MacBook Air M4

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Pricing, base config, and value

  • Many are impressed that the current M4 Air hits US$999 instead of recycling an older chip, and that 16GB RAM is now standard across Macs.
  • Several compare configs to PC ultrabooks and conclude the M4 Air (especially 16GB/512GB at ~US$1200) is very competitive or best-in-class, especially given screen, trackpad, battery, and thermals.
  • Others balk at non‑US pricing (e.g. €1249 base) and call the devices “premium” rather than cheap.

Performance claims and marketing

  • The “up to 23x faster than Intel Air” line is widely mocked as meaningless without context; Apple’s chosen Pixelmator benchmark is seen as cherry-picked and GPU-heavy.
  • Some defend comparing to old Intel Airs and M1s because that’s the realistic upgrade pool and typical 5–10‑year replacement cycle.
  • There’s acceptance that Apple doesn’t lie outright but picks highly favorable tests; users say they ignore the fluff and wait for independent benchmarks.

Upgrade cycles, longevity, and targets

  • Numerous posters still on M1 Airs or Pros (and even 2013–2015 Intel Macs) report machines feel “new” and see no reason to upgrade; M1 is described as a generational leap that hasn’t yet been obsoleted by workloads.
  • Consensus: M4 Air is mainly aimed at Intel Mac holdouts; going from M1/M2 Air to M4 is not compelling for most.

Thermals, fanless design, and dev suitability

  • Owners of M1–M3 Airs report they are mostly cool and silent even under typical dev loads (web, Rails, Docker, JetBrains IDEs, mobile simulators). Heat shows up mainly with sustained GPU-heavy tasks or gaming.
  • For long, fully loaded workflows (large C++/Rust builds, LLVM, ML training, serious gaming), people recommend the Pro for its active cooling.
  • Several note how dramatically cooler and quieter Apple Silicon is versus 2010s Intel MacBooks and many modern Windows machines.

Air vs Pro tradeoffs

  • Differences repeatedly highlighted:
    • Pro: 120Hz mini‑LED HDR screen, higher brightness, better speakers/mics, more ports (HDMI, SD, extra USB‑C), active cooling, longer battery life.
    • Air: thinner and lighter, fanless, cheaper; now supports two external displays with the lid open.
  • Some would gladly pay for a “Pro-screen Air”; others are fine with the Air panel but won’t give up ProMotion once used.

RAM, storage, and soldering

  • Strong criticism of Apple’s upgrade pricing: +16GB RAM and +1TB SSD together can nearly double the base price, despite commodity component costs being much lower.
  • Soldered RAM and SSD are seen as wasteful and anti‑repair, especially when SSD failures require motherboard replacement.
  • Others argue that, amortized over many years of use and given the overall experience, the premium is tolerable; many non‑tech users cope fine with base storage plus cloud.

Cellular connectivity

  • Significant contingent wants built‑in LTE/5G for convenience, reliability, better antennas, and to avoid draining phone batteries and dealing with flaky hotspots.
  • Another camp says iPhone hotspot integration is “good enough” for most and doubts the value of paying for an extra data line; some suspect Apple wants cellular upsell to remain an iPad differentiator.

Display quality, 120Hz, and matte options

  • Many wish the Air had a 120Hz HDR display like the iPad Pro/MBP; some won’t buy 60Hz again, others claim they barely notice 60→120Hz.
  • Lack of nano‑texture/matte on the Air is a recurring complaint; a few returned reflective Airs and moved to the heavier Pro just to get matte.
  • Workarounds include high-quality matte glass protectors, but people worry about fit and potential contact with the keyboard.

Linux and Asahi

  • Asahi Linux is praised on M1/M2, but commenters note that lead development has changed hands and M3+ support is uncertain and likely years away.
  • Some are willing to pay a premium for Mac hardware if it could run Linux fully; currently that’s seen as impractical beyond experimentation.

Competition and Windows laptops

  • Several describe trying high‑end ThinkPads, XPS, Surface, Asus/ROG, LG Gram, and Framework:
    • Pros: cheaper RAM/SSD, upgradability, decent screens (often OLED), Linux preloads from some vendors.
    • Cons: worse thermals, fan noise, sleep/wake and battery issues, mediocre speakers/mics, and trackpads that still lag far behind Apple’s.
  • Overall sentiment: for “just works” portable performance and battery, Apple Silicon laptops remain well ahead, though AMD and Snapdragon designs are closing the gap on raw performance and efficiency.