Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

freudling · Jan 29, 2008, 09:40 PM

One may replace 'truth' with 'new, groundbreaking technology'.

'All truth passes through three stages: First it is ridiculed. second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.' - Schopenhauer

analogika · Jan 30, 2008, 02:30 AM

Just to be contrary, I counter with:

"A lie told often enough becomes truth."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)

Chuckit · 04:43 AM

Yes, how could I not see that I want a slow processor, a really substandard HD* that's not even capable of holding all the stuff on my iPod and a nonexistent graphics card in exchange for half a centimeter of space in one dimension? It's so self-evident. I have been extremely upset about these computers that are actually capable of running things I want to run at acceptable levels of performance.

No, seriously, if somebody wants to get these things because they like the design, knock yourself out. But suggesting that I'm going to wake up tomorrow and realize that this is obviously perfect for me is patently ridiculous.

*Yeah, it is adequate for who don't need much, but it's worse in speed and size than just about anything you'll find in a modern computer, as far as I can tell.

MacosNerd · Jan 30, 2008, 07:10 AM

nonexistent graphics card

Its amazing that not having any graphics card, the computer is working at all

Why do people buy the MacBook with the same GPU and get work done. Because its in a MBA you now say its nonexistent. Come on Chuckit. Enough with the hyperbole. Can the MBA run Photoshop? Can it run other CS3 apps, office apps, etc Yes.

Your half centimeter quip is also misleading. The MBA is smaller and lighter then any other laptop. We've been over this before and for other folks this is more important then a faster cpu. It fits a need yet you feel justified in posting that since it doesn't fit your need to you have to say its a poor computer. A very myopic stance.

byw you felt compelled to to add to this thread and not lock it down? We already have an MBA thread where your whining about the 1/2 centimeter and non-existent GPU.

Simon · 07:22 AM

In five to tens year from now all notebooks will be less than a half inch thin, have no more mechanical internal parts, and be hooked up to all kinds of peripheral devices without the use of any wires.

And then, when we all consider such a design "just a regular notebook", some of us will look back and realize it was all kicked off with devices like the MBA. And that's when you'll know we've reached Schopenhauer's third phase.

Simon · Jan 30, 2008, 07:20 AM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

... a nonexistent graphics card in exchange...

News flash: no portable Mac has a graphics card.

With all due respect, you can go off on a rant about the MBA if it makes you feel better, but how about sticking with at least some technical facts while you're at it? You being a mod and a good example and all that other yada yada...

What you probably wanted to say is that the MBA doesn't come with dedicated VRAM, a dedicated graphics memory bus, and a highly 3D accelerated GPU. If it comes with a card or not is however entirely irrelevant and as you will easily find out, basically no sub-notebook at all comes with a graphics card.

Oh and BTW, since you're a mod, would you mind adding the missing 'p' to Schopenhauer's name in the title of this thread? Thanks.

analogika · Jan 30, 2008, 07:46 AM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

[not] for me

Let's just reduce that entire barrage of useless ranting to the only relevant detail.

Wow.

ghporter · Jan 30, 2008, 07:48 AM

Note that there was much sturm und drang over the "substandard" graphics system in the Core Duo MBP, the aluminum 20" iMac, etc. The graphics system in the MBA is shall we say "anemic" when compared to the current MBP or even the MB.

And while it is not precise to call the graphics system in most Macs a "graphics card," it is conventional to refer to any computer's graphics system as a "card." Getting pedantic about this particular wording is not terribly helpful. Simon's got the straight attitude on this; with the MBA you get "integrated graphics" in its most concentrated form to date (in a Mac), and this is done specifically to ensure that the MBA is thin enough to slip under a door and light enough to blow away in a strong breeze. If you value graphics performance over "thin and light", this is an indication that the MBA is not for you. I don't see this as having anything to do with Schopenhaur, Moore, or anyone else-it's about a particular market niche. Remember the thread about a "razor thin" Mac laptop? I do.

Eug · Jan 30, 2008, 07:52 AM

Originally Posted by ghporter

The graphics system in the MBA is shall we say "anemic" when compared to the current MBP or even the MB.

How is the MBA's graphics anemic compared to the MB?

Originally Posted by Simon

In five to tens year from now all notebooks will be less than a half inch thin, have no more mechanical internal parts, and be hooked up to all kinds of peripheral devices without the use of any wires.

And then, when we all consider such a design "just a regular notebook", some of us will look back and realize it was all kicked off with devices like the MBA. And that's when you'll know we've reached Schopenhauer's third phase.

Except this started way before the MBA was released.

Originally Posted by analogika

Let's just reduce that entire barrage of useless ranting to the only relevant detail.

I'm glad you understood his point, as that's what he was saying after all. ie. Regardless of how much some people try to claim the MBA is an epiphany, it simply ain't true. It's a nice design for a niche market, which is fine, but it certainly isn't a revolutionary product.

ghporter · Jan 30, 2008, 07:16 PM

Originally Posted by ghporter

Note that there was much sturm und drang over the "substandard" graphics system in the Core Duo MBP, the aluminum 20" iMac, etc. The graphics system in the MBA is shall we say "anemic" when compared to the current MBP or even the MB.

Originally Posted by Eug

How is the MBA's graphics anemic compared to the MB?

I must have been reading things wrong. It was my impression that the MBA's GMA X3100 was not able to access the same amount of system RAM as the GMA X3100 in the current MacBook. I just rechecked and the specs are the same, so I was obviously wrong on this. There WAS a note from Apple about the MBA's CPU usage impacting graphics performance at this link, but it's apparently been pulled (Google 'macbook air graphics' and it's the first hit-at least for me). I guess I have used up my "oopses" for the week, eh?

Simon · Jan 31, 2008, 01:34 AM

Originally Posted by ghporter

... There WAS a note from Apple about the MBA's CPU usage impacting graphics performance at this link, but it's apparently been pulled (Google 'macbook air graphics' and it's the first hit-at least for me).

That has nothing to do with the GPU though. It's just the way the MBA's C2D handles heat. At some point it will shut down one core and if that doesn't help enough, it will clock down the running core. That in turn affects graphics performance under load (as Apple specifically mentioned). This is perfectly ordinary behavior for a C2D processor.

The Apple note says more about the cooling than the graphics capabilities of the MBA. Compared to the MB it likely has less cooling capacity which could cause it to heat up faster as well as to higher temperatures than on the MB. This would indicate that on the MBA the C2D's protection mechanism could kick it more often than on the MB. And that is the likely reason why Apple posted that note.

ghporter · Jan 31, 2008, 08:52 AM

The problem was that I got to scan the note on the way to other things, and when I tried to go back and actually read it, it was gone. I was thinking it had something to do with RAM management, which could have impacted how the GPU accessed the shared RAM...

Simon · Jan 31, 2008, 09:09 AM

Yeah, unfortunately the note has been removed and google didn't cache it. Anyway, it was merely a warning about how single-core and downclocked CPU operation could have negative influence on 3D graphics performance.

malone · Jan 31, 2008, 09:40 AM

So true! Well put.

Originally Posted by Simon

In five to tens year from now all notebooks will be less than a half inch thin, have no more mechanical internal parts, and be hooked up to all kinds of peripheral devices without the use of any wires.

And then, when we all consider such a design "just a regular notebook", some of us will look back and realize it was all kicked off with devices like the MBA. And that's when you'll know we've reached Schopenhauer's third phase.

analogika · Jan 31, 2008, 01:24 PM

Originally Posted by Eug

I'm glad you understood his point, as that's what he was saying after all. ie. Regardless of how much some people try to claim the MBA is an epiphany, it simply ain't true. It's a nice design for a niche market, which is fine, but it certainly isn't a revolutionary product.

I'm just amazed at how much effort is spent on proclaiming as loudly and wordily something that is completely obvious:

It ain't everything to everybody.

Not yours? Don't buy it and shut up.

freudling · Jan 31, 2008, 02:10 PM

analogika:

Exactly. I love all these people posting authoritatively but in fact, they have never seen it except on engadget. This always happens with new Apple products. SHUT UP.

mduell · Jan 31, 2008, 05:16 PM

That Intel throttles back the clockrate (and thus performance) at high temperatures is well known and documented.

Originally Posted by Simon

What you probably wanted to say is that the MBA doesn't come with dedicated VRAM, a dedicated graphics memory bus, and a highly 3D accelerated GPU. If it comes with a card or not is however entirely irrelevant and as you will easily find out, basically no sub-notebook at all comes with a graphics card.

The only laptop I can think of under 4lb with discrete graphics is the 12"/3.5lb Asus U6 has 8400M G. All the rest of the 12-14" laptops with discrete graphics are in the 4-4.9lb range.

ghporter · Jan 31, 2008, 05:20 PM

Originally Posted by analogika

I'm just amazed at how much effort is spent on proclaiming as loudly and wordily something that is completely obvious:

It ain't everything to everybody.

Not yours? Don't buy it and shut up.

It's obvious to you and me, but not to people who WANT the thing to be absolutely everything to them-even though it is a poor fit for most people. So they keep coming up with "but can I..." and "I wish that they'd..." things.

Chuckit · 05:51 PM

Originally Posted by analogika

I'm just amazed at how much effort is spent on proclaiming as loudly and wordily something that is completely obvious:

It ain't everything to everybody.

Not yours? Don't buy it and shut up.

So in other words, the MBA very well might not ever be "self-evident" to me? Good, then we agree.

malone · Jan 31, 2008, 07:49 PM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

So in other words, the MBA very well might not ever be "self-evident" to me? Good, then we agree.

Maybe not the MBA in its current form... but its future derivatives might be,

. Kudos to Apple for pushing the envelope a bit more, and kudos to the early adopters who help pave the path to a better future!

We should be thanking the MBA buyers instead of continually criticizing them!

(I sometimes wonder what the PMP industry would've been like without the iPod)

(and yes, I realize the MBA and iPod are not the first of their kind: there are other lightweight notebooks before the MBA, and other PMPs before the iPod, but you can't help but to feel like Apple is nevertheless a major player in paving the way for the industry)

ghporter · Jan 31, 2008, 07:53 PM

I know that my tastes and demands on computers are not likely to turn from "the most I can possibly get" to "the least I can possibly get by with" any time soon. So no, the MBA won't be for me. The MBP I have is not the latest, but it is very fast and very full-featured, and that's the sort of computer I've always gone with.

As for what the PMP industry would be without the iPod...it would be nonexistent. Ever seen a Rio? Lame is a mild word. The iPod paved the way for feature sets that made personal music players a reality rather than a novelty.

I don't at all disparage anyone who wants a MacBook Air. Unless they whine that it is slow and under-featured. You see, that's what the MBA is, and being really excited about getting one for what it is is very cool. Being excited about getting one but whining that it's not a MacBook Pro in a skinny shell is just dumb.

Simon · Feb 1, 2008, 04:13 AM

Originally Posted by ghporter

I don't at all disparage anyone who wants a MacBook Air. Unless they whine that it is slow and under-featured. You see, that's what the MBA is, and being really excited about getting one for what it is is very cool. Being excited about getting one but whining that it's not a MacBook Pro in a skinny shell is just dumb.

Very well put.

I think you can understand the MBA better if you consider what the target customer was. This is a guy who wants the lightest and smallest notebook he can get that still offers a regular keyboard and a decent screen. Apart from the bezel width that basically leaves thickness as the paramater to optimize. And that is precisely what Apple has done. They have gone for the thinnest possible case even when that meant giving up the optical or things like FW and built in Ethernet.

Given that Apple has always made full sized keyboards an important issue on notebooks and given that a lot of Apple users are creative people who can't work with a low resolution or small screen I think Apple's design choice appears strikingly obvious. Quite a few people don't fall into this category (myself included since I can't sacrifice performance for weight) so for us such a MBA might not make sense, but that's not the point. The point is Apple now has an excellent product geared at their target customer and that's what usually earns them a whole lot of money.