[old-gregg]

"CPU... GPU..." who cares? The laptop is composed of a shell, battery, keyboard and the most importantly - the LCD. Nowhere in your post you mentioned the quality of those 4 critical difference-making components. Comparing computers based on irrelevant commodity (chips) is like comparing automobiles by how many wheels they have.

[phaus]

Please allow me to address the "4 critical-difference-making components."

1- Shell - I love the idea of having a gaming laptop with apple's build quality, but its hard to fit a decent GPU and cooling system in such a slim, stylish case. Gamers know this and are generally willing to compromise. While I hate the way alienware computers look, many reviewers gush about their excellent build quality.

2.-Battery - High-end GPUs use a lot of power. Unfortunately, current technology only allows for the battery to act as a glorified UPS. This is unfortunate but anyone who is purchasing a gaming computer should understand the limitations of such hardware.

3.-The keyboard is very important. Alienware keyboards aren't the very best keyboards, but they are better than the overwhelming majority. On the other hand the Razer has a "chiclet" keyboard which is considered by many to be inferior to traditional laptop keyboards.

4.-The LCD - If you purchased a gaming computer, would you rather play a game at 17 FPS on a beautiful screen or play the same game at 60 FPS on a computer possessing a marginally worse panel.

When you are talking about a gaming computer, the GPU is pretty much the only thing that matters. If you want battery power, a nice shell, and a nice LCD you can get a SAMSUNG laptop with the same specs as the Razer for 2k cheaper.

[potatolicious]

#4 is a bit disingenuous no? There is a ridiculous gap between the shittiest laptop panels and the best ones. The difference is anything but "marginal".

If I'm going to push 60fps in Crysis 2 on a laptop I want good screen contrast, proper color rendition, proper brightness, no light leaks from the edges, etc. What is the point of the world's most powerful mobile GPU if it feels like I'm looking at the game world through a bad Photoshop filter?

[nrb]

No... comparing "gaming PCs" by their internal components is like comparing automobiles by their engines and handling. Which is to say, perfect apt.

[SoftwareMaven]

But there are still a huge variety of "sports cars", including $200k cars that could be trounced by a $45k Suburu.

[Jach]

Gamers care. The Macbook Air got away with not having normal things inside it because everyone knew it was for looks alone. This thing is being marketed as a gaming rig, which necessarily means you have to care about what's inside.

[reverend_gonzo]

Nice subtle snark.

There might not be a lot of power in the Air but there is a market. Specifically, for people where mobility is more important than power, but able to get actual work done.

I bought one when I was hauling around my ThinkPad to school, work, coffeeshops, and everywhere else around the city. Since I didn't have a car, it meant it was one my shoulders the whole time. I considered getting a netbook, but after using a friend's for a little while, I realized it wasn't going to work (tiny keyboard, not enough power.)

The Air, on the other hand, has a full-size keyboard. I don't remember what the processor is, but it was more powerful than an Atom. RAM was short but you can survive.

I used it for primarily writing my thesis, making presentations, coding in TextMate, and work in Matlab. I didn't need power, and I definitely didn't want weight. That was lighter and easier to hold than a textbook, and could actually perform the duties I needed to.

So, regardless of what you'd like to think, there is a market for them outside of people who want shiny things.

[count]

The Air is actually really well done. It's a Core i5/i7 (current top of the line), 4GB of RAM, and with a new Intel HD3000 graphics chip, which is able to play TF2 full screen at a usable framerate. I've never used another laptop with embedded graphics that could do that. It's not 'Crysis' good, but it's damn good for a cheap little laptop (especially compared to this Razer monster).

[sbinetd]

Just to add a small correction - the air does not have 'top of the line' i5 or i7 processors. Rather, they use a slower, dual-core mobility model. I'd also argue that it is 'cheap' - but that's more of a relative point. :)

[count]

The Core i5/i7 line of CPUs is currently the top of the line. Of course it uses the 'mobility' model, but it's still the current top of the line.

$1199 ($50/100 off if you're a student) as configured. Show me another laptop with it's form factor and capabilities for that price? Hell, show me another laptop with it's form factor and capabilities?

$1000 for some so convenient is a STEAL, especially if you actually make money using it.

[phaus]

Because they chopped the amount of cores in half and neutered the speed, it is not a top of the line CPU, even if it is called an i7.

That being said, in my opinion no other ultra-portable comes close to the Macbook Air. If I could justify having two laptops I would be ordering one right now instead of typing this.

[raarky]

bang on.. I've got an air and I play tf2 on it. It's sweet!