It's hard to compare PC and Mac hardware because part of the Mac value proposition is Mac OS X. If you're not going to run that I would have to ask: why buy a Mac?
Anyway as for comparison of tech specs:
- The X1 uses a higher power CPU (up to 2.7 GHz dual core i7, the 13" MBA tops out at a 1.8GHz dual core i7);
- The MBA has better battery life;
- The MBA has a higher-res display;
- The X1 can have 8GB of memory and the memory and HD are, I assume, user-replaceable (I can't recall if they're soldered on or otherwise not replaceable on the MBA);
- Size/weight (MBA is almost a pound lighter);
- The X1 seems to have 1 USB 3.0 port, which is nice. The MBA has Thunderbolt;
- SSD storage on the MBA goes to 256GB on the MBA, up to 160GB on the X1, although this may well be user-upgradeable;
- Pricewise the MBA I think does edge it out, which is kinda amazing. The X1 with i5/128GB SSD currently specs out at about $1700. Price will vary considerably with offers and coupons.
I have the 1.7/256/13" MBA and love it but I run OSX not Linux on it.
> It's hard to compare PC and Mac hardware because part of the Mac value proposition is Mac OS X. If you're not going to run that I would have to ask: why buy a Mac?
Some people have no desire to use OS X, but the Air is an extremely nice piece of hardware at an awesome price. Except possibly for some ridiculous luxury models in a totally different price range, nothing similar is available from other manufacturers yet.
And no, the X1 is not even remotely similar. I don't understand why this article seems to think they make for a good comparison.
I believe the SSD on the MBA is technically user replaceable, but it's a weird proprietary format (which some enterprising manufacturer may have cloned, not sure). Sadly the RAM is soldered; the 4GB cap is the blocking issue for me on considering one (thank you, Eclipse).
Doesn't swapping to an SSD should make supposedly 4GB of RAM acceptable? I don't use Eclipse (Dog forbid, I'm an IDE hater) but I can't fathom it needing more than 4GB of RAM. Heck, I run 2 virtual machines, Firefox and my editor on my 2 GB MacBook.
I forget the SSD assist, but I'd have to see it in action before I put cash on it. Eclipse was tolerable with 4 on my last years MBP, but doubling made a world of difference.
> It's hard to compare PC and Mac hardware because part of the Mac value proposition is Mac OS X. If you're not going to run that I would have to ask: why buy a Mac?
I brought a Mac as I wanted a POSIX compliant operating system with a good battery life and flawless and fast suspend. Linux was unable to provide that for me.
I thought it interesting that the author didn't mention the 50% increase in clock speed in his "only buy the X1 if..." section. If you need clock speed, then the X1 has much more to offer in that arena.
If clock speed is a primary concern, you probably don't want an ultraportable. It's one of the tradeoffs with having a smaller, more portable machine. Sure, some will do better or worse, but if you NEED the extra processing power, there are better alternatives. For ultraportables, a good-enough processor is usually good-enough.
You are right, that is quite an omission on my part. Just note that the higher clock speed isn't a priority in _my_ books and brings lower battery life which _is_ a priority for me.
... but still, why upgrade the clock speed if it's a net detriment to you?
If you're making the comparison for yourself, why up the clock speed unecessarily, if you know it causes problems for you?
If you're making the comparison in general, then it's not really an excuse that you were doing it for yourself to omit the benefit of the significantly faster clock, particularly since you're drawing attention to the negatives of it (shorter battery life)?
Please don't interpret this as a serious attack or anything, I just find it a little odd.
The upgrade I chose for the MacBook Air still includes a power-efficient CPU, probably with the exact same TDP rating, just a slightly higher clock rating. This will most likely not increase the power drain, depending on what task your putting it to.
This. Macs are the only short/medium-term future proof machines right now. I use Windows 7 on a new Macbook Air 13" for my daily stuff but dual boot to OSX to work on iOS.
To me, the main limitation of the MBA is that it can only have 4 Gigs of memory. If it wasn't for that, it would be the perfect laptop. Relatively inexpensive even, as the article points out.
However, I require 8 Gigs (for running VMs) and OSX (because I have trouble tolerating anything else), a ~250 Gig SSD and at least some 1400x800 pixels. That leaves me with a crazy expensive Macbook Pro 15".
If it wasn't for the screen resolution, I'd go with the 13" MBP.
If it wasn't for the memory constraint, I'd go with the 13" MBA.
And, well the OSX requirement constrains me to Macs, obviously.
If I do this, this will set me back some 2700 bucks. I wonder if that is just bad luck in my requirements or actually carefully planned by Apple Inc.
I also wonder what the same machine would cost if it were not from Apple. (I'd add: 5-7h battery life, Sandy Bridge processor)
I recently picked up a ThinkPad T420 with a dock for around $1000. Adding in an mSata 80 gb ssd for $200. i5-2540, 1600x900, 8 gb ram, 2 batteries (9 cell for 9-10 hrs working in a VM, 6 cell gives around 5-6 hours).
Like you, I enjoyed OS X and the fact that everything worked so well. But it came to a point where MBP's hardware limitations just got too much (no dock so I had to plug and unplug peripherals 2-3 times a day, battery not swappable so 5-6 hrs was the maximum I could get, no way to have two hard drives (SSD + HDD) without voiding the warranty etc) and I decided to switch.
So far so good, the flexibility and build quality are great. Lets see how long before Windows 7/Debian start to become annoying though ;)
I have been working on a hackintoshed Dell for the last year or so. Initially, I tried to work with Windows 7. It really is not bad at all, but my brain seems to be hardwired to use a Unix command line (and Vim) at this point, so after a while, I had enough and sought refuge in Linux-land. It didn't last long though. After fiddling with the Nvidia drivers for a while to get a multi-monitor setup working, I decided that I could just as well invest that time in getting it hackintoshed. Amazingly, that worked flawlessly (nearly: network and sound didn't work. A USB-ethernet adapter and a USB sound card did the trick, though). Then came Lion and that broke my App Store on the hackintosh. So it's back to a genuine Mac for me.
It nearly worked, though. I wish you the best of luck.
"Initially, I tried to work with Windows 7. It really is not bad at all, but my brain seems to be hardwired to use a Unix command line (and Vim) at this point, so after a while, I had enough and sought refuge in Linux-land."
Have you tried Cygwin? I've been using it for years, with no problems. Unix command line goodness in Windows.
Also, you can install vim from the Cygwin packages, or install native Windows vim. Both solutions work well.
I have used Cygwin for a while, yes. However, I found it to be slow and just... alien, from a Windows perspective. My main gripe with it was a different thing though: Its package management is atrocious. Packages are outdated and there is no simple way to fix them. Also, it installs its own versions of common software, that are only usable from within Cygwin, but not from CMD. Honestly though, I never bothered to investigate further after being annoyed by it a few times, and just used a Linux VM instead.
Gvim works fine on Windows, though. Also, ViEmu has had my love for many months. It's not like you can't work productively in Windows. It's just that I am more comfortable elsewhere.
I suggest running a VM in Linux when developing. It kills battery, but not as bad as you'd think unless you're doing intensive work. It has been the best of both worlds for me on my home projects.
> To me, the main limitation of the MBA is that it can only have 4 Gigs of memory. If it wasn't for that, it would be the perfect laptop. Relatively inexpensive even, as the article points out.
Couldn't resist pointing out that I have a 4GB MBA, and I have yet to encounter any memory issues whatsoever. I have run some hefty software on there - e.g. photoshop + iWork + Pages all at once. Granted, it's not the same as VMs, but it seems that the ultra-fast SSD makes swapping a non-issue. Maybe someone who does run VMs on an MBA can chime in?
Run a Windows VM with Visual Studio. That will need at least 1.5 Gigs. Then run some heavy stuff on OSX too and it will become slow. If you have an SSD, it won't become unbearably slow, but clearly straining.
Which is to say, 4 Gigs are fine for a VM every now and then, but not for everyday use. At least not for me.
To me too, OS X is very important. The way it works and everything else that is not objective and deals with "taste". On the objective side of things, I like the ability to be in *nix environment, run proprietary software (such as Adobe CS, a reasonable Skype, iTunes, MS Office or iWork - I definitely don't like OOo or forks, etc.) amongst other things. On the middle ground of objective and subjective, I like the fact that my OS doesn't keep slowing down with time - this can be measured but I'm not aware if someone has.
I'm often surprised that the value of OSX and its built in conveniences is not factored into a comparison. Preview, built in file extraction, TimeMachine (which does not really have any comparable alternative on windows IMO), Calendar, Mail etc.
Some of these apps are built into windows (but not with the same modern feature set) and most are available for free, but OSX seems to have hit a good selection of apps that you can use out of the box.
Edit: Also that I upgraded/time machined from my 2008 white MacBook to my current generation MBP on Lion without loosing any performance, apps or data was a remarkable time saver.
Agreed: The best thing about OSX is that it combines a great graphical interface and support for commercial software with a Unix command line.
You can achieve something similar with Windows 7 and a Linux VM and some file system mirroring tool (VMWare sharing or Dropbox or something). But nothing beats OSX for slickness.
I've got a lenovo T520 with the 9-cell battery, 8GB ram, sandy bridge processor plus an nvidia mobile graphics card (i can use that or switch to the intel 3000 if i want to save power), cost me about 1200 bucks all said an done. Got an HDD instead of SSD, so add a few hundred for a more pure comparison if you want.
Just out of sheer curiosity, what is the type of the development work you mentioned in the article? Reason I'm asking is that while perhaps it cannot (conveniently) be done on Windows (OS on Lenovo), I'm wondering why OSX cannot be used as a development platform?
We're targeting Debian, so running that (in a VM) on a 4GB MBA is not pleasant. Borderline unusable, sometimes. That's why I'd have preferred an ultraportable with either more RAM or the ability to run Debian natively on. Turns out, I found none so far.
I know everyone is doing a comparison of checklist specs but to me things like design of the body, it's durability, touchpad area, etc. along with OSX which supports gestures on that touchpad and other things that make my computer usage considerably pleasurable, etc.
Edit: On a side note; good thing that the MBA is coming out competitively priced here but even if it was a bit costlier than it's competition, I wouldn't mind paying that little extra for making me not pull my hair out using my computer.
1. My opinion, but it seem unfair to dismiss the glossy screen for outdoors without actually having used it. I'm writing this on a MBA right now and I regularly use it outdoors without any problem, as do most of my coworkers.
2. If he's going to claim the battery life is better with extended battery, he needs to add it into his estimated weight as wel (which I don't believe he has.) Seems like at that point the X1 would be close to twice as heavy as the MBA, at least 1.5x.
For what it's worth, I do use an MBA (3,2) and I sometimes have problems with the glare screen indoors (have to move it around to diminish sunlight reflection).
Of course batteries add to the weight, I just mentioned it because sometimes you just need those extra hours, just like some people specifically need 8GB of RAM.
The disadvantage of a glossy screen is that at some angles, you'll get more glare. The advantage is that (as you note) if you modify its angle, you get less glare than you would with a matte surface.
Agreed that you sometimes need those extra hours. But to be fair you have to count their weight as well; you can double the usable life of a MacBook Air with an external battery if you need to but it also doubles the weight.
I really wish Lenovo would get its act together with its product lines, because it's nearly the only company besides Apple that makes hardware I can love, but it really takes time to unpack the logic behind its product lines. The other company is Sony and it has similar problems.
I'm a bit surprised that the Asus U36SD isn't in the comparison too; it's slightly lighter than the X1, although not quite as thin, has a better battery life with the integrated battery (and identical with the slice battery), the highest configuration has the same processor as the X1 (though I haven't found anywhere that actually sells that configuration), and a much better GPU.
The low-end configuration of the U36SD is about $400 cheaper than the low-end X1 or 13-inch Macbook Air, too, as well as having a better processor than both, although this comparison focuses on the high-end, so that's not too relevant.
I can't keep track of all the models around, so I picked the biggest competitor to the MBA. On a glance, that Asus doesn't seem to have a particularly sturdy case and also Nvidia Optimus might make it a nightmare to run Linux on.
I got the same X1, but with base 3 year warranty and no upgrade on HDD for $1,449.27 CAD, and you can easily put in a 120gb Vertex 3 for an extra $260.
At least here in Canada we've got RedFlagDeals.com that always has an ongoing discount thread for lenovo, and sometimes you can get way better discounts than above.
Ubuntu runs great inside VMWare Fusion on my MBP, so that's always an option if a bare install or dual boot is giving problems. (Still wish there was an Air with 8GB. Hmm, could one make a RAM peripheral that attached through Thunderbolt, to serve as a big 'outboard virtual memory', even faster than a usual SATA SSD?)
According to what I read it's a hassle to get it installed and then working. Also, I don't know how it behaves on updates. The Ubuntu help page linked in the article mentions something about a post-install script which might needed to be run more than once...
The linux compatibility argument is entirely moot, the MBA will run linux just as well as the Lenovo, there basically is no difference in how hard it would be to install or setup.
Every part in the MBA has Linux drivers, which isn't surprising in any way, since there are no magical parts made by unicorns in there, just the typical combination of generic PC components you will find in other laptops. What sets the MBA apart is the way the body is constructed and how it holds all the stuff inside together in such a small enclosure.
Ooh, no, I beg to differ. Reality is quite different. Lenovos are near perfect Linux machines - everything including power management, various buttons, suspend/resume etc. works great.
MBA is far from ideal Linux machine - Apple's EFI implementation is well known to be crappy to the point Linux kernel developer mjg59 routinely blogs about it. Power management sucks - for example - it runs hotter, battery dies in 2-3 hours tops. On my X220 I can get 6+ hours and it never gets hot.
I have to wonder about the Linux requirement though? What do you do on Linux that can't be done with OS X underlying BSD? If you are a linux developer then I can see it but if you are doing almost any other development or design, there is little to recommend Linux over BSD and many reasons why OS X is superior as a desktop OS.
> I have to wonder about the Linux requirement though?
Matter of personal preference really. My "Desktop" machine is Windows 7 which happens to work better for my needs than OS X - Blu-Ray, AnyDVD, Hulu/Netflix without fan noise etc. That's where I do all my media/email/browsing/chat etc. Linux is primarily a development machine - I find it better for OSS development than OS X. (Plus in my case I hack on the kernel some times so that's another compelling reason.)
128 gb SSD. Core i5 ULV. and 13 inch screen outperforms an
X1 and X220 primarily in terms of usability and is within 100 dollar price range. X220 has fantastic battery but is not ultraportable...
The published maximum RAM is usually just the number of RAM slots multiplied by the largest module that exists for those slots at the time the machine is released. Frequently, larger modules are introduced later on, which the machine will handle even though it goes beyond those published specs.
The MacBook Air is a different beast in this respect because it doesn't have any RAM slots. What you buy it with is what it has, forever, unless you're much more comfortable wielding a soldering iron than most people.
It is true. Check out the iFix it teardown[1]; you'll see the RAM is soldered to the board. I still don't think 4GB versus 8GB matters as much -- you'll be paging to an SSD, after all.
I started using a MacBook air after the 3rd replacement of my Lenovo T410s. The screen would have a large white line across it (happened 2 weeks after i got it) and each time it was replaced, it happend again. The body was also brittle, and cracked. Half the people on my team had the same laptop, and had near the same experience. How such a flawed laptop could pass quality control is past me, but I'll definitely never buy a laptop from them.
> How such a flawed laptop could pass quality control is past me
Every manufacturer has a few lines of lemons. Apple for instance had a few generations of iBooks where the graphics chip would come loose (since it was placed unprotected under the wrist rest), everyone who I've ever known with a plastic MacBook (5+ people) had the front plastic crack, one generation of MacBook Pro 15" had an issue where the LCD would randomly turn on with every other row of LED lighting turned off (so it looked like stage lighting), and then of course the classic "mooing" MacBook.
This is why anecdotal evidence is difficult to take to heart - it's always black and white.
That was a problem with the t400s and t410s that were manufactured for a period. The problem is now fixed in newer t410s and all t420s.
I love my Lenovo t400s. I went around the world with it, dropped it, smashed it, and just did terrible things to it. And yet, it keeps on chugging along. My t400s is like a car that never wants to die. The consumer in me wants to upgrade but I can't find a sensible reason to do so.
It's like my mother: always present, reliable and stable. It's the only piece of hardware that ever made me smile.
It's hard to compare PC and Mac hardware because part of the Mac value proposition is Mac OS X. If you're not going to run that I would have to ask: why buy a Mac?
Anyway as for comparison of tech specs:
- The X1 uses a higher power CPU (up to 2.7 GHz dual core i7, the 13" MBA tops out at a 1.8GHz dual core i7);
- The MBA has better battery life;
- The MBA has a higher-res display;
- The X1 can have 8GB of memory and the memory and HD are, I assume, user-replaceable (I can't recall if they're soldered on or otherwise not replaceable on the MBA);
- Size/weight (MBA is almost a pound lighter);
- The X1 seems to have 1 USB 3.0 port, which is nice. The MBA has Thunderbolt;
- SSD storage on the MBA goes to 256GB on the MBA, up to 160GB on the X1, although this may well be user-upgradeable;
- Pricewise the MBA I think does edge it out, which is kinda amazing. The X1 with i5/128GB SSD currently specs out at about $1700. Price will vary considerably with offers and coupons.
I have the 1.7/256/13" MBA and love it but I run OSX not Linux on it.
Specs:
X1: http://shop.lenovo.com/us/ww/pdf/X1_datasheet.pdf
MBA: http://www.apple.com/macbookair/specs.html