We've definitely been curious about the difference sticking an
SSD would make in the
MacBook Air's otherwise
average performance and battery life, and it looks like the answer is a resounding "meh." The crew at Ars Technica ran an SSD-equipped Air through a battery of tests, and found that while the increased random disk read / write speeds and slightly faster processor led to a minor overall speedup and less pinwheeling, the dramatically lower sequential read/ write speeds of the SSD made things essentially a wash. What's worse, battery life -- where the SSD should have shone -- was decidedly mediocre. Ars was able to coax the SSD model in to lasting 29 minutes longer than the HDD version they tested, but on average the SSD-equipped MBA didn't have the juice to last any longer than the HDD model, getting to about 2 hours and 31 minutes before petering out. All said, Ars says the extra $1300 for the SSD MacBook Air just isn't worth it -- but c'mon, you know that's not stopping the people who are buying Airs in the first place.
[Via
Digg]
posted February 6th 2008 4:16PM
"getting to about 2 hours and 31 minutes before petering out."
Wasn't it supposed to have a 5 hour battery life?
thats with the screen turned off and no programs running :P
I never believed the 5 hour claim that Apple was making. And 2.5 hour or 50% from your advertised battery length is what most people call "False Advertising"
Why is wanting to see the performance gains with SSD over HDD exclusive to a macbook air??
'We've definitely been curious about the difference sticking an SSD would make in the MacBook Air's otherwise average performance and battery life'
There are other laptops that can, do and will use and offer SSD as an option, or is the macbook somehow all of a sudden the holy grail of laptops, despite lacking so many critical components and sporting a slow processor?
It probably has to do with the fact that the machine isn't really a heavy lifter and people were hoping that the SSD would make up for a lack of speed elsewhere.
Except that to test a particular component you maximize all the other components so that none of them are the bottleneck......................................
Generally speaking, I'm all for SSD technology because, well... it's solid state. Much less chance of an HD failure and losing my data. SSD is expensive right now, but the technology will only get better (larger capacity and faster) and the costs will certainly come down.
I didn't bother reading the full article, but did they mention anything about the heat output?
When a hard drive fails you can usually still get at some of the data on the disk. When an SSD fails you're pretty boned.
This does not look good... for Homestar Runner.
"and that's the end of our show... DONK!"
this computerbox needs more typewriter and less computer
SSD has many advantages but it's a shame that many of the "affordable" drives on the market have rubbish read/write speeds. IMO the technology has yet to mature and it will likely take 1-2 years until we are able to buy the monstrously fast SSD drives we are all dreaming of.
interesting. when i did side-by-side comparisons of both at an apple store, the macbook air with the SSD was almost twice as fast in opening/running apps. i tried stuff like opening garageband (i call it the adobe photoshop of Apple applications) and imovie video editing. they weren't official benchmarks though, just usage tests, so who knows.
It's ALMOST like the word "sucks" is subjective.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
These benchmarks make the Santa Rosa Macbook look like a real bargain. The Macbook is the true sweet spot in Apple's laptop line-up. Optical drive, full of ports, great performance, prices starting around $1000. How can you beat that?
I bought my MacBook Air yesterday and so far so good. It replaced, mercifully, a Dell D830. I am finding it fast enough for my uses and you simply cannot understand how great the form factor is until you use it for a bit.
I also purchased the ethernet connector and SuperDrive. Very happy, and glad I didn't drop an additional $1k for the SSD. However, the store sold out on the SSDs, so somebody's buying them.
I don't get it, is this because of something to do with MBA itself? 'Cause I mean, isn't SSD suppose to significantly improve battery life, and speed as well (although not by as much)? What happened to all the great things we've been hearing about SSD? One could argue that slower sequential access speeds are enough to negate any random access speed boosts, but the fact that it has fewer mechanical parts than HDD should definitely boost battery life, so what happened here?
What I don't understand is how this cannot have any diggs while a lame upgrade of 16->32gb for the ipod touch gets 1500 diggs.... fanboy overload is probably why i stopped visiting digg.
me too. if you're an apple story, or some blog post saying why microsoft is evil, you get a million diggs.
I purchased a Solid State Mac on Monday and it lasts over 5 hours on battery with semi-persistent use .. not sure what y'all are using it for but all I see here is a bunch of people who no absolutlely nothing about marketing and trying to make a great product sound bad. Yes its expensive but its enviro-friendly, thinest in the world, and I even got Mac Quake 4 running on it, even the ssd lasts over 50 years. Basically this will be an iTunes/Web machine for me .. I certainly wouldn't want this as my only computer. This is my first mac in almost 20 years (since high school) and everything just works with no complete system failures .. yes an app can crash but on a mac it doesn't take the rest of the running OS with it. The Air has a target market .. if you are under 30 years old than you are not in it. Unless you own one of these all the comments are a huge waste of time for 99% of the bloggers.
"yes an app can crash but on a mac it doesn't take the rest of the running OS with it."
Trying to flaunt the system stability of a computer with static hardware and no upgradeability strikes me as a pretty weak argument. I'll start being impressed with the stability of OSX when Apple starts letting me put it on whatever computer I like.
As for the rest of your post, it's pretty much true. This isn't a useful computing device as much as a status symbol: if you can afford to blow ~$3k on what amounts to a word processor that also happens to play media files and browse the web then good for you.
so you spent around $3000 to surf the web, play 5 year old games, and buy music one song at a time?
BRILLIANT!
"yes an app can crash but on a mac it doesn't take the rest of the running OS with it."
The same is true with Vista and Linux...
reading from the brochure, huh?
Well a SSD is a lot more stable... no moving parts... which means you can bang it around and your hard drive wont stop spinning, and you won't lose your entire music library. Any laptop owner knows the hard drive eventually dies.
when Ars reviews things, it typically gives them a score from one to ten. it's funny how the macbook air reviewed poorly and ars somehow neglected to give it a poor score.
How can Engadget possibly diss an Apple product, after all they are such Apple fanboys, right?
I've said it before on here, but SDD will only come down when more people buy it and a fashion item like this is probably the only way to get the mainstream interested, like Apple did with MP3 players.
quick release 12GB iphone and 32GB ipod to distract them...oh wait?
Ahem.. 16GB
*Checks URL*
...Engadget is actually posting bad reviews of an overpriced Apple product?
WHAT KIND OF EFF'D UP UNIVERSE AM I IN RIGHT NOW!!?!
ars technica loves apple products. this is probably the only single bad review of an apple product they have ever written...
You guys need to get your facts straight.
First- The one with the SSD does get better battery life, it just doesn't shine because it is using a 1.8 GHz processor, as opposed to the version with the HDD, which uses a 1.6GHz processor.
Second- It was probably even set up so that they would get the same approximate battery life on purpose by Apple, so that all of this type of their computer would get the same battery life,just like all the versions of their other laptops.
Third- What were you expecting? A computer that is thin enough that it might end up being the murder weapon in a future decapitation CSI case to still perform better in every aspect than others? Good luck with that buddy ;)
I love how people take bad reviews on computers (MS and Apple alike) so personally.
The boy genius report is refuting this whole thing based on personal use. The author claims he got 4 hours of battery life with constant use and that the SSD (he has both MBA's) operates noticebly faster for common tasks.
I can understand the missing performance boost and it doesn't boot any faster, but shouldn't battery life be increased. Well for an extra $999, at least you can say your disk won't crash.
I have to say, after spending some time with the MacBook AIr, I find the speed at which programs load is not screaming fast, but enough to not begin to get impatient. This MBA is for my wife, as she wanted something light and can do everything she wants it to do. I have am MBP as I would need more function than I can get out of the MBA.
So, most people commenting on technology blogs probably won't find this to suit there needs, but the MBA is a like an expensive Wii. It isn't the most powerful out there, but it probably fits the needs of casual computer users (albeit users with the ability to spend the kind of money for the MBA).
We actually sold our 6 month old Mac and so only paid $1000 for the Mac, and we are definitely happy with the way things played out.
"I have to say, after spending some time with the MacBook AIr, I find the speed at which programs load is not screaming fast"
Wow... I'd expect "12th man screaming" fast if I paid THAT much money on a laptop.
Really... it seems like a LOT of people are trying to justify the price they paid, but aren't succeeding.
Well.. most Apple products aren't justifiable anyway. I surely paid too much for my iPhone.
True, it can't copy and paste... BUT........................
(heh heh)
@ bill g
I am not justifying my purchase. I am telling my experience with it. Just like for you, you'd expect X, X, X because you paid X. For some people, those Xs are not needs as well. My wife likes it, and that's all that matters. And trust me, she has never woken up or said to herself, "Boy, I've got to see what Engadget or Gizmodo are saying about technology or my purchases".
a thin laptop that costs well over three times what it should. Good ol Apple.
"cool factor." that's all it is. Its what Apple Computer Inc. now is. Oops, I mean Apple Inc.
-posted from my iPhone (LOL)
YES!!! I can now finally walk around with my manila envelope in public, and people will think "He just might have a cool thin laptop in there!"
PSHH! And they called me crazy! Me and my manila envelope... yeah.... I knew it would pay off
Why did anyone expected a large difference in battery life with the SSD? A 1.8" HDD consume roughly 1W while active (look at spec sheets from Samsung, Hitachi etc). The MBA have a 3h battery life. So even if the SSD had zero watt consumption in the three hours the computer run only 3Wh (8%) would be saved of the 37Wh the battery is rated at. Or in other words, eight percent of 3 hours is 15 minutes. We could therefore expect 15 minutes longer battery life or less, depending on how much energy the SSD consume.
Wow. I am not trying to start anything, but bill g, we get you don't like the MBA and find it more "cool" than anything else. That's ok, but do you have to go on about it, unless it is YOUR opinion that matters most. Thanks.