apple's aperture program i hear tops off photo editing software over photoshop...even lightroom (which is pretty much photoshop's 300 dollar answer to Aperture)

I think that apple seems to be focused on the education and business demographics of consumers...im not so sure why but it seems to be a much more productive platform for said demographics.

i do agree with terra though. Laptops are still far to heavy to be considered a portable work platform. I have a dell vostro thats like...8 pounds i carry it around campus all day, it really beats the shit out of my back.

Are you kidding me? Since when was 8 pounds on your back unbearably heavy? I'm going to guess you've never gone hiking/camping. Ever.

Yeah, Jomei basically hit it. Just for staying connected. It's not aiming to be your one and only portable media center that can play Call of Duty 4/view DVDs/store your movies, 50GB music collection, etc.

With that said, $1700 is sort of...crazy excessive for just staying connected. When I was watching the demonstration, part of me thought "the world really isn't ready for this yet." We don't have wi-fi access everywhere in America yet. 5 hours, though great for a laptop, is still pretty limited.

I think something like this should have come out about three years from now when they could drop the price and wifi-access is much more common (hopefully).

It seems like it's trying to be the "Mac Mini" of laptops, but the price just isn't right.

[quote="Blank"]
Look man, they took on IBM back in the day, the pretty much owned schools in the 90's, especially with the insurgence of the iMac, and today dominate the mp3 player industry.

Whether or not you like the company is irrelevant. They're still a good business because they make a lot of money off of a lot of people.[/quote]

"Back in the day," IBM was an utterly shitty business that only benefitted from its size. That's why it completely failed in the personal computer market, leaving wide open gaps for numerous companies like Apple to thrive. That's why now the vast majority of people buy their personal computers from Dell, and not IBM.

As far as the iMac and the mp3 players, I covered that. They have been a good company in the recent past. The iMac was an incredible success due to trendy packaging. Recently, Dell started doing this with their laptops, where they immensely capitalized off of it. It was a great idea, and still is.

I have no opinions on the company itself. Why would I like or dislike a company? I'm not a stakeholder. It's irrelevant. They have been a very good business in recent years, and their stock performance adequately reflects that now.

Edit to GR:

Yes, like many others, the company has had many achievements and influences. So did Enron. That doesn't make it a good company.

Aside from the mp3 players and trendy designs, which I already covered and never contested to, they obviously had great marketing to schools, but did this necessarily help the company much? There has to be a reason they never took off in that era.

Finally, the successful company is the company that considers its consumers. Apparently Apple Computer has taken that into consideration in recent years and are now thriving. This was not always the case. Apple is no Dell, but it's still a good company that's been experiencing a newfound success.

[quote="Marekenshin"]Are you kidding me? Since when was 8 pounds on your back unbearably heavy? I'm going to guess you've never gone hiking/camping. Ever.[/quote]

haha yea i have never been hiking or camping come to think of it.....

but in my defense i also have several textbooks on me as well and another 8 pounds isnt really easing the weight. and lugging all that around on a 10-12 hour day isnt much fun....

haha maybe i am being a bit of a pansy about it but its not so much fun lugging that much around anyway.

Well their tactic of catering to the wealthy seems to be paying off?

I don't know, this laptop seems ridiculous. They strip needed technology just to make it smaller. I'm thinking of all the programs and all the cds I can't put on this computer because of no cd drive(if I already had anbother mac this wouldn't matter that much, i guess). I'm severely limited to what I can plug in because of the 1 usb cord. Right now I have my mic, mouse, printer, and ext. hd plugged in. I could use MORE usb slots, if I had the option.


Apple has done a decent job apart from this. The iphone seems really useful in limiting what you have to carry around, the desktops are really nice for graphic design(my major), and ipods are pretty sleek mp3 players. But this is just an excess that no one actually needs. There are already computers that offer bluetooth, wifi, etc.

[quote="clouds"]I'm thinking of all the programs and all the cds I can't put on this computer because of no cd drive.[/quote]

1) If you have any inclination at all, you should watch the demonstration on Apple.com The method for coping with no optical drive looked pretty cool (if, yes, inconvenient.) Essentially you put the disc in another computer, access that computer wirelessly from the Macbook, and use the disc as you normally would. Wirelessly "streaming" program installations. So in THAT way, you're not really limited.

2) Also, in response to the entire thread, has anyone ever heard of a USB hub? They're what, $2 used on craigslist? Jesus christ.

For the record, I'm just defending what needs to be pointed out. I'm not really pushing for mass acceptance of this thing. Just thought it was interesting. I mean, I did say "AWESOME", but I half take it back.

So what we've discovered in this thread is that

A) It doesn't absolutely suck, and
B) It's not awesome.

Yeah, but that streaming from another computer is STILL pretty useless, not only because of the lack of wireless connection everywhere, but also because who the hell's gonna put the disc you need in there? What if you need more than one disc? Fail of a feature, at least for now.

Intel GMA X3100 Graphics processor with 144MB RAM [b]shared[/b]

well, that makes graphics programs suck... let's see... no one is interested in an eee pc? smaller screen, sturdier... $400... just not a powerhouse in any way.

however, apple has done a great job creating a subculture that considers buying a new laptop the same as buying a new dress... so i forsee this thing doing great.

also, i've always wondered why it was macs in elementary school. was it because they were cheap? because they were idiot proof? or because no one at home had one so we didn't KNOW how to break it?

i can cede that they generally take less maintenance than pcs, but if your staff knows what they're actually doing (weird ghosting and shit, so that you can't get viruses) then a pc can take care of itself...

tech details: it's really weird.. at my school the way they do it (i think) is that every time you log in, they mount an image of a windows installation. you use this image and then when you log out it's unmounted and no changes are saved... so nothing can change and no viruses? i dunno. kind of funny that after coming to berkeley, the school has pcs in the computer labs but the students now all have macs.

I've been looking up asus computers after hearing about this. My friend has an asus. I'm thinking of getting an eee now.

edit: that is odd, I agree. It's the same in my school, except for the graphic design area for obvious reasons.

I love the MacBook Air. Who hasn't dreamed of a laptop that is that small? Sure, it's "overpriced" as far as it's specs go, but this is really the first of it's kind, so it will be expensive. The fact that most people operate under the misconception that Macs are a ton more expensive than PCs just make it seem even more expensive to Joe Consumer.

Personally, it's not for me, I need more oomph because I do a lot of video editing, but the thing is damn sexy anyway.

(As long as I'm on an apple note, I love macs, but OSX 10.5 is a worthless upgrade over 10.4... which was a worthless upgrade over 10.3... and iPods still suck)

[quote="sonic3305"]1) Who hasn't dreamed of a laptop that is that small?

2) Sure, it's "overpriced" as far as it's specs go, but this is really the first of it's kind, so it will be expensive.

3) The fact that most people operate under the misconception that Macs are a ton more expensive than PCs just make it seem even more expensive to Joe Consumer.[/quote]

1) It's [i]thin[/i], but it's not very [i]small[/i]. What if Apple's next laptop were half as thick, but with an extra 5" tacked onto the width and length? Would you still be so excited? Small is portable. Thin is not necessarily portable.
Compare it with the Asus EEE ($400)
[url]http://gizmodo.com/assets/resources/2008/01/mbavsall.jpg[/url

2) Not only is it disgustingly overpriced, but it's extremely underpowered. Apple totally missed the boat on this one. If you want to make a fairly bare-bones notebook for people "on the go" (which I'm not against at all), then give it low-end specs, a smallish form factor, and sell it at a semi-affordable price.

At $1799, there are so many other Apple substitutes worth considering. Get a souped up Macbook, perhaps. Drop an extra $200 and get an entry level Macbook Pro. Buy three Asus Eees.

So if you seriously just want to get some basic email/web/word processing/trivial tasks done...You don't need to kid yourself into buying this style-over-substance notebook.

3) Computers manufactured under Apple are gonna be, on average, more expensive than Brand X PC machine. There's no "misconception" here. There's just a price tag.

</rant by an Apple fanboy>

I was going to say, there is no misconception that Macs are more expensive. If you buy a PC and a Mac that are roughly equivalent, you're going to pay a considerable premium for the Apple Computer. That's simply what happens whenever there is a small - but dedicated - fanbase.

I dunno, when I was looking at Macbooks/MBPs versus Dell and HP laptops, when I spec'd them out to about the same thing, and the Apple would wind up being maybe $100-150 more, and when I'm looking at $1500-2000 for a laptop, I don't really consider that a very huge difference.

I forgot to mention, though, I make sure to get as little RAM as possible when getting a Mac. Apple MEGA-overcharges for RAM, which is one of the things that pushes the price up for most people who don't know it's far better to just buy RAM on Newegg and pop it in themselves. If you do this then the Macs aren't [i]that[/i] more expensive.

Anyway, the Macbook Air is definitely style-over-substance, but that is kind of the point. With the amount of shit I have to commute with on a daily basis to school and work, I know a thin laptop would be nice over the (already relatively thin) old PowercrapG4 I have. I personally can't come close to justifying the price tag versus size, because I need a lot more power for what I do, but I can see how somebody who has the money to burn (bastards) could justify the price for size-convenience.

The second-gen Air would definitely be worth waiting for, though, I'm sure they can get more in there for less price.

It's real cool that they're offering a solid-state HDD. Hilariously expensive, but it's great to see that [i]somebody[/i] is finally doing it.