook Pro. For everyone else, the difference between the 320M and the HD 3000 won't matter at all.
I think you need to define very simple, because the MBA can run about everything. Lets face it, computers have been capable of running pretty much anything for the last decade, the upgrades stopped being as meaningful as they used to be quite some time ago.
I'm a Unix sysadmin, the MBA is my only computer. I do casual gaming on it, I use it to do graphics for my website using CS5, I use it for my work (using a VM), I use it to do my hobby coding, I use it to watch TV series and Anime in 720p. It has the upside of being light and small, so carrying it around on the motorcycle for when I'm on stand-by is less of a pain than 15" MBP or even a 13" MBP (which I had before, when it was called the Unibody Macbook).
Call me bat-**** crazy or my needs "simple", but it works for me as a stand-alone computer.
By "run everything", you can't possibly mean run games at "higher than medium" settings, nor edit lots of HD footage in something like Final Cut Pro. Though that's not what YOU use YOUR MacBook Air for, and really that's fine. I'm not trying to invalidate your purchase decision, man. I'm saying that on the whole, unless ultraportability ABSOLUTELY HAS TO BE A CONCERN, it's not the best of buys in an already over-priced Mac market. If you handed me $1000 and told me to buy a Mac laptop, I'd buy the white MacBook over the 11.6" Air every time. But that's a difference in opinion and frankly, I'd rather not argue difference in opinions.
If you don't need the power of a MacBook Pro, then a white MacBook is the best bang for the buck. Period. The only two reasons why an Air would be desirable over a white MacBook are superficial aesthetic preferences (please people, these are computers, not fashion accessories) and weight, which brings me to...
I am going even further - I like the featherweight of the 11" and the fact that after the update it is going to be a very serious machine is not to be neglected.
After the update, it'll still be the slowest Mac in the line-up. Serious machine? Perhaps compared to a Core 2 Duo machine, but then again, at that point, they'll all have Sandy Bridge and will thusly all be serious compared to the Core 2 Duo Macs in every respect (save for the IGP in tow, of course). Featherweight? Sure, but at that point, do I really want to be editing my Microsoft Word documents or Photoshop files on a computer with an 11.6" screen? And for the same cost as a full featured Mac laptop (white MacBook)? No thanks.
Last but not least, those 2 pounds you're talking about can be crucial when deciding what to take in your hand luggage when traveling by plane. I've been up to such a decision when I had to take my 2.8kg PC laptop. That's where I guess the name of the computer comes from - Macbook Air, designed for use on an Airplane.
A 13" MacBook Pro wouldn't make travel THAT much harder. Seriously. I've traveled with a white MacBook for quite a while, and honestly, an Air would make the bag lighter, but not to the point where I'd take it over a white MacBook or a 13" MacBook Pro. Were I doing constant walking with the thing, maybe. As it stands I don't have that kind of mobile computing lifestyle, nor do I know many people that do.
The integrated Intel HD 3000 seems to be about equal to the integrated GeForce 320M when Barefeets did their tests on vidoe games.
On Portal, the HD3000 was 68FPS and the 320M was 65FPS.
On X-Plane, the HD3000 was 38FPS and the 320M was 43FPS.
Certainly worth moving to SB processors.
http://www.barefeats.com/mbps04.html
The 4Gig RAM limit is more critical than the change in graphics.
For every test that the HD 3000 beat the 320M or matched it, the CPU was largely at play. Jus' sayin'. Though really of the four Macs that ship sans a discrete GPU, the only one where it is sorely missed is the 13" MacBook Pro. For everyone else, the difference between the 320M and the HD 3000 won't matter at all.
I think you need to define very simple, because the MBA can run about everything. Lets face it, computers have been capable of running pretty much anything for the last decade, the upgrades stopped being as meaningful as they used to be quite some time ago.
I'm a Unix sysadmin, the MBA is my only computer. I do casual gaming on it, I use it to do graphics for my website using CS5, I use it for my work (using a VM), I use it to do my hobby coding, I use it to watch TV series and Anime in 720p. It has the upside of being light and small, so carrying it around on the motorcycle for when I'm on stand-by is less of a pain than 15" MBP or even a 13" MBP (which I had before, when it was called the Unibody Macbook).
Call me bat-**** crazy or my needs "simple", but it works for me as a stand-alone computer.
By "run everything", you can't possibly mean run games at "higher than medium" settings, nor edit lots of HD footage in something like Final Cut Pro. Though that's not what YOU use YOUR MacBook Air for, and really that's fine. I'm not trying to invalidate your purchase decision, man. I'm saying that on the whole, unless ultraportability ABSOLUTELY HAS TO BE A CONCERN, it's not the best of buys in an already over-priced Mac market. If you handed me $1000 and told me to buy a Mac laptop, I'd buy the white MacBook over the 11.6" Air every time. But that's a difference in opinion and frankly, I'd rather not argue difference in opinions.
Ja Di ksw
Aug 25, 05:15 PM
I would just like to say that every time I have dealth with Apple's help (blue line on screen, crack on trackpad, melted power brick cord, ordering, etc), they have been superb. Very professional, very helpful, and very quick. Does this add much to the discussion? No, but too often we only hear the bad, so I wanted to put in some good as well.
coder12
Mar 22, 09:30 PM
I hear that the PlayBook is really easy to hold one-handed. If you know what I mean.
Hmm... yah, I think I get it! (I assume you're holding coffee in the other hand ;) ;) )
Hmm... yah, I think I get it! (I assume you're holding coffee in the other hand ;) ;) )
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar