Macbook Air MB003B/A, 1.6GHz - £899 inc delivery @ John Lewis - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HUKD, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HUKD app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit
Looks like John Lewis are clearing out old stock of the previous version (it was updated in October 2008) of the macbook air. Still, ~£400 off vs the current macbook air is nothing to be sniffed at, especially when combined with John Lewis' 2 year warranty.
More From John Lewis:

All Comments

(48) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
Page:
#1
whats the differance between this one and the new version?
#2
thetoyman
whats the differance between this one and the new version?


The new one has a better graphics chip, 120gb hard drive and displayport rather than dvi monitor connector

http://gizmodo.com/5062442/macbook-air-gets-cheaper-4x-faster-graphics-mini-displayport-holds-more-stuff

Processor & ram is unchanged
#3
That's a great price for this machine. If I (a) had the money and (b) didn't already have a Macbook Pro I'd be sorely tempted.
#4
Wicked hot
#5
This is the 1s generation MBA.

Many faults with the 1st generation.

- fan noise
-overheating
for more info go to Macrumours.com , then to Macbook Air forum on the website

Also the 2nd generation is way better, faster graphics chip which, more memory faster speed, all the faults from first one removed.

In Jan 2009- after Macworld confernce their may be even more speedier processors and a better version of MBA.

Or you can get MACBOOk. Which is faster, more powerful, easier replacable battery and hardrive new came out 0ct 2008 and cheaper. Its onlyslightly heavier then Macbook air.
#6
Um - the new ones run hot too...
#7
great for Apples sheeps.
#8
riz786123;3732035

Many faults with the 1st generation.

- fan noise
-overheating
for more info go to Macrumours.com , then to Macbook Air forum on the website

Also the 2nd generation is way better, faster graphics chip which, more memory faster speed, all the faults from first one removed.


I'm shocked...... truly :cry:

I thought they had no faults!
#9
rash
great for Apples sheeps.


Don't let's start this again. I though the sheep were the ones who did what everyone else did...

Microbaaasoft
#10
0907spring
Don't let's start this again. I though the sheep were the ones who did what everyone else did...

Microbaaasoft


LOL

;-)
#11
apple quality is awesome, but this particular model was a let-down. looks good, but serious sacrifices!!
if u r going to spend this much, u are better off with the macbook aluminium as he ^ said.
#12
sounds like a good deal, but very confused daughter wants an apple but not sure which one, has an ibook g4 at the moment and wants similar, which one do i need?
#13
Unless you have a must need for the thinness of the Air, you'll get a much better machine with the standard MacBook, but this is a good price for a brand new Air.
#14
wiz
sounds like a good deal, but very confused daughter wants an apple but not sure which one, has an ibook g4 at the moment and wants similar, which one do i need?


The Macbook Air is a niche product within the Mac range. It is not for people who want it as their main computer.

Your best bet would be to get a Macbook white or ideally an alu Macbook if you can spend the extra imho
#15
wiz
sounds like a good deal, but very confused daughter wants an apple but not sure which one, has an ibook g4 at the moment and wants similar, which one do i need?


Get a base spec Aluminium MacBook, or even the old white one will be good enough for her. Any new laptop will be a huge jump from an old, creeky iBook G4!
#16
rash
great for Apples sheeps.


childish little boy lol
#17
1.6GHz, LOOL
#18
Codify
1.6GHz, LOOL


OS X is not like running Vista ;-)
#19
Seems an AWFUL LOT of money for just a laptop computer.
#20
scrooge
OS X is not like running Vista ;-)

That's very interesting. Did you know that eating is not like Driving? Or that Chips are not like Chocolate? Or that purple is not like vegetables?

What I'm saying makes no sense. Because what you just said makes no sense. The OS has nothing to do with what the person you've quoted said.
#21
Kushan
That's very interesting. Did you know that eating is not like Driving? Or that Chips are not like Chocolate? Or that purple is not like vegetables?

What I'm saying makes no sense. Because what you just said makes no sense. The OS has nothing to do with what the person you've quoted said.


I assume what he meant to indicate was that the speed of the processor was not a big issue because the OS was not that demanding in terms of the processing it consumed for a given task in comparison with other OSs.

Perfectly valid comment therefore :thumbsup:

Voted hot
#22
Jeezeypeeps
I assume what he meant to indicate was that the speed of the processor was not a big issue because the OS was not that demanding in terms of the processing it consumed for a given task in comparison with other OSs.

Perfectly valid comment therefore :thumbsup:

Voted hot


Well if that's what he meant, then it's still not a Valid comment. Vista is actually very good when it comes to utilising a CPU. It gets more "work" out of a CPU than previous OS's and is a lot more fair to applications in terms of the processor time they get.
Not valid at all and just a troll for no reason.
#23
hotukdeals should start banning the kids on here
#24
The spec itself isn't amazing for the price however you are paying for the high quality screen, profile/weight and backlit keyboard.

To be honest, it would make more sense to go for the unibody Macbook 2.0 at this price.

If you're set on an Air this is the cheapest new one available though.
#25
For portable market the netbooks like the EEE and the Advent 4211 have murdered the Air, which has an unjustifiable price tag. Still expensive at this price, whatever the perceived and arguable benefits of MAC OS, they don't justify the huge ticket.
#26
If you want an Air this is a good deal so it's tecnhnically hot.

Dumb computer and overpriced still though...but technically a hot deal.
#27
Voted cold.
#28
I'd just like to point out that no matter what way you swing - Mac, WIndows or even Linux, if you're going to propose an argument for or against something, at least use a decent one with facts that back it up instead of silly, childish remarks.

I'm referring to things like "lol vista sucks" or "macs are rubbish!". Saying things like this and in this tone does not help your argument, it just makes you (And thus anyone associated with you, i.e. the very people you're "rooting" for) look like an immature idiot. It's unfortunate, but Mac fans have the worst reputations because of the die-hard few out there that can't mention anything about Apple without mentioning how rubbish Microsoft are in the process. Not all Apple fans are like that - hell, most of them aren't, but those few make them all look bad, which in turn puts people off Apple products altogether.

Seriously, it's just a computer, it's no reason to kill your own brain cells over (directed at everyone, not just Apple fans). If you think this is good value, by all means vote hot. If not, vote cold, that's how the system works.
#29
to answer peoples queries.

-high price is for the look,sexiness thiness beuty not for the spec

- the 1st generation had many problems, if you go to the macrumours forum their is a hug list from many people of the prblems they have had. 2nd genearation is way better and works out cheaper.

for your daughter madaame i would advise the entry level macbook

1.macbook white plastic = £ 700 ok spec

2. macbook, aluminium addition = £900 to £1150, the higher spec of the aluminium has backlit keyboard.

both macbook are 13"

3. there is the macbook pro- which is replacement for desktpop used mainly for designer, musciacains etc which come in 15" and 17" and are much more expensive then macbook. I would only advise this laptop if your daughter wants a big laptop.

Their has been a few problems with the new Macbook aluminium ones.

if you guys have any further questions i would highly recomend go to macrumours.com forum you can post your quesiton their and their are hundreds of experts that can answer any type of mac, ipgone quesitons.

Below is the direct link for Macbok air forum.

http://forums.macrumors.com/forumdisplay.php?f=122
#30
Kushan
I'd just like to point out that no matter what way you swing - Mac, WIndows or even Linux, if you're going to propose an argument for or against something, at least use a decent one with facts that back it up instead of silly, childish remarks.

I'm referring to things like "lol vista sucks" or "macs are rubbish!". Saying things like this and in this tone does not help your argument, it just makes you (And thus anyone associated with you, i.e. the very people you're "rooting" for) look like an immature idiot. It's unfortunate, but Mac fans have the worst reputations because of the die-hard few out there that can't mention anything about Apple without mentioning how rubbish Microsoft are in the process. Not all Apple fans are like that - hell, most of them aren't, but those few make them all look bad, which in turn puts people off Apple products altogether.

Seriously, it's just a computer, it's no reason to kill your own brain cells over (directed at everyone, not just Apple fans). If you think this is good value, by all means vote hot. If not, vote cold, that's how the system works.


Handbags at dawn...
#31
Kushan
Well if that's what he meant, then it's still not a Valid comment. Vista is actually very good when it comes to utilising a CPU. It gets more "work" out of a CPU than previous OS's and is a lot more fair to applications in terms of the processor time they get.
Not valid at all and just a troll for no reason.

To run Vista smoothly, you need a better computer than you did for XP. It is a valid comment, yours is not re: "it gets more "work" out of a CPU than previous OS's", unless you mean it's more demanding? Then sure, yeah, it requires more.

OSX does not need as much power, it is a valid reason as the specification doesn't need to be as high, and can't go that much higher without better cooling.
#32
http://www.hotukdeals.com/item/291751/new-apple-macbook-13-3in-notebook-a/showthread.php?t=291751&page=6


for those that want to buy Macbook.

This macbook air offer has been on the apple uk website for over 2 months. Its old offer.
#33
Adamo
To run Vista smoothly, you need a better computer than you did for XP. It is a valid comment, yours is not re: "it gets more "work" out of a CPU than previous OS's", unless you mean it's more demanding? Then sure, yeah, it requires more.

OSX does not need as much power, it is a valid reason as the specification doesn't need to be as high, and can't go that much higher without better cooling.


A computer than ran XP wouldn't necessarily run OSX, so what's your point, again?
But here's the thing - min spec for Vista is an 800mhz CPU. According to Apple's own website, the minimum processor required for OSX is "Mac computer with an Intel, PowerPC G5, or PowerPC G4 (867MHz or faster) processor". Not that's a PowerPC mhz rating, which is typically much faster than an x86 processor (As used by windows).
So really, when the guy says "OSX is not like running Vista", he may very well be saying that OSX is actually slower?

There's a myth going around that Vista has crazy system requirements when it doesn't. It uses a bit more RAM than previous OS's (And this is very much overblown - a lot of people think Vista uses a lot more RAM than it really does because it caches data into any unused RAM you have, but this is dropped as soon as another program needs it with no loss of performance - you can quite happily run Vista on 512Mb of RAM) and if you want the Glass interface, you'll need a DX9 capable graphics chip (Pretty much any graphics chip within the last 4 years, except for intel ****). That's it. It's processor scheduling is better than XP's, you get more bang for your buck with Vista in that regard so once again, I ask you, what's your point?

And this argument is pointless because he was bitching about Vista when there was absolutely no need. Doesn't matter what OS is running on this thing, a 1.6Ghz processor is still pretty basic for a laptop, no matter how thin it is. I could just as easily say "lol Linux is not like running OSX", it would still be perfectly valid (in your eyes), but it'd be a useless point.
#34
heat added for the price. definetly tempting for those of us in the market for an apple notebook...

the only thing that concerns me is the overheating issues etc. the spec is fine for those us of who use their laptops as secondary machines ...
#35
when will HUKD users learn how to spell "definitely"???
not definately/definetly
#36
Kushan
A computer than ran XP wouldn't necessarily run OSX, so what's your point, again?
But here's the thing - min spec for Vista is an 800mhz CPU. According to Apple's own website, the minimum processor required for OSX is "Mac computer with an Intel, PowerPC G5, or PowerPC G4 (867MHz or faster) processor". Not that's a PowerPC mhz rating, which is typically much faster than an x86 processor (As used by windows).
So really, when the guy says "OSX is not like running Vista", he may very well be saying that OSX is actually slower?

There's a myth going around that Vista has crazy system requirements when it doesn't. It uses a bit more RAM than previous OS's (And this is very much overblown - a lot of people think Vista uses a lot more RAM than it really does because it caches data into any unused RAM you have, but this is dropped as soon as another program needs it with no loss of performance - you can quite happily run Vista on 512Mb of RAM) and if you want the Glass interface, you'll need a DX9 capable graphics chip (Pretty much any graphics chip within the last 4 years, except for intel ****). That's it. It's processor scheduling is better than XP's, you get more bang for your buck with Vista in that regard so once again, I ask you, what's your point?

And this argument is pointless because he was bitching about Vista when there was absolutely no need. Doesn't matter what OS is running on this thing, a 1.6Ghz processor is still pretty basic for a laptop, no matter how thin it is. I could just as easily say "lol Linux is not like running OSX", it would still be perfectly valid (in your eyes), but it'd be a useless point.


we have a vista fanboy :-D
#37
scrooge
we have a vista fanboy :-D


No you don't, you just have someone with enough sense to actually research and investigate people's claims and not just believe the hype of the day. I bet you've never even heard terms like "processor scheduling" before.
#38
Kushan
No you don't, you just have someone with enough sense to actually research and investigate people's claims and not just believe the hype of the day. I bet you've never even heard terms like "processor scheduling" before.


:-D touched a nerve have we?
#39
Avoid my statement all you like, I'm not a fan of Vista, nor am I a fan of OSX (or Linux for that matter), they all have their place and uses in the world. I am, however, a fan of truthful, accurate information and any time someone starts having a go at Vista just for the sake of it, I'll be happy to defend it. I'd do the same if someone was spreading FUD about OSX, so take that as you will.
#40
Kushan
No you don't, you just have someone with enough sense to actually research and investigate people's claims and not just believe the hype of the day. I bet you've never even heard terms like "processor scheduling" before.


http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff140/Javelin09/Nerds.jpg

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Top of Page
Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!