backtop


Print 178 comment(s) - last by hexxthalion.. on Oct 26 at 4:59 AM


MacBook Air

iLife 11

OS X "Lion" Launchpad
Apple announces OS X 10.7, iLife 11, and the MacBook Air

Apple is no stranger to snagging a lot of media attention with their press conferences, and today is no exception. Last week, Apple announced that it would get "Back to the Mac" and the company is appears to be firing on all cylinders with its Mac portfolio.

33% of Apple's revenue comes from Mac, and the computers have been showing 27% year-over-year growth. The company also reports that for the month of August, it had 20.7% of the retail PC market. So it makes sense that the company would be focusing on its Mac platform today.

Apple introduced FaceTime with the iPhone 4, then later brought it to the iPod touch (fourth generation). Now, Apple is adding FaceTime calling to the Mac platform which will allow you to make video calls to both iPhone 4 and iPod touch users. It's a pretty simple software addition to the OS X that will be made available today in beta form.

For today's “entree” as Steve Jobs described, he next jumped into OS X 10.7, “Lion”. Steve Jobs describes Lion as incorporating the best features of iOS which is used on the iPhone, iPod touch, and iPad. Some of the features that Steve Jobs highlighted from iOS include:

  • Multi-touch gestures
  • App Store
  • App Home screens
  • Full screen apps
  • Auto save
  • App resume when launched

Steve Jobs described that multi-touch gestures when used on vertical surfaces (i.e. your laptop or desktop screen), your arm becomes fatigued after long-term use. This is the reason why Apple incorporates multi-touch gestures instead to trackpads on the MacBook/MacBook Pro/MacBook Air, the Magic Trackpad, and the Magic Mouse.

Next, the App Store is being brought to the OS X platform with one-click download, free and paid apps, automatic installs, automatic app updates, and apps will be licensed to use on all of your personal Mac computers.

Launch Pad can be accessed from the OS X dock, and it brings up a grid array of apps (think iOS) to allow one-click access to your favorite apps. Naturally, like iOS, you can create folders for your apps and flick through them using multi-touch gestures.

Fullscreen view is available to apps now with Lion, and multi-touch gestures can be used to navigate through the app or between other running applications when running in fullscreen mode. Apple is also combining Expose, Full screen apps, the Dashboard, and Spaces into a feature it calls "Mission Control".

Apple plans to release Lion in Summer 2011. However, the Mac App Store will open within 90 days from today for the Snow Leopard platform. App submissions will begin in November.

The company also announced its new iLife 11 digital media productivity package which was leaked earlier this morning. Steve Jobs highlighted three of the applications in the software suite (which is included for free on all new Macs, and available for $49 for upgraders), the first of which was iPhoto 11. IPhoto 11 features a new fullscreen mode, Facebook enhancements, the ability to email photos (without leaving iPhoto), new slideshows, and letterpress cards.

Next up was iMove 11. New features include all-new ado editing, "one step" effects, people finder (can pinpoint individual people from a video stream), news and sports themes, and the ability to create movie trailers with little effort (this actually looked extremely cool from the demo presented on stage).

The last application from iLife 11 highlighted today was GarageBand 11. The new features include Flex Time, Groove Matching, more guitar amps and effect, new piano and guitar lessons, and a new "How did I play?" component.  

Finally, Steve Jobs announced the new MacBook Air, which is supposed to combine the best of the MacBook and the iPad. The MacBook is 0.68 thin at its thickest point, it tapers down to just 0.11 inches at its thinnest point, and it weighs just 2.9 pounds. It features complete unibody construction, a 13.3” LED-backlit display (1440x900), Core 2 Duo processor, NVIDIA GeForce 320m graphics, 802.11n wireless, two USB ports, full-size keyboard, multi-touch trackpad, and FaceTime. The new MacBook Air forgoes optical and hard drives, and will rely solely on flash for storage. The battery is rated at 7 hours using standard wireless web tests (the previous MacBook Air got 5 hours), and it can run on standby for up to 30 days.

There's also a smaller sibling, an 11.6” MacBook Air which weighs 2.3 pounds. It has a 1366x768 display and all of the features of its bigger brother. It's rated at 5 hours of battery life and 30 days of standby.

The 11.6” model will cost you $999 (1.4GHz, 64GB), $1,199 (1.4GHz, 128GB), while the 13.3” model will set you back $1,299 (1.86GHz, 128GB), $1,599, (1.86GHz, 256GB). MacBook Airs at those prices, unfortunately, only come with 2GB of RAM. However, it appears that the machines can be upgraded to 4GB as a factory option for an additional $100. All variants of the new MacBook Air are available to order today.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By Pirks on 10/20/2010 2:57:30 PM , Rating: 3
They use old C2D but not the new i3 ULV chips, anyone knows why? There should be some technical explanation, I don't believe this is just marketing.




RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By acer905 on 10/20/2010 3:03:04 PM , Rating: 4
The old ones are cheaper? That way they get even more profits.


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By quiksilvr on 10/21/2010 12:59:42 AM , Rating: 3
As if a grand wasn't enough for a low powered and underfeatured "laptop?"

I seriously will start losing respect for anyone that buys these Air laptops. Why spend a grand on this?


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By MikeMurphy on 10/21/2010 3:57:35 AM , Rating: 3
C2D is used as it consumes less power than the new i3/i5/i7 line does.

This efficiency is necessary since the Air dimensions do not allow for a large battery.


By quiksilvr on 10/21/2010 9:03:46 AM , Rating: 1
o_O

Oh God...I think I just got an aneurysm...


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By snapilica on 10/21/2010 10:34:51 AM , Rating: 2
Wow! Really?!?

Please detail that. How come an old chip made with 45nm process and a higher TDP value consume less power than a chip made with 32nm process and a lower TDP value (similar specced)?


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By Pirks on 10/21/10, Rating: 0
RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By Totally on 10/21/2010 11:14:43 AM , Rating: 2
That made my brain hurt more than the first guys comment

Old chip == CPU + GPU on the motherboard.
New chip == CPU + GPU on die

New chip uses less power. Got it?

Anyways, others than the old chip being cheaper => larger profit margin. Reliability may have influenced the decision. If either cpu or gpu faults, they both do => costs more to replace.


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By MikeMurphy on 10/21/2010 11:39:00 AM , Rating: 2
^^ Yes guys, the CULV C2D as a PLATFORM consumes less power than the i3/i5/i7 mobile platform. That is, net power draw is less both at idle and and especially under load.

I know it seems backwards but its absolutely true.


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By quiksilvr on 10/21/2010 12:48:11 PM , Rating: 2
We were under the assumption that Apple went the Optimus route (use integrated Intel chip during times of low hardware acceleration and dedicated nVidia during tiems of high hardware acceleration).

I mean, they updated their video cards to the 320. Granted it is an 8 watt difference but it really balances out since the core i5 low voltage systems can change their speed on the fly when needed.

Honestly, I'd rather they added a bit more girth and put a bigger battery in there with the Core i5 instead. In the end you would get more battery life because integrated Intel chips take WAY less power than dedicated chips, even if you cut down on the power.


By Taft12 on 10/21/2010 3:14:26 PM , Rating: 2
Optimus is a pretty out-there assumption. There's not nearly enough room in a Macbook Air for a discrete GPU.


By snapilica on 10/21/2010 3:20:01 PM , Rating: 2
You do know there's a CULV Core i3/i5/i7 platform out there don't you? Compare that one with the CULV in the C2D. Don't go comparing appl... err peaches with oranges.


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By Denigrate on 10/21/2010 7:32:33 AM , Rating: 1
Because it's magical!

Seriously, that thing looks pretty sweet. If only it were priced competitively with the market. Oh, and too bad you have to load Windows7 on it yourself.


By msheredy on 10/21/2010 11:23:25 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Oh, and too bad you have to load Windows7 on it yourself.


But you can!


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By name99 on 10/21/2010 9:24:59 PM , Rating: 2
Christ this is a stupid statement. I'm not in the market for a motorbike, but I don't claim that people who buy them are idiots.

I own an Air (along with about three other macs). What I want from my server is different from what I want from my media mac, which is different from what I want from my desktop mac. For the AIr I wanted a machine that
- is extremely lightweight for typing in bed
- runs OSX

Tell us, oh wise soul, why
(a) my desire to have an ultralight laptop is stupid OR
(b) how I can run OSX satisfactorily on the $200 POS netbook you claim to be the
equivalent of an Air

Would I buy this new one? No, it's not enough of an upgrade from my existing Air. But when the next one comes out in a year or so, presumably with either USB3 or LighPeak, and presumably with a SandyBridge ULV [hopefully that has integrated GPU good enough for Apple's needs], or maybe even a Fusion ULV, I'd be happy to buy another top of the line version --- and "waste" not just $1000 but $1799.

Dude, have some fscking perspective. Depending on your tastes, you'd happily spend, for example, way more than $2000 on a vacation, or on clothes or alcohol in a year, or on live music, or on a fancy Viking stove to impress your friends. Other people are willing to spend that money on a computer that makes their lives better every day, rather than paying $300 and then having their lives be a little more miserable each day. Intelligence is about spending money on the things that genuinely make you happy, and most Apple users will tell you that their products delight them every day, which is more than you can say for many purchases.


By clovell on 10/25/2010 5:35:41 PM , Rating: 2
well-fscking-said.


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By sviola on 10/20/2010 3:04:06 PM , Rating: 5
Because they use nvidia chipsets. And Intel does not allow nvidia to do chipstes for core i cpus.


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By Pirks on 10/20/2010 3:08:19 PM , Rating: 2
Then my question becomes why do they use nVidia chipsets instead of going with new integrated Arrandale ULV solution? What's the point in this? It's not like 2-pound 11" is a gaming device so Arrandale's integrated GPU is more than enough, so why, why?


By mianmian on 10/20/2010 3:16:06 PM , Rating: 2
No Mac uses Intel integrated graphics. Not a single one.
I guess OS-X uses some features that Intel can't implement yet. Maybe OpenCL or something else. Apple can't go back.
I don't know if SandyBridge can change it or not.


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By omnicronx on 10/20/2010 3:32:26 PM , Rating: 3
Are you seriously asking why Apple does not want to go with a sub par GPU solution that is Intel Integrated graphics?

Badly supported, terrible drivers, missing important features, and is flat out underpowered compared to what Apple has been offering in the past.

You mention gaming device, but I think you forget how the OSX environment makes use of 3D acceleration. Heck I don't even think that the Arrendale solution supports OpenCL, which is a must for Apple, considering how they are now tying it into the OS.

Apple ditching Intel was the best thing the company has ever done, they would be completely stupid to go back until Intel has proven they can do something on that front. (which they have failed in doing so time and time again, even with 15+ years of experience they still manage to create subpar product offerings)

I'm actually glad Apple is pushing back, Intel is trying to push sub par solution down our throats. The underlying technology on the GPU end is still the same, its just packed into a single die with a much improved CPU.


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By StevoLincolnite on 10/20/2010 3:40:42 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Are you seriously asking why Apple does not want to go with a sub par GPU solution that is Intel Integrated graphics?


They did in the past, a-la the Intel x3100 IGP's in various systems.

quote:
You mention gaming device, but I think you forget how the OSX environment makes use of 3D acceleration. Heck I don't even think that the Arrendale solution supports OpenCL, which is a must for Apple, considering how they are now tying it into the OS.


Yes it can accelerate 3D, but so can an old 1994 DOS box with a 3dfx Voodoo rush, doesn't mean it's going to do anything exciting.
For gaming, you cannot beat the PC, Mac has never been in the same league.

quote:
I'm actually glad Apple is pushing back, Intel is trying to push sub par solution down our throats. The underlying technology on the GPU end is still the same, its just packed into a single die with a much improved CPU.


I do agree, Intel's solutions are sub-par, hence why they are dubbed as Intel "decelerators" with many people, but there is a simple solution to all this...

Move to AMD.

Better IGP, better CPU performance over a Core 2 Duo, and probably won't increase prices at all either.


By omnicronx on 10/20/2010 3:51:51 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
They did in the past, a-la the Intel x3100 IGP's in various systems.
All Macbook variants used to make use of Intel integrated graphics, until Apple ditched them for lack of performance.
quote:
Yes it can accelerate 3D, but so can an old 1994 DOS box with a 3dfx Voodoo rush, doesn't mean it's going to do anything exciting. For gaming, you cannot beat the PC, Mac has never been in the same league.
You obviously missing my point, if you don't give an OS that relies on 3d Acceleration enough power, the user experience is going to suffer. Transitions between screens, video performance etc etc.. Here is a perfect example, having aero enabled in Windows with a sub par video card. Its designed to work with 3D acceleration, and requires a certain amount of horsepower to remain fluid.

Apple has also put a lot of money into Open CL, which these intel IGPS do not support.


By Lugaidster on 10/20/2010 4:50:41 PM , Rating: 4
There's a reason AMD isn't a choice just yet, and that is power consumption. Current AMD processors in the mobile segment that are available today consume more power than their Intel alternatives. As long as AMD doesn't have a good mobile platform, Apple will stay away. AMD will come with a good alternative eventually, but Apple can't sit and wait in the meanwhile.


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By Pirks on 10/20/10, Rating: -1
RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By omnicronx on 10/20/2010 4:50:12 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Yeah, they used it before when it was WAY slower than now, so why not use it now when it's MUCH faster?
Much faster compared to what? They doubled performance over 2/3 year old technology YAY! Much faster is irrelevent if the final product can't even match offerings that were released 2+ years ago.
quote:
How come the old uberslow Intel video decelerator of the Core 2 Duo era was more than enough for OS X 3D acceleration, and now the new much faster version of Intel video is not enough? Are you high or what? You're definitely contradicting yourself here.
It clearly was not good enough for Apple, thus the reason for the switch. Also the fact that much of Apples focus on the 3d acceleration and things like OpenCL only happened AFTER the transition away from Intel. They could not have gone the same direction had they stayed with them. There is really no debating this.
quote:
Omni, you're sooo stupid, I don't even know what to say. OpenCL DOES NOT NEED GPU TO OPERATE! Did you know that? Did you know OpenCL can use CPU cores just as easy? So why then Apple can't go with OpenCL-over-CPU in this case?
Oh man, just go sit in a corner. The advantages of using OpenCL go completely out the window without a GPU present. The idea is that it is device independent, but will use them if they are there. If a developer specifically codes something to use the GPU's parralell processing abilities, its going to be shifted over to the CPU in which any advantage of using OpenCL is now lost.


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By Lugaidster on 10/20/2010 4:57:53 PM , Rating: 1
You beat me to the answer!

In any case, why bother replying to that stupid ass troll. He'll come back to you saying that you're wrong, your argument is void and that you're stupid.

You can't argue with that guy. You could tell him your nickname is omnicronx and he'd still fight you for it claiming you're wrong, your argument is void and that you're stupid (rinse wash and repeat).


By omnicronx on 10/20/2010 5:05:56 PM , Rating: 1
Ya, the truth is I'm just bored..

I normally do not try to feed the trolls :)


By omnicronx on 10/20/2010 5:05:07 PM , Rating: 3
Comprender? OpenCL is useless without a GPU present.

Its meant to take advantage of the GPU's parralell processing ability for certain intensive tasks.

One place where Apple put a lot of work into is encoding videos in SL, which is vastly sped up (up to 5x according to Apple) when using an OpenCL compatible GPU.


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By Pirks on 10/20/2010 5:26:52 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Much faster is irrelevent if the final product can't even match offerings that were released 2+ years ago
It's relevant if it's good enough for a target device (11" MBA in this case).
quote:
If a developer specifically codes something to use the GPU's parralell processing abilities, its going to be shifted over to the CPU in which any advantage of using OpenCL is now lost.
No it's not lost - the parallel tasks are going to get executed on (virtual/HT) cores, which is I think about 3 extra cores if we talk Arrandale, that's 3X speedup, or maybe 2X at the least, what's not to like? Why does 2X speedup on CPU-only OpenCL not count, huh?
quote:
Apple put a lot of work into is encoding videos in SL, which is vastly sped up (up to 5x according to Apple) when using an OpenCL compatible GPU
Is this stated officially somewhere on the Apple site? Where did you read about this speedup in SL? Never heard about it. What video encoder you have to use for that speedup to happen?


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By omnicronx on 10/20/2010 6:31:42 PM , Rating: 3
Just stop pirks, you are dead wrong.

You clearly lack the understanding of how openCL works.

Simply put, OpenCL makes it possible to use the GPU for general-purpose tasks (instead of different assembly languages that could differ by the vendor), which previously was not possible. Its far more extendable than that, but in a nutshell, this is how it is currently used on the Mac platform.

Its basically just an Apple initiated GPGPU framework which unlike other GPGPU implementations like CUDA, is not limited to the GPU, as certain tasks will always be faster on the CPU.

I recommend you go look up what GPGPU programming is before you make any other comments.

Please stop spreading misinformation.. you are not helping anyone.


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By Pirks on 10/20/10, Rating: -1
RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By omnicronx on 10/20/2010 7:22:43 PM , Rating: 2
Is it really that hard to realize that Apple wants a unified platform along its entire OSX line?

It makes absolutely no sense for a company that controls the software and hardware to not take advantage of it.

OpenCL is one of those things. If all new Mac's have an OpenCL supported card, they can code OSX to take advantage of it.

GPGPU won't be pushed by Microsoft the way its being pushed by Apple because they have little to no control over what hardware is being used.Now of course MS has done something similar with Direct Compute, but I doubt we will be seeing it being used in any native windows applications (unlike OSX in which it has already been implemented) any time soon


By Pirks on 10/21/2010 8:23:28 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
unlike OSX in which it has already been implemented
Where was it implemented in SL? To me it looks like you're just fantasizing or dreaming. Never heard of any OpenCL accelerated system apps in SL.

Stop dreaming stuff up omni :)))


By SPOOFE on 10/20/2010 8:10:39 PM , Rating: 2
Just what Apple wants: Another piece of hardware that they have to code and QA for.

No, a lot of Apple's design choices revolve around eliminating variables. If they add another piece of silicon to their lineup, that's hardware that they have to keep in inventory, for years, in case a customer's chip fails; they need to add more code for it, pay man-hours to keep that code up-to-date; customer support needs additional work to deal with the extra piece of hardware... etc.

The Apple logo is not some magical sigil that makes a chunk of plastic and silicates perform miracles, not matter how much Steve Jobs would want you to believe it. :D


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By mianmian on 10/20/2010 3:10:08 PM , Rating: 2
No room for a separate graphics in the Air.
CULV I3 can only use build-in graphics, which is too weak.

I think Apple did it right.


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By Pirks on 10/20/10, Rating: -1
RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By omnicronx on 10/20/2010 3:44:58 PM , Rating: 2
Close your trap Pirks.. Clarkdale != Arrandale

Clarkdale is the desktop variant.

Perhaps you should actually read instead of pretending you understand.


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By Pirks on 10/20/10, Rating: -1
RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By monomer on 10/20/2010 4:27:10 PM , Rating: 2
You are comparing the graphics to GMA X4500, which basically says that Arrandale is 129% better than crap. Yay?

You do understand that for games, the GPU is much more important than the CPU, right?


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By Pirks on 10/20/2010 5:08:02 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
for games, the GPU is much more important than the CPU
Who'd seriously game on such a tiny lightweight 11" ultraportable? You buy Alienware 11" for that, if you want serious. Otherwise if you want casual you got all you need with Arrandale's GPU.


By Omega215D on 10/20/2010 6:32:05 PM , Rating: 2
Uh.. you didn't see Anandtech's article about using a MacBook Pro 13" as a Windows laptop did you?

That 320M can casually game a lot better than Arrandale. Why not have an ultraportable for some office work and hit up a few online games to kill some down time? The 11.6" is decent enough and I've seen Sony laptops that have a fast GPU on such a device with a small screen and for me it worked out pretty well (trying it out at the store but bought a MacBook Pro instead).


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By omnicronx on 10/20/2010 4:32:26 PM , Rating: 2
You clearly just looked this up now.. otherwise you would have posted it in the first place. (FYI I read that article when it came out in January)

And why should I/anyone care that the new Intel GPU benches twice as fast as their previous one?

Apple already indicated that performance would actually be less (at the most on par) than integrated 9400M chips, let alone their new 320M's. So I really don't know why you are arguing.

Why on earth would Apple take a step backwards in GPU performance? Nvidia still has better performance with a 2+ year old chip in the 9400M.. It makes absolutely no sense.


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By Pirks on 10/20/2010 5:11:38 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
why should I/anyone care that the new Intel GPU benches twice as fast as their previous one?
'Cause it proves that Arrandale's GPU is not "too weak" for an 11" ultraportable, as this mianmian guy stated above.
quote:
Why on earth would Apple take a step backwards in GPU performance?
To extend battery life.


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By omnicronx on 10/20/2010 6:09:48 PM , Rating: 2
It not dramatically enhance battery life as they are now using the 320M which draws around half the power of the 9400m and boosts the performance up to two fold.

There is no comparison between the two.

You asked, we told.

I seriously don't know why you are arguing. If Apple truly saw the incentive in using Intel's IGPS, they would have done so.


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By Pirks on 10/20/2010 6:42:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You asked, we told
Well, you gave me your opinion, and I'd be interested in some official docs or power consumption benches with regard to 320M versus Arrandale GPU. Who knows if you're right or not. At least before it was always the fact that Intel GPU was a power sipper, hence it provided the longest battery life. Don't see any proof that this changed now. Do you see any?


By SPOOFE on 10/20/2010 8:15:01 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Well, you gave me your opinion

Sez the guy that linked to a gaming benchmark to make a point about an OS's performance...


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By charrytg on 10/20/2010 9:07:37 PM , Rating: 2
First you must know: An arrandale culv uses more power than a core 2 culv. 10w versus 18w. Arrandale can use almost double the power. This is in part due to the inclusion of graphics.

Now, with Arrandale you have a two chip solution. The processor+graphics, and the chipset. So.. 18w + ???.

With core 2, normally you would have a 3 chip solution. However, nvidia fixes this. a core 2 with the 320m+chipset is also two chip. So.. 10w + ???.

As the 320m is a custom job, the power draw of it is not known to me. The 9400m, which was also a 2 chip solution for apple, was 12w for the graphics + chipset.

So for a core 2 + 9400m you would have 10w+12w... 22w. Now Arrandale? The chipset must use less than 4w to match or best the core 2 + 9400m. Even without the chipset, the difference of 4w is probably not worth considering.

Now, for performance.. well, the best intel graphics are on the desktop i5 661. It runs its graphics at 900mhz. It can compare to the 9400m, they very similar in performance.

However, the arrandale culvs run their graphics at 166-500mhz. This means that an arrandale culv mac would use about the same power as a core 2 culv mac, but one would have.. say, double the graphics performance.

Now, the 320m doubles the performance from the 9400m. You would think that comes at a price of power, but it uses smaller transistors, so perhaps not. Take for example, the new mac mini. It used to have a core 2 + 9400m, it now has a core 2 + 320m. It's power consumption... reduced.

This does not mean that the 320m is designed to use less power necessarily, but that it can at least be very optimized. Max power consumption and min power consumption being two different things, it is possible that despite the 320m being very powerful integrated graphics, that it idles at a very low power consumption. It's possible that this could be done with driver optimization, as well. And intel, unfortunately, does not have very good drivers.

So, in short, an arrandale culv and a core 2 + 9400m consume similar power, despite the 9400m having greater performance, and seeing as other macs have increase battery life when switching from 9400m->320m, and given nvidia's superior drivers, it is possible that the power consumption of this set up might be superior in both performance and power than that of arrandale.

PS: Amusingly, an old anand test shows that the old g45 (4500) intel graphics of core 2 times uses more power than that of 9400m when gaming, so to say that intel graphics sip power.. may not be true.


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By Brainonska511 on 10/20/2010 9:46:51 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
First you must know: An arrandale culv uses more power than a core 2 culv. 10w versus 18w. Arrandale can use almost double the power. This is in part due to the inclusion of graphics.


And you should know that as a platform, the Arrandale platform has a lower TDP than the C2D platform. You cannot compare the TDP of the processors since Arrandale incorporated the north bridge into the chip.


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By charrytg on 10/20/2010 10:35:40 PM , Rating: 2
'As a platform' is unimportant, as I doubt that intel's core 2 platform accounts for nvidia's 320m bringing the solution from 3->2 chips. I did mention that the increased power consumption from arrandale is not solely from the processor itself, for example, as you quoted, it includes graphics on the chip. You would think all this would help power consumption, but 18w brings it pretty close to what a core 2 culv + 9400m would do in the first place, without knowing the power draw from the chipset that arrandale uses.


By Alexstarfire on 10/21/2010 8:45:54 AM , Rating: 2
Unless you know the power output of all the chips involved I'd just stop talking. You could very well be wrong in what you say. Ohh, and if nearly a 20% reduction in power, the 22w vs the 18w, is negligible then I don't think it matters what you say.


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By omnicronx on 10/21/2010 12:21:10 PM , Rating: 2
And you should know that arrandale still requires an external controller (called the PCH, which is basically just an external southbridge).

The result being, even if Apple wanted to use arrandale for its cpu enhancements, they would be stuck using Intel's on die igp, as there would be no space for an nvidia solution as the space is now being taken by the external SB.

So not only does not it free up any space it could possibly take more as the previous low voltage c2d's with a very small outline were made special for Apple. My guess is that they just expanded the battery instead =P.. keeping the far superior GPU performance. (It now has a 7hr battery life instead of 5).


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By Alexstarfire on 10/21/2010 2:34:48 PM , Rating: 2
And yet without numbers it's just speculation. Guesses help no one and mean nothing in this case. I wasn't saying if he was right or wrong because I, and no one else here for that matter, seems to actually know. I doubt it's a simple as any one thing most people talk about.


By omnicronx on 10/21/2010 7:46:23 PM , Rating: 2
DT starts to stack threads when they get too long. I was responding to the guy above you ;)

Obviously speculation in terms of real power consumption as Apple does not release those numbers, I was just trying to point out that arrendale has an extra controller than previous c2d's that were used in the Air did not.. (which takes up space, and obviously uses power)


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By StevoLincolnite on 10/20/2010 3:42:22 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
No room for a separate graphics in the Air. CULV I3 can only use build-in graphics, which is too weak. I think Apple did it right.


Are you forgetting about AMD? There are always other options.


By Pirks on 10/20/2010 4:16:05 PM , Rating: 2
not when these options are way worse performance/watt wise than Intel's


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By ajcarroll on 10/20/2010 3:25:23 PM , Rating: 3
Nvidia is not licensed to develop chipsets that interconnect to Nehalem (i3/i5/i7). apple claims the Nvidia 320M is 2x faster than the GPU they used in prior gen Macbook... so they had to choose whether to stick with C2D and make use of Nvidia's graphics... or head down the i3 route, which would have given them a faster CPU but probably steered them towards a slower Intel Integrated graphics which although improved still isn't as fast across the board as Nvidia chip... so they basically chose improved GPU over improved CPU. They made the same decision on the recent macbook refresh...


RE: Any ideas why not the Arrandale ULV chip?
By Johnmcl7 on 10/21/2010 1:55:16 PM , Rating: 2
If they weren't able to produce an i3/i5 machine with an Nvidia card then why do the 15 and 17in Macbooks have an i5 processor and Nvidia graphics cards? Other manufacturers are also able to do this including Sony who with their Z series offer an i5 or i7 with an Nvidia GT330m in a smaller and lighter chassis than the 13in Macbook which would seem to show it's just cost reasons that Apple haven't done so.

John


By Pirks on 10/21/2010 2:19:30 PM , Rating: 2
Not just cost, battery life too


By name99 on 10/21/2010 9:14:39 PM , Rating: 2
This is no secret and has been discussed for months. The problem is that they don't want to deal with the hassle+size+cost of the i3 GPU given that they will be adding an external GPU anyway.

Why the insistence on the external GPU? Personally I DON'T think it has anything to do with games --- the crowd that obsess about game performance are the same crowd that sneer at how "underpowered" the Air is, and whatever Apple does in this space will not shut them up. Which means that the answer is presumably that Apple expects to require substantial GOU capabilities across its line over the next few years. This could just be requiring lotsa triangles and pixels, but presumably what it ACTUALLY means is requiring OpenCL capabilities across the line. Maybe start moving audio processing onto the GPUs (or speech recognition/synthesis?) Maybe just want developers be able to equate "Mac bought since 2009=OpenCL"?

To my mind the more frustrating limitation is that we're still stuck with slow IO (ie USB2). And don't think the SD card is a magic bullet --- like all the other non-disk IO it's hooked up to one of the many USB controllers the chipset provides. Again this is less than Apple's fault --- they're stuck with what Intel offers, and Intel is going slow on USB3 (perhaps to try to give LightPeak some breathing room, but it's still frustrating given that USB3 is available today, while LightPeak MAY be available H1 next year).


By hexxthalion on 10/26/2010 4:59:39 AM , Rating: 2
yes, the reason is gpu, intel's integrated gpu can't compete with nvidia - that's the only reason


I am going to buy this MacBook Air 11.6!
By NanoTube1 on 10/20/2010 2:35:53 PM , Rating: 2
I guess this is the Lexus Pirks always talked about...




RE: I am going to buy this MacBook Air 11.6!
By Pirks on 10/20/10, Rating: -1
By weskurtz0081 on 10/20/2010 2:52:09 PM , Rating: 2
Well, since they go back and forth when it comes to ripping each other off, it's only a matter of time!


RE: I am going to buy this MacBook Air 11.6!
By SkullOne on 10/20/2010 2:52:36 PM , Rating: 3
They all steal from each other so don't sit there and pretend Apple is a f*cking saint.

I'm just waiting for iOS to completely replace OS X at this point. Then a single virus written by some jackass for the insecure iOS will infect every iOS based device attached to the Internet.


RE: I am going to buy this MacBook Air 11.6!
By headbox on 10/20/10, Rating: -1
RE: I am going to buy this MacBook Air 11.6!
By Luticus on 10/20/2010 3:15:53 PM , Rating: 3
lol, the virus argument again... if you have virus problems you haven't a clue how to use a computer and should probably stick to your mac. just because you're an idiot, don't assume everyone else is.


RE: I am going to buy this MacBook Air 11.6!
By mstrmac on 10/23/2010 2:21:06 AM , Rating: 2
Apple’s previous operating system, the Classic Mac OS, never had the market share that their current operating system does, and yet there were viruses for the older operating system. Again, if viruses and security exploits can be explained away by market share arguments, then this should never have happened. Malware creators, so the myth instructs us, couldn’t possibly have had any interest in doing that.

What’s funny about the market share argument too is that it really doesn’t even apply to the Mac to begin with as it assumes the Mac is a platform unto itself. That was true in the old days, but the Mac doesn’t run OS 9 anymore. It’s OS X, and OS X is, underneath the pretty user interface, Unix. There are lots and lots of Unix (or Unix-like, if that makes you Linux fans happy) machines out there and they’re all running the same or similar software under the hood and all have similarities in how they operate and are structured. In that sense, OS X is part of a much bigger market. And yet, I don’t see a whole lot to worry about from the Unix side of OS X either. We’ve seen a few security issues pop up (like the ssh thing a while back) but nothing that has exploded into a major virus outbreak.

One thing that may explain the differences between Unix-like platforms and Windows is the nature of the software that runs on each platform. Much of the software running under-the-hood on Macs is open source. That means anyone, including you and me, can download and look over the source code. When you have lots of programmers looking over the code, security issues can be spotted before they become a headache. This leads to proactive software patching as opposed to reactive—that is, patching after the viruses and malware are running rampant. Windows is closed-source, proprietary software and does not benefit from countless numbers of programmers and hackers viewing its code. In some unfortunate instances, security issues become known only after they have turned into viruses boring holes in your computer’s brain.

With the latest iterations of OS X, Apple has introduced many initiatives to prevent security issues. One of the most interesting is known as address space layout randomization (ASLR) which is more commonly known as memory randomization. ASLR is important because it makes one of the most common security issues, the buffer overflow, almost impossible to exploit.
For those of you who don’t understand it, think of it this way. Imagine the memory of your computer like a map of your hometown. Some vandal wants to change some of the street names to mess with your map. In order for him to do that, he needs to know the exact longitude and latitude of those streets. It’s easy for him because he can buy a map of your hometown and get that same information.

The latest version of OS X chops that map up into little squares and randomly rearranges them, but is also smart enough to know how to continue reading the map unhindered by the confusing rearrangement. Nobody is able to buy a map arranged exactly like that so nobody can get the exact information they need to vandalize your map. It doesn’t mean they can’t. They just can’t quite zero in on exact targets anymore.

On top of that, OS X also offers tagged downloading of applications (a system that watches very closely what gets downloaded and run on your computer and alerts the user before it runs for the first time), stronger forms of built-in encryption, more robust firewall features that watch for malware-like activity and application sandboxing to prevent hackers from targeting program-specific vulnerabilities.


By themaster08 on 10/24/2010 3:50:59 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
That means anyone, including you and me, can download and look over the source code.
Except OS X, unlike Windows, is a closed platform. It can only run on specific hardware. Hardware Apple allows. It cannot be installed on a non-Apple computer, hence its miniscule market share and lack of malware.

You really should read some of the posts from Pirks, talking about how malware infests. This should give you a clearer perspective on why market share is everything when it comes to malware.

quote:
Apple has introduced many initiatives to prevent security issues. One of the most interesting is known as address space layout randomization (ASLR)
Windows has ASLR and has done since Vista, OS X since 10.5. OS X's ASLR stack was flawed and thus easily hackable until lately.

quote:
On top of that, OS X also offers tagged downloading of applications (a system that watches very closely what gets downloaded and run on your computer and alerts the user before it runs for the first time), stronger forms of built-in encryption, more robust firewall features that watch for malware-like activity and application sandboxing to prevent hackers from targeting program-specific vulnerabilities.
Windows as all of that. Has done for years.


RE: I am going to buy this MacBook Air 11.6!
By invidious on 10/20/2010 3:28:07 PM , Rating: 2
Why would you make a virus to target hippies? Hippies don't have any money...


By Pirks on 10/20/2010 3:35:37 PM , Rating: 2
botnet


By StevoLincolnite on 10/20/2010 3:41:35 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Hippies don't have any money...


That's because they spent all there pennies on a Mac. ;)


RE: I am going to buy this MacBook Air 11.6!
By SkullOne on 10/20/10, Rating: 0
RE: I am going to buy this MacBook Air 11.6!
By Tony Swash on 10/20/10, Rating: -1
RE: I am going to buy this MacBook Air 11.6!
By Alexstarfire on 10/20/2010 6:00:25 PM , Rating: 2
Perhaps the word "obscurity" isn't the right word anymore, but playing on semantics isn't going to make the argument any less valid. 5% of the market or 95% of the market, which would you go for if you wanted to make money. It's certainly no the 5% I know that. Viruses and such aren't limited to one country so it doesn't matter if Apple has a greater marketshare in the US.

Considering that Macs have been the first to get hacked at the PWN2OWN for quite a while I'm going to go with; yea, that's the only reason it's not exploited. It's obviously much easier to get into them if people want to. If no one wants to break into your house then it doesn't matter even if you leave the front door wide open.

If/When iOS replaces OS X then it'll certainly be a much bigger target and people will actually want to put the small amount of effort forward to make malware for it. Rather surprised that phones aren't a bigger target these days. Most people carry around so much information on their phones that's it's crazy. Must just be easier to steal phones or something.


RE: I am going to buy this MacBook Air 11.6!
By Tony Swash on 10/21/2010 6:59:49 AM , Rating: 1
quote:

Perhaps the word "obscurity" isn't the right word anymore, but playing on semantics isn't going to make the argument any less valid. 5% of the market or 95% of the market, which would you go for if you wanted to make money. It's certainly no the 5% I know that. Viruses and such aren't limited to one country so it doesn't matter if Apple has a greater marketshare in the US.

Considering that Macs have been the first to get hacked at the PWN2OWN for quite a while I'm going to go with; yea, that's the only reason it's not exploited. It's obviously much easier to get into them if people want to. If no one wants to break into your house then it doesn't matter even if you leave the front door wide open.


Demos of exploits is not malware. Macs don't have malware. Why?

The primary explanation being offered is that it is because the Mac has a low market share. Essentially the Mac is not a juicy enough target.

In order to judge whether that hypothesis - that the Mac target is not juicy enough - would depend on deciding on what makes an OS a juicy target for a malware and then seeing if Macs meet that criteria? If the Mac does meet the criteria for being a juicy target - even partially, - and yet the Mac still does not have malware then something else must be happening. It means the obscurity/low market share argument is insufficient.

Lets assume for the sake of argument that writing malware for the Mac is, as many claim here, relatively easy, that MacOSX is less secure than Windows.

What motivates malware authors. Money and Infamy (some malware authors just do it for the thrill of the kill).

Clearly if you were after infamy then writing propagating malware that actually went on to infect many Macs in the wild would be a big hit. It would cause huge headlines. Infamy guaranteed. And yet no one, not one black hat hacker out there, not one antisocial unpleasant geek, has bothered to write a propagating hack for MacOSX. That's odd and needs an explanation.

If you were after money then how does the Mac shape up? MacOSX is apparently, according to many around here, wide open and vulnerable as most complacent Mac users don't even think about security. As the malware author writing for MacOSX has no competitors it seems a relatively easy target. So writing successful malware for MacOSX, according to people around here, looks to be fairly easy technically.

Would it be lucrative? There seem to be an installed user base for MacOSX of about 50 million users. Some might argue with that figure so let's, for sake of argument, say there is a installed user base of 30 million. We know that the Mac is considered an up market type of product, and so it is reasonable to assume that the average income of the average Mac buyer is almost certainly above average. That doesn't mean that Mac users are rich but it does mean that the average mac user is not poor.

So we have a target group of 30 million plus user with pretty good incomes running an OS that is less secure than Windows and is being administered by users who don't even think about security.

If you were a money making malware writer, trying to make an income through malware, and you are writing stuff for the Windows platform which is full of security measure and add-ons and where users in general have an awareness of malware threats and you want to expand you income would the MacOSX not look at least a bit juicy? Wouldn't you think that someone somewhere would have thought "I will expand my income by expanding my malware into this virgin MacOSX - its not a huge market but its an easy and juicy target"

And yet there is no - none - zero - malware probating on the MacOSX and there never has been. Odd.

It's only odd if you think the only explanation for the lack of MacOSX malware is market share. If that is the only explanation then the lack of malware does look odd.

However if market share is not the explanation, or the whole explanation, for the lack of MacOSX malware then something else is preventing or deterring malware on the MacOSX platform - would could it be?

quote:
If/When iOS replaces OS X then it'll certainly be a much bigger target and people will actually want to put the small amount of effort forward to make malware for it. Rather surprised that phones aren't a bigger target these days. Most people carry around so much information on their phones that's it's crazy. Must just be easier to steal phones or something.


So another odd phenomena.

My explanation for the fact that phones are not being hacked and stolen from is simple - phones don't run Windows.


By Luticus on 10/21/2010 8:26:12 AM , Rating: 2
uhhh, yea they do. my phone is windows 6.1, no viruses, no hacking occurring so far.

quote:
phones are not being hacked

Jail breaking my not be a bad thing but it is still a hack. and there have been many other proof of concept hacks for iphones out there. Even the exploits the jail breaking software uses can be used to further exploit the phone and "hack" it for malicious reasons.


By Alexstarfire on 10/21/2010 8:48:38 AM , Rating: 2
Didn't someone post a link that talked about actual malware for Macs? I'll have to go find it and post the link for you. I thought it was in this article but I don't see it.


RE: I am going to buy this MacBook Air 11.6!
By Pirks on 10/21/2010 9:06:55 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Clearly if you were after infamy then writing propagating malware that actually went on to infect many Macs in the wild would be a big hit
Nah, if you're after infamy - you hack MacBook at a security conference, win it, and then sell on eBay => PROFIT _and_ INFAMY at the same time.
quote:
yet no one, not one black hat hacker out there, not one antisocial unpleasant geek, has bothered to write a propagating hack for MacOSX. That's odd and needs an explanation
That's not odd if you just get a little smarter, Tony. To get quickly propagating worm for example, you have to have a DENSE population of victim systems. But with Macs you have very sparse population, they are very few and very spread around in a "very thin layer", so how's this worm supposed to propagate if there are no direct connections between Macs? Windows machines are always in huge crowds/clusters, and Macs are alone so there's no way for the worm to propagate. Got it?
quote:
and you are writing stuff for the Windows platform which is full of security measure and add-ons and where users in general have an awareness of malware threats
Aha! Now you went down the path of straight LIES! I never expected it from you, how come you just did it? Who told ya that Windows users in general have awareness of malware threats? This is the biggest piece of BS I ever heard from you. I even know why. It's because you live in your little Apple RDF induced bubble and never look out. I do support a bunch of Windows users on my own, they all are my friends or family or friends of friends or family... and I NEVER met ANYONE among them who's really aware of malware threat and in general has ANY idea what is this malware thing about. Windows users IN GENERAL, with some rare exceptions (like techies and really smart people who are all a tiny minority) have no f*cking clue of any malware, they even don't know how to turn off their computers properly.

God, Tony, please stop lying about this, I beg you - GET OUT OF YOUR RDF BUBBLE! Resist the dark side! Just take a look out, see the big wide world around you and realize that Windows users in general are absolute idiots with regard to security, JUST LIKE Mac users are.

Man you must be REALLY fanatical and not educated in this issue if you say things like that. That's bad sign, really bad. When you talk like this you look like another Mac loving troll without brains. I know you aren't but just stop saying this horrible not true things, please!
quote:
then something else is preventing or deterring malware on the MacOSX platform - would could it be?
See above. It's called "population density". Why population density of Macs is so low you ask? Because of the low market share. Got it now Tony? It won't get simpler than that. This is your last chance to understand.
quote:
My explanation for the fact that phones are not being hacked and stolen from is simple - phones don't run Windows
Yeah right, and all these Android privacy breaking personal info stealing Chinese apps appeared why? Because Android handsets don't run Windows? I'm really sorry to say that Tony but you look even more dumb now. Frobizzle-dumb. Which is very very low.


RE: I am going to buy this MacBook Air 11.6!
By Tony Swash on 10/21/10, Rating: 0
RE: I am going to buy this MacBook Air 11.6!
By Pirks on 10/21/2010 12:03:18 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
All computers connected to the internet are as connected as the next one - they are not sparse - there is no spatial element in the net
Haha, you wish. Why then Windows worms usually propagate across one network segment and if you are outside of that segment, alone, and covered by firewall - then you won't have any worm infection attempts on your ports? If your theory were true then Windows worms would quickly propagate across the globe in a matter of minutes or seconds, but in never happens - the infection is always localized in clusters of enterprise (or large home i.e. cable) networks, where it spreads instantaneously and then stops at the nearest firewall. Hence, your theory is wrong and density/clusterization does matter a lot in this case.

You just missed the simple fact that worms never pass through firewalls, they can't propagate through a firewall. If you were more tech literate and knew more about security then the density and firewalling issues in network/malware security were obvious for you, and you would never ask your questions to begin with.
quote:
Write a piece of malware for macs and you can hit anyone of those 30 million just like Windows malware can hit any PC
Hahaha, I see you totally know nothing about how Internet works, you think you can send one multicast packet from your Mac and get this packet hit ALL 30 MILLION MACS OF THE WORLD? Hahahaha :))) Would be a nice joke... for a troll, but not for you. I'm disappointed.
quote:
99.99% of malware is Windows desktop related
Which is totally normal since Windows dwarfs everything else in install base and density too. Of course infections spread in Windows clusters the fastest, 'cause these clusters are always the biggest.
quote:
I understand the resistance to conceding the self evident truth of Windows special insecurity
I don't need any of your truth, 'cause I saw my own truth in the security conferences where Macs were hacked in seconds. The words of the smart hackers who are experts in networking and security matter for me much more than words from a guy like you who seriously believes you can hit 30 mil Macs with one multicast packet, LOL.
quote:
No malware for macs. Doesn't matter how many Macs, market share doesn't matter - no malware.
Well, if you ever learn more about security and how worms usually spread across the networks - you may change your mind. But you'll have to become much more technically literate than you are now, and with Mac users this is very much a big exception. Probably even more an exception than with Windows users, since Windows users have pretty large and thriving self-assembly community full of techies while Mac ones have close to nothing.


RE: I am going to buy this MacBook Air 11.6!
By themaster08 on 10/21/2010 2:34:01 PM , Rating: 2
You hit the nail on the head, Pirks. Tony seems to be getting angry. Truth must hurt.


RE: I am going to buy this MacBook Air 11.6!
By Pirks on 10/21/2010 2:41:52 PM , Rating: 2
I'd prefer to see angry smart hacker than angry casual user who knows jack about networking and security. For me anger is fine and actually good thing, but the lack of tech literacy is a liability :(

I don't mind Tony defending Macs, I just don't like him to think up some artificial excuses and reasons. If he were more tech literate his comments here would be much more enjoyable, I'm sure.


RE: I am going to buy this MacBook Air 11.6!
By Tony Swash on 10/21/2010 6:39:36 PM , Rating: 2
OK so we agree to differ, Some say Macs don't have malware because of low market share some say its because the architecture of MacOSX is better than Windows.

Either way its still true that Macs don't get malware.

And Windows gets lots.

So at least on that aspect we can all agree that, for whatever reason, the experience of using Macs is better than the experience of using Windows. At least that's settled :)


By themaster08 on 10/22/2010 1:49:00 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
some say its because the architecture of MacOSX is better than Windows.
Who are these "some"?. Security experts? Because never come across an article from a security expert that states the OS X architecture is less vulnerable to malware. Your sentence should have read as follows....

quote:
macheads such as myself say its because the architecture of MacOSX is better than Windows.
What is it in OS X's architecture that makes it better? Because it sure isn't its ASLR stack or Safari.

http://threatpost.com/en_us/blogs/transcript-charl...

quote:
the experience of using Macs is better than the experience of using Windows. At least that's settled :)
You can't pass off an opinion as fact. I know a lot of people that prefer the Windows experience regardless of the risks (which are for the most part self inflicted).


By Pirks on 10/22/2010 8:43:30 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
some say its because the architecture of MacOSX is better than Windows
And some say Bush is an alien, so what?


By damianrobertjones on 10/20/2010 3:44:48 PM , Rating: 2
Open those eyes of yours, there are Mac viruses and web pages dedicated to mac security. Just because you've never taken the time to find out doesn't mean that they don't exist.


RE: I am going to buy this MacBook Air 11.6!
By B3an on 10/20/2010 5:39:43 PM , Rating: 3
And if you talk to anyone who actually knows about security, they will tell you that OSX is less secure than Win7. Just like at hacking conventions where OSX falls quickly, and any hacker there will tell you it's not as secure. Then on top of that you have Apple them self that take up to a year sometimes to fix security issues.


By borismkv on 10/20/2010 6:53:31 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah. I love how iPhones act when you try to use them in an Exchange environment. They don't even *try* to properly implement the Client Access Security rules. And since XServe is still a phenomenal pile of garbage...


By Tony Swash on 10/21/2010 6:20:23 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Open those eyes of yours, there are Mac viruses


How about backing that up with some evidence?


By borismkv on 10/20/2010 6:58:55 PM , Rating: 2
Using a Mac for security is like wearing a Condom 24x7 because you're afraid of STDs. I haven't had a virus on my PC in...lemme think here...8 years? Yeah. About that. The secret is to avoid all the crap that can give you a virus.


RE: I am going to buy this MacBook Air 11.6!
By Luticus on 10/20/2010 3:14:05 PM , Rating: 3
seriously, have you ever compared linux and osx... the similarites are amazing!!! osx is a complete linux ripoff!


RE: I am going to buy this MacBook Air 11.6!
By sviola on 10/20/2010 4:08:51 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, OSX is based on BSD, not linux.


By Luticus on 10/21/2010 8:14:14 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Actually, OSX is based on BSD, not linux.


I know. I said linux and osx are similar, not that osx was based on linux. linux and bsd are also similar (so much so that untrained people can't tell them apart) and therefore it's not a stretch that osx and linux would be similar.


By ipay on 10/21/2010 2:03:49 AM , Rating: 2
If Fort Knox had all its gates open and unlocked it isn't particularly secure is it?

Being based on some other secure system doesn't mean a whole lot unfortunately. If any hole is left open then the system is insecure, regardless of what it's based upon.


RE: I am going to buy this MacBook Air 11.6!
By sviola on 10/20/2010 2:56:14 PM , Rating: 4
Well, if you kept track of announcements, MS said a couple of months ago that Windows 8 would feature an App Store.


RE: I am going to buy this MacBook Air 11.6!
By inighthawki on 10/20/2010 2:57:14 PM , Rating: 3
you beat me to it. Don't pretend MS stole it from Apple when it's introduced in Win8 when they announced it months before Apple.


RE: I am going to buy this MacBook Air 11.6!
By Akrovah on 10/20/2010 4:21:54 PM , Rating: 4
And let us not forget Xbox Live Arcade. More focused than other app stores, but the idea is essentially the same, and if I recal correctly it was been around longer than the iOS app store.

So uh... who's ripping off who now?


By inighthawki on 10/20/2010 4:56:58 PM , Rating: 2
Very true, I wasn't even thinking about a lot of the examples others have posted. Live arcade, zune hd, msdn, etc. Not to mention the idea of an app store isn't exactly special, it's been done long before Apple and the iPhone app store.


By Spivonious on 10/20/2010 3:02:24 PM , Rating: 2
Microsoft has had an app store on their website for years, well before Apple put one on the iPhone.


By zorxd on 10/20/2010 2:56:58 PM , Rating: 4
You mean like Apple ripped off all Linux distro for their "app store"?


By omnicronx on 10/20/2010 3:08:40 PM , Rating: 2
Several Linux distro's had central repositories long before Apple even thought of the idea, but nice try.

MS also announced there would be an App Store in Windows 8 several months ago.


By Luticus on 10/20/2010 3:09:00 PM , Rating: 2
Hopefully never... Windows is good the way it is.

Interesting... When i tried to post this comment i got this "This comment is apparently spam and we do not allow spam comments." message untill i added this text about the issue... lol dailytech :)


By nafhan on 10/20/2010 3:13:31 PM , Rating: 2
I'm waiting for someone to mention how this rips off the way various Linux distros handle "apps"...


By Devilpapaya on 10/20/2010 3:46:17 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, MS has already has a store, the Zune store, which is going to be expanded for the Windows 7 phones.... so uh.... yea, need to work on the *pre* part of your predictions.


RE: I am going to buy this MacBook Air 11.6!
By The Raven on 10/21/2010 11:25:17 AM , Rating: 2
Umm... I think Apple got that idea from Xbox, who got it from Steam, who got it from... ... ...

Oh unless you are talking about the super creative name for the place you go to buy apps. Yeah they deserve credit for that!

And if this is the Lexus... and the Acer is a Toyota...what does that make the iPad?


By Pirks on 10/21/2010 12:10:46 PM , Rating: 2
Smart


By Luticus on 10/21/2010 12:55:52 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
what does that make the iPad?

A sports car with a 4 banger and a governor!


RE: I am going to buy this MacBook Air 11.6!
By omnicronx on 10/20/2010 3:20:35 PM , Rating: 2
Why must you feed the troll?

I'm thinking of taking out some DT ad space with a big white banner that scrolls this warning =P..


By NanoTube1 on 10/20/2010 3:43:46 PM , Rating: 2
he he.. from time to time I enjoy feeding them, it spices things up and this was a golden opportunity! ;)


Dammit! Still only 2 GB RAM?
By CharonPDX on 10/20/2010 2:39:55 PM , Rating: 3
The new Air is almost exactly what I was hoping for. But c'mon, Steve... 2 GB of RAM?!?! (And only 1.4 GHz on the 11" model? Couldn't even go for a 1.6 GHz? It's the same 10 Watts as the 1.4 GHz model.)




RE: Dammit! Still only 2 GB RAM?
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 10/20/2010 2:49:43 PM , Rating: 2
I updated the article... looks like you can upgrade to a max of 4GB. The extra 2GB will cost you $100 direct from Apple.


RE: Dammit! Still only 2 GB RAM?
By CharonPDX on 10/20/2010 2:51:19 PM , Rating: 2
Thank goodness... $100 is steep, but whatever. At least the option is there. I'd be "upgrading" from an original 2.0 GHz 15" MacBook Pro, and dammit, if I can't get at least an equally fast processor, I want more RAM.


By AstroGuardian on 10/21/2010 9:33:58 AM , Rating: 2
100$ for a 2Gb? Is there any fool (except for Apple fools) that would pay such sum for such RAM?


RE: Dammit! Still only 2 GB RAM?
By n00bxqb on 10/20/2010 2:55:30 PM , Rating: 5
$1000 for a netbook ... Brutal ...


RE: Dammit! Still only 2 GB RAM?
By Pirks on 10/20/2010 3:01:36 PM , Rating: 1
Don't be THAT dumb to pretend that Atom equals C2D


RE: Dammit! Still only 2 GB RAM?
By omnicronx on 10/20/2010 3:17:38 PM , Rating: 1
Oh thats right, power only counts when its Apple that is implementing it right Pirks?

Please enlighten us as to what you will be doing on a Macbook air over a Netbook?

The fact that it houses a CULV is irrelevent, for what these things will be used for, an Atom is often enough.

With a screen that small, it certainly falls into netbook category, regardless of the CPU inside.

Not saying it won't sell (heck I've always found it to be a cool device), but i'd hardly call the comparison invalid.

AND FYI: This is a dual core cpu, upcomming netbooks will be dual core with hyperthreading (i.e the OS will see it as 4 cores, and will be able to process more threads at once). I have an Atom 330 box, and believe me, it surely does make a difference over traditional single core atoms.


RE: Dammit! Still only 2 GB RAM?
By Pirks on 10/20/2010 3:54:35 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
power only counts when its Apple that is implementing it right Pirks?
wrong
quote:
what you will be doing on a Macbook air over a Netbook?
enjoying snappy UI and apps
quote:
an Atom is often enough
often, not always
quote:
it certainly falls into netbook category, regardless of the CPU inside
it certainly falls into the category of ultraportable notebooks, not netbooks, because netbook is an ultraportable notebook => with an Atom inside <=
quote:
it surely does make a difference over traditional single core atoms
Atom is always Atom, an in-order slowness, no matter how you call it, two Atom cores are going to be molasses slow compared to two C2D cores, so moot point


RE: Dammit! Still only 2 GB RAM?
By omnicronx on 10/20/2010 4:19:20 PM , Rating: 2
I'm fully aware of the archetechtual differences between the two, and I understand that the MacBook air IS an ultraportable. But that does not mean it will be treated as such by consumers, with a screen that small, you would be hard pressed to say that people are not going to be drawing comparisons between the two.

I also know that the Atom 330 benches around 66% (or 2/3) of of the 1.6GHZ CULV variant being used in the Mac Book Air.

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.php?cpu=Int...

You should know that ULV's don't perform on par with their desktop or even higher end notebook cpu variants.


RE: Dammit! Still only 2 GB RAM?
By Pirks on 10/20/2010 5:15:30 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I also know that the Atom 330 benches around 66% (or 2/3) of of the 1.6GHZ CULV variant being used in the Mac Book Air
This is why it's not a netbook, so calling it a $1000 netbook is dumb. It looks like a netbook but looks can be deceiving.


RE: Dammit! Still only 2 GB RAM?
By omnicronx on 10/20/2010 6:40:54 PM , Rating: 2
Call it an ultra portable, call it a netbook, call it a flying squirrel for all I care, the fact remains that the smaller form factor and screen size are going to have people comparing the AIR to netbooks.

This is the exact reason why PC vendors have been keeping their CULV based machines on the slighter higher end. Most have been kept in the 13"+ category as to not canabalize their own sales.


RE: Dammit! Still only 2 GB RAM?
By Alexstarfire on 10/20/2010 6:15:15 PM , Rating: 2
So what are ultraportable laptops with celerons in them?


RE: Dammit! Still only 2 GB RAM?
By Pirks on 10/20/2010 6:22:21 PM , Rating: 1
if Celeron is quite close to Atom performance wise then it's a netbook


By Alexstarfire on 10/20/2010 6:30:36 PM , Rating: 2
Not sure about the newer Celerons vs the newer Atoms, but when the atom debuted a 900Mhz Celeron was faster than the 1.6Ghz Atom. Both were single core. It's hard to find direct comparisons between those two CPUs.


RE: Dammit! Still only 2 GB RAM?
By omnicronx on 10/20/2010 6:59:56 PM , Rating: 2
Stop making stuff up, there is no true definition as to what a netbook is/is not.

There term is so overused these days its not even funny.

There have been netbooks sold with Intel Atom , Via powered, Celeron powered, and AMD geode powered processors. If the manufacturer wants to call it a netbook, so it shall be.

Heck some peg it on screen size and weight (anything under 3 pounds and screen sizes between 6-11 inches)

That being said, the first Asus EEE was celeron powered.


RE: Dammit! Still only 2 GB RAM?
By Pirks on 10/21/2010 9:11:11 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
there is no true definition as to what a netbook is/is not
There is one. Look at newegg's netbook category. Netbooks are tiny cheapo notebooks of 9-11" form factor and always with low memory, uberslow CPUs like Atom or Geode, slow HDDs and crappy glossy screens. New 11" MBA has the only thing similar - form factor i.e. size/weight, so it's not a netbook. You can call it what you want but once you look at newegg you should understand what I'm talking about.


RE: Dammit! Still only 2 GB RAM?
By Alexstarfire on 10/21/2010 2:53:52 PM , Rating: 2
Seems like a netbook to me, even the 13" MBA, since it has no optical drive. Just my opinion though. Got to admit that with Windows 7 Starter being on netbooks now they must be uber slow. Not enough RAM for Windows 7.

If form factor doesn't make it a netbook, then what makes an ultra portable laptop ultra portable? Size and weight. You can call it what you want, but the 11" MBA sure looks like a high end netbook to most people.


RE: Dammit! Still only 2 GB RAM?
By Pirks on 10/22/2010 9:06:33 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah it looks, but looks can be deceiving


RE: Dammit! Still only 2 GB RAM?
By n00bxqb on 10/20/2010 6:53:51 PM , Rating: 2
Don't be that dumb to pretend you can't get other brands of netbooks w/ C2D CULV CPUs ...


RE: Dammit! Still only 2 GB RAM?
By Pirks on 10/21/2010 9:16:40 AM , Rating: 1
You can't get 'em because netbook != CULV, these are very different things


RE: Dammit! Still only 2 GB RAM?
By Nutzo on 10/20/2010 3:54:46 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed.
Bought an Acer with an 11.6" screen, CULV dual core CPU, similar battery life, 160GB drive for < $400

My Acer does weight about 14oz more, but for $600 less, I'll take the cash.


RE: Dammit! Still only 2 GB RAM?
By CharonPDX on 10/20/2010 2:56:08 PM , Rating: 2
Yay, and a 1.6 GHz processor as an option. $999 for 1.6 and 4 GB would have been nice, but at least the options are there.


RE: Dammit! Still only 2 GB RAM?
By invidious on 10/20/2010 3:42:21 PM , Rating: 2
Jobs be priased for giving you the option to overpay even more.

FYI you can get a 4gb stick of DDR3 memory for about $60. The difference between a 4gb stick and a 2gb stick is about $20. Thats an 80% profit margin when they make that option available to you.


RE: Dammit! Still only 2 GB RAM?
By Nutzo on 10/20/2010 3:59:15 PM , Rating: 2
4gb of LAPTOP DDR3 for $60? I'd like to see where you are getting your pricing. The cheapest I've seen the generic stuff (that I wouldn't use) is $90


RE: Dammit! Still only 2 GB RAM?
By Cheesew1z69 on 10/21/2010 5:53:23 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, he is pretty close, I didn't believe it either but a 4Gb stick on newegg, the lowest price for a single stick is 65 bucks.


RE: Dammit! Still only 2 GB RAM?
By robinthakur on 10/21/2010 8:40:00 AM , Rating: 2
It is his money, so who are you to question his purchasing decision when not in possession of all the facts? I might get one, purely because it looks absolutely beautiful and it would be useful to be able to Facetime my partner without holding my iPhone up ;-P Price is not really a factor for everyone.


There's already a notebook that's much better
By ack on 10/20/2010 3:31:37 PM , Rating: 3
The Acer TimeLineX 3820TG. 8 hour battery life and *can* play games. Thin and under 4 lbs.

MBA thinner, but the hardware is really outdated. But Apple marketing will win again. So sad.




By RussianSensation on 10/20/2010 6:43:36 PM , Rating: 1
I don't own a single Apple product. But, here is another way I look at the Air.

I own a Core i7 @ 3.9ghz + GTX470 for games . So anyone here who is trying to "argue" that their Acer Timeline 3820 or any other laptop can play game in any shape or form is laughable. No person who seriosly plays modern games will game on any of the shitty Windows or Mac laptops, period.

Every laptop outside the best ones with HD5870 and GTX470 or faster can't play modern games unless you are ok with 1024x768 Medium quality no AA. In that case a Nintendo DS/PSP is a much preferable gaming system.

For the other times when you need to carry a light portable device with a keyboard (let's say you are on a business trip, or on a plane, train, in a business meeting carrying your laptop many times a day) in the Air you get:

1) thinnest notebook in the world
2) made out of solid quality aluminum and a keyboard with no flex
3) at least 2-3x as good LED backlit screen with 2x the contrast ratio of any equivalent notebook, and a great 1440x900 resolution
4) 7 hours of battery life without the protruding rear battery
5) no mechanical hard drive which reduces noise and increases application loading due to flash setup

All of the above for $1399 with 4GBs of ram. Can you please provide me with a Windows laptop that can do fulfill all of the above in the size/form factor and price <$1400?

I am all ears.

When will you people get it in your head that a laptop = portable device. If I want to play games, there is a desktop replacement laptop OR a desktop for that task.

Also, the processor is a 1.86GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor with 6MB on-chip shared L2 cache . This is fast enough for anyone doing internet browsing, email and office work.

Anyone else who may complain that the Air is missing a Backlit keyboard - every single power user knows how to type "blindly". So if you need to look at your keys to type fast, you should probably take a typing class before criticizing laptop keyboards.


RE: There's already a notebook that's much better
By ack on 10/20/2010 9:03:20 PM , Rating: 2
Huh? Lots of people play games on laptops. Who still buys desktops?

If thin and light is what you're after, Sandy Bridge CPUs are coming out in a month or so, and designs will be much faster and with better battery life.

Because games don't matter on a laptop. Right.


By RussianSensation on 10/21/2010 1:14:43 AM , Rating: 2
Who buys desktops?

1) People who care about price/performance
2) People who enjoy gaming ==> Desktop + 30 inch 2560x1600 or a 37-42 LCD monitor = great gaming experience

I also have a laptop = light work, portable device for internet browsing, etc. Not everyone enjoys playing solitaire or Sims.

Sandy Bridge GPU is a joke. It will only be as fast as G310M from NV which is 2x slower than the slowest most modern NV laptop GPU - the GT415M.

Good luck playing 2011 games on your laptop.


By ack on 10/21/2010 9:23:31 AM , Rating: 2
Agreed, and that's why I also have a monster desktop rig. I was just playing devil's advocate. Sorry.

Sandy Bridge's IGP will be sufficient for non-gaming needs. And draws a lot less power vs. Core 2 ULV + Nvidia GPU.

The fact that the new CPUs are already ramping up for release means the MBA will be 2 generations behind in a couple of months.

Intel already demonstrated a super thin laptop at Computex. As for gaming, the 3820TG is fast enough to play WoW or Starcraft II, and that's enough for most people.


By charrytg on 10/21/2010 1:51:35 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
All of the above for $1399 with 4GBs of ram. Can you please provide me with a Windows laptop that can do fulfill all of the above in the size/form factor and price <$1400?


That's like asking if I can provide you with a macbook air that isn't a macbook air. If you are too picky, you get nothing.

Fortunately, there is no benefit to having the thinnest laptop ever. Also fortunately, I don't see the point of having an aluminum laptop, unless you put it there "because it looks nice" or "because I like it". Besides possible heat dissipation.. on to your body.. I would think that if aluminum was found to be a very good material for laptop casing, that everyone would be producing laptops like that. Desktops are a different story. All my desktops are aluminum.

Now, as for "2-3x as good LED backlit screen".. 2-3x as good as what? It was just released today. What information about this screen do you have that nobody else does? Generally apple screens are very good, and generally all other laptops are really not. But as all modern laptops are LED backlit these days, and I've seen no other specs for the screen, I can't judge just yet.

As for mechanical hard drives, oh.. with the money saved by not getting an apple computer, ssds are very cheap.

You seem jaded on certain things. Why are you against gaming or doing work on a laptop? Are you unaware that laptops actually play games better then you claim they do? Are you unaware that a gtx 470 is overkill for many people? Why are you against backlit keyboards? They never hurt anyone. It seems like you are making excuses for this device.

I present you with : alienware m11x
1) netbook size, macbook air size, being an 11.6" screen device. It's not thin.. but past a certain width, being thin has no advantage. It is the length first and weight second that determines how portable it is. Being thin is for show. It amuses people with more money than sense.
2) it's got a core 2 culv as well.. 1.6ghz. But the fun part is the GPU.. 335m. 72 shaders. Switchable graphics to intel integrated. With this, it can play all modern games on medium quality, 1366x768 res, no aa, and be at playable framerates. Yes, crysis, oblivion, all of the fun stuff.
3) with integrated graphics enabled... 9 hours of battery life. I've gotten it to read above 9 hours before if I disabled everything, so 9 hours is actually a realistic figure. About 5-6 hours of HD movies it gets you.
4) backlit keyboard, because unlike you, other people are aware that laptop keyboards sometimes have odd arrangement of buttons, so typing blindly does not always work as expected
5) with the money saved (it's only $800 dollars, what a deal) you can purchase a ssd. A rather large one in fact.

So you can save your core i7 and gtx 470 for games. You can buy your $1,400 macbook air if you wish, and use it solely for checking email if you want to let it go to waste. Meanwhile I will use my core i7 and CF 5970s for everything while at home, and use my alienware m11x for everything while on the go. Just about the only thing I wouldn't do on the m11x would be transcoding and the like. Thats work for a computer without a battery life.


RE: There's already a notebook that's much better
By Dug on 10/20/2010 7:07:01 PM , Rating: 2
I wouldn't call it much better.
There's a lot to be said for unibody construction. It's very solid. The keyboard on the Acer sucks, I've used one.
Better screen and resolution on Mac. (And isn't 16x9)
SSD will make the Mac seem a lot faster.
Weight
Glass touch pad, easily the best on the market.
Magnet on lid is best I've used too.
So yes, the Acer may have better processor, but usability for daily use, I would take a Mac any day.


By Dug on 10/20/2010 7:42:41 PM , Rating: 2
Forgot to mention noise. As soon as that Acer I tried started using the ATI card, it sounded like a jet engine compared to what the Air will be which is essentially silent.


Looks Great!
By Flunk on 10/20/2010 2:39:47 PM , Rating: 3
Wow, that looks really fantastic. It's a shame it has the performance of a 4-5 year old desktop system. Maybe Apple will put something neat together when AMDs fusion chips finally ship.




RE: Looks Great!
By Phynaz on 10/20/2010 2:45:00 PM , Rating: 2
What other non-plastic two pound notebook performs better?


RE: Looks Great!
By Alexstarfire on 10/20/2010 6:21:55 PM , Rating: 2
I don't understand all the hate on plastic. No doubt aluminum and carbon fiber look a bit better, but I'm not using my laptop as a baseball. Maybe I just take care of my stuff better than most people though. I've always been function over fashion. As a result this and netbooks don't appeal to me. Without an optical drive it's just not that useful. That might change and more things move to DD though.


RE: Looks Great!
By Pirks on 10/21/2010 9:23:08 AM , Rating: 2
I don't understand all the hate on cloth seats in cars. No doubt leather looks a bit better, but I'm not using my car seats as a display for leather sales. Maybe I just take care of my cloth better than most people though. I've always been function over fashion. As a result these stupid leather seats don't appeal to me. Without a low price of cloth it's just not that useful. That might change and more leather seats move to lower prices though.


RE: Looks Great!
By Alexstarfire on 10/21/2010 2:57:40 PM , Rating: 2
Congrats on yet another crappy car analogy.


RE: Looks Great!
By The Raven on 10/21/2010 11:36:14 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
this and netbooks


FYI this is a netbook.

And while I'm here, I'll just say that I like the aluminum for more than just looks. I think it feels good as I type too. And there is the functionality where it transfers heat better than plastic. I would pay extra to have it. unfortunately Apple doesn't make it easy to find out how much I do have to pay for it.


Finally, a NEW Macbook Air!
By spread on 10/20/2010 2:42:05 PM , Rating: 5
I can't wait to upgrade my 2GB Core2Duo Macbook Air to the new 2GB Core2Duo Macbook Air.

Wait a minute...




RE: Finally, a NEW Macbook Air!
By MrWho on 10/20/2010 4:05:06 PM , Rating: 3
Good one! +1


By AstroGuardian on 10/21/2010 9:46:54 AM , Rating: 2
My thought exactly! +1


Yawn
By Spivonious on 10/20/2010 3:01:19 PM , Rating: 1
So Lion finally catches up to Vista + Live Photo Gallery?

Multi-touch support? Windows 7 (with single-touch support back in XP)
Full-screen apps? Windows 95
App Store? pointless - just another way to suck consumers into the Apple universe.
App Save/Resume? Possible with any application since non-volatile storage came around.




RE: Yawn
By Luticus on 10/20/2010 3:27:18 PM , Rating: 1
that's apple for you, steal/recycle old tech slap it in a pretty white case with a light up apple logo on it and call it invative...

apple is like the underpants gnomes:

step one: steal technology
step two: ??? = marketing lies and complete fabrications
step three: PROFIT!!!

seems to be a working model so far :)


RE: Yawn
By Tony Swash on 10/21/2010 11:56:38 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
So Lion finally catches up to Vista + Live Photo Gallery?

Multi-touch support? Windows 7 (with single-touch support back in XP)
Full-screen apps? Windows 95
App Store? pointless - just another way to suck consumers into the Apple universe.
App Save/Resume? Possible with any application since non-volatile storage came around.


They call this the Steve Ballmer Reality Distortion Field (SBRDF).

The SBRDF is similar to the Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Field except those affected by the SBRDF hypnotically follow Steve Ballmer as he walks off the edge of a cliff.

Here is an example of the SBRDF in action

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJajOG9dL2s&


RE: Yawn
By Luticus on 10/21/2010 1:03:15 PM , Rating: 2
Method by which i buy electronic devices.

Step 1: Examine device, see that it works as intended.
Step 2: Compare features with that of other devices in the same category.
Step 3: decide if the device meets my needs and can fit into my lifestyle.
Step 4: Compare prices to ensure that once i buy the device i can still sit down without wencing in pain.
Step 5: Purchase device...

There's no steve ballmer or steve jobs in that equasion.


RE: Yawn
By Tony Swash on 10/21/2010 6:46:37 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Step 1: Examine device, see that it works as intended.


I think you kinda lost Vista on step one :)


RE: Yawn
By Pirks on 10/22/2010 9:10:20 AM , Rating: 2
Not if he used premium $1k+ PC to try Vista on :P

Vista when it was released was for premium hardware, mass consumers/cheapskates buying $500 PCs at that time were out of luck. I hope you weren't one of them Tony, I bet you got your Vista impressions from a review somewhere on Macworld or Macrumors or Daring Fireball etc.

This, Tony, does not count


THANK YOU APPLE!!!
By jah1subs on 10/20/2010 5:03:10 PM , Rating: 2
I have NO interest in the MacBook Air.

However, I am thrilled that Apple is putting 11.6" and 13.3" (overpriced) notebook computers with SSD on the market. The Wintel notebook manufacturers will copy these combinations. I don't care if it is a standard height case. In fact, I want standard height cases (3-4 pounds anyone?) for more structural integrity (one would hope).

This will push smaller notebook computers on the market with (almost?) full sized keyboard for 11.6" and full sized keyboard for 13.3." Right now, the sweet spot seems to be 15.6" with far less choice (and relatively higher prices) below 15" diagonal display based notebook computers.

HOORAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!




RE: THANK YOU APPLE!!!
By Alexstarfire on 10/20/2010 6:27:10 PM , Rating: 2
Ummm, I don't think Apple was the first to use SSDs in laptops. Netbooks use them and several laptop manufacturers have them as options, since they are usually much more expensive than HDDs.

Maybe your entire post is sarcasm though, hard to tell.


RE: THANK YOU APPLE!!!
By Dug on 10/20/2010 7:11:15 PM , Rating: 2
You aren't going to get more structural integrity over a unibody. And overpriced would be $3700 13" Sony with ssd that makes a crackling sound because it doesn't have unibody construction.


RE: THANK YOU APPLE!!!
By bruce24 on 10/21/2010 12:49:16 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
However, I am thrilled that Apple is putting 11.6" and 13.3" (overpriced) notebook computers with SSD on the market. The Wintel notebook manufacturers will copy these combinations.


You don't have to wait, just go to Sony.

http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet...


RE: THANK YOU APPLE!!!
By Johnmcl7 on 10/21/2010 2:03:13 PM , Rating: 2
As usual, Apple are a few years behind the rest as aside from Lenovo, Sony also have some ultralights which are SSD only.

John


Apple $tore = $$$ for Apple
By jbwhite99 on 10/20/2010 3:05:58 PM , Rating: 2
Of course Apple will have their store. They get a 30% cut of everything in the iTunes and iPhone store for taking the order and distribution. This gives them about a 85% margin on that part.

I agree - $1000 for a Netbook. It may not be instant on, but I'll take a Thinkpad over this 10 days a week. X100e with Intel processor will run a lot faster than this, and be a lot cheaper - just won't be as cool looking.




RE: Apple $tore = $$$ for Apple
By Pirks on 10/20/10, Rating: 0
RE: Apple $tore = $$$ for Apple
By sdsdv10 on 10/20/2010 8:41:32 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
X100e with Intel processor will run a lot faster than this,


According to Lenovo's online store, the x100e only comes with an AMD processor. An Intel CPU is not an option.

http://shop.lenovo.com/us/landing_pages/thinkpad/2...


RE: Apple $tore = $$$ for Apple
By jbwhite99 on 10/21/2010 12:51:34 PM , Rating: 2
sorry - I meant Edge with the Intel processor.


RE: Apple $tore = $$$ for Apple
By Pirks on 10/21/2010 1:02:03 PM , Rating: 2
Like it changes anything, since MBA also has Intel CPU.


Apple app store.
By zorxd on 10/20/2010 2:58:37 PM , Rating: 2
I can't wait for Apple to close OS X so that only pre-approved apps from their app store can be installed.




RE: Apple app store.
By Luticus on 10/20/2010 3:20:56 PM , Rating: 2
I'll officaially leave osx and never look back if they ever do this... and rely on my virtual windows 7 for "apps".

Apple will NOT tell me how i can and can't hurt my computer!


Wow... Just... Wow
By amanojaku on 10/20/2010 8:52:56 PM , Rating: 1
I'm usually underwhelmed by what Apple does. I'm not the kind of person who appreciates aesthetics when function is neglected. So I'm a little disturbed at what OS X DOESN'T advertise.

1) Reduced memory footprint - There's no mention of memory usage
2) Secured memory access - It's already been proven that a wireless keyboard can access a Mac's RAM; who knows what else is possible?
3) Reduced CPU usage - Are there any optimizations?
4) Storage enhancements - Support for 2048 byte clusters?
5) Graphics support - A port of DirectX to entice game designers (I won't hold my breath)

These are just some of the things I think of as a user. Other people have other needs, and I can understand if you think my list is weird. But an APP STORE? How is that a new OS, even by Apple's standards? Hell, it's not even virtualization...

FWIW, the one feature I DO like is Mission Control. Integrate that with hardware status and performance charts and that would be awesome. Although, it does look similar to this, which I installed as early as 2005:

Alt-Tab Replacement

With this PowerToy, in addition to seeing the icon of the application window you are switching to, you will also see a preview of the page. This helps particularly when multiple sessions of an application are open.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/downloads/power...




RE: Wow... Just... Wow
By Goatjoe on 10/21/2010 12:21:34 AM , Rating: 3
Not defending apple here, but I will bite...

quote:
1) Reduced memory footprint - There's no mention of memory usage

Of course there isn't... You want specs on a OS that has not even made beta yet? It would be foolish to throw out some numbers this early in development.

quote:
2) Secured memory access - It's already been proven that a wireless keyboard can access a Mac's RAM; who knows what else is possible?

WTH are you talking about?? How are they accessing the RAM with a wireless keyboard? Bluetooth? Wireless adapter via USB?

quote:
3) Reduced CPU usage - Are there any optimizations?

I am sure there will be, but see #1. Not even Beta yet...

quote:
4) Storage enhancements - Support for 2048 byte clusters?

I may be a bit naive here, but what is the huge importance of this exact size of clusters?

quote:
5) Graphics support - A port of DirectX to entice game designers (I won't hold my breath)

And you shouldn't hold your breath. Porting Direct X to OSX (or even Linux) would be a huge undertaking. If game companies wanted their game on OSX, they would just use OpenGL, which all of the major OSes can handle.


Interesting
By Setsunayaki on 10/21/2010 5:16:57 AM , Rating: 2
I tend to help out people get their Wine installations working on MAC OS X. Unfortunately, thanks to APPLE applying changes to the OpenGL specification that Khronos Foundation releases....

It causes some things to behave differently. A lot of these Wine programs use are failing on the start-up screen and regardless all I try to help others...A lot of programs fail with DDR-Errors (DDR in this case means DirectDrawRender)

I'm running on Linux and I am not getting the very same problems. In fact, a little secret....If Wine matures...I am sure by the time it reaches versions 2.0, it will reach a point where Windows Gaming Conventions become obsolete...It may steal the entire show.

You see, if you run on 3 - 5ghz Cores on Linux and love playing games and look at performance...while normally Windows has a higher framerate...on what I have now wine breaks 60 FPS on practically every major game I am playing...

But that is not all...I am able to launch multiple instances of Wine and literally run 4 - 6 games at once...all retaining their framerates. I click on one to full screen mode and it still retains a 60+ FPS.

On Windows launching multiple games causes DirectX conflicts causing crashes and slowdowns. On Apple, a lot of stuff fails on Wine...

Now they are going to make OS 10.7 to be closer to the iOS...last I checked I have a computer, not a smartphone.

Windows wants to boast about triple monitor gaming. Sorry but few people can afford this and its really pathetic.

Apple wants to talk about "Gaming finally coming to MACs"

Pure Linux can truly say "We can already play most games with faster loading times, lower ping and even better security than on Windows (or MAC) and its possible to retain framerates launching 5 - 6 seperate games.

I know this because I do this always....Why should I care about spending tons of money on an APPLE if I can just spend the same amount and get killer performance on my linux build?

...and before you give me the entire "10.7 pwns", sorry but you know its true...when those are released...a lot of people on Linux are going to apply virtualization on it to create their own hackintosh thanks to torrents and do what all the SMART and COOL kids do...Run Linux with Wine + Virtualizing Windows and OS X....just for kicks and to prove one OS truly is above them...Have fun with Parallels...that has as great optimization as roadkill over a silver moon.




RE: Interesting
By AstroGuardian on 10/21/2010 9:53:35 AM , Rating: 2
Yea! :-)


iPad
By The Raven on 10/21/2010 11:39:43 AM , Rating: 2
Steve Jobs was right. The iPad is the greatest! It makes the fad that were netbooks obsolete!!!

I agree with Jobs! Netbooks are dumb and useless. Who ever came up with this netbook is retarded. Huh? It was made by Steve... who now?




iLife 11 not ready
By NanoTube1 on 10/22/2010 6:44:30 AM , Rating: 2
Just to let you people know...
Installed it today - the thing is not ready for prime time, buggy as hell.
iPhoto wouldn't even import videos recorded on my iPhone 3GS - says it can't recognize MOV file... WTF! this is Apple's own video format!! XD

There are many other bugs I already encountered - shame on Apple, this is sub standard QA.




"It looks like the iPhone 4 might be their Vista, and I'm okay with that." -- Microsoft COO Kevin Turner














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki