Apple Announces New MacBook Air with 15.3-Inch Display and M2 Chip | Hacker News Reader

Apple Announces New MacBook Air with 15.3-Inch Display and M2 Chip

macrumors.com

141 pointsclairity113 comments

It's bizarre to me they're still bragging about performance relative to Intel macs. I guess there's been diminishing returns after the ARM transition, or else they'd be comparing to M1?

I suspect the majority of mac owners still have intel based macs so they want to highlight the performance improvement to those users - since they may be most likely to upgrade?

I think it could be a combination of: 1. Marketing speak because it sounds better to compare it to the much slower Intel Macs than to the fast M1. Plus the gains between and M1 and M2 are marginal compared to Apple Silicon vs. Intel. 2. They are marketing more to Intel Mac owners/potential PC switchers rather than M1 owners.

The chip is the same as the last year’s, only the screen size is larger.

M2 vs M1 is a minor difference (relatively). It feels like M3 was / is delayed so there's nothing better to brag about.

Note: maybe not M3 the name, but at least the 3nm transition.

It's correct that there are Intel chips that last as long as ARM macs.

However, AFAIK there are none that compare to M1/M2 in terms of efficiency and relative performance.

I might be wrong - I'm comparing an old budget ThinkPad (L580) to 2021 and 2023 MacBook Pros here.

Noteworthy for me is that this 2019 i5 with 16GB (Lenovo L580) still trashes all AMD notebooks that I ever used in that regard. Xubuntu lasted me a work day easily on that machine. But performance was slow of course.

Even in single thread tasks in interpreted languages, the speed difference between that 2019 i5 and an M1 Pro is around factor 5-10, with the Mac inaudible compared to the i5 sounding like a small airplane (cough, legacy webpack frontend build).

Also here, my experiences are probably distorted by price range differences.

Then there's all the stuff that really matters: virtually unlimited multitasking, reliability (wireless, graphics especially), trackpad, speakers, WebRTC, etc etc

And with a current MBP, you really need to do very expensive tasks (ML, huge builds etc) to notice any performance or battery life degradation.

I had a 13" MBP with the last Intel chips and no whatever bar. I got at most 4 hours of battery life during the work day.

I now have a 2022 M2 13" and I can go 10+ hours w/o a charge doing normal work shit which generally includes 4-6 hours of video chat and 2-4 hours of development.

For me, the upgrade was well worth it. I now treat my computer like I do my phone; I charge it once a day overnight.

10h would be nice. Depends on workload significantly I bet; any x86 emulation likely tanks it. 6h of video processing is seriously impressive though.

On Apple's own site they claim "up to" 40% faster than M1 Air. Maybe that's true? The problem with comparing it to contemporary Intel models is neither their performance nor efficiency looks terribly amazing. They are marketing to existing macOS users and it is easy to demonstrate that M2 stomps all over a 10th-generation Core MBA.

For an M1 user, there's not a lot of incentive to upgrade because they already got the huge boost in terms of battery life and performance. If you love the styling, or you need a larger size, you might upgrade. But lots of people are still running Intel MBAs or MBPs and so they're pitching to that audience.

They could probably also cite stats of how it compares to the M1, but that would lead to potential confusion as journalists and bloggers mix up which stat is which. Marketing people want one message, said clearly and repeated often.

Is it a marketing trick to make people think they're that much faster than current Intel computers?

Depends heavily on the workload. A lot of tasks can use the newer accelerators in the M1/M2 over what was in 10th gen Intel. The higher end Intel models also had the issue of running hot and stuttering in practice which really sucked, as underclock/undervolt would have made the experience much better even at the cost of 5% performance on all-out workloads.

That doesn't get into the battery life. My M1 air has mostly been used on road trips to check email, or do light reading. No video or work. I can get pretty much a full 4-6 day trip on a full charge just doing email/reading in the evening a couple hours a night. This has been pretty fantastic imo. Never had any other device that could achieve that before.

I've used M1 Max and M2 Pro for work, and both are fantastic... x86_64 docker used to be a pretty big issue for some images, but it's been great outside of that. The drive I/O is outstanding, and can build large web/node apps faster than my 5950X desktop with a 980 pro drive.

Biggest down sides come down to the money sink if you want/need more storage or memory in the box. It's WAY overpriced for what it is, and you might be better served with a DIY desktop or framework laptop. There are also some workloads that are a true miss. Not to mention gaming as an entire use case that is pretty poor. Not to mention the UX is rather dated at this point, and I really wish some of the hotkeys were more aligned with Windows and Linux. Muscle memory is a pain when you jump back and forth.

I think the major advantage is performance per watt and low heat, rather than raw performance?

Airs don't even need a fan.

Weird way to say it. Airs are underclocked to avoid reaching fan temps.

Its good. It just means they are not looking for M1 users to upgrade.

It's useful for folks currently running Intel Macs (or considering a used one). For other folks, not as useful since the last Intel MacBook only ran 10th gen. As an example, the top end 13 inch 2020 MacBook Pro used an i7-1068NG7. A current Intel i7-1360p will get about 2.4x the multi-core performance of that old 10th gen chip, even outperforming an M2 in most multi-core workloads.

There is still a lot of people to move over to the ARM side. Most people haven't made the move yet. I'm just about to myself. It makes more sense for them to focus on migrating people over at this stage.

Maybe they are making that comparison for the people they want to upgrade to the new macs and not for people that just got their M1 MacBooks.. making m1 to m2 comparison for intel mac users would not make much sense in that case.

I think it's also a clever way to compare performance to other, non-Apple Intel machines--without mentioning them.

I recently got an M2 Air and it is the perfect laptop (for me). I would find the 15" too big, but glad it's there as an option for those who want it.

I have a 16" MBP primarily because of the screen size — I use a lot of screen real estate. A 15" Air is perfect for me, so I'm looking forward to maybe picking one of those up when I'm ready to part with my current MBP.

Does it support more than one external display? The lack of that feature was the primary thing that drove me to choose a 13" MacBook Pro instead.

MacBook Air uses Thunderbolt 3, which only requires 1 additional display. Thunderbolt 4, which the MacBook Pro 14/16 has, requires support for connecting at least two additional displays. [0]

[0]: https://www.thunderbolttechnology.net/tech/faq

Does the M1 14/16" Pro use Thunderbolt 4, or is only the M2 14/16" Pro?

They do.

The 13 inch MacBook Pro also only supports one external screen. To have more then one you need the 14 inch or 16 inch models.

You are correct, MBP 13 is Thunderbolt 3. I updated for clarity.

It has nothing to do with thunderbolt versions; intel macs (or other laptops with intel gpu) with tb3 support more than one external displays.

The support depends on the amount of display outputs from the display controller. Base m1/m2 has only two, and you need one for the internal display, leaving only one to be routed through thunderbolt or usb-c alt mode. Pro/max/ultra have more of them, so they can support more displays.

The Thunderbolt specs define minimum quantities of connectable external displays. Thunderbolt 3 requires support for 1+ connected displays, Thunderbolt 4 for 2+. Apple creates an artificial restriction for profit reasons, and does not equip MBA with Thunderbolt 4 as a result.

TB4 has introduced support for Displayport 1.4, with UHBR, which has finally enough bandwidth to connect two 4k@60 displays per port (i.e. daisy-chain them). If has nothing to do with how many streams are "required support"; it was bandwidth limitation. Again, per port.

Apple devices with base M1/M2 do not support multiple displays even if they were low resolution (thus fitting into the bandwidth requirements), or if you were willing to connect them with separate cables through separate ports. The Displayport encoders are simply not there, and by connecting chiplets into Pro/Max/Ultra, they are.

Is it used for market segmentation? You bet it is. But it is Apple Silicon limitation, not Thunderbolt. As I wrote before, TB3 laptops with Intel GPU had no such limitation, though you had to use multiple cables and ports if you wanted multi 4k@60.

Interestingly, the M2 Mac Mini has TB4 and supports two connected displays, because there isn't an internal one. Yes, it's still 2 total displays, but it's the only non-Pro Apple Silicon machine with TB4 instead of TB3. I'm not sure if the only real distinction is allowing a second monitor on the link, or if there is additional bandwidth as well.

Oh, right. I meant to say 14” MBP in my parent post.

The new MBA15 has TB4 not TB3, but no official info yet.

Looks like display support is the same as the MBA13

https://www.apple.com/macbook-air-13-and-15-m2/specs/

If you use a TB3 dock with DisplayLink, you can use multiple external displays on a M1/M2 MBA.

The keyword you just mentioned is dock.

Is that really such a big burden if you're wanting to connect multiple external displays anyhow?

DisplayLink still does not fully support 4K hiDPI displays correctly.

Beta support is there in DisplayLink software on macOS for scaled 4K displays, but it does not provide full colour bit depth. The colours are washed out and the display lacks contrast.

So yes, Display Link works, but it’s not a solution for anyone wanting a Retina experience.

I’d be pleased for someone to tell me in wrong and show me how it can be done!

Looks great, but base RAM is still only 8GB which (incredibly) is barely enough to browse the internet these days.

Why does it cost $400 to add another 16GB of RAM when the chips themselves cost $50 on Best Buy? Is it that much more expensive to make the RAM small enough to fit in the Air?

Have you actually tried using one of the Apple Silicon Macs with 8GB RAM?

When they first came out, there was a great deal of hay made over the fact that this was still the base RAM—and then people started using them, and reporting that it was fine. As long as you're not trying to put them under heavy loads, 8GB RAM is plenty for the M1 and M2.

And if you want to put it under heavy load...then you're not really the target customer for the base model, are you?

Yes, I have tried using the M1 with 8GB RAM. I frequently bumped into RAM issues while using Chrome whenever I accumulated more than ~15 open tabs.

At this moment I am on a 16GB M2 Air and using 14.6GB of RAM. The only substantial app I have open is Chrome.

Chrome is well-known to be a vicious memory hog.

Maybe you should try using Safari? It's not only much better with memory, it doesn't actively punish you for avoiding giving Google direct access to all your browsing...

Same with all Google software, complete disregard for efficiency.

they actually added a setting to let tabs drop out of memory, but it's an opt-in

fwiw safari can also be a memory hog as well; it really comes down to the site you are browsing unfortunately (its just a reality of the web nowadays)

just open a few tabs of youtube in safari and 8gb laptop starts to feel cramped

What benefit would you get if Chrome dropped cache earlier instead of later?

I don't how/why/where these myths have been perpetuated from that Apple Silicon Macs magically needs less RAM or magically Apple Silicon Macs are better at memory management.

Software didn't start needing less RAM. All that changed is that RAM and SSD speeds became much faster which allowed for faster swap which reduced the perceived impact of low RAM. If you watch the Activity Monitor, Memory would run into yellow all the time with 8GB machines.

So, you still need RAM based on the use case, Intel or Apple Silicon, and if you pair low RAM with small SSD, you'll just wear out the SSD sooner.

> I don't how/why/where these myths have been perpetuated from that Apple Silicon Macs magically needs less RAM or magically Apple Silicon Macs are better at memory management.

It depends. For the Intel macbook pros, the GPUs had their own separate memory. For the intel macbook airs, the graphics could use up to 1.5GB of the system memory (so your 8GB MBA could have as little as 6.5GB of system memory)

The unified memory model in M1 means the graphics can hopefully eat up less RAM since data from the system memory can be read directly by the graphics chip (no need to copy from system memory into graphics-reserved memory)

that performance is due to extremely aggressive use of swap on the SSD, which is non-replaceable. I often use 4-7GB of swap, and wrote a TB in one day once when testing it. This "speed" is like goku's set himself on fire ability: it is killing him, but it makes him a bit more powerful. Ie, it's going to kill those macbooks long term

They're rated for what, 150TBW in their lifetime? Suppose it lasts double that, then a macbook would last somebody like me 1-3 years before the ssd died and the entire machine became scrap

Nope, the $400 isn't really the price of 16 GB of RAM, it's more like the price difference between a "MacBook with 8 GB RAM" and "MacBook with 24 GB RAM". These two products are priced separately and aimed at different customers with different budgets.

Is there a reason to prefer macrumors over the original https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2023/06/apple-introduces-the-... ?

Thanks for that, that was a lot more informative on the specs (minus the usual marketing fluff, but hey!). Here are some key details that were missing from the original article:

> a powerful 8-core CPU with four performance cores and four efficiency cores

> a 10-core GPU

> a 16-core Neural Engine

> M2 delivers 100GB/s of memory bandwidth and supports up to 24GB of fast unified memory (pretty sure the base is 8GB, but it doesn't explicitly say)

> up to a 6K external display (via the Thunderbolt ports, no mention of 2+ externals afaict)

> a 3.5mm headphone jack

> up to 500 nits of brightness and support for 1 billion colors

But no SD slot and no old USB ports. Sigh...

MBA is never expected to have many ports though.

My old MBA has these things.

$1,299 is a great price point. I guess their share price implies growth that's not available just targeting the high-end. Any idea of UK pricing yet?

Answering my own question - just published at £1,399

Disappointing to see higher £ numbers than $. Even accounting for 20% VAT, the price should only be £1,250

For what it’s worth US prices don’t include tax. I’ve got a 10% sales tax which puts the $1299 at $1430

That reminds me I don't want to move anywhere in the US that has sales tax. I realize that limits my options.

AFAIK, just about every state has Sales tax... it's really not much different in practice than a VAT though, just accounted for differently. Not to mention, that many counties and cities add their own.

You COULD live in a state without an Amazon presence, then you won't get charged sales tax. However, you're supposed to file use taxes to your local state, and there are efforts to change the mail order regulations altogether.

Most states will eliminate or reduce taxes on food.

All states have sales taxes on something, whether it be alcohol, tobacco products, cannabis, hotel room nights, car rentals, or general retail purchases. And every state requires residents to pay use tax if they procure an item without paying at least an equivalent sales tax had it been purchased within the state, and bring that item home with you for use.

5 states do not have sales tax on most retail purchases:

https://www.thebalancemoney.com/states-without-a-sales-tax-3...

>You COULD live in a state without an Amazon presence, then you won't get charged sales tax.

This has not been true since Jun 2018:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dakota_v._Wayfair%2C_Inc.

Don't forget that Apple has shipped slower SSDs in their base (128GB) models of MBA and MBP. So if you want a full-speed SSD you have to upgrade that. Hopefully they'll bump the base RAM from 8GB to 16GB, but I'm not holding my breath on that one. So it could be an extra $350 for those two upgrades. Still not a bad price for what the machine is, but until we know the base config, it's not clear how good a deal it is.

i have a perfectly usable MBP right now, but this is the laptop that i've been waiting for. seems to hit the sweet spot on price while having a large screen but still "thin & light".

It's thin, but it's not light. There are lots of laptops, even some 15" ones, that are under 1kg.

sure, it's light enough for me though (<4lbs). i like the tradeoff of more (heavy) battery vs. shooting for the absolute lightest machine.

Most of the weight is the aluminum and not the battery.

but the ability to affect weight is mostly in the components, and the battery is the largest and heaviest of these. aluminum is pretty light but you need a certain amount of it to have the structural characteristics they're aiming for.

The 13" Ryzen 7 5700U LG Gram weighs 980 grams with a 51 kWh battery. The 13" M2 MBA weighs 1200g with a 52.6 kWh battery. The main weight difference is not from the 1.6 kWh of battery but the choice of aluminum over magnesium alloy. I'm sure things will be similar for the 15" MBA vs. 15" LG Gram.

A 52 watt hour battery is very middle of the road. The tradeoff you're making is aluminum for plastic. The aluminum MBA is heavier and feels more premium. Plastic is an underrated material IMO -- in many situations it will bend rather than break.

note that it's a 66.5 W・hr battery. aluminum is pliable too.

Examples? There are very few laptops under 1kg period last I looked into this.

https://www.techspot.com/news/98469-lg-gram-superslim-weighs...

"LG Gram SuperSlim weighs under 1kg, packs a 15-inch OLED screen. It's also extremely thin"

It is light, but also only 1080p. I don't think I could ever go back to 1080p.

I don't care how thin it is - a Macbook Air does not have a 15" display.

The hoped for model goes the other direction - a new 11" MBA.

I agree. I really don't understand obsessing about thinness.

Being a few millimeters thinner doesn't actually help it fit into a small backpack any better.

Not really relevant to this model, since this generation of MBAs are not particularly thin.

It can have a 15" display and it does have one.

The weight is more important and this seems impressive. 3 pounds seems light for a laptop with a 15" display. And based on where we are in Apple's product cycle, I imagine it will hold up pretty well.

> The weight is more important

To you

I was thinking of less strain on the back from carrying it around every day.

I feel the same way. Somewhat disappointed to find it is actually 3.3 lbs: https://www.apple.com/macbook-air-13-and-15-m2/specs/

I do prefer lighter but I prefer smaller form factor more. id prefer smaller (in all dimensions) over weighs less. Somewhere between the 12” rMB and the 13” MBA is my sweet spot size wise

I too wish for the 11” MacBook Air again, but having a 15” model in that line seems like a good idea too.

As long as it is isn't a sign of the 13" being phased out. I was already annoyed that the MBA line came with a larger form factor than the old retina MacBooks.

Getting to a point where I'd like to upgrade my original M1 Air, but figure I might as well wait for whatever is after the current M2 generation. However if that means a 15" form factor, no thanks.

Same. The 11" MBAs were perfect for me. I want my laptop to be as portable as possible. If I need a bigger screen, I'd rather use an external monitor.

I feel the same way about the gigantic phones of today, by the way. I want my phone to be small.

I recognize that I'm apparently in the minority here.

I'm less than convinced... the Pro models aren't THAT much bigger, and at the starting price, this isn't priced better either.

Considering the shrunken screen bezels, the 11" MBA is very close to the same size as the current 13" MacBook Air

~~~ MacBook Air 11" ~~~

Height: 0.11-0.68 inch (0.3-1.7 cm)

Width: 11.8 inches (30 cm)

Depth: 7.56 inches (19.2 cm)

Weight: 2.38 pounds (1.08 kg)

~~~ MacBook Air 13" ~~~

Height: 0.44 inch (1.13 cm)

Width: 11.97 inches (30.41 cm)

Depth: 8.46 inches (21.5 cm)

Weight: 2.7 pounds (1.24 kg)

~~~ Difference (New compared to old) ~~~

Height: 0.24 inches thinner (at its thickest point)

Width: 0.17 inches wider

Depth: 0.9 inches deeper (which helps give you a much nicer trackpad and function keys)

Weight: 0.32 pounds heavier (5.12 ounces)

Has Apple fixed their dying keyboards? This is the only major flaw I've encountered with Macbooks. I've had it happen twice with my Intel Macbook Pro from 2015 and now for the first time with my M1 Macbook Air from 2020. It's that issue where keys start to die, and it seems to usually start with the R key and progressively gets worse with more keys dying. It's an issue Louis Rossmann has mentioned in the past, so I know it's not just me.

The reason I'm asking is that, given the upcoming M2 Macbook Air, I'm debating whether to have someone swap out the keyboard for my M1 or just go ahead and upgrade to M2. But if the keyboard on my M2 is going to start dying in a couple years no matter how well I take care of it then I'll pass and go with the repair instead.

They fixed the keyboard issue with the 16" Macbook Pro Intel series, which came out 4-5 years ago.

> I've had it happen twice with my Intel Macbook Pro from 2015 and now for the first time with my M1 Macbook Air from 2020

> They fixed the keyboard issue with the 16" Macbook Pro Intel series, which came out 4-5 years ago.

Fixed what keyboard issue? Clearly, GP is experiencing an issue across these generations. You can add my anecdata to that as well: intermittently cruchy/blocked keystrokes on my 2020 M1 MBA, exactly like my old ~2016-2018 MBPs.

my 2020 13" macbook keyboard works just fine (sample size of one though so probably doesn't count for much)

I'm still running a 2020 M1 MBP and this looks pretty similar, so I'm considering making the jump. Am I missing anything important? I mostly like my current MBP but I would really appreciate a larger screen and actual function keys, ideally without shelling out $3k+. Any ideas what I would gain or lose by making the switch? Are there better options?

Screen is a bit worse, only 2 usb ports, no HDMI

I was hoping to get 10 cores and 32gb of RAM but I have to spend a lot more for that on the MB16.

The 13 inch Macbook Air M2 price has gone down EUR200 in Europe, making it much more attractive.

I think this is a great move. I wanted to get my girlfriend a Macbook Air, but the smaller screen was the only deal breaker. She doesn't want to use an external monitor, and outside of the occasional USB stick, doesn't use any peripherals.

This is easily the best product Apple has launched today. Apple has needed a system for people who want a large screen but don't have the performance requirements nor want the weight and price of the 16" MacBook Pro.

With 16gb of ram and 512gb ssd, you may as well get a refurbished 14 inch pro. Much better screen, better speakers, and better performance / future proofing, same weight, similar screen size, for approx. the same price.

Holy crap, it'll cost $1750 in Sweden. I remember the days when you could add a zero at the end of the USD proce to get the SEK price.

Hopefully they fixed the display flicker issue.

When are they going to get rid of the notch?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com