My first reaction to the new MacBook Airs was, gee I could use that to replace my 15” 2015 MBP. I’ve been wanting a machine with TouchID, but I don’t like the touch bar and like a physical escape key. With cloud work becoming more prevalent, maybe 2 cores and 16 GB is enough.
I almost did as well, and then I saw that they are equipped with the "Y" series of CPUs, so extremely underpowered 5W-limited series that normally goes in the basic Macbook or fanless tablets. It looks like they have completely neutered the CPU in the Air, where it no longer is a machine intended for anything more than light web browsing. It really shouldn't be called an Air - more like Macbook XL(Or Max, or whatever the current nomenclature is).
Yeah, MacBook 13" would have been a better product name. I've read contradictory things online for the projected performance of the i5-8200Y chip. The good news might be it's actually 7W and it has a fan. Maybe we can expect performance closer to the MB pro nTB 13".
I also recently bought one (~3 months ago?). My main reason for getting the machine was the small weight and size. I'm a fairly small person with small hands and like to travel extremely light for work (which is very often).
The keyboard was my biggest concern since I've been touch typing most of my life.
The v2 butterfly keyboard are a marked improvement over the first gen. The first gen was very difficult for me to type on due to the small key travel -- it felt like I was typing on glass.
With the second gen, I did a lot of in-store testing and speed tests. My speed only dropped to like 80-something WPM from my normal ~100 wpm. Within a few hours of owning the machine, I was pretty much back to full. (Their return policy is also something to keep in mind if the keyboard concerns you)
It increasingly has become quite possibly my favorite keyboard ever. I'm even unashamed to say that I prefer it over my mechanical keyboards. Never thought I'd say that about a laptop keyboard. Obviously down to personal preference.
I'd say if you haven't tried the v2 butterfly keyboards (can't speak to the v3), try to give them a test with an open mind. Do a couple typing tests. Type as close to normal as possible (both speed and subject).
> whether you use it much for text input (such as emails) or programming
I use it extensively (>8 hours a day) for programming, emails, and chat. The only thing I don't really do with it is play games (not exactly a gaming machine).
For some added background, I also used an Acer Aspire One 522e netbook running Linux for a few years (this was a while ago), so I definitely have some abnormal tastes when it comes to daily driver machines.
Overall, the only thing I'd change about this laptop is I'd swap out the headphone jack for another USB-C port, but even that isn't that big of a deal (to me).
did you use previous generations of macbook (before the butterfly keyboard was introduced) such as 2012? how does it compare?
I find it odd that you say it's fine if you're "forced to" use it, like your standard for a laptop keyboard isn't one that you should be able to use regularly (and you mention bringing your own). was wondering why you have this attitude...
I've had all generations of keyboards on multiple machines going back to the 1st gen Macbook Pro (early 2008).
I type just as fast on the butterfly mechanism as any other, a consistent 90wpm with no mistakes and scattershot up to about 130 wpm during programming. I've been at this speed for about 2 decades now, going all the way back to using a vintage model M keyboard, an AEII keyboard, etc.
I sometimes go back and forth between my newer MBPs and a 2014 I still have. It takes about an hour of adjustment to get my speed up when switching.
Thanks for this detailed info. (I type at similar speeds as you.) So when you use the butterfly keyboard at a cafe for example, is your initial feeling a bit of frustration (ah this again), since you did use the expression "forced to use it"...
I don't really have much of a preference TBH. That slightly less action actually translates into a bit less work... my touch lightens and my fingers move less. I don't think I could live with the 1st gen used on the original 12" Macbooks though.
I mean the keyboard isn’t amazing: the key travel is still tiny. But, it doesn’t have that top row replaced with a touch screen, which I would never look at (let alone touch) anyway.
EDIT: ahh, you were wondering about the size. I have small hands and type on it with ease. No complaints :)
It's funny how "the keyboard" actually identifies a number of issues, of which only one has been fixed:
1. The Memebar ("TouchBar") is thankfully gone.
2. If a single molecule of dust gets under a key, the key has a non-zero chance of no longer working.
3. The travel distance is basically non-existent, like typing on a squishier iPad.
Seeing them deal with 1 in at least some capacity gives me hope that they will deal with issue 2 by the third or fourth iteration of the keyboard. Unfortunately there is no chance of issue 3 being addressed.
4. If you're working in an office and someone has headphones on the lack of travel causes them to type angrily and loudly as if they were pretending to work in a sarcastic manner.
Can always tell when users of this laptop have headphones on just from the typing noise.
i think you're making the author's point for him. it's an inferior machine in every way except for an inch of screen size. People are willing to pay extra for a marginally smaller computer, and apple is happy for that.
again, that's the whole point of the article - the MacBook/air/pro lineup is all about upsells, and they've managed to convert "smaller" into one of those upsells, where the 11" air used to be the cheapest model.
As someone that loves his Macbook, I thought I'd give some context for my decision to buy the Macbook and why I'd still probably the Macbook if I had to choose again today.
It really comes down to two things
1. Weight
2. Tolerable Performance
The Macbook I have has a 1.4 GHz Core i7 and 16 GB of ram. Very rarely do I feel that I have issues with the daily things I need to do with the mac, which are some light programming/scripting/SQL and even hums when I have to do spreadsheets and manage multiple websites.
Given the performance is very good by real life standards, the weight is really the big issue to consider.
This is a considerable amount of difference between 2.03lbs and 2.75lbs. That's 35% lighter, that's a huge percentage when you have to drag your laptop around everywhere with you. I would gladly pay up to $1000 for that weight cut because of how much better my quality of life is with a smaller and more portable Macbook.
For me, I need to have my computer with me everywhere I go: dinner, hiking, vacations, etc. Having it do everything I want in a reasonable performance threshold and being 35% lighter, the Macbook is still by far the superior product.
It’s so tiny it’s practically the size of an iPad. If you travel a lot this can be a huge deal. I did a ton of development on one and it was great, but I had a beefier machine for visualizations and big compiles. Still, the tiny 12” is my go-to computer, small disk notwithstanding.
It also appears anecdotally that the smaller screen is more popular in Asia than in US/EU (for both Mac and Windows).
I used to have the 13" MacBook Air but am now on a 15" MBP. What I found is that whereas I'm reluctant to pull out my MBP on the couch or bed; I used to do that without hesitation with the MBA. There seems to be some threshold of weight/size that produces friction and makes me keep the MBP on a desk instead of using it like a (more) mobile device.
This is bizarre since the 2 machines are not immensely different in sizing, but it's something about the feel. Obviously this is highly subjective but this is making me consider a 12" MacBook to have as my personal, non-workhorse machine.
My carry-on and camera bags have a pouch for this size laptop, originally the 11” MBA. The bags only cost a hundred each so I am not putting a large dollar value on a laptop that fits.
The smaller laptop is lighter, and when we have airlines aggressively enforcing 4kg limits on carry-on, every gram matters. I put my chargers in checked baggage, while my camera, lenses and laptop live in carry-on.
An extra 200g of laptop means leaving behind part of my camera. Not price sensitive about one-off purchase, but I am price sensitive about more frequent purchases!
Interesting theory about the iPhone X being "obviously different" than the lower end iPhones last year, and how it would immediately signal if you had the 'latest' device or not. I suppose that's somewhat inarguable in terms of the iPhone ecosystem, particularly when powered on, but my favorite thing about my X last year (and especially now) is how anonymous it is. With a generic black quad lock case on a black phone, sitting face-up on a table, literally all you can see is black, and a tiny slit for an earpiece. If you look REALLY closely you can see the camera next to the earpiece. There's no home button to say "this is an iPhone", or advertise whether it's a touchID home button or an even older physical home button. It could be absolutely anything. The only real giveaway is when it's on, or if you put it face down; the stacked cameras were fairly distinctive.
I mean, I certainly didn't choose it over some other phone merely because WASN'T flashy, but I'm a lot happier buying something that doesn't advertise itself.
imho that is some serious rationalization. you likely don’t see yourself as a flashy person so you have to construct a reality where the phone is the extreme of that — anonymous.
i have news for you. for anyone that does care, you can tell an iphone X all the way across the bar.
Why are you criticizing someone's personal aesthetic preferences? So you think that the iPhone X isn't understated. Doesn't mean that someone who disagrees is doing "serious rationalization" or "constructing a reality".
It looks like the new Air has a 7 W chip, more like an active-cooled MacBook, while the non-TB Pro has a 15 W chip like the old Air. Only the TB MacBook Pro 13-inch has a 28 W chip.
But I know how to and what to look up. For most people: super confusing.
The Macbook and iPhone lines are really mature. They've both been around for a decade now, Apple is doing a good job of continuing to squeeze the juice out of these fruits and these sort of strategies are textbook when it comes to executing on a mature product line.
I think Apple's biggest question is what's next? The Apple Watch is really starting to hit's its groove and I think within the next few years will become a really fantastic product (even moreso than now) but what's next?
The article is wrong when it says: Absolutely nobody who knows anything about Macs – or computers of any kind – is going to recommend that they buy the old model.
Two things better on the old model: keyboard and MagSafe.
I'm glad I own an older Macbook Pro Retina. I'd always have "keyboard anxiety" with any of the new models: is this the day my keyboard fails? And: do I dare take my laptop outside? Will airborne dust get into the keyboard mechanism?
Not to mention that CPU technology hasn't advanced sufficiently to render the old model obsolete. Most, if not all, tasks you can do on the new model can still be done quite competently on the old model.
I'm split. I have a 2011 Air that I rarely use. The 4MB of RAM and slower CPU is the major problem with it; screen resolution is a distant third. I keep thinking of buying the most modern USB-A-and-SD-card-reader-equipped AirI can find, because it truly is the best machine I've owned.
On the other hand, new and shiny! And I almost never use the SD card reader or USB port, it's just nice to have. And the keyboard is fantastic.
>The article is wrong when it says: "Absolutely nobody who knows anything about Macs – or computers of any kind – is going to recommend that they buy the old model."
You're absolutely correct here, though I disagree with you on saying the "keyboard and MagSafe were better" is necessarily the reason. It's more fundamental, this is one of those "things everyone knows" that was a product of its time and is rapidly (or long since) obsolete but will no doubt linger for a while. When it comes to "computers" (as in traditional desktops/notebooks) that probably stopped being true at least a half a decade ago or more. It's not the 90s or 00s anymore, a decent 8 year old system can still be a solid performer (perhaps needing an SSD upgrade at that age, but SSD improvements have now slowed too). Getting an "old model" that meets ones needs at a significant discount will probably be how many people get their systems. The newest will carry a bigger premium.
Mobile systems are now going that way too. A 2-3 year old iPhone is still a fine device and can count on years more of software support from the mothership. That looks to be Apple's new plan for addressing different price points: rather then build new "entry point/midrange/high end" models each year, the "entry point" is simply "the model from 2 years ago", the midrange is "last year" and the high end is the newest.
I think weight wise MacBook Air is not much lighter than MacBook Pro 13". But it is about 500 dollar cheaper than MBP with newer 8th gen processor. I guess will wait until MBA gets cheaper or cheaper MBPs get new processor and keyboard.
> I think weight wise MacBook Air is not much lighter than MacBook Pro 13". But it is about 500 dollar cheaper than MBP with newer 8th gen processor.
Except it's a dual-core Y-series (same as the macbook) while the 13" MBP gets a quad-core 25W U-series, and the MBP comes with double the storage (that alone accounts for $200) and connectivity.
You are of course right. I was mainly looking 12-1300ish MBP with newer processor or about 1000 dollar MBA. Since I can wait for a year or longer, maybe there will be better pricing then.
I'm also waiting for new keyboards but I fear it will take a couple of years.
I imagine a new keyboard means a complete redesign, and considering the new MBPs were released in late 2016 I doubt we will see new models before 2020.
Apple used to release new Mac models ever 2-3 years but the Mac line is not a priority anymore (it's only 10% of Apple's revenue).
Weren't the keyboard reliability issues largely addressed with the addition of membranes which keep out debris? Or is it a change of feel that you're hoping for?
The first gen was the first 12" Macbook. The second gen was the MBP with the high failure rate. The 3rd gen was the design with the additional membrane that was introduced with the MBP update earlier this year.
So I did a search in the article for the word "inflation" and found no hits, but I think it's something that the tech world is going to have to start getting used to after decades in the steep part of a S-curve that let it defy the normal. In most of the developed world at least inflation is generally quite low, but it's not zero (nor is zero or worse deflation a healthy sign). For electronics there has been a long time where constant improvements in process technology, efficiency, mass manufacturing tech, and just plain ever larger scales as it went global, meant that every year or two allowed more to be done cheaper.
But at this point that's heavily played out. Progress is certainly not "done" by any means, and the slowdown is uneven (GPUs still scale more easily for example), but it's not exponential or essentially "free" anymore either. Bumping into harder physics means process shrinks keep getting harder and vastly more expensive for less gains, the low hanging frequency improvements and IPC has been picked, a lot of the trivial vectorization and parallelism done, hyper cheap mass labor utilized, the easy parts of the global market gobbled up, etc. There are also softer issues like inequality to deal with and in turn a wider spread in prices people might pay.
So tech companies are going to face a more "normal" world, where no a device from a year ago or two years ago or even 5 or more years ago isn't necessarily "obsolete". That means they'll need to figure out how to start raising prices over time just to keep pace with inflation let alone secure more growth when expanding marketshare or cutting costs is ever harder. But the public has been conditioned for a very long time to expect prices to always stay the "same" (which really means it's falling in real terms over time) or outright drops on the sticker price. Figuring out how to navigate that to a new normal without promoting undue backlash is something everyone will need to grapple with. One approach that Apple may be going for is to just take some pages from mature areas like cars, where there is a huge premium for "brand new", and large percentages of the population are fine getting used or "last year's that didn't sell" (let alone an "old model but newly manufactured" which isn't really a thing with cars) and will never buy brand new their entire lives. But "old" models still get support for a long time and to the basic job fine.
Other strategies of course include trying to shift more into ongoing services revenue, platform monetization (be it a cut of software sales or ads), premium support offerings, etc. Different players will try different mixes. But nobody will be able to avoid it anymore then other industries, at least not unless some other huge productivity shift (automation related perhaps) happens.
When I started seeing posts of people complaining about the price, it was mainly complaints about how the updated model was more expensive than the outdated model that languished for several years. I would argue that the new model still launched at a cheaper price but the rate of price reduction definitely slowed down enough for people to notice. Considering the first MacBook Air launched in 2008 at $1,799 starting price, that would be around $2,100 in today's dollars adjusted for inflation. Then the second gen launched at a reduced base price of $1,299 in 2010. That would be around $1,530 today. Compare that to the 2018 version that just launched for $1,199 which is still several hundred dollars cheaper.
I think the rate of price reduction in tech has slowed down enough that even though the prices are being reduced, the inflation offsets the perceived price reduction and ordinary people just get upset that Apple jacked up the prices yet again.
This was my thought too; even though the article is from a pro-Apple site, the author wasn't trying to make any excuses, he just laid out the facts. He didn't bother trying to address WHY one would try to raise ASP; margin is obviously one reason, but simply keeping up with inflation is another.
Inflation has been in the (low) single digits for about 20 years in most developed nations.
An iPhone cost $200 in 2008.
The combined rate of inflation in the US since 2008 is 17.2%. So an iPhone should cost less than $240 today, if inflation were the main driving factor.
The cheapest iPhone costs $450 now. The technological equivalent of that 2008 model costs almost 3x.
Inflation is not a driving factor. You could raise IT prices 5% YOY and nobody would bat an eyelid.
No, $200 was the "subsidized price" as part of an AT&T service plan: "AT&T, like most U.S. carriers, offers a variety of phones that we sell below our actual cost when customers agree to sign service agreements." [1]
The cheapest non-subsidized ("no commitment price") iPhone you could get back then was $499. At your 17% inflation rate, that's almost $600 in today's dollar, so Apple's entry level iPhone is actually a little cheaper than in 2008.
The unsubsidized launch price of the base model iPhone was $499 in 2007, which would be $600~ today, not too far off from the $749 price of a base Xr, and worse than the $449 of a base 7 today.
> the 12-inch MacBook is still there in the line-up, price unchanged. It makes no sense: it’s an inferior machine at a higher price. But it will find a market with those who know nothing about technology and simply want the sleekest possible device.
Meh, what a load of BS. I know a lot about technology and prefer the 12-inch. Form factor matters, both to professionals like myself and to "people who know nothing about technology".
Apple have created a mess by providing multiple options between Airs and Pros. If you upgrade the RAM to 16GB on Air it surpasses the base model of Pro and similarly other storage options. At that point you should rather buy a Pro over Air because the only major difference is size. Lot of this is totally confusing for non-technical folks and they might just end-up making a wrong purchase.
You're largely ignoring the primary differentiator in these machines, the power class of the CPU/GPU.
If you use the base model in each category, set all the machines at 256GB disk and 16GB of ram and use geekbench cpu numbers as a performance metric, you get the table below. Also geekebench is a pretty short test, I would guess that the core-m / y-series models will fall further behind under sustained loads. I don't think this is a particularly bad spread of options.
2017 Macbook - 1.2Ghz dual, 3.0Ghz T - $1499 GBS:3740 GBM:6835
2018 Macbook Air* - 1.6Ghz dual, 3.6Ghz T - $1599 GBS:4189 GBM:7896
2017 Macbook Pro 13 (non-TB) - 2.3Ghz dual, 3.6Ghz T - $1699 GBS:4333 GBM:9440
2018 Macbook Pro 13 (TB-quad) - 2.3Ghz quad, 3.6Ghz T - $1999 GBS:4643 GBM:16540
[*] For the 2018 Macbook Air I'm using geekbench numbers for the higher end 7th gen Y-series CPU as I can't find any benchmarks for the i5-8210Y so this should be considered an estimate.
I completely agree. I've been using MacBook Air mid 2013 for the last 5 years and it's a great laptop. Now I'm considering buying a new one, and Airs just don't make sense for me anymore.
In Singapore the difference in price between cheapest Air and cheapest Pro is less than SG$100 (US$70). The only advantage of Air is longer battery life, but that's it.
I think at this point the Air series should be merged with MacBooks. Make it small (12"), give it one more USB-C port, upgrade processor, add TouchID and it's good to go.
> The only advantage of Air is longer battery life
And less weight.
(I was going to say "and less volume", but one end of the Air is actually thicker than the MBP, so overall volume might not be that different in the end - even though it does look smaller.)
The base 13" Macbook Pro has the same 2x USB-C/TB3 ports as the new Air. That one also didn't get a processor update this year, leaving it on the 2017 dual core CPU.
I have no idea why they don't abandon either the non-Pro Macbook or the Air and consolidate. Have an Air and a Pro only, because the overlap between the Air and the non-Pro Macbook seems to serve only to confuse.
This seems to be the same issue that the (seemingly) ever-increasing lineup of iPhones and iPads have.
What the author is really discussing is Apple's PRICING strategy. This has nothing to do with ASP, which is an internal metric that I doubt external to Apple is privy to.
still not sure why we have both a "macbook" and "macbook air". they seem to occupy the same market segment. i thought apple was all about minimizing choices.
At this point, Apple is nearly back to the mid-90's state of having an assortment of overlapping products that compete against each other due to overlapping pricing.
They are a lot more similar than they were when the MacBook came out a few years ago. However, the MacBook is fanless (which also means much slower) and smaller/thinner/lighter than the Air.
Will the MacBook stay around? I suspect Apple is quite disillusioned with the performance that Intel offers in this TDP range, and the MacBook will either get dropped or go ARM.
I have a feeling that in the next year, the macbook may disappear again. I know others have mentioned the size and weight being a huge draw for the macbook, but I can't imagine at it's current price, many people will pick it.
I could see Apple just dropping it again and focusing on the Air/Pro lineup.
Working with kids, I actually see parents purchasing middle schoolers MacBooks over MacBook Airs. As the kids enter high school, they often opt for the MacBook Air over the pros. I suspect as they get into college, they'll end up with the MacBook Pro.
To be honest I think this article is making a lot off nothing. TL;DR: New models, higher prices. Keep the old models just in case someone is super price sensitive. It's not rocket science is it.
The worst part is that for many of us, we'd be happier to pay the higher price but Apples giving us LESS. A worse keyboard, no magsafe, no USB-A, worse thermal management, less reliable, more expensive and difficult to maintain.. the list goes on. If the new machines weren't a big step backwards in some areas it would be a much easier pill to swallow.
