The 2012 MacBook Air (11 & 13-inch) Review
by Anand Lal Shimpi on July 16, 2012 12:53 PM EST- Posted in
- Apple
- Mac
- MacBook Air
- Laptops
- Notebooks
Final Words
The MacBook Air is in its third iteration of the current design and it's tangibly better than the two that came before it. The 2010 (and older) models are just plain slow by comparison. Thanks to architectural, frequency and thermal improvements, one of the cores from a 2012 MacBook Air ends up being faster than two from a 2010 MBA. In other words, the 2012 models end up being more than twice as fast as the 2010 models in many of our CPU bound tests.
Battery life has also improved thanks to Intel's 22nm silicon. You'll get between 3 - 7 hours on the 13-inch MBA, and between 1.85 - 5 on the 11-inch model.
It's not all about Intel in the 2012 Airs however. The improvement in storage performance is even more revolutionary. Similar to the rMBP, with the 2012 MacBook Air Apple has entered the world of modern SSD performance. The impact of the faster SSDs is felt everywhere from boot to application performance. Once again there are two SSD suppliers, but unlike in previous models both can be deliver good performance. If you use FileVault or plan on working with a ton of already compressed data, you'll want to pick a 256GB or 512GB drive to end up with Samsung's controller rather than the SandForce driven Toshiba solution.
By offering 8GB RAM and 512GB SSD BTO options, Apple has made the MacBook Air even more of an upgrade for owners of older MacBook Pros. The options aren't cheap but the flexibility in an inflexible machine is important.
The only real downside to the 2012 MacBook Air is in the display department. Apple raised the bar with the 2012 iPad and Retina Display on the MacBook Pro, the MacBook Air's display is good for a TN panel but the rest of Apple's new world has moved to high resolution IPS panels. The same is starting to be true outside of Apple as well. The competition has simply caught up and surpassed Apple in the low-cost, but high-quality display business. The MacBook Air is no longer competing against poorly designed netbooks, but a bunch of clones that are quickly approaching parity across the board. The MBA panel isn't bad, but it needs to be better.
Even without a new display however, the MacBook Air continues to be one of the best executed ultraportables on the market today. If you're after absolute portability, the 11-inch model is great. If you want a Pro replacement and can get away without four cores and a discrete GPU, the 13 gets the job done. I have no issues recommending either system.
Looking forward, Haswell will have an even more significant impact on the MacBook Air next year. Without room or the thermal budget for a discrete GPU, the MacBook Air stands to benefit even more from improved processor graphics. With 2.5x the graphics compute power of HD 4000 plus embedded DRAM, Haswell's processor graphics will bring an entirely new level of gaming performance to the MacBook Air.
190 Comments
View All Comments
Osamede - Tuesday, July 17, 2012 - link
This Y5 was highly portable. If you never used one you have no idea. It was wedge shaped. And the shape allowed for durablity. It was military grade and rated to survive a drop of several feet. And yes STILL only 3.5 lbs, In 2004.Besides its now 2012, give us a call when Apple manages to bring to market a 14" laptop with optical drive at 3.5 lbs.. Only God knows the kind of hype we would have heard it it was Apple doing what Panasonic managed damn near a decade ag.
There was also the even smaller Panasonic W series and before that Sharp had some really good products with the Actius series at really good prices. And now thats going back to probably 1998 or even earlier
Of course Apple fanboys imagine that the world began when Apple launched the MacBook Air. Pschew.....
KPOM - Tuesday, July 17, 2012 - link
Apple isn't going to make any more notebooks with optical drives. Once the classic MacBook Pro is phased out, optical drives are history at Apple. If you notice, most Ultrabooks lack them, as well.A wedge design topping out at 1.9" thick is still pretty bulky. Obviously it was designed for a niche audience, since they aren't selling them anymore. From the specs in 2007 it had a Core Duo 1.66GHz, topped out at 1.5GB RAM, and was very expensive. The keyboard also looks cramped.
http://www.trustedreviews.com/Panasonic-ToughBook-...
I'm not disputing that there were ultraportables before the MacBook Air. Heck, I've even pointed to the PowerBook Duo. I've always been a fan of ultraportables and though they were a long-neglected category. Apple itself didn't have one for 2 years after the 12" Powerbook was dropped.
Most ultraportables were slow sellers that were quietly abandoned. To its credit, Apple stuck with the MacBook Air. A lot of Apple fans were even calling for Apple to drop the MacBook Air as late as September 2010. However, they stuck with it and continued to perfect the design. It's indisputable that the release of the $999 11.6" MacBook Air in October 2010 launched the concept of a mainstream ultraportable.
Osamede - Friday, July 20, 2012 - link
Nice try with the red herring about optical drive.The Panasonic was 3.5 lbs with Optical dive. Take that weight out and you have a 14" laptop with 1400 x 1050 at 3.2 lbs.....in 2006.
And yet according to you we are all supposed to roll over in supplication because in 2012 Apple is selling 13" laptops that weight 3lbs. Spare me the hype. Even The 2010 Sony Z is already a superior laptop compared to even todays "latest" MacBook Air, let alone the 7 year old Panasonic model.
Some of you swallow marketing BS and think it is fact.
KPOM - Friday, July 20, 2012 - link
Red herring? You are the one claiming that Apple should be putting in optical drives if they want to brag. My point is that optical drives are mostly passé. Intel hasn't made it part of the Ultrabook standard. Sony's Vaio Z is an impressive machine, but at more than twice the cost of the base MacBook Air it had better be.I'm not saying we need to roll over in supplication. What I am saying is that Apple transformed the ultraportable from a niche device to a mainstream device. My whole point, which your red herring about Panasonic Toughbooks and Sony Vaios ignores, is that ultraportables had been around for a decade but weren't popular devices until Apple got the formula right. Maybe Panasonic could have made a 14" laptop with 1400x1050 at 3.2lbs in 2006, but they didn't. Maybe Sony could have made a $999 Sony Vaio in 2010, but they didn't. Apple DID make a $999 MacBook Air in 2010. Apple DID make an ultraportable with a full size keyboard and super slick trackpad in 2008, and they DID make it affordable in 2010, and they DID take the drastic step of dropping hard drives and going exclusively with SSD storage in 2010.
phillyry - Tuesday, March 26, 2013 - link
You can't just say that this other laptop was lighter than it actually was because it would be lighter if it didn't have an optical drive that it did have. Confused much? That's because it doesn't make sense. Your logic is flawed. It either had the drive and the weight and bulk that go with it (as it did) or it didn't (as in your imaginary best case).phillyry - Tuesday, March 26, 2013 - link
Also, Apple is phasing out the optical drive. No red herring there.KPOM - Tuesday, July 17, 2012 - link
"Of course Apple fanboys imagine that the world began when Apple launched the MacBook Air. Pschew..... "Actually a lot of "Apple fanboys" HATED the original MacBook Air.
Read some of the comments to this article: http://www.macworld.com/article/1131583/macbookair...
As for optical drives, it's 2012. Did you complain when Apple stopped supporting the floppy drive, too? I don't see any optical drives on Microsoft's Surface Pro.
phillyry - Tuesday, March 26, 2013 - link
The devices you refer to were not mainstream.will54 - Monday, July 16, 2012 - link
"While 1440 x 900 is a bit much on a 15-inch MacBook Pro, I'd say it's near perfect on the 13-inch Air. If Apple were to do the Retina treatment on here, it'd be magnificent." This line is a bit confusing, can you explain further?Tegeril - Tuesday, July 17, 2012 - link
I assume he intended to mean that the 15" screen is too large for 1440x900 as the pixels are quite large, but on a 13" screen it is ideal.