4 ms·
That might well work one day in the future, but today, a MacBook Air with retina display would be a significantly better machine, given the TDP of the CPUs typi
by giobox 9y ago
That might well work one day in the future, but today, a MacBook Air with retina display would be a significantly better machine, given the TDP of the CPUs typically used in the Air vs the passively cooled 12" MacBook.
This is the computer huge numbers of people want, but Apple force up the range to the entry level 13" MacBook Pro (which incidentally IIRC currently has the same TDP class CPUs as the existing Air...) to get a decent display.
Really the entry level 13 inch MacBook Pro should start at $999, given it largely _is_ a MacBook Air but with Retina display and TB3. Heck the 13 inch Pro is technically thinner as well now, even if the wedge shape of the Air makes the Air seem smaller. They all but weigh the same now too.
> it [The MacBook Air] was honestly never that great to begin with
In absolute terms perhaps not, and definitely not at launch. Later models however offered a pretty compelling mix of price, size and performance for a long time. Especially the performance to battery life ratio, which at various times has been one of the best compromises in Apple's lineup. There's a reason sites like the Wirecutter and the Verge kept it their recommended machine "for most people" for such a long time. I still think later versions of the Air are some of the best machines Apple has made at their respective peaks, again "for most people".
- digikata 9y agoYup, for me the current Apple lineup is a bit more than needed in the 13in Mac Pro, and a little low in the Macbook. And neither are giving real battery life/perf ratio that I'm looking for - so there's a gap. If not Apple then as an alternative I keep hoping that some linux shop will put in some power integration work to a quality PC-supply chain sourced laptop - because if I could get 10-12 hrs of light use battery life I think I'd switch.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]