MacBook Air(apple.com)
apple.com
MacBook Air
http://www.apple.com/macbookair/
9 comments
[deleted]
It's been said to death various places on the internet, but the lack of inputs, and the lack of a easily replaceable battery (it's "integrated") are a huge loss. It may be wireless and have few wires to deal with, but you'll have to deal with USB hubs and other cables when it's in "desktop" mode. Traveling usage (for anyone other than those who carry spare batteries) will probably be OK though slightly inconvienenced. I wonder if Apple will come out with a USB "dock" for desktop mode.
The MacBook Air is a $1800+ wireless movie player for rich people. Media is where Apple is heading, and this product supports that direction.
There was nothing new for MacBook Pros or MacBooks, and the Mac Pro upgrade was made a couple of weeks before MacWorld. That makes me think that Apple dropping "Computer" from their company name was a telling sign.
There was nothing new for MacBook Pros or MacBooks, and the Mac Pro upgrade was made a couple of weeks before MacWorld. That makes me think that Apple dropping "Computer" from their company name was a telling sign.
Why use a laptop in 'desktop' mode at all?
Last time I used a desktop was... well... years ago.
I have a 24'' external display attached to a 2lb notebook. I like my small and lightweight notebook for traveling, but for longer stretches of work I like to have the big screen, too.
I like the significant separation between monitor and keyboard and mouse.. it feels more comfortable and ergonomic to me. I do enjoy hacking on a laptop on a sofa.. but not for more than 2-3 hours.
I've never changed the battery of my notebook, and it seems to me the inputs are fine otherwise - USB gives you everything you need.
Grrr. I've been waiting to replace my 12" PowerBook. I mean, waiting and waiting. I bought a black MacBook, but it has no soul. Oh well... looks like I'm going to have to buy one
That's a pretty machine, alright. The "aesthetic" factor almost makes me want to preorder one (I really like the look of the mac, even with the aforementioned design flaws). I won't, though, because my 2005 toshiba satellite is still ticking and all my current development tools run without a problem on it, so I can't justify it as a necessity.
There's a lot to like about this computer, but a lot to dislike as well, even for those who favor a minimalist aesthetic.
For example, designing the "Remote Disc" feature was great; telling the world with a straight face that "you can just wireless rent movies from Apple instead of playing DVDs" was just lame.
For example, designing the "Remote Disc" feature was great; telling the world with a straight face that "you can just wireless rent movies from Apple instead of playing DVDs" was just lame.
no, discs, DVDs, blueray, HD-DVD... they are all dead.
My MacBooks superdrive is barely of use anyway since it has stupid region coding on it so I can't play half the DVDs I own.
I think it's great Apple have 'got it' as regards the future. In 5 years people are unlikely to be shoving discs into things.
I think it's great Apple have 'got it' as regards the future. In 5 years people are unlikely to be shoving discs into things.
Blu-Ray, DVDs, and HD-DVD are dead? Not so fast there. :)
As tempting as it is, I won't get baited into that particular discussion. My point was that the idea of eschewing viewing the DVDs I already own in favor of renting from Apple is preposterous. As they say in Propaganda, Jobs was "passing from the acceptable to the dubious" with product placement thinly veiled as cool minimalism.
As tempting as it is, I won't get baited into that particular discussion. My point was that the idea of eschewing viewing the DVDs I already own in favor of renting from Apple is preposterous. As they say in Propaganda, Jobs was "passing from the acceptable to the dubious" with product placement thinly veiled as cool minimalism.
Just look at what the college down to the first grade kids are doing these days.... disks are dead.
Letting people rent movies on USB sticks may work. They could rent out several movies at a time, and you wouldn't need to keep track of them separately. They could also throw in a few random free movies, too. And since the sticks are ordered en masse, they'd probably pay for themselves within a short amount of time. It's something Blockbuster could try to stay in the game, at least.
Why? The internet is a much better and cheaper alternative, and it offers the enormous upside of instant gratification.
Software might come on USB sticks for a while in the future, I think, but eventually even that will be delivered digitally. Valve has done this insanely well with Steam.
Software might come on USB sticks for a while in the future, I think, but eventually even that will be delivered digitally. Valve has done this insanely well with Steam.
Heh. I didn't say it was the best way, just that it was a way. And I was only referring to movie rentals. (It doesn't make sense to deliver software via USB, since it seems like CDs and DVDs will always remain cheaper than USB sticks. The dynamic USB drive isn't an advantage for software.)
You'll have a new Apple machine in 5 years. Why not buy one now that works with the media we have now?
Handbrake. Don't watch dvd's without it! Half of the new releases these days include copy protection "features" that make the super drive go bonkers when trying to play the disk.
Far better to handbrake it and them just watch the files with VLC.
Far better to handbrake it and them just watch the files with VLC.
Yeah, but he's right. The future of entertainment doesn't have DVDs in it.
I'm hoping with Apple TV I can skip BluRay alltogether, but I haven't seen the HD specs from the iTunes store yet.
I'm hoping with Apple TV I can skip BluRay alltogether, but I haven't seen the HD specs from the iTunes store yet.
Apple TV has to be using some serious compression to be able to serve you a 720p movie fast enough that you can watch it as it does. You're still getting an inferior experience to the guy with Blu-Ray, especially if he has a 1080p capable set.
That said, highly compressed 720p is still going to be an upgrade to a lot of people over a standard DVD. Perhaps only obsessives like me will care.
That said, highly compressed 720p is still going to be an upgrade to a lot of people over a standard DVD. Perhaps only obsessives like me will care.
You obviously weren't watching the keynote. Steve demoed downloading and starting an SD movie, not an HD one. SD downloads fast enough to start "instantly". HD does not.
The claim that this is "highly compressed" is baseless.
The claim that this is "highly compressed" is baseless.
It still has to be highly compressed. An uncompressed HD movie is something like 25 gb. I don't have or want iTunes so I can't verify it, but I'd be surprised if the files they send are more than 1/10th of that.
True, it is most likely compressed, but compression does not have to be lossy. Apple tends to use H.264/MPEG-4, which is (or at least can be?) lossless. It would be silly to send uncompressed HD video to the Apple TV when lossless or nearly lossless compression could be used.
The only other thing I can say on the matter is that I was at Macworld today, and they were demoing Apple TV playing an HD movie on a giant screen (probably 50 feet across) and it looked excellent.
The only other thing I can say on the matter is that I was at Macworld today, and they were demoing Apple TV playing an HD movie on a giant screen (probably 50 feet across) and it looked excellent.
Well, h.264 is a fine codec, but just like aac, it offers a range of quality, and better quality means bigger files. I haven't played around with it to see how it handles motion, but I know with DivX/WMV that's always been a big problem. I can't imagine watching an action movie in compressed 720p is going to be anywhere near as good as uncompressed 1080p, but then I also can't imagine most people will know or care about the difference.
You've gone from complaining that the device has super compressed 720p which won't be as good as blue-ray, to claiming that you don't really know what it will look like, but that any compression on 720p video will look worse than uncompressed 1080p.
The facts on blue-ray: "Discs encoded in MPEG-2 video typically limit content producers to around two hours of high-definition content on a single-layer (25 GB) BD-ROM. The more advanced video codecs (VC-1 and H.264) typically achieve a video runtime twice that of MPEG-2, with comparable quality."
In all likelihood, iTunes is using H.264, or their newest variant. The same as blue-ray. So, in reality, the choice of codec matters a great deal, blue-ray is not uncompressed video (thus, 25GB holds a 2 hour compressed movie), and yes, 1080p is better than 720p.
And it's also worth noting that digital cable, and as far as I know every other on demand HD video service, is also "highly compressed" 720p.
The facts on blue-ray: "Discs encoded in MPEG-2 video typically limit content producers to around two hours of high-definition content on a single-layer (25 GB) BD-ROM. The more advanced video codecs (VC-1 and H.264) typically achieve a video runtime twice that of MPEG-2, with comparable quality."
In all likelihood, iTunes is using H.264, or their newest variant. The same as blue-ray. So, in reality, the choice of codec matters a great deal, blue-ray is not uncompressed video (thus, 25GB holds a 2 hour compressed movie), and yes, 1080p is better than 720p.
And it's also worth noting that digital cable, and as far as I know every other on demand HD video service, is also "highly compressed" 720p.
Huh? First you said that uncompressed movies take up about 25gb for 2 hours. Blu-ray movies are generally around 25gb, which leaves the second layer free for extras or whatever.
Then you said that "blue-ray is not uncompressed video (thus, 25GB holds a 2 hour compressed movie)" By your own math they would only take up 12.5ish gb if compressed.
I actually am curious what digital cable uses. It's definitely 720p in my area, and probably compressed, but not highly.
Then you said that "blue-ray is not uncompressed video (thus, 25GB holds a 2 hour compressed movie)" By your own math they would only take up 12.5ish gb if compressed.
I actually am curious what digital cable uses. It's definitely 720p in my area, and probably compressed, but not highly.
Actually, Matt, you claimed uncompressed movies take 25GB for two hours. Right up here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=99416
What I said is, Blu-ray movies take up on average 25GB with MPEG2 compression. In other words, your original estimate of the size of things was wrong, as was your implication that blu-ray was uncompressed.
What I said is, Blu-ray movies take up on average 25GB with MPEG2 compression. In other words, your original estimate of the size of things was wrong, as was your implication that blu-ray was uncompressed.
Most people can't tell the difference between 1080p and 720p resolution at any normal home viewing size or viewing distance.
The issue of compression is a bit more hard to answer, since all these formats all use the same codec. I have no idea what parameters you can tweak to make the same resolution video smaller.
The issue of compression is a bit more hard to answer, since all these formats all use the same codec. I have no idea what parameters you can tweak to make the same resolution video smaller.
Does anyone have a good guess as to where we are in the Macbook Pro upgrade cycle?
This one seems perfect to me. Just what I need.
It's the Sony Vaio as an Apple.
Seriously, I think I liked the whole "Something's in the air" thing when FSJ suggested it was a reference to Woz's flatulance back in the garage days. "You could barely work with the guy."
Seriously, I think I liked the whole "Something's in the air" thing when FSJ suggested it was a reference to Woz's flatulance back in the garage days. "You could barely work with the guy."
Kathy Griffin seems to be surviving.
Wozzzz Noooo!!!
Ha. That's the first I'd heard of that. To each their own, I suppose. Maybe she'll feel rich enough to not do comedy.
Oh horrid thought. What if she uses the Woz's cash to make more reality tv?!
Ha. That's the first I'd heard of that. To each their own, I suppose. Maybe she'll feel rich enough to not do comedy.
Oh horrid thought. What if she uses the Woz's cash to make more reality tv?!
Also, I purchased a MacBook when they first came out, and had numerous problems with the battery and power supply. Thus, the lack of replaceable battery makes me nervous.