3 ms·
I completely agree with the author's argument about smartphones and tablets, but I think @nextparadigms is right about the MacBook Air. It belongs in a complete
by kijinbear 15y ago
I completely agree with the author's argument about smartphones and tablets, but I think @nextparadigms is right about the MacBook Air. It belongs in a completely different market segment, along with $2,000 "ultraportables" from Lenovo and Toshiba. That segment has been there for a long time even before netbooks appeared.
It's definitely possible to pack a real Core 2 or i7 processor, an optical drive, and 10+ hours of battery life in a 11-13 inch form factor with a weight of no more than 3 pounds. It gets pretty damn expensive, though, even without the mandatory Apple mark-up.
Personally, I would urge anyone who has a good enough budget to get a real ultraportable instead of a half-assed Atom netbook. But if somebody is shopping for a $350 netbook, I don't think they'd consider the MacBook Air a serious alternative. If anything, smartphones and tablets are stealing market share from both netbooks and ultraportables.
- todayiamme 15y agoI think that the author was talking about functionality... >>> If there was an appetite for easy-to-use, lightweight, entertainment and light computing devices, the netbook was supposed help fulfill that dream. Instead, it's been replaced in functionality by lower priced computers (a version of the MacBook Air became available for $995) having more capacity and better specs than the OLPC—while retaining light weight, high battery power conservation, and SSD devices without a plethora of jacks and an integral DVD drive—and the smartphone and pad/tablet genre. <<<
- kijinbear 15y agoBeing "replaced in functionality" by a superior product that costs at least 3 times as much doesn't make the inferior product "dead" any more than BMW makes Ford "dead". The author makes some good points, but the MacBook Air is a bad example.
- todayiamme 15y agoAh yes, you're right. Thank you for correcting me.