They sort of did. They claim it has a "more efficient layout" and a "simpler, more modern appearance". I have no idea how they researched this but I can't find a single scenario where the new layout is more efficient than the classic one. IMHO they pulled this argument out of you know where. That means they changed it becuase they think it looks better. And that's the problem. ThinkPads have always been about form following function, not the other way round.

I think we should kickstart fund a company to produce classic IBM-ish laptops from Thinkpad parts.

We would just need 3 systems:
- SXGA+ 12" (X61s with hi-res)
- SXGA+ 14" (updated T4xp)
- UXGA 15" (updated T4xp)

IPS screen, highend CPU and discrete GPU for the 14" and 15" parts.


Would be OK, if we could start with just one model, probably UXGA 15"

All we need now is first 15000 orders

Lenovo and IBM Thinkpads share the same name but are completely different products.

IBM is a logistic company and they made Thinkpads back in the day where notebooks were considered durable business assets. They designed them so they would stand abuse and be repaired and upgraded easily. They knew businessmen are more rational when making choices so they would never complain about an ugly machine as long as it was well designed. So they went and designed it with important considerations in mind such as ergonomics, familiarity, expandability, etc. Thinklight, for example, is much more than a light to see the keyboard; it's probably the only comfortable way to read a printed document in a dark room. The modular bay offered lots of options, just a few that come to my mind are: floppy drives, ZIPs, port modules, batteries, secondary hard drives, etc. They charged premium and people paid for it.

Thing is, at some point people started to realize notebooks aren't durable assents. Usually a customer will replace it well before it fails or becomes obsolete. So notebooks became sort of disposable and as such, people was not so concerned about the premium bits and didn't want to pay premium for them. IBM realized this and sold its division to Lenovo.

Lenovo Thinkpads are no longer business models. They are above average quality consumer grade notebooks with some inherited business grade features. They aim for the large audience and in most notebooks today you'll find a six row keyboard with the delete key on the corner. Lenovo knows that's what people is used to and rather than trying to re-educate the large audience they felt it was more convenient to re-educate the small Thinkpad cult. It's plain numbers and we're far less.

Why are Thinkpads so large this days? Well, one reason for it is that Lenovo wants a touchpad there at all costs. It wasn't a bad idea to add one back in the T4x days as it was a 4:3 design and there was more than enough space for it, but today it's plain stupid. With an ultra-wide screen and a seven row keyboard there is not enough space for a decent sized touchpad unless you make the machine artificially tall. A business user will probably accept the tradeoff between size and the loss of touchpad. After all, it's redundant, Thinkpads up to T30 (and even X200) sold well without it.

To make long history short, IBM did what they considered more adecuate and business users just trusted them on that. Lenovo just does what they believe market demands even if it's flat stupid. Hey, and how could they not? A Thinkpad sells today for way less than $1,000.

... the laptop market isn't as you imagine it to have been in the past, or how you imagine it is now.

I can't say I agree with everything else in your post, but this statement is right on.

apple doesn't do that. apple dictate market demand.

I dont think Apple can really dictate anything.
IMO its more like that the competitors of Apple give up a lot of room, so that Apple
can easily sell high priced hard- and software, which is trendy, partly superior in hardware
and has a "just-works" bonus. That seems to be a big market sector other vendors have neglected,
or where not smart enough to generate revenue in.

Besides Apple managers seem to have the knowledge and the guts to compose products
and source OEM parts, of which Lenovo representatives have claimed in the past
it would not be possible.

Imagine that IBM/Lenovo have sold 15inch laptops around 2005, which had good keyboards (NMB),
great build quality and a 133dpi UXGA IPS Flexview LCD. If Lenovo would have nursed this
product line, Apple today would have a hard time to sell their Retina display in its MBP as
ground breaking new product. And people would know, "but the better keyboard is still with
Thinkpads".

I'm still wondering how comes that the notebook market has become so crippled last years comparing to digital camera one where you can find new amazing and evolving products every month (now I'm just impressed by this one). And yes, camera manufacturers do listen their customers.

Have they gotten past the problem of pushing too many useless megapixels onto small sensors for the sakes of marketing to dunces, thereby decreasing the SNR, leading to cameras producing worse images than older cameras with fewer megapixels?

Yes, but I still have the option to choose better (more expensive) cameras.

I have to vehemently disagree with you on this because I think the ultrabook movement (thanks to the Macbook Air) and the return of IPS screens (thanks to the iPad) have resulted in more exciting laptops than ever. True, I hate the 16:9 aspect ratio as much as you, but I like most other recent trends in the laptop market.

On the other hand, if your statement referred specifically to the *Thinkpad* market, then I agree with you 100 %. The Thinkpad lines have never been so unappealing in their 20-year history.

Makers releasing new cameras every year doesn't mean there's (significant) advancement in the field of digicams.

If one gets pass the marketing-induced-oh-my-god-I-must-have-that-blah-blah-blah, many new products aren't actually that interesting, including those affected by the RDF.

Cheers.

Apple has the volume to get all sorts of special deals with suppliers. And -- unlike Lenovo -- they have the consumer marketing power to create the demand that enables that volume.



If Lenovo had marketed that line to the average consumer *and* had been willing to take enough of a loss that they were competitive with Apple's pricing for high-res laptops, sure. They didn't, and they weren't.

IDTech didn't close up because the constituents got bored; it went away because they made an expensive, low-volume product, and because the venture was what could charitably be called a money pit.

With massive consumer demand comes massive volume and with that comes a number of perks. Apple has the marketing and the fanbase to enable that sort of volume. Lenovo doesn't. Simple as that.

Maybe they didn't have as enthusiastic fanbase as Apple, but they still had unique features that make a Thinkpad a Thinkpad, and why people bought them instead of an HP or a Dell. Not anymore.

lets face it, lenovo is going after consumer market. average joe doesn't want a desktop keyboard in a laptop so forget about it. unless of course lenovo becomes "le novo" and combines a "cool style" keyboard with an experiance of a desktop keyboard. apple seems to do that job quite well, they don't invent new stuff but they re-invent it, make it better and make it cool at the same time.

I finally gave in to temptation and commented on that blog entry yesterday.

State Farm Insurance recently changed from HP to Lenovo (T420).
Those people that I have spoken to, hate the Thinkpad, and want their HP back, mostly based on the keyboard!

After typing on nothing but my Asus laptop with flat-top shallow-stroke chiclets for 3 years, I could not type on a classic ThinkPad keyboard (R60, X41t, X60t) with any efficiency. Even now with a few month's regular use, I still can't type as fast on my X60t as on my Asus. If I were a more excitable person I would also say I hate the ThinkPad keyboard. Does this mean the ThinkPad keyboard is worse than the Asus keyboard? Of course not.

Even more arguments for a variety of keyboard options needed to be offered.
After all the Thinkpad keyboards could be exchanged by only loosening 3 screws.
Another advantage which is waiting to be made use of.

It's really all about what we are used to. I was using Thinkpads almost exclusively for almost 8 years. When I switched to other brands in 2010, it took me a while to adjust to their keyboards but eventually I got used to them. A few months ago, I acquired an X32 for my lab. It's my first Thinkpad after not using one for two years and I found it very hard to type on, especially for typing in the dark.

In conclusion, Thinkpad keyboards may not be intrinsically superior. They seem the best to members of this forum mainly because most people here are used to Thinkpads. That said, the gaps between the "F" keys are definitely helpful.

I don't think they're intrinsically superior, but I do think that if you give me a dozen random laptops to test the ThinkPads have the best odds for being a keyboard that I like. There are plenty of ThinkPad keyboard designs that I don't like though: the X1x0e, the T4x, and the X4x being the first examples that come to mind.

TBH if I could get a laptop keyboard that had the same stroke depth and feel as a Unicomp Ultra Classic I would...

Are any of you pianists or ever shopped for a digital piano or keyboard?

Some of the most expensive ones out there are those that most closely mimic the hammer action of an actual piano. Cheaper models only require uniform pressure and are much easier to push buttons on. So why don't all pianists just learn to use the digital keyboards and throw regular pianos away? It would be more efficient. Why would they blow money on replicating an archaic technology?

However, I don't think it's crazy at all. Some things just feel right.

pianowizard got his moniker, because... he is!

Key action is just one of the two biggest differences between actual versus digital pianos. The other difference, which I think is actually even more significant, is that real pianos have better sounds and much larger dynamic ranges. I have two digital pianos. One is a high-end Yamaha with the company's fanciest key mechanism, and the other is a budget model made by Casio. The Yamaha's keys actually feel quite realistic (though not perfect); however, while its sound is pretty and pure, the narrow dynamic range is rather disappointing.

In the context of this thread, the sound of a piano keyboard may be analogous to the layout of a computer keyboard, whereas key action is, of course, analogous to key action. Perhaps due to the fact that I have learned to quickly adapt to the feels of different pianos, I can easily adjust to different laptops' key actions, including chiclet as well as traditional keyboards. By contrast, it takes me much longer to get used to a new computer keyboard layout and it's obvious from this thread that I am not alone.

Admin: Since we are over 4 months into this topic, and its now drifted off to an entirely different keyboard discussion, we are done here!