The 2011 MacBook Air (11 & 13-inch): Thoroughly Reviewed
by Anand Lal Shimpi on July 28, 2011 3:25 AM EST- Posted in
- Apple
- Mac
- Intel
- Sandy Bridge
- MacBook Air
- Laptops
I've always liked ultraportables. Back when I was in college I kept buying increasingly more portable notebooks until I eventually ended up with something horribly unusable for actual work. When Apple introduced the first MacBook Air back in 2008 I fell in love. It finally stuck a fast enough CPU in a small enough chassis and gave me a full sized keyboard to type on. I was set.
Last year Apple introduced the first major update to the MacBook Air, bifurcating the lineup with the first ever 11-inch model in addition to the standard 13. With last year's update the MacBook Air did so well that it actually started outselling the base MacBook. Apple isn't a fan of large complicated lineups so it retired the MacBook. If you want a portable Mac you can buy a MacBook Air or a MacBook Pro.
As the mainstream counterpart to the MacBook Pro, Apple had to do something about the performance of the MacBook Air. While last year's updates were great alternatives to cheap, underpowered netbooks, they weren't fast enough to be a mainstream computer in 2011. Last year's Air featured Intel's Core 2 Duo processors, based on an architecture that debuted in 2006. Intel has released two major architectures since then.
Just nine months after the release of the 2010 MacBook Air, Apple fixed the problem. Meet the new Air:
If these systems look identical to the ones they're replacing that's because they are, at least from the outside. With the exception of a backlit keyboard, some differences in the row of function keys and a Thunderbolt logo, these babies look identical to last year's models.
You shouldn't judge a (Mac)book by its cover, because the MacBook Air's internals are much improved.
| 2011 MacBook Air Lineup | ||||||
| 11.6-inch | 11.6-inch (high-end) | 13.3-inch | 13.3-inch (high-end) | |||
| Dimensions |
H: 0.11-0.68" (0.3-1.7cm) W: 11.8" (30cm) D: 7.56" (19.2cm) |
H: 0.11-0.68" (0.3-1.7cm) W: 12.8" (32.5cm) D: 8.94" (22.7cm) |
||||
| Weight | 2.38 lbs (1.08kg) | 2.96 lbs (1.35kg) | ||||
| Base CPU | 1.6GHz dual-core Core i5 | 1.7GHz dual-core Core i5 | ||||
| Graphics | Intel HD 3000 | |||||
| RAM | 2GB DDR3-1333 | 4GB DDR3-1333 | 4GB DDR3-1333 | 4GB DDR3-1333 | ||
| SSD | 64GB SSD | 128GB SSD | 128GB SSD | 256GB SSD | ||
| Display Resolution | 1366 x 768 | 1440 x 900 | ||||
| Ports | Thunderbolt, 2x USB 2.0, composite audio in/out jack | Thunderbolt, 2x USB 2.0, SDHC slot, composite audio in/out jack | ||||
| Price | $999 | $1199 | $1299 | $1599 | ||
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
103 Comments
View All Comments
dertechie - Thursday, July 28, 2011 - link
Actually, I can see a $500 19x12 14" Thunderbolt Panel doing pretty well for them. It certainly won't move numbers but it is a more practically priced Thunderbolt display. I'd buy one, but admittedly I already want a 24" IPS panel with DisplayPort for an Eyefinity setup, using it as a docking station for my laptop is gravy.To be bluntly honest, if Intel wants to see Thunderbolt take off, the Thunderbolt-fed multipurpose displays are where it will happen, and it needs to encourage that. Storage won't sell it outside the Mac niche, USB3's backwards compatibility with * will destroy it there. But a display with the connectivity that desktops take for granted is an easier sell (and likely easier to tunnel that it would be over USB3). I can see other OEMs selling 22" 1080p ones with good connectivity at ~$250-300 (the TB chip itself is something like $40)
I think given a few years we'll have seen manufacturers test out displays and docking stations with everything from backup HDDs (complements an SSD laptop well) to external GPUs integrated into them. With a low enough latency connection, you can do all sorts of cool things.
darwinosx - Saturday, July 30, 2011 - link
You could show them a TN panel next to an IPS display. The differences are obvious.Wally Simmonds - Thursday, July 28, 2011 - link
If I were looking at buying a netbook today, I'd probably go out right now and grab this, however I already have a HP DM1Z. Okay, CPU performance isn't nearly as good, its body isn't as good looking or solid, and doesn't have a SSD, but looking at the battery life and graphics performance the E-350 based netbooks seem to fare better.It'd be nice to see some other pc manufacturers do something similar in looks/specs to the air but get some halfway decent graphics performance in there - Llano anyone?
Might see some price drops on the Samsung Series 9 too, here in NZ they're selling for *more* than the new MBA's....
quiksilvr - Thursday, July 28, 2011 - link
Just get an SSD for your DM1Z now and save the money wasted- er I mean spent on this.http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...
There really is no real need for crazy pixel pushing CPU performance in this day and age for an ultraportable since almost everything is hardware accelerated (GPU pushing). Having said that, the E-350 you have runs faster than the fastest DESKTOP Atom processor.
Plus you can also upgrade to 8GB of RAM too for pretty cheap, giving your laptop a real great edge:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...
Broheim - Monday, August 8, 2011 - link
I'm curious, why would a CPU push pixels... seeing as that's the job of the (i)GPU.darwinosx - Saturday, July 30, 2011 - link
If you read the review you would know this is not a Netbook.Netbooks are cheap miniature laptops with poor quality screens, slow, clunky, and poorly made.
Rasterman - Wednesday, August 3, 2011 - link
DM1Z? lol you must be joking, you are comparing apples to xylophones.damianrobertjones - Thursday, July 28, 2011 - link
It's a shame that the Elitebook review didn't get this much attention and time spent on the review :(Either way I appreciate the information
damianrobertjones - Thursday, July 28, 2011 - link
P.s. How has the thermal paste been applied on these models as there have been reports stating that it's literally slapped all over the place which will lead to issues down the linedarwinosx - Saturday, July 30, 2011 - link
Those '"reports" are BS and they were't about this model anyway.