Comments on: Apple MacBook Air vs. MSI X340: The Super-Slim Ultraportable Face-Off

By: David

David — Fri, 25 Dec 2009 11:53:26 +0000

What about MSI X320? It is available for just $389 at amazon.Is it much different from x340.

By: billigvoks

billigvoks — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 07:11:01 +0000

Im really satisfied with my MSI X340.

I had i for 2 months now!

Thanks for this artikel. i did it for me.

Mvh billigvoks id voks

By: goodjob

goodjob — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 11:56:25 +0000

Sean, are you that dense that you don’t understand the purpose of this comparison?

Most people who buy ultra portables are looking for a stylish lightweight unit for surfing while they drink overpriced lattes at some cafe amounst other people surfing and drinking lattes. Well maybe not that exactly, but they are looking for something to surf and watch videos with the portability requirement (battery life and WEIGHT)

This is why the comparison is valid. The “drawback” of x320 of having inferior componentry is not a drawback; it is a smart design choice. MSI nailed it when they released the x320 and x340, because the Majority of people won’t drop 1800 for a full size netbook, and won’t put up with the bogus unusable keyboard size of a small netbook. The x320 is even more specific — emphasis on freedom from power outlets with atom processor and the 8 cell battery.

Chris, where does the article state that they were running the battery test in Vista?

By: collegiate dreams

collegiate dreams — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 11:24:00 +0000

Hmm… I’m tired of PCs. I need an ultraportable! But, I’m not sure if Macs are worth the extra cash.

By: sid

sid — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 04:42:40 +0000

IMHO windows 7 really rocks! i mean seriously. and I dont see the OS being an issue at all anymore while picking a new rig.. mac user here so dont come out bashing.

By: billigvoks

billigvoks — Fri, 29 May 2009 05:09:51 +0000

Thanks, think I will buy the MSI X340, then… ;o)

Good artikel.

Billigvoks Hårvoks

By: Nancy

Nancy — Sun, 24 May 2009 13:58:34 +0000

Never buy a mac computer. When my work decided to switch from PC to mac, I was excited to return from the user-friendly computer of my college days. To my bitter surprise, the mac is a far cry from what it used to be. If you like watching a beach ball swirl (at work, we call it the “beach ball of death”) while waiting for the computer to process, if you like waiting 10-180 seconds for documents to open, if you like a computer that constantly crashes, get a mac. At work, general consensus is that switching to the mac was poor and unfortunate business decision. In addition to creating endless frustration, the key board also enhances repetitive stress injuries; the computer takes so abysmally long to react, you tend to type things multiple times, thinking that your initial command didn’t register. Opening my PC at home is the best sigh of relief. It starts up in seconds, is ready to respond, responds quickly, can efficiently run 3-5 open programs (which would certainly crash the mac).

By: Johnathan

Johnathan — Sun, 17 May 2009 01:37:46 +0000

Ok I have to ask — why is it that the Sony Z never gets any mention — ANYWHERE? Granted this is looking at superthin notebooks, but that Z is slightly thicker, yet packs a blu-ray and doesnt use a whimpy ULV processor — it has a real core 2. Even when I look at the ultraportable section of this site, or any site I never see it mentioned. Is it that Sony has poor PR and doesnt connect with the media well? From all the ulatrportables I see that have come, and are coming, that still looks like head over heels over them. help me understand this

By: Chris

Chris — Wed, 13 May 2009 22:51:08 +0000

It’s well known that the #1 drawback to running Vista on Macs is that Mac hardware is optimized for MacOS (and vice versa). Anyone who purchases a MacBook Air to run MacOS will find its battery life comparable to the MSI’s.

In which case, the breakdown boils down to:

MSI: Price, Ports, and arguably Display
Apple: Performance (obviously), Keyboard/Touchpad, and Build Quality (questions about display hinges notwithstanding)

Or, in other words, do you want a cheaply assembled ultraportable that’s sort of attractive that runs Windows? Or an expensive, well-built, more attractive ultraportable that runs MacOS X?

My answer? Neither. 15″ MBPros are only slightly less portable than the Airs, and are 5x the computer for the same money.

By: Sean

Sean — Wed, 13 May 2009 14:33:59 +0000

Bang for the buck? Just how much more would the MSI machine cost if it had the same CPU and graphics card? If you ran any kind of CPU or general speed tests, I’m sure you would find that the Mac Air would win easily. And I’m not at all sure that the Air would still be seen as overpriced when you include the proper components.

What bothers me about this comparison is that you’re really only comparing form factor. While the form factor in this case is a big part of why you’re comparing these two particular machines it seems unfair to ignore how well the machine itself performs. I might not be intending to render 3D images — on the other hand I might be doing photo editing or playing graphics intensive games. And while neither machine would excel on those games, the Airbook would do a lot better.

What’s inside does make a difference, even if form factor is the major selection criteria.