POST A COMMENT

174 Comments

Back to Article

  • barncii - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    0 Comments? OK... Great article, as always. Reply
  • solipsism - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    You posted right after the article was posted. Give it some time. Reply
  • n13L5 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Maybe cause everybody's jaw dropped on the table when they got to the end of the article and found no GPU benchmark.

    I'm sure he ran one already, but didn't want to post it until doing a full investigation and comparison...
    Reply
  • n13L5 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Hopefully, Anandtech will also tell us if it runs Windows without all kinds of issues from not being optimized for Windows, running the gamut from reduced battery life to cooling fans running at full tilt etc... Reply
  • Canllaith - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    The 2012 MacBook Air runs Windows 8 very well without cooling or battery life issues - I would expect similar from the 2013. Reply
  • dusty5683 - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    Just curious, What OS version was the test platform running? Reply
  • Zok - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    I'm going to go out on a limb and guess OS X. Reply
  • Homeles - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    "Version" Reply
  • Dman23 - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    I'm assuming it's Mountain Lion the latest version of Mac OS X Reply
  • Spoony - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    I believe what he is driving at is: often new versions of Apple hardware ship with special builds of the current operating system. It will be 10.8.4, but it may or may not be a special build of 10.8.4 with support for Haswell, PCIe SSDs, 802.11ac, and the like. With 10.8.5 that codebase is then merged in with the normal release cycle. Generic versions of 10.8.4 might not even boot the machine. Reply
  • mavere - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    Is it safe to regard the Samsung SSD as a refitted 840 Pro? Or does Apple usually customize the firmware? Reply
  • darwinosx - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    Not remotely an 840 Pro. Totally different design, bus, and much faster. Reply
  • Death666Angel - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Faster likely because of the different interface. Different design is a given since it uses a different interface. But how do you know that it is totally different and not just adapted to the specific needs of the different interface? Reply
  • DERSS - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    Apple does not use Samsung (or anyone else's) SSDs in any of its products, they design their own SSDs.

    That said, the controller here for MBA is by Samsung (or it could be another supplier). Though patented solutions that this controller works on are Apple's; their engineers invented the technology (Apple bought its developers couple of years ago).
    Reply
  • Dug - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    Where did you get your info?

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/6727/apple-is-using-...
    Reply
  • descendency - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    Second to last paragraph: "Obviously battery life is the biggest improvement here with the new MacBook Pro."

    I think it should say MacBook Air. (there was no new Pro announced)
    Reply
  • JamesL - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    Excuse my ignorance, but what is the difference between mass storage via SATA and PCI-E? Doesn't SATA typically run over a PCI-E bus and if so, what is the purpose of SATA? Reply
  • mevans336 - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    SATA is limited by the SATA spec. In the case of SATA-III, that's about 500MB/s. By eliminating the SATA spec and running raw PCIe, you eliminate a bottleneck and can achieve much higher throughput. I'm not an computer engineer, but as I understand it, SATA would be similar to tunneling a higher-level network protocol through a lower level one. By eliminating the higher-level protocol (SATA) and moving to transport using the lower level protocol (PCIe) you can achieve much higher throughput. Reply
  • fteoath64 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Great explanation Mevan!. You are right, eliminating hardcoded sata controller allows for faster throughput and less overhead in signalling, many of which were for HDD and useless of SSD. Old scheme is [SSD Ctrl/firmware: sata port]---sata cable---host-sata-port---PCIbus or PCIe lane {ahci driver in OS}.
    New PCIe scheme is [SSD Ctrl/ PCIe port/chip---edgeconnector---PCIe-lane connector {ahci driver}. Short cut is good!.
    Reply
  • vol7ron - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Worth mentioning that until recently, SSDs couldn't really come near that threshold. Also worth mentioning, those that do are only saturating it with sequential reads/writes. Finally, worth mentioning that the typical user most likely won't have a need for it. Unless you've lots of $$, large data transfers generally require large data storage, which are most likely going to be HDD or hybrid drives; though TB SSDs will be commonplace soon. Reply
  • Dug - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    We didn't need more than 64k of memory either. I'll take the improved speeds of the pcie bus whether you think a typical user will have need for it or not.

    Blackmagic Disk Speed Test. Engadget recorded read speeds of 725.4 MB/s and write speeds of 433.4 MB/s, which is almost twice the speed of the current 15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina display.
    Reply
  • marco89nish - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    SATA is limited to 6Gbps, 550MBps in practice, while single PCIe can carry up to 5Gbps. So, couple of PCIe lanes are decent upgrade to SATA. Reply
  • NikiK - Thursday, June 13, 2013 - link

    Looks like Apple decided to go conservative using two links of PCIe Gen 2 at 2.5Gbps rather than a single PCIe Gen 3 link. Probably easier to have a more robust connection too. Reply
  • twistedgamez - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    the PCIe SSD sound awesome! Reply
  • Lord 666 - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    Looking to see the battery life difference, if any, between the 13" i5 and i7 models. Was hoping for the rMBP 13" to be updated, but my laptop is on its last legs. Reply
  • StealthGhost - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Me too but I don't think intel released the processors for the MBPros yet Reply
  • 8steve8 - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    is the TB port TB1/DP1.1 or is it TB2/DP1.2 ??
    i thought i read the new TB hardware for haswell platforms is TB2/DP1.2, is that the case here?
    Reply
  • repoman27 - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    Redwood Ridge, i.e. still Thunderbolt 1, but with DisplayPort 1.2 capability when directly connected to a display and operating in DisplayPort signaling mode. Reply
  • 8steve8 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    do you have a source for this?
    also, that means we can do DP MST and have up to 3 displays?
    Reply
  • 8steve8 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    oh nevermind, i misread the other article, redwood ridge is tb1, falcon ridge which is not out is tb2.

    Thanks repoman27
    Reply
  • repoman27 - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    I was wrong. DSL3510L, Cactus Ridge 4C. No DisplayPort 1.2 support.

    It seems Intel has finally added Thunderbolt controllers to ARK. Still no spec sheets, but they do list pricing. $9.95 for the Cactus/Redwood Ridge 4C controllers, $9.40 for the 2C versions (why bother?) and $5.25 for Port Ridge. That's a lot cheaper than I thought. Maybe they are charging a steep licensing fee after all.
    Reply
  • coolhardware - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    Nice to see a PCIe SSD show up in a consumer product :-)

    I wish Apple had splurged on the displays though as much of the competition,
    not to mention the iPad, have higher res displays :-(

    PS as an illustration, here's a handy dandy little list of the top pixel density laptops:
    http://pixensity.com/list/laptop/
    (site is still in beta)
    Reply
  • easp - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    Apple already has a HiDPI 13" laptop, the 13" retina MacBook Pro, which has been out for a while now and yet is missing from your list.

    The MacBook Air line puts an emphasis on being lightweight (hence the name). A Macbook Air with a retina display and an Apple-worthy battery life would basically be indistinguishable from a rMBP 13".
    Reply
  • teknic - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    You just explained apple's marketing strategy... way to go. Reply
  • coolhardware - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Thanks for mentioning the MBP13 easp, it has now been added to the list:
    http://pixensity.com/list/

    Also, you can add stuff to the list yourself if you want to contribute:
    http://pixensity.com/add/

    Personally I think teknic is on to something there... if Apple can do high resolution on an iPad they could do it on a MBA IMHO at least as an option, that way people could choose if they wanted more battery life (and low-res) or high resolution (and some degree shorter battery life) on their MBA.

    As for that making it an MBP clone, personally I prefer the MBA form factor for travel and/or actually using a laptop on my lap.

    PS thanks to Anandtech readers for adding a bunch of items to the pixel density list last night, appreciate the help!
    Reply
  • fteoath64 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    "A Macbook Air with a retina display and an Apple-worthy battery life would basically be indistinguishable from a rMBP 13".

    Not if the Air sports a 1600X 1200 resolution display going back to 4:3 aspect ratio which makes more sense in viewing web and documents rather than the idiotic 16:10 ratio!.
    Reply
  • abs1992 - Tuesday, June 18, 2013 - link

    what they could have done is have a macbook air with 1080p display. This would take a battery life hit of about 2 hrs (having 10 hrs of battery life compared to 12 hrs is a compromise I would be willing to make, if it meant a better screen). I get this figure by comparing other laptops battery life. toshiba kirabook lasts about 5.25 hrs with a 2560 x 1440 screen. Apple MBA (last gen) lasts for 6.25 hrs with 1440 x 800 screen. Assuming haswell doubles the battery life, (which has been proven), having a retina display MBA would result in battery life of about 10 hrs approximately. I would think its would be better since it is OSX and not windows 8.

    Now, some people are saying that it will be too similar to a retina MBP 13". I say the MBP 13" should add a discrete graphics card, like it does on the MBP 15" to differentiate between the two laptops.
    Reply
  • ghm3 - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    Just ordered an 11" w/ an i7/8GB RAM/512GB storage. This'll be my first Mac since my C2D Macbook back in 2007, can't wait to play with it!

    I'm looking forward to to the ample battery life for long flights I'm frequently on, My M11xR3 is good for about 3.5-4h of video w/ wifi/BT off and and the brightness down, I'm guessing this thing will be good for at least 6hr+ of nonstop video playback.
    Reply
  • Homeles - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    Looks like the 13" is down $100 over last year's launch prices? That price drop was greatly needed. Despite this, MacBook Airs are still the least interesting PCs that Apple sell, in my eyes.

    The 800 MB/s SSD is grossly overpowered for the kind of workloads that the MBA will be handling. Still, I can't help but hope that this helps drive PCI-E to be more mainstream in the SSD space, and carries over to the retail SSD market someday.

    Looks like weight didn't change at all on the 13". I guess the alleged benefits of component reduction due to Haswell's FIVR aren't being realized here, or are not making a difference on the weight.

    I do feel like Apple could have done so much better with Haswell, though. Every improvement being made here is going toward battery life, and the graphics boost is simply something that tags along by sheer coincidence. Could they not have made the CPU a little less anemic? Did they really have to jump all the way from their already industry leading 7 Hr battery life to 12? I guess they're trying to maintain their battery life edge, but there's a point where ludicrous battery life will have a diminishing return on your sales numbers. I suppose the jump from 7 to 12 hours is still within the range of being a useful boost, but they're pushing it.

    Lower power memory, Haswell, and a higher performing SSD: all three will make no influence on the user's perception of the MacBook Air's performance. Those are almost literally the only changes coming. Perhaps 802.11 ac sneaks its way in, but at the end of the day we're just looking at everything amounting to more battery life -- something Apple already has enough of.

    No redesign, still the same boring color gamut, no weight reduction, no noticeable performance boost. Just more battery life and a price cut.

    How boring!
    Reply
  • xTRICKYxx - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    How Boring? This is the first Ultrabook with serious battery life and at an extremely competitive price point.

    I do think it was a mistake for Apple to skimp out on the displays sense nearly every other flagship Ultrabook will have 1080P+ displays.

    Isn't it exciting to see computers finally getting all-day battery life? I mean, I remember wishing for a laptop with battery life like this in the 90's!
    Reply
  • xTRICKYxx - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    since* Reply
  • Homeles - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Apple's already had "all day" battery life. Other ultrabooks (technically the MBA isn't one) will also be receiving huge battery life increases. 12 hrs vs 9 hrs is a lot less of a deal than 7 hrs vs 4-5 hrs was. In addition, there will certainly be ultrabooks that are priced substantially lower than the MacBook Air. Reply
  • tim851 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    The MBA didn't have "all day" battery life and this new model probably won't have either, unless you spend that day processing word on lowest brightness with WiFi turned off. The IB 13-incher returned 5-6 hours if you actually used it as a computer on the go, with high brightness to counter reflections, WiFi turned on with a less than optimal connection and lots of websurfing (including battery eaters like Youtube) and a multitasking workload. The new model will probably shoot at 8-9 hours, coming closer to a workday away from an outlet. The 11-inch model will still have room to grow.

    Apple has positioned the MBA as the ultraportable, the device you grab without thinking about weight or charger. The MBP is the mobile workstation.
    Reply
  • seapeople - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    Saying that 7 hours is all day battery life is just like saying the Tesla Model S is good for a road trip. Reply
  • darwinosx - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    Not boring at all. Reply
  • Homeles - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Care to come up with a better argument than "I disagree?" Reply
  • easp - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    Given that the main issue with my wife's 5-year old MacBook Pro is memory capacity and battery life, not to mention the fact that I almost never tax the i7 Ivy Bridge in my rMBP, but the battery is currently in the red-zone, I think apple made a reasonable choice with their mainstream notebook line. I imagine we'll soon be hearing about bumps to the MBP that include moar power. Reply
  • Homeles - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    "5-year old"

    Well, there's your problem right there.
    Reply
  • JDG1980 - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    Haven't you been paying attention? Haswell is a flop. Runs hot, guzzles power on full load, and offers performance only marginally better than Ivy Bridge at the same clock speed. Heck, it probably took all the ingenuity of Apple's engineers just to make sure people wouldn't burn their laps while using this new MacBook! Reply
  • cditty - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Haswell is nowhere near a flop. You need to do some more research. Reply
  • teknic - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    initial reports are indicating that thermal temperatures have gone up over ivy bridge.

    also, some consider the power savings in a desktop CPU to be a disadvantage since the CPU throttles giving you less the maximum performance on a desktop thats plugged into the wall.
    Reply
  • teknic - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    but ya, its not a flop. Reply
  • sherlockwing - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    All of those reports are from benches done at Desktop clockspeed(3.4Ghz+). Haswell could very well be designed to have much better efficiency at laptop clockspeeds(1.3-2.7Ghz) instead. Reply
  • teknic - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    interesting, I'm curious to see what comes of this... it seems like mobile was all they were thinking about. Reply
  • JDG1980 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    I did. AnandTech and Tom's Hardware didn't post thermal results on Haswell for some reason (not wanting to burn bridges with Intel?), but LegitReviews tested a Haswell 4770K and found that, under full load, it runs at 82 degrees Celsius at STOCK speed. No overclocking. That's utterly insane. At those temps, it'll probably burn out in 4 years or so (and since Intel only has a 3-year warranty, that's probably what they're hoping for). Ivy Bridge had some thermal issues, but nowhere near that bad, and Sandy Bridge had better thermal performance than any other x86 chip so far. I think that Intel decided Sandy Bridge was too good and might hurt future sales, and that they should make their next chips run hotter (using low-quality TIM with a gap between the heat spreader and core) so they wear out faster and can't be overclocked as much. Reply
  • Death666Angel - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    You have no idea about temperatures, do you? I've had laptops with C2D CPUs in them running in the high 80s and 90s for most of 5 years. Those CPUs will still outlive most other components inside such a laptop or desktop. Reply
  • Oscarcharliezulu - Friday, June 14, 2013 - link

    Same, all our work laptops (thousands of them) run for 5 years easy ( replaced every 3 but we get to keep,the old one) and they run in the 90's at full load and no problems. Reply
  • Homeles - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    "Haswell is a flop."

    Only if you are a drone of the internet hivemind, and are incapable of rational and critical thinking.

    If the implications of Haswell aren't apparent to you, you're hopeless.
    Reply
  • Hacky Boy - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Where did you get this info from? Reply
  • steven75 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    "Did they really have to jump all the way from their already industry leading 7 Hr battery life to 12? I guess they're trying to maintain their battery life edge, but there's a point where ludicrous battery life will have a diminishing return on your sales numbers. I suppose the jump from 7 to 12 hours is still within the range of being a useful boost, but they're pushing it."

    Wat.

    Let me just leave this here: I disagree completely with this entire paragraph.
    Reply
  • teknic - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    He's implying that they could've made a choice to increase CPU performance vs battery life, or say high res screen vs battery life.

    unlike you (and me) he's adding discussion to this article.
    Reply
  • Homeles - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Yeah, you're right -- a phone with 10000 hours of battery life is so much more useful than a phone with "only" 5000 hours of battery life. Reply
  • doobydoo - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    Yeah, you're right. Going from 5000 hours to 10000 hours is the same thing as 7 to 12... Reply
  • hackztor - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    I agree, they should of cut one hour off that and put a retina display on. I would of purchased that and I hate buying Apple products. Reply
  • blacks329 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    So you want a something that already consumes a tremendous amount of battery life in laptops to consume 300% more power and want the battery to only be affected by 8%. ... Oh and cost the same price

    Yeah thats not how things generally work.
    Reply
  • Homeles - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    The price dropped by $100 -- there's plenty of room for a higher resolution display while maintaining last year's retail price. Yes, the battery life would undoubtedly drop by more than an hour with the same capacity battery, but 9-10 hours is certainly achievable. Reply
  • KitsuneKnight - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    But then, by your own assertion, Apple's battery life will be basically no different than the other Ultrabooks' battery life. Reply
  • Homeles - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    My issue is that almost literally every drop of improvement is going into the battery life.

    Could they not have gone halfway on performance, and halfway on battery life, then delivered half of both again with Broadwell? Give me a better display. Give me more performance. Give me an updated design -- improve *something* in addition to battery life, if you insist on improving it. Power outlets are not a scarcity in today's world.
    Reply
  • tim851 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    "Could they not have gone halfway on performance, and halfway on battery life"

    They could have. But they didn't. Their choice. You don't have to buy. Stop the whining. Look around, maybe Samsung, Asus, Acer, Toshiba, Lenovo, Sony or Dell are selling your drug.
    Reply
  • teknic - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    Without the whining the internet would be a 1/4 of its current size.

    Pretty sure this is a comment thread on a discussion surrounding the decisions and overall architecture of the Macbook Air.. what were you expecting to find here? You gotta admit, Apple didn't actually improve anything, Intel did.
    Reply
  • doobydoo - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    If this were true, their competitors would match Apple's battery life. Reply
  • mavere - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    OEMs are glorified hardware gluers; there's no reason to "admit" anything.

    Either the machine as a whole works well or it doesn't.
    Reply
  • akdj - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    "....You gotta admit, Apple didn't actually improve anything, Intel did."

    How sad. Did you even read the article teknic? Intel didn't put PCI-e SSD storage into the air. Intel didn't design the memory pipeline. Intel didn't deliver wireless AC, nor did they design the battery and thermals and internal protection from heat. Apple has to be reliant on Intel for their CPU and GPU. As does every other OEM. Your comment is ridiculous. As are about 70% of the rest in this discussion. Anand and his crew are easily the top shelf when it comes to technology insight and wisdom as well as their 'care and energy' they put into each and Every article and contribution. They're impressed with the storage. They're impressed with the battery life, new wireless protocol and Apple's engineered memory control. What is it that you do that leaves you so 'un' impressed? And what is it that every other OEM that relies on Intel to 'power' their rigs have or will have that Apple hasn't offered in a 2.5 pound package....able to essentially perform any and every task a non-power user could ever need? They offer a higher resolution screen in the rMBP which will surely be updated later this year when Intel releases the appropriate higher powered silicon. That's the only 'non' improvement made. Of course their workstations will improve in performance with the latest CPU offerings. It's how you implement that CPU as a 'system' that differentiates Apple from Sony from Samsung from Asus....et al
    Reply
  • doobydoo - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    For me battery life is far more important than an incremental CPU improvement which 90% of Macbook Air users wouldn't even notice. You don't buy a Macbook Air if you're doing anything seriously CPU/GPU bound. You buy one for portability and battery life, with enough performance to do all of the basic tasks such as web browsing, mail, document creation etc.

    The difference between what is actually a real 5-6 hours on the old Macbook Air to potentially 12 in the new one is staggering, it really changes how you can use the computer. A slightly faster CPU doesn't really do anything useful for this target market.
    Reply
  • seapeople - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    If you're not looking for battery life then why are you buying a MBA in the first place? They're not that much smaller than a rMBP, which would also, BTW, solve your lust after a high resolution screen. Second, if you you really want something super light and portable that has a high resolution screen, then buy a retina iPad. Reply
  • Oscarcharliezulu - Friday, June 14, 2013 - link

    We all really want both, but I'd have to say, as someone who is always on client sites and travelling between meetings the performance has been good enough for a few years now even on C2D or C2Q so its definitely all day battery life which is the key improvement Reply
  • Bkord123 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Man you're killing me! I'm thinking about getting one and your points are valid. I would be upgrading from a mid-2009 MBP with the Core2Duo. After reading your comments, and the article, I'm a little bummed that the performance gains just aren't there. Do I hold out for another year?!?!? Reply
  • fteoath64 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    @Bkord123: Hold off for the MBP announcement!. There might be a surprise choice if Apple puts in a GT3e chip in the 13 inch and NV GT770M for the 15incher. And who knows might gun for a 17 incher with dual SSD in raid 1 mode running 1.6GB/s of disk!!. Yikes, would be a scorcher machine !. Reply
  • perpetuity - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Dude you have a 2009 MBP. I have a mid-2011 13" MPA after rolling with your rig. This is the best computer I have ever owned.

    It's light (homeles they do not need to lighten this thing), it's fast as hell, the screen is crisp and bright and battery life is decent.

    I'll likely upgrade just for the slight bump in speed and the incredible battery life, plus I'll be getting a faster GPU in comparison to the Intel HD Graphics 3000 on my current MBA.

    Macbook Air is the best computer you will own.
    Reply
  • tim851 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    1. No redesign

    Apple has established a design brand. Everybody knows a MacBook when they see one. And every other manufacturer envies that. Apple will not abandon that design until brand fatique - what you display: being bored with a design for no other reason than "it's been around so long, it's too familiar and it's omni-present" - dictates they have to.

    2. still the same boring color gamut

    Yeah, Apple must receive tens of calls everyday from consumers demanding better color gamut in the MBA...

    3. no weight reduction

    The MBA is sturdy as a rock. Can't imagine it being possible to reduce weight without compromising build quality. I prefer build quality.

    4. no noticeable performance boost.

    That's rather Intel's fault, isn't it?

    5. Just more battery life and a price cut.

    How rude of them...
    Reply
  • caleblloyd - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Got to love it when the base clock on your phone is higher than the base clock on your laptop. Granted it's all about IPC anyways, but still it's kind of funny... Reply
  • jasonelmore - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    1.3 Ghz?!?!?! Appalling for a $1300 Ultrabook.

    No MacBook Pro Update = Told ya so
    Reply
  • ThreeDee912 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Here I was thinking that everybody on this site already knew that more GHz and cores doesn't mean performance.

    Most of Intel's ULT chips have very low clocks to conserve power, but can turbo up to much higher speeds if needed. If you actually read the article, you'd see the i5 4250U in this laptop can turbo up to 2.6GHz.
    Reply
  • KitsuneKnight - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    The ARM world's obsession with GHz has caused everyone to forget the lessons of the Pentium 4. It's quite hilarious/sad. Reply
  • seapeople - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    Don't be so bland. 1.3 Ghz is pathetic. I would rather they put in a 3.6 Ghz Pentium D to the MBA if they're going to rock the Dual Core!!! Reply
  • Neurus - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    And that's why you don't work at Apple or any other hardware OEM or Manufacturer. Thanks. Reply
  • Homeles - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    It's available in the $1100 version as well. I do think it's a bit unfortunate that $200 only buys you extra storage space, although there's not much room for Apple to profit if you start upgrading anything else. However, it's still a better deal than last year's model, any way you look at it. Reply
  • SignalPST - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Fingers crossed for a Fall rMBP update Reply
  • akdj - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    You....told us so? Wow! You DO know Intel hasn't released the appropriate silicon yet for high power rigs, right? The quad core mobile chips are coming in the next 30-60 days...desktop CPUs to follow. Doesn't take much to 'tell us so' does it? Common sense.
    1.3Ghz allows for enormous power saving. You don't need extreme horsepower to check email, browse the 'net or respond to a post on Facebook. You're aware these chips 'boost' when the task at hand calls for it right? You're aware there's a possible 50% increase in graphics horsepower (& GPU memory), right? You're I'm sure aware that the price isn't starting @ $1300, right? Like every other 'ultra book' on the market, with similar specs from other OEMs...the base price is $999. Just like Asus. Just like Toshiba. Like HP and Dell...and a bit cheaper (with much better battery life) than Sony. Nothin 'appalling' about it. I understand if your mom told you 'No!' That's ok. Save your cash and buy what you need. You're not going to find another sub 1300 dollar UltraBook at this time with these specs.
    Spend some time learning about Ghz. And processors. And their advancement in Tri gate transistors....and the performance gains attributed to these advancements in a clock vs clock battle of similar speeds on older architectures. Then, maybe you can add some meaningful discussion and insight to the 'comment' section in one of the top tier tech review sites on the Internet. World. Wide.

    J
    Reply
  • oyabun - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    The Sony Vaio Pro 13'' released last week has a PCI Express SSD as well. It's 200gr lighter as well. Beat them to the punch by a week :P.

    Of course, the shipment volume of Macbooks makes their implementation of PCI-E SSDs much more crucial.
    Reply
  • doobydoo - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    The Sony Vaio (which I purchased last year) is flimsy as hell, screen hinges are awful, feels plasticy and not well built at all - horrible mousepad compared to the Air (which I also own), and despite a QUAD SSD it's still slower than the Macbook Air. Reply
  • Neurus - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    Last time I heard the Sony Vaio didn't come with OS X ;) Reply
  • doobydoo - Monday, June 17, 2013 - link

    I run Windows 7 on both. Reply
  • jb510 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    They announced the new MBA had 11ac, but I can't find any reference to how many streams it supports? Anyone? Reply
  • abrowne1993 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Other than the move to PCIe SSDs, it seems like kind of a boring, run-of-the-mill update. Everything is going to be getting Haswell so we should see similar battery life improvements across the board as well as the other benefits that brings. I suppose the change to LPDDR3 will be nice for its lower power consumption, but it's possible other vendors will switch, too. I don't know how prevalent 802.11ac is now, but I can't imagine most consumers will need it or notice the difference.
    I wasn't expecting a retina MBA because of the obvious downsides, but something new or interesting would have been nice.
    Reply
  • JJWu - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Intel Haswell-ULT supports LPDDR3. Haswell-ULT supports many low power interfaces moilbe device uses, such as LPDDR3, SDIO, UART...etc.
    Does the WiFi use SDIO interface as Intel suggests?
    Reply
  • npp - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    I can't help but feel a bit frustrated about all the comments here. A 800mb/s next-gen SSD, 12h battery life, plenty of CPU performance, much improved wireless connectivity, 100$ cheaper than the previous model, and still some people feel disappointed... Design? It's still one of the best in the industry, if not the best. Display? It's of very high quality anyway, even if it lacks those sacred 180 pixels in height to make it 1080p. I really don't get it, this is by all sensible criteria an excellent machine. Reply
  • Scannall - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Most of the complaints are just trolls that wouldn't buy an Apple product anyway. Just disregard them, it makes life much more pleasant. Reply
  • Roland00Address - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    My only complaint is the lack of an IPS screen. Yes apple has one of the best TN screens on the market but it would be nice to be IPS. Of course the problem with that is that it removes differnentation with the retina model even if the retina model has 4x the resolution. Apple wants you to pay $400 more for IPS and 4x resolution, instead of $100 more for ips Reply
  • Death666Angel - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Interesting, I was expecting more rage concerning the resolution. Sub 1080p in windows notebooks usually get tons of rage for that low resolution. Reply
  • zogus - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    Most of those sub 1080p windows notebooks that people complain about are a) 14" or larger and b) have 16:9 aspect ratio. MBA 13" has a more useful 16:10 aspect ratio, and it is much better than 1366 x 768, the "standard" resolution for low-res notebooks which is heavily disliked by heavy users. 11" is 1366 x 768, but the screen is so small that people tend to be more forgiving on the issue. Reply
  • Bkord123 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Hi everyone. I've been waiting for a few years to upgrade to an Air. Is this the time to do it? I was hoping for retina. Two years I held off because I heard Ivy Bridge was going to be a big deal. Then I held out another year for Haswell. But one of the sentences in this article troubles me: "Although the base clock is lower, I wouldn't expect substantially lower performance..." At the risk of sounding ignorant, why would we see ANY lower performance? It's a new computer for God's sake! Help me understand everyone. Reply
  • jeffkibuule - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    The possibility of having slightly lower performance is because Apple focused heavily on battery life. If you want a true performance machine in this size class, get the 13" Retina MacBook Pro.

    With the path they've chose, I don't see them doing a Retina MacBook Air for another 1-2 years. It's not worth waiting for at this point. Buy the air if you want the battery life, get the Pro if you want Retina and performance. That's how they are going to justify having 2 13" models for some time.
    Reply
  • Bkord123 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Here's my entire laptop usage: Email, Internet, YouTube, occasional Netflix. Is this new Air right for me? Reply
  • Scannall - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Yes Reply
  • kyuu - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    That kind of usage can be handled with a tablet that costs about half as much. Reply
  • perpetuity - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    I use my mid-2011 MBA for: email, internet, internet development (code, light database work), graphic design (from web badges to 16x20 print posters) using old Photoshop (screw Adobe for locking me out of an upgrade!) and Pixelmator; netflix, etc...

    It's the best computer I have ever owned, period.
    Reply
  • Bkord123 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    I have a general question about the 802.11ac spec. Will that make my Internet any faster or will it just make my Time Machine backups faster? I'm limited by my ISP bandwidth, right? I'm trying to figure out if ac is important to me. Reply
  • Kristian Vättö - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    802.11ac will only increase the bandwidth between your device(s) and router. Actual Internet speeds will still be limited by your ISP. Reply
  • fteoath64 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    @Bkord123: On a rare case if your laptop has 3 or more concrete walls before it reaches your router, you might connect at less than 20Mbps and not know it. So if you have 30Mbps down or more Internet, you might benefit from the better penetrating power of ac and multi-bonding. Check the router tests from some good sites and do your own speed test to be sure. Some 802.11n routers have poor connection speeds after a certain distance, others are stellar in their performance. Apple just had to update their routers since the new AIRs support ac. Prevents customer question : "Err, but you sold me that feature with nothing to connect to ?!". Reply
  • Bkord123 - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    Thank you. I get it now! Reply
  • asendra - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Anand, or anyone really, do you know if those estimated battery times correspond to the macbook air with mountain lion installed, or with Mavericks?
    It should be with Mountain lion because Mavericks won't be available till Fall, but with all the battery improvements in Mavericks, I find hard to believe they could even improve those 12h when mavericks launches..
    Reply
  • Elwe - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    From the pictures/video posted on-line (the ones from CNET are as good as any, I guess--http://www.cnet.com/apple-macbook-air-13-inch/), the ones currently available are clearly OS X Mountain Lion (10.8.4) of some form. But there are two caveats to that:

    1) Apple could have (I would doubt it, but they did not make it clear) done these battery tests with a 10.9.x build, and mean for those numbers only to reflect Mavericks. Since Mavericks is not due to drop (for production use) for a while, I cannot imagine them not have some caveat or *.

    2) Apple could have tweaked the base 10.8.4 to include some special Haswell goodness for the Air, and tide it over until 10.9. *If* they did either #1 or #2, I would find #2 much more likely. That they done this in the past both with Mac and iOS hardware. I have no idea how much trouble it would be to backport such things (there were a lot of new changes announced, and even more not discussed).

    What I hope the situation is is that this is a standard 10.8.4 with the new Haswell chips and modern chipsets. And that Mavericks will just give us a bit more. Unlike some people that have posted, in this form factor I am not looking for much more power (cpu nor gpu) than the current line provides. I think the extra battery life is crazy helpful, though. Especially in the 11" inch one, where I was seeing more like four hours usage vs the five Apple sees (I do prefer 100% brightness vs 75% on these non-Retina screens, though). So let's say I would loose an hour (or even two hours) off the nine hour number from Apple . . . that still leaves me a good seven hours for the 11" model (and 10 for the 13" model). In something that is not ARM nor Atom based . . . that really is something, people.

    Retina would have been nice, but I just do not see how (and did not last year) how they could do it in the form factor and at scale/cost. When they introduce the 13" Macbook Pro Retina just last year, I think we all saw the current state of what could be done in this price range/form factor.

    For a "basic" SysAdm machine, I am really liking the 11". For a basic student or executive machine, I am really liking the 13". For power users, let's wait until the fall.
    Reply
  • asendra - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    I thought of the possibility of them porting some of those features to a special 10.8.4 version for this airs, but the changes are really low level stuff, I really don't think it would be reallistically feasible. Reply
  • SamuraiSausage - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    Elwe - Can you elaborate on why you might find the 11" a better option for a sysadmin over the 13"? As a sysadmin myself I am a bit torn over the two. The power and portability of the 11" intrigues me and while I could get over the comparatively lower battery life the 1366x768 resolution concerns me. Reply
  • Bkord123 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Am I the only one in America that wonders why "Maverick" is pluralized? Sounds weird to me. 'Maverick' sounds right. OS X Maverick. What's the deal with the 's'? Reply
  • lhurt - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mavericks_%28location... Reply
  • Bkord123 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    No kidding. I must have missed that part of the WWDC. Many thanks! Reply
  • tipoo - Thursday, June 13, 2013 - link

    It ships with 10.8. Yeah, I really want to see what Mavericks can do, if it already gets 12:51 on a light load according to Engadget. Reply
  • fourthletter - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Mascbook Airs have been using PCI-E SSDs since they launched ! They bought the first run of Toshiba's PCI-E SSDs - Please do more research. Reply
  • Mxheadroom - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Bullshit. The socket may look similar, but the protocol was always sata. This is the first Apple device that direct connect the AHCI via PCIe. Reply
  • Bob Todd - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    I love the battery life improvement with Haswell, especially for the 13". However, these make the 13" rMBP look like a bargain if you can deal with the (still very competitive to most of what's out there) 7 hour battery life. The Airs seem like a decent deal in absolute base configuration, but I'd want 8GB RAM and 256GB of storage. That puts the 13" Air at $1400. You can get a 13" rMBP with 8GB/256GB/faster regular voltage i5 for $1479 (for me with free 2 day shipping and no tax). You lose out on a whopping 5 hours of additional battery life and you've got the lowly HD4000 trying to drive all those pixels, but that's still more tempting for me. Reply
  • Bkord123 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    That's right where I'm at also. I can't decide! Reply
  • aliasfox - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Or if you're willing to wait 1-2 months, you'd probably be able to get the rMBP with Haswell as well - alternatively, have the choice of a clearance Ivy Bridge or new Haswell.

    If you put it that way ($1400 vs $1479, RAM and storage matching), the only things the Air really has going for it are 0.5 lbs and a few extra hours of battery life.

    That said, the last time I played with a rMBP 13" it felt laggier than it should be given that it's a premium computer sold at a premium price. Let's hope a Haswell model (with Iris Pro?) corrects that deficiency.
    Reply
  • Elwe - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    It think the base 13" Pro (with Retina) is $1499, but for me, your point is a good one. If you need/wantthe extra ram (and not even close to everyone does, especially given the responsiveness of the SSD) and you need/want the 256GB SSD, a $100 difference that gives you that awesome screen (and presumably bit better cpu, when the Haswell line comes to down) seems worth it. But the screen is wasted on lots of people for lots of uses, clearly (just reality), and the extra weight is still noticeable. If I was a student, I still think I would probably stick with the Air. The battery life will be worth it to a lot of people (I know I really am interested in it, and I have access to power throughout the day though it is more of a pain to use than I would like).

    But it puts into greater context why Apply released the 13" at $1699 (though I really appreciated the drop). You can either say the more nicely configured Airs are too expensive (what most people are going to say) or the 13" Mac Pro (with Retina) is cheap.

    I think Apple is going to sell a tone of the 4GB/128GB 11" and 13" models for the school year. I think most people are going to avoid the older Macbook Pros (withou Retina) from here on out, and the Retina options are still an unnecessary option for lots of people.
    Reply
  • Neurus - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    You also gain a few pounds… the Airs are really light :) Reply
  • Sm0kes - Sunday, June 16, 2013 - link

    It's actually less than a pound, the 13'' air is 0.5lbs less than the 13'' rMBP. Reply
  • ntafy - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    I wish Anand had included the 1.7GHz i7 in there as well. I'm currently between getting the latest MBA13 1.7GHz i7 /8/256 or the rMBP13 2.6GHz i5 /8/256. If the 1.7 offers comparable performance, it's an easy choice. Reply
  • willstay - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Please test battery performance when Windows 8 is installed in it too. Reply
  • willstay - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    After researching a little and finding features like Unity of VMWare Fusion and Coherence of Parallels. I wish battery performance is tested against Outlook running in one of those. Reply
  • SamuraiSausage - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    This would be interesting to me as well. Working in a heavy Windows environment, running some apps in Fusion +Unity is a daily occurrence. Would like to see if 6+ hours on battery is possible. Reply
  • wiz329 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    I'm curious @Anand, what are the benefits of 800 MB/s over 500 MB/s sequential transfers, unless you are routinely copying large files from an external TB SSD? Reply
  • dstroot - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Help! Definitely getting a 13 inch air / 256gb HD. Questions are:
    - Worth it to upgrade RAM to 8gb?
    - Worth it to upgrade to 1.7Ghz CPU?

    Use case is my main laptop - some web development and light iOS development and lots of email/web surfing. Travel a bit so I like the battery life.

    Agree with the comments that a 1080p screen would be nice but when at home I think I will use an external display anyway...

    So advice? Thanks!
    Reply
  • r3b3lspy - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    Same question here, debating between i5 or i7 processor, all tests at Apple were done using the i5 and I'm afraid the i7 will get a hit on battery life, it will run hotter and the fan will start sooner than the i7 (this happened on the 2012) Reply
  • mavere - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    As a long time user of a 4GB RAM Macbook... get 8GB or don't buy it at all. Reply
  • Neurus - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    I'm a long time Mac user. I have had a 11 MBA since 2011 (mid). If you can, max our ram and CPU. Yes. It's more money, but the machine will last 2-3 years minimum (depending what you do) and The more you have, the snappier will feel in the future. Even if it's "only a mere increase in performance" in the future, new versions of OSX, new things, will require more power. I've been using my MBA for iOS and Android development, so I'm the 5% of users who don't use a MBA for "occasional email/web/netflix". i really push this tiny 11. I have the i7/4g/256 (all you could get back then).
    I will be getting a new one only for the USB3. The difference is noticeable (vs. USB2) and I need external storage for different reasons.
    Reply
  • karamazovmm - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    "Update: It's a custom Apple design, not M.2. Since there's no PCIe routed off of the CPU in Haswell ULT, these 2 lanes come from the on-package PCH."

    Im sorry could you explain this to me? whats wrong in using the lanes from the pch? those are after all the pcie 2.0 x2 lanes required in the specs arent they?

    http://www.sata-io.org/documents/NVMe%20and%20AHCI...

    and if we look at the hardware overview, I dont see a clear reason why it needs to be proprietary because it uses the pch pcie.

    Can you please explain?
    Reply
  • ssiu - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Apple could have used i5-4350U instead of i5-4250U to minimize the "new CPU is slower (or not faster) than old one" complaints. But I am glad Apple uses i5-4250U instead of (i5-4200U with higher base CPU clock but cut-in-half HD4400 GPU).

    And I didn't expect retina this year but was hoping for IPS screen. This is still a premium $1k+ notebook (even if it is low-end for Apple), and even the lowly iPod Touch has IPS screen.

    The battery life and SSD improvements are very good.
    Reply
  • Mr Perfect - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    In the screen shot showing SATA/SATAExpress properties, there is a line that states "TRIM Support: Yes". Last I knew, OSX did not support trim, has this changed? Reply
  • ThreeDee912 - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    TRIM has been in OS X since 10.6.8, but it's only turned on by default for macs that come with an SSD. If you add your own third-party SSD, you have to edit some plist files to enable it manually. Reply
  • Mr Perfect - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    No kidding... Every time AT throws a SSD in a Mac for testing, they always comment on how OSX doesn't TRIM them. I wonder why they don't just edit these plist files? Reply
  • mestarm - Thursday, June 13, 2013 - link

    The plist hack is not reliable, my Intel SSD got crazy with it... Since this hack is not official - this is why AT is correct in stating that SSD trim is not supported (for non built-in ssd) Reply
  • iwod - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    You are the only one who mention this in comment. I was late to this discussion and i was hoping more would have discover this already.

    This,'t isn't PCIe SSD. it is SATA Express. So to those who keep saying it is PCIe Raw without the SATA Overhead it is not true. I hope Anand will dig more into this
    Reply
  • mavere - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    Intel's chipsets don't natively support SATA Express yet, and Apple isn't known to arbitrarily add extra controllers (or extra anything) into their mobile systems.

    Also Apple stated the Mac Pro uses PCIe SSDs, and there's a production benefit for Apple to standardize connectors.
    Reply
  • repoman27 - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    To quote a SATA-IO slide on the subject:
    "SATA Express is PCIe
    The SATA Express environment is pure PCIe
    There is no SATA link or transport layer, so there’s no translation overhead
    Users will see the full performance of PCIe"

    SATA Express appears to be just an electrical/mechanical specification which combines existing protocols into a couple common physical interfaces. Sort of like ExpressCard—you didn't need chipset support to implement it, just PCIe, USB and OS support.

    Apple seems to have deftly avoided the prescribed physical interfaces and once again gone proprietary in that regard. This is not M.2 (formerly known as NGFF).
    Reply
  • StealthGhost - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    Battery capacity went up to 38 and 58 watt hour respectively.

    Not sure if this has been pointed out yet but it's still wrong.
    Reply
  • hasseb64 - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    Apple has increased battery capacity in Air.
    Haswell is still not that big improvement as your articles claim.
    Reply
  • Neurus - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    So… according to your math, (taking the 11inch model as an example). Going from a 35-watt-hour battery which could give "5 hours of web" to a 38-watt-hour battery and getting "9 hours of web" is not " a big improvement…

    35 -> 5 hours.
    38 -> 9 hours.

    Not an improvement at all! My God! Let's go buy a Lenovo.
    Reply
  • Neurus - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    The 13'' model is WORSE! OMG!

    It went from a 50 watt battery where it could only get 7 hours… to a new 54 watt battery and now it only gets 12 hours… damn you Apple!

    50->7
    54->12.

    Something is wrong at Apple.
    Reply
  • ashic - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    "On the storage front, Apple officially leads the charge with the move to PCIe based SSDs." - Don't really expect accurate journalism from crApple fanboy Anand any more. The Vaio Pro has already done PCIe SSDs on an ultrabook. Get your facts straight. Reply
  • valrond - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    Yes, the new VAIO Pro puts the Macbook "Air" to shame. Lighter and with FullHD touch screen. The Pro 11 weighs less than 1 kg, and the Pro 13 just 1.068 kg. Reply
  • ashic - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    Yup. And my Vaio Z2 has been running rings around everything else for two years. Reply
  • Neurus - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    Nice, what version of OS X does your Vaio Z2 have? OS X "Tokio" ? Reply
  • ashic - Thursday, June 13, 2013 - link

    Why would you want something as "kiddy" as OS X when you can have proper operating systems like Windows / Linux? Reply
  • ashic - Thursday, June 13, 2013 - link

    Guys...my comment was not about one being better than the other (though it's pretty obvious). The point is about the biased journalism favouring Cupertino making false claims. We've seen it before from Anand, and we're seeing it again. Reply
  • lukarak - Sunday, June 16, 2013 - link

    Well, leading the charge doesn't have to mean first to market. But apple has been leading the charge in mafny things, and it is rarely first with a tech. But Apple mentiones something in a keynote, and it's important. Not so much with the rest of the field, especially Sony. All in all, Apple takes 99% of the credit people will know about pci-e ssds. Reply
  • ashic - Tuesday, June 18, 2013 - link

    yeah...and skewed journalism has a part to play in that. Reply
  • KPOM - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    The MacBook Air, unlike the Sony Vaio Pro, is a mainstream PC, not a niche product. It starts at $999. Reply
  • ashic - Thursday, June 13, 2013 - link

    Let's see...
    Air 11" starts at $999. Vaio Pro 11" starts at $1149.99.

    Air 13" tops out at $1849.00 (laptop only, no adapters, software, etc. add ons). The Vaio Pro tops out at $2399.99 (with a faster processor, VGA adapter, IPS screen, additional sheet battery, and carbon fibre body).

    Base 13" air (256GB storage and 4GB RAM) is $1299. Base Vaio Pro with 256GB storage and 4GB RAM, but with a faster processor is $1469.99.

    Seems the difference in price is in the range of $150~$550 (with much better things on offer for each bracket). This is a huge change from the Z days where the difference was in the range of four figures. I don't see the Vaio Pro being any more niche than the air.
    Reply
  • AnTech - Thursday, June 13, 2013 - link

    Performance Testing: Not All 2013 MacBook Air SSDs Are The Same

    In the meantime, we have noticed a vast difference in write speeds between the two SSD offerings that we’ve received so far. The 512GB Samsung SSD found in our 13-inch model offers roughly a 400MB/s increase in write speeds over the 128GB SanDisk/Marvell SSD as our 11-inch model was configured.
    http://blog.macsales.com/19008-performance-testing...
    Reply
  • Sm0kes - Sunday, June 16, 2013 - link

    This is nothing new. In the 2012 models Samsung drives were only used on the 256GB models. The 128GB models got Toshiba. Reply
  • HugoWayne - Friday, June 14, 2013 - link

    Does the Macbook Air 2013 support DisplayPort 1.2? Can I daisy chain two DisplayPort 1.2 monitors to it? Reply
  • kiwilegal - Saturday, June 15, 2013 - link

    Can you test how fast the SD slot is in this new machine. I believe you reported on the 2012 machine that speed was capped at 40MB/s. Is that still the case? Reply
  • MrN1ceGuY - Sunday, June 16, 2013 - link

    Hello Lal Shimpi,

    nice first-look but when can we expect the full review? There are no 3DMarks or serious 3D-test out yet which is really sad.
    Reply
  • Sm0kes - Sunday, June 16, 2013 - link

    He posted on twitter he is testing now :) Reply
  • Paapaa125 - Monday, June 17, 2013 - link

    Which twitter feed you mean? Reply
  • Sm0kes - Monday, June 17, 2013 - link

    Anand's twitter feed (@anandshimpi). Several people asked him specific questions (e.g., battery life, i5 vs. i7) and his responses were pretty clear that it's in progress. Reply
  • NonTechGuru - Monday, June 17, 2013 - link

    So, as a consumer who is confused by all this information, can someone knowledgable advise if they expect that the MacBook Pro to come out in the fall will be significantly faster than the new MacBook Air, including at bootup? Which would you purchase for consumer usage (documents, movies, music storage and streaming, etc.) at a moderate level (i.e., several hours daily)? Reply
  • NonTechGuru - Tuesday, June 18, 2013 - link

    Haha, living up to my username. Just realized that it's the Mac Pro, not the MacBook Pro, that they are updating in the fall. Reply
  • Kill16by9TN - Monday, June 17, 2013 - link

    "Update: It's a custom Apple design, not M.2. "
    Well, according to today's ElReg article "Samsung wins Apple MacBook contract, starts spitting out PCIe SSDs" www.theregister.co.uk/2013/06/17/samsung_pcie_flash_bell_tolling/
    Samsung's SSD is called XP941, comes in 128GB, 256GB and 512GB and IS "an M.2 form factor of 80mm x 22mm".
    Reply
  • abs1992 - Tuesday, June 18, 2013 - link

    looking forward to how much of an increase in battery life OSX Maverick will bring Reply
  • Konrad89423 - Thursday, June 20, 2013 - link

    Until the real review comes, here's my experience as a user, not a tech, who got a new 13 inch Air/8GB/1.7 i7 and ATC 2TB this week. Used wireless today to make initial clean backup and it took two hours and four minutes from begin to cleanup for 95GB according to the TM window. Using the Air since Monday I have a four cycle count on the battery, not run it below 40 per cent yet, right now battery indicator shows 83 per cent/10:15 remaining. Start up seems to vary from 15 to 30 seconds, wake up is instant. NO problems so far with either unit. Reply
  • dstroot - Saturday, June 22, 2013 - link

    Really looking forward to the full review. Just ordered one and need something to read while I wait! :) Reply
  • tecsi - Monday, June 24, 2013 - link

    Can you let us know whether these new MBAs will support 4K displays? Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now