Keyboard size difference in 11" and 13" MBA

I plan to purchase a new MBA in the next week or so, to replace my 2010 11" MBA. I love the 11" form factor, but since I do a lot of writing, I'm wondering about the keyboard differences in a 13" MBA. My Apple store is over an hour's drive, so I thought I'd throw this out for those who may already have experience with both models.
Is the 13" model's keyboard substantianlly larger? Does anyone know the measurements of the 13" keyboard vs the 11"? Not the unit's measurements, but just the keyboard area. Has anyone used both for typing and have an opinion?
Any thoughts would be appreciated, thanks in advance.

Just checked the official specs which states that they both have:
"Full-size backlit keyboard with 78 (U.S.) or 79 (ISO) keys, including 12 function keys and 4 arrow keys (inverted “T” arrangement) with ambient light sensor"
I guess this was an improvement over the 11" model I had.

Similar Messages

SQL Server replication and size differences of source and destination databases

I set up snapshot replication for a DB between two SQL instances. On the source instance, the DB shows as 106612.56MB with 34663.75MB as available free space. I expected that the replica would then end up being 71948.81MB (106612.56 - 34663.75
because it wouldn't replicate the white space). The resultant replica database is showing as 35522.94MB. The required data appears to be present in the replicated DB as the SSRS reports that use it are able to find the data they look for. But
why the large discrepancy in size between the source and replicated DB? The replicated DB is less than 1/2 the size of the source DB. I've searched around and can't seem to find any explanation. I realize this isn't mirroring so the DBs will
not be identical in size but I did not expect to see such a large difference between the two. I am replicating all almost all articles (tables, stored procs, etc.) with the exception of a handful of stored procedures and user-defined functions that either
reference invalid column names in a table (vendor bug) or reference another DB that is not present on the replica's instance. I would expect these 4-5 articles can not account for a 37000 MB size difference between the two DBs.
Please note that this has nothing to do with transaction log size. I am specifically talking about the database size and am not looking at the size that combines both DB and TxLog size.
Any insight?

Another factor could be that on the publisher the data is distributed through pages, paragraphs and extents. Depending on your fill factor and the amount of deletes and your datatype, there could be space in the pages, paragraphs and extents which have not
been reclaimed.
During the bcp process which is part of the snapshot application process on the subscriber all the data will be in the tables in a contiguous fashion. I would suspect this would be why you have the difference in space usage.
looking for a book on SQL Server 2008 Administration?
http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Server-2008-Management-Administration/dp/067233044X looking for a book on SQL Server 2008 Full-Text Search?
http://www.amazon.com/Pro-Full-Text-Search-Server-2008/dp/1430215941

Font Size Difference between Exe and Labview IDE

I'm stumped on the following issue and surprizinglycan't find any references that are similar on this forum.
I've developed an application which, when built to an Exe, has different font sizes than when executed on the same computer in the Labview Integrated Development Environment. In each instance the screen resolution is the same. I've used the "Application Font". I'm having trouble figuring why the font would render differently in each case. Of possible signifigance is that I'm running the Exe by simply browsing to the folder where the build procedure drops it instead of building an installation.
I've attached one of the most glaring examples that shows the rendering in each case.
I'm hoping that someone can point me in the right direction to resolve this issue.
Attachments:
Font Differences1.zip ‏1704 KB

Hi Doctor,
two notes:
for the font size differences: I would try to change the font settings
to a more 'specific' font like Arial 14pt. The application font is set
somewhere in an ini-file and the setting may change with the
environment (IDE vs. exe-rt).
for your attachment: please convert pictures to jpg or png. This will
reduce size by orders of magnitude :-) And please crop them, unless you
have a very (VERY) beautiful desktop background picture!
Best regards,
GerdW
CLAD, using 2009SP1 + LV2011SP1 + LV2014SP1 on WinXP+Win7+cRIO
Kudos are welcome

Size difference between 60GB and 80GB?

Is there a size difference between the 60GB and 80GB iPod with videos? I was looking at a Belkin Tunepower power source for my iPod and it said it has sleeves for 30GB and 60GB iPod videos, but I just checked the Apple store and they only sell 30 and 80 gig iPods. Will my 80GB fit the 60GB sleeve?

Your 80 GB ought to fit the 60 GB case, since the exact dimensions of both iPods are identical:
60 GB: 4.1 x 2.4 x 0.55 inches
80 GB: 4.1 x 2.4 x 0.55 inches
Of course, if you are using a 30 GB, that would be different, since the 30 GB is a little thinner than the 60 and 80 GB models of Fifth Generations.
-Kylene

JPG file size differences in ACR and PS

Camera: Nikon D80
Photoshop: CS3 Extended v.10.0.1
ACR: version 4.3.1
Saving from ACR, Q=9 -> 1,2Mb
Saving from ACR, Q=10 -> 1,8Mb
PS, Q=11 (no thumbnail) -> 3,1Mb
PS, Q=11 (with thumbnail) -> 3,1Mb (no difference)
PS, Q=12 (no thumbnail) -> 5,8Mb
PS, Q=12 (with thumbnail -> 5,8Mb (no difference)
Save for Web, Q=90: 3,7Mb (larger than PS/11)
Save for Web, Q=100: 5,8Mb (same as PS/12)
1.) Why ACR saves much smaller files?
2.) Why there isn't difference when saving with thumbnail or not?
3.) Why the different methods?
4.) Is any of them better? If yes: why the other? If not: why does it exist?
Saving from ACR produces much smaller files than any other known RAW converter. I've tried Bibble, Lightroom, CaptureNX, DxO and all of them created nearly the same size as Photoshop does. So the most important question: why ACR creates so small JPG files?
Thanks in advance!

Huhh,
the question isn't stupid, just seems a little bit strange in my point of view. But you're right, i must confess. So halfway i am the stupid, not the question (and not the software).
But when i choose 'maximum' in ACR it gives me the 10, and i thought maximum is the maximum. For me it tells about the highest possible quality. There is no value bigger than the maximum.
I've never realize that in PS the way is exactly the same like in ACR! In PS the maximum is 10 too!! I'm always enter the value by the keyboard and never choose a preset. And in PS there's a slider showing the full scale and the entered value, so on that i can see that there's life after the maximum. in ACR the missing slider suggested me that 10 is the top level. But now i've entered 11 and 12 and gave the same sizes as i gave from PS with 11 and 12.
So i can conclude that the GUI of ACR isn't perfect (OK, i *must* now it uses the same engine/values like PS), but the method behind the scenes is perfect, like in PS. Sorry for the trouble and thanks for the very fast answer!

Size differences between editable and non-ediatble combo boxes

Hi
There seem to be some differences between the sizes of editable and non-editable JComboBox.
I have two combos one editable and one non-editable.Even though all the constraints(except [x, y], of course) are same for both in gridbaglayout, they are displayed in different sizes.
Why is it so? and what should I do to display them in same size. I dont want to do trial and error.
Another related question is, how do I set two editable comboboxes to always have same sizes irrespective of the values are added into it. I am asking this question bcos I have observed that sizes differ between combos when values are added during initialization and when values are added at a later time.
TIA,
CA

Maybe something like this:
myCombo.addItemListener( new ItemListener() {
public void itemStateChanged( ItemEvent ie )
    JComboBox combo = (JComboBox)ie.getSource();
    ComboValue selection = (ComboValue)combo.getSelectedItem();
    if( combo.getSelectedItem().equals("edit") )
        combo.setEditable( true );
    else
        combo.setEditable( false );
}}):(untested code)

Size difference in diskset and logical volume

Hi,
Created a disk set and a simple mirror LV on the set. The disk had EFI label, so
once the disk is added to the set it repartitions again and stores state database replica
in s6 (for EFI). The remainder of the space on each drive is placed into slice 0
If I do prtvtoc on the /dev/md/map/rdsk/d18 and /dev/rdsk/c6t60000970000194900391533030344631d0
the size varies or the available size on the disk doesn't match to the lv size.
-bash-4.0# prtvtoc /dev/md/map/rdsk/d18
* First Sector Last
* Partition Tag Flags Sector Count Sector Mount Directory
0 0 00 32768 1966080 1998847
-bash-4.0# prtvtoc /dev/rdsk/c6t60000970000194900391533030344631d0
* /dev/rdsk/c6t60000970000194900391533030344631d0 partition map
* First Sector Last
* Partition Tag Flags Sector Count Sector Mount Directory
0 4 00 32818 1997485 2030302
6 4 01 34 32784 32817
8 11 00 2030303 16384 2046686
In the 2nd o/o you can find the sector count 1997485 but in the lv,
the sector count is 1966080.
But this is not the case for lv on VTOC labeled disk. There both of them match.
-Manjunath

Hi,
Created a disk set and a simple mirror LV on the set. The disk had EFI label, so
once the disk is added to the set it repartitions again and stores state database replica
in s6 (for EFI). The remainder of the space on each drive is placed into slice 0
If I do prtvtoc on the /dev/md/map/rdsk/d18 and /dev/rdsk/c6t60000970000194900391533030344631d0
the size varies or the available size on the disk doesn't match to the lv size.
-bash-4.0# prtvtoc /dev/md/map/rdsk/d18
* First Sector Last
* Partition Tag Flags Sector Count Sector Mount Directory
0 0 00 32768 1966080 1998847
-bash-4.0# prtvtoc /dev/rdsk/c6t60000970000194900391533030344631d0
* /dev/rdsk/c6t60000970000194900391533030344631d0 partition map
* First Sector Last
* Partition Tag Flags Sector Count Sector Mount Directory
0 4 00 32818 1997485 2030302
6 4 01 34 32784 32817
8 11 00 2030303 16384 2046686
In the 2nd o/o you can find the sector count 1997485 but in the lv,
the sector count is 1966080.
But this is not the case for lv on VTOC labeled disk. There both of them match.
-Manjunath

Difference between mid2011 and mid2013 MBA

I recently sold my mid 2011 built MBA, 13" screen with 128GB storage and 4GB memory, i5 processor. Thought I could live with just my iPad and iMac and found out I was wrong so I bought a new, 2013 build MBA with the same specs as my old one. I know the battery life is supposed to be better on the new one but I've found that everything, from boot-up to shut down is much, much faster. So, what's the reason for this huge (to me) step up in performance? Even though the processor says it's the same, is it really different? Same for the flash drive, same but different? I know that Apple's website says that there is improvement in both, is this what I'm seeing? Not just hype on Apple's part?
Thanks for any insight.

Someone showed me side-by-side building of an iOS app in a development environment ... a 2011 17 in MBP vs a new 15 in MBP ... 5 second build on new, 45 second build on old.
Faster RAM ,faster flash probably, much faster CPU ...

Size difference between recorded and published?

I'm launching a custom sized window using javascript for a
e-learning course that has a nav bar at the bottom (my own, not
captivate related - including next and back buttons that navigate
html pages). I'm recording my movies at 790x496. When the .swfs and
the html outputed by captivate 2 are published it is adding 24
pixels at the bottom. I'm using a captivate controller but it is at
the top. If I try and manually go change the html back to my custom
height the swf displays messed up. Anybody know how to get these 24
pixels from being reserved/displayed at the bottom by the swf's?
Just seems wierd to offer the ability to record at a custom
size but then it automatically adds 24 pixels to the height.

Hi theconfusedone and welcome to our community
Hopefully I can help un-confuse you.
Okay, click Project > Skin... > Borders tab. Note that
the bottom border is the one selected. Further note the "Width"
value. These are normally configured with the bottom border enabled
so that the playback control doesn't cover any part of your
project. So DE-select the bottom border and RE-select the top. This
should allow space for your playback control and allow it to
operate as you want.
Keep in mind that this also creates an additional .SWF that
will need to be included in your output. If you want no additional
.SWF, you may DE-select the "Show borders" check box to force it
all to be stored in a single .SWF.
Cheers... Rick

Odd size difference between iPhoto and Finder

I've just noticed something rather odd. In finder my iPhoto Library is calculated at 94.43GB, and yet when i look in the bottom left info window it says 61GB - i've ensured that I have looked at the library as a whole and have emptied trash, but i'm still left with a 30+GB differential.
Anyone got any thoughts?

Nothing odd about it.
The iPhoto Window reports the resulting size of a folder if you exported into it, all the current images, in their current version.
The Library in the Finder reports the size of the package: All those originals, all those modified photos, the database files, thumbnails, faces thumbnails, caches and various other support files.
Regards
TD

File size differences between cp3 and cp4

Hello
I created a cp file in captivate4 & import audio file (mp3) & published it.
swf file size was 305kb.
but when I created this file in cptivate3 & published it swf file size was 260kb.
why swf file size in cptivate3 less than cptivate4?
in two sample setting is default.
Thanks for any help.

Hello
I created a cp file in captivate4 & import audio file (mp3) & published it.
swf file size was 305kb.
but when I created this file in cptivate3 & published it swf file size was 260kb.
why swf file size in cptivate3 less than cptivate4?
in two sample setting is default.
Thanks for any help.

Would there be a problem with the warranty in the UK if bought in USA? Plus is there a big difference between US and UK keyboards? Thanks

Hi, I'm from the UK and in the USA for a week. I'm thinking of purchasing an Air. Would there be a problem with the warranty in the UK if bought in the US? Plus is there a big difference between US and UK keyboards?
Cheers
G

There are subtle differences on a British layout, mainly having to do with the top line (shift numbers), to permit the use of European monetary symbols. There are a few other keys different (note the enter key).
Here are the basic layouts. Obviously the MBA won't have an eject key, as the power key resides in that location.
British English Keyboard
USA English Keyboard

Difference between text size in General setting and large type in Accessibility settings

Difference between text size in General settings and large type in Accessibility settings?

None that I can see.

File size difference between DNG Converter and Lightroom Beta 4

Hi,
I want to go the all-DNG route and am trying several things ATM. I want my files to be as small as possible, thus I disable previews and RAW embedding and enable compression in DNG Converter. In Lightroom, there are no options at all. What I do get, are pretty amazing file size differences:
Original .NEF as it came from my D70s: ~5MB
.DNG created by DNG Converter: ~1MB
.DNG created by Lightroom: ~4MB
The very small file size in DNG Converter is the one that bother's me most. I get these small files from time to time. I checked both the DNG and the NEF in Photoshop, and they seem to be identical. So my question is: What triggers these small file sizes? Do I loose anything? Or is the Lightroom DNG converter not as advanced as the stand alone version?
Maybe this helps: I get the ridicolous small files for very dull subjects that tell the computer scientist in me that it should be easily compressable by common compression algorithms.
Thanks for any pointers,
Markus

Thanks for the hint! It did make me revisit those files and now I see the reason for the small file sizes: The Apple Finder does note update the file size view once a file was added to a folder. Here's what I did:
Opened a folder full of .NEFs in detail view in Finder.
Converted them using DNG Converter
Looked at the sizes of the files as they were shown in the Finder window allready open.
Unfortunately, those file sizes are not correct. If I open a new Finder window of the same folder, file sizes are correctly reported as between 3.5 and 5 MB.

Looking for new laptop what are the differences between pro and air? Besides size. Does the air preform like the pro?

Looking for new laptop what are the differences between pro and air? Besides size. Does the air preform like the pro?

The NEW macbook Pro and Air are EXTREMELY close in form factor
The newest macbook Pro is essentially a larger macbook Air with Retina display and options for speed in increasing prices up to an independent graphics and quad core processor.
both Air and new Pro now have PCIe SSD and permanent RAM.
The Air is the lightweight portable form factor, fast to boot and shut down, but with longer battery life than any of the macbook pro in 13"
Now the new macbook Pro and macbook Air are extremely close in form factor and nature.
both have 802ac wifi
both have permanent RAM, no superdrive
both are slim profiles and SSD
The only real differences now are (in the most expensive Pros) faster processors and quadcore processors and top end model autonomous graphics.
....and of course the retina display
both are now "very good for travel"
Other than features the form factor of the Air and Pro are VERY close now,....so now its merely a matter of features and price more than anything.
You need an external HD regardless of what you get for backups etc. Drop into an Apple store and handle both and make your choice based on features, such as Retina or non-retina, .... both at a distance now look like the same computer.
The Pro weighs more, ....but nowhere near what it used to just a month ago on the older macbook Pros
The NEW macbook Pro is a different creature entirely than the older macbook Pro, .....the new Pro is thicker than the Air, but id frankly call the NEWEST Pro a "macbook Air with Retina display" , or
Maybe a “macbook Air PRO with Retina display”
Instead of Air VS Pro now,.....its really a smooth transition from Air to pro without comparing say, 2 different creatures, now its like contrasting a horse from a race horse.
Either one in 8gig of RAM (preferably)... the 4gig upgrade costs very little, the I7 you will notice only 15% faster on heavy applications over the I5, and NOTHING on most APPS.....I5 has longer battery life.
As you see below, the non-Retina 13" AIR is 82% of the Macbook with Retina display in resolution
there is no magical number of pixels per inch that automatically equates to Retina quality.
http://www.cultofmac.com/168509/why-you-might-be-disappointed-by-the-resolution- of-those-new-retina-display-macs-feature/
A huge internal SSD isnt a game changer for anything, you need an external HD anyway
what you WONT READ on Apple.com etc. is that the larger SSD are MUCH FASTER due to SSD density
"The 512GB Samsung SSD found in our 13-inch model offers roughly a 400MB/s increase in write speeds over the 128GB SanDisk/Marvell SSD"
http://blog.macsales.com/19008-performance-testing-not-all-2013-macbook-air-ssds -are-the-same
Here is an excellent video comparison between the 11” I5 vs. I7 2013 Macbook Air.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDqJ-on03z4
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7113/2013-macbook-air-core-i5-4250u-vs-core-i7-465 0u/2
I5 vs. I7 performance 13” Macbook Air 2013
Boot performance
11.7 I5 ……11.4 I7
Cinebench
1.1 I5….1.41 I7
IMovie Import and Opt.
6.69 I5….5.35 I7
IMovie Export
10.33 I5…8.20 I7
Final Cut Pro X
21.47 I5…17.71 I7
Adobe Lightroom 3 Export
25.8 I5….31.8 I7
Adobe Photoshop CS5 Performance
27.3 I5…22.6 I7
Reviews of the newest Retina 2013 Macbook Pro
13”
Digital Trends (13") - http://www.digitaltrends.com/laptop-...h-2013-review/
LaptopMag (13") - http://www.laptopmag.com/reviews/lap...play-2013.aspx
Engadget (13") - http://www.engadget.com/2013/10/29/m...-13-inch-2013/
The Verge (13") - http://www.theverge.com/2013/10/30/5...ay-review-2013
CNet (13") - http://www.cnet.com/laptops/apple-ma...-35831098.html
15”
The Verge (15") - http://www.theverge.com/2013/10/24/5...w-15-inch-2013
LaptopMag (15") - http://www.laptopmag.com/reviews/lap...inch-2013.aspx
TechCrunch (15") - http://techcrunch.com/2013/10/25/lat...ok-pro-review/
CNet (15") - http://www.cnet.com/apple-macbook-pro-with-retina-2013/
PC Mag (15") - http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2426359,00.asp
Arstechnica (15") - http://arstechnica.com/apple/2013/10...-pro-reviewed/
Slashgear (15") - http://www.slashgear.com/macbook-pro...2013-26303163/

Keyboard size difference in 11" and 13" MBA

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for