CTech Morning. Apple's new MacBook Pro is lighter than the MacBook Air. I have questions.
MGood morning to everyone but Apple's naming team. Marques Brownlee posted the comparison.
COn X, Marques posted: quote, "The 14-inch MacBook Pro with PROLED is lighter than the 15-inch MacBook Air."
MI checked. It's true. The fourteen-inch Pro with Pro LED is three pounds on the dot. The fifteen-inch Air is three point three.
CSo the Pro beat the Air at its own game. The Air's whole identity is thin and light.
MHold on. It's a fourteen-inch screen versus a fifteen-inch screen. One is smaller. Of course it can be lighter.
CBut it has a cooling system, the M5 Pro chip. It's not supposed to win on weight.
MThree-tenths of a pound, Chris. That's the weight of three slices of bread. Not a revolution.
CIt's not about the number! It's about what the Air is supposed to mean.
MMaybe the Air means fanless and thin, not lightest at any size. Those are different things.
CThe word Air used to mean featherweight. Steve Jobs pulled the first one out of a manila envelope.
MThat was years ago. The lineup got bigger.
CFine. But if you buy an Air today, you'd assume it's the lightest MacBook.
MOnly if you ignore screen size. A bigger screen has more glass and a bigger battery.
CThen why call it Air? Just call it the MacBook.
MBecause Air sells. Same reason Pro sells.
CPro means performance. Air means light. Now the Pro gets both? That's the confusion.
MPro means faster chips and better display. Air means fanless and cheaper. Not a weight promise.
CPeople order an Air because they think it's the light one. That's the branding problem.
MPeople order an Air because it's cheaper. Not because they're weighing three-tenths of a pound.
CNo, no, wait— Apple spent years teaching us Air equals light. This breaks it.
MOh, come on. A smaller screen should be lighter. That's not breaking anything.
CThe reply that got me: "MacBook Pro becoming the Air???" That's exactly the confusion.
MOne guy said that. Most people are happy their Pro is lighter. They don't care about the name.
CYou're missing the point. If the Pro is light, what is the Air for?
MFanless silence and a lower price. It's not hard.
CThe Pro is already the power machine. Now it's lighter too. That kills the Air.
MIt makes sense if you accept that screen size changes weight. A smaller phone is lighter than a bigger phone.
CBut this isn't two random models. It's the Pro versus the Air. The names mean something.
MThe names meant something in two thousand ten. Now they mean marketing.
CSo you agree it's marketing?
MIt's always marketing. But this specific comparison is not a scandal.
CI'm not calling it a scandal. I'm saying Apple undercut the Air.
MAnd I'm saying the Air is still cheaper. It's fine.
CYou are impossible.
MI'm fact-checking, not agreeing.
CSpeaking of Apple's product names, there's a budget headset floating around that uses your iPhone or Pixel as the screen.
MOh no. Is this the "Vision Pro for fifty bucks" thing?
CA tech account called Tech Eblog posted it on X. Basically says it's a super budget alternative to the Vision Pro.
MTranslation, if the post is right: a plastic shell with lenses, and your phone does all the work.
CAnd if it costs a fraction of the Vision Pro, I'm listening. Not everyone has face-computer money.
MYou can get a cardboard phone holder for twenty dollars. That doesn't make it a spatial computer.
CBut if all you want is a movie screen on a plane, a phone-powered headset might be enough.
MThen say it's a personal movie viewer. Calling it a Vision Pro alternative is dishonest.
COkay, that's fair. But I still think there's room for a cheap Vision Pro.
MRoom? Sure. Vision Pro? Not even close.
CAny headset is only as good as the software. We'll see if anyone actually ships one.
MAnd if it's just a phone holder, please don't call it spatial computing.