Thinkpads Forum

Hi,

I ordered a Thinkpad T60 just six days ago and have two questions.

Here are the specs of my new Thinkpad:
Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo T5600 1.83ghz
Screen: 14.1" TFT SXGA+
RAM: 1GB (1 DIMM) expandable to 3GB
Hard Drive: 80GB 5400 RPM
Security: Fingerprint reader, TPM 1.2 Security Chip
Graphics Card: ATI Mobility Radeon X1300 -64MB
Optical Storage: DVDRW/DVD-RAM Ultrabay Slim (removable)
Battery: 6 cell (got it because of the 9 cell recalls)
OS: XP Professional
Other Stuff: Bluetooth, ThinkLight, Wireless LAN Antenna
Warranty: 3 Years (I also added a 3 year accidental damage plan on top of that)
Total Cost (excluding shipping): $1,397.50

1. Vista Compatibility: I'm sweating bullets now that I realize Vista requires at least a 128MB Video Card. I ordered this Thinkpad with XP Pro and like it well enough, but am concerned that once Vista becomes the 'standard' OS, I'll have a major problem on my hands. Any thoughts on owning a Thinkpad with less than a 128MB video card and its implications with respect to Vista?

2. Of the four current operating systems -- Mac OS X, XP Pro, Vista, and Linux -- which is your favorite? For awhile I briefly considered buying a Macbook or running Linux on my Thinkpad, but just wanted some commentary on operating systems before I do anything stupid.

If you can afford it I'd upgrade your video card to at least 128MB. Or wait until the new Santa Rosa boards come out.

Cheers.

socal531 wrote:Hi,

1. Vista Compatibility: I'm sweating bullets now that I realize Vista requires at least a 128MB Video Card. I ordered this Thinkpad with XP Pro and like it well enough, but am concerned that once Vista becomes the 'standard' OS, I'll have a major problem on my hands. Any thoughts on owning a Thinkpad with less than a 128MB video card and its implications with respect to Vista?

2. Of the four current operating systems -- Mac OS X, XP Pro, Vista, and Linux -- which is your favorite? For awhile I briefly considered buying a Macbook or running Linux on my Thinkpad, but just wanted some commentary on operating systems before I do anything stupid.

1) As far as I know all of the X1300 Radeon cards have hypermemory. This will allow your OS to use system memory as video card memory as needed. I know my Fire GL 5200 registers as 512MB, when only 256MB is physically on the card. Don't worry about system memory though, because it does not take the memory if it isn't needed. So, my guess is that your X1300 will show that it has 128MB at least, which should be fine.

Even if it isn't enough, the only thing that will happen is that you can't use the new Areo interface. Also you may want more ram depending on what kind of work you do if you run vista.

2) I have briefly owned a MacBook Pro, and currently I run Fedora Core 6 x86_64, on my laptop, in addition to windows xp (32bit). I have loaded a RTM version of Vista, but took it off because the few programs I need windows for don't work under vista.

I use Linux for development and general computing. It does what I need, and I like the multiple desktops. With Core 6 the only piece of Hardware that didn't work initially after the instal was the Intel wireless card. However, a quick download of the driver and firmware and it was up and running.

Windows XP runs really well, and is "prettier" then linux. However, I only use power point and a couple of other windows applications that I need for my work.
OS X was nice, but there were some performance issues (especially in programs that needed to dynamically allocate and free lots of memory). But, overall I would have kept it if I could have gotten linux up and running, or been able to change some lower level wireless settings.

Overall I would rank My choice for favorite OS as:
1) Linux
2) OS X
3) Windows XP

Remember if you can install linux and windows on the same system, but install windows first, then linux. Linux will automatically create a boot loader to allow you to boot to either system.

My wife has an identically configured T60, or if not quite identical, pretty close. I upgraded XP to Vista on there, and it runs fine, including Aero. At some point in the future, I'll probably replace one of the RAM sticks with an extra gig (bring it to 1.5 gigs), but it's very responsive and enjoyable to use right now.

You might consider waiting, but that system is also a good $600 less than it was nine months ago, so it seems like a pretty good deal either way.

OS-wise: Right now I'm really liking Vista. I see a lot of potential, and even its various quirks aren't enough to make me want to go back to XP. XP and OS X are both great operating systems, and both are viable options, but I didn't want to run XP because, well, I'm kinda bored with it and OS X just isn't responsive enough for my tastes in terms of interface interaction. Plus I'm pretty devoted to Thinkpad hardware, and I don't really want to run an entirely unsupported OS. I haven't tried Linux on the desktop in five or six years, and I have no need to give it another shot right now. If I want a Unix-based desktop OS, there's already a great one called OS X.

Thanks for the insight.

Assuming I am interested in beefing up my video card so I can run Vista in the near future, is it possible to return the Thinkpad and reconfigure a new one with a more powerful video card? Or is it desirable to simply purchase a new video card and replace the X1300?

Thanks.

I actually did something similar: I ordered a Thinkpad, caught a good sale on another model before it was scheduled to ship, and canceled (or tried to) my first one and ordered the more robust machine. Well, as it turned out, it was too late to stop my initial order from shipping, but they've sent some return labels in the mail to me and assure me the return won't be a problem at all.

If you want to upgrade and your first computer hasn't shipped yet, you might want to call a sales rep and get him to cancel the order. Plus if you order through him, giving him the commission, presumably he'll be inclined to make sure a return of your first model (if necessary, as in a situation like mine) goes as smoothly as possible.

primedude wrote:OS-wise: Right now I'm really liking Vista. I see a lot of potential, and even its various quirks aren't enough to make me want to go back to XP. XP and OS X are both great operating systems, and both are viable options, but I didn't want to run XP because, well, I'm kinda bored with it and OS X just isn't responsive enough for my tastes in terms of interface interaction. Plus I'm pretty devoted to Thinkpad hardware, and I don't really want to run an entirely unsupported OS. I haven't tried Linux on the desktop in five or six years, and I have no need to give it another shot right now. If I want a Unix-based desktop OS, there's already a great one called OS X.

I second the above. I still need XP though, so I'm dual booting XP/Vista and carry a 60gig HD with OSX with me if I'm in a client's office and need it.

For regular, everyday computing it's tough to beat the Microsoft ecosystem. I haven't used Vista much, but XP Pro is a solid OS. Things largely just work, there is a wealth of high quality open source applications available for Windows as well which takes away some of the momentum of linux (in my opinion). There is the whole anti-virus, spyware mess, but staying away from IE, outlook, and MS Office over the years by using alternatives has largely mitigated those concerns for me.

I'm a developer and I work with UNIX all the time, so I tend to like linux from that point of view, however, I can understand how people get turned off pretty quickly with linux on the desktop.

For example, my wife is interested in trying ubuntu or kubuntu, but not the way it works out of the box (IE, minus the media codecs, etc). I understand the viewpoint that says if people keep using things like ndiswrapper, closed codecs, etc that it removes the compelling need to force the market to open alternatives. This is probably true to some degree. It's also true, however, that my wife doesn't care about that... Another good example of this is Sirius satellite radio - it doesn't work on linux (at least for me via a browser). Instead there is a pretty neat console application called sipie that does the trick, however, I definately get a lot of looks from coworkers about "why would I want to go home and spend the time to figure that out when it just works on windows?".

And I guess this is the heart of linux conundrum - to some degree today you have to either sacrifice some measure of functionality and/or ease of use for the hope that it drives change tomorrow. That's not for everyone.

wolfman wrote:
For example, my wife is interested in trying ubuntu or kubuntu, but not the way it works out of the box (IE, minus the media codecs, etc). I understand the viewpoint that says if people keep using things like ndiswrapper, closed codecs, etc that it removes the compelling need to force the market to open alternatives. This is probably true to some degree. It's also true, however, that my wife doesn't care about that... Another good example of this is Sirius satellite radio - it doesn't work on linux (at least for me via a browser). Instead there is a pretty neat console application called sipie that does the trick, however, I definately get a lot of looks from coworkers about "why would I want to go home and spend the time to figure that out when it just works on windows?".

Download Mplayer and mplayer-plugin, and it is indeed possible to listen to sirius in a firefox browser. It works well and I have never had an issue with it

hoplite wrote:If you can afford it I'd upgrade your video card to at least 128MB. Or wait until the new Santa Rosa boards come out.

Cheers.

So you're saying to purchase a new video card and install it once I receive my T60? I've upgraded my desktop before, but have never owned a laptop and thus never upgraded one. How difficult is it to replace a video card in a laptop as opposed to a desktop?

And finally, if replacing a laptop video card is not a big deal (monetarily and labor-wise) do you have any recommendations on which video cards to get that will be sufficient for operating Vista?

Thanks.

Vista will run JUST FINE on 64MB video memory.

I had it purring like a kitten on a T42 w/ 64MB (Radeon 9600 Mobility).

Hypermemory will help, but it is no big deal.

Unless you GAME or do CAD, save your money.


EDIT - ALL video cards on thinkpads are soldered to the motherboard. So FORGET about upgrading the vid card unless you are up for a motherboard swap.

socal531 wrote:1. Vista Compatibility: I'm sweating bullets now that I realize Vista requires at least a 128MB Video Card. I ordered this Thinkpad with XP Pro and like it well enough, but am concerned that once Vista becomes the 'standard' OS, I'll have a major problem on my hands. Any thoughts on owning a Thinkpad with less than a 128MB video card and its implications with respect to Vista?

It won't be an issue. I have a T60 with the X1300 (64MB) and it runs Vista with full Aero effects on a 1400x1050 @ 32 bpp display just fine. This includes all the "frosted glass" effects, the Flip-3D stuff, and even having live video playing while Flip-3D is happening, etc.

FWIW, here's how the "Windows Experience Index" thingy sums things up. Microsoft considers anything with a rating of 3.0 to be sufficient for Aero and most other Windows Vista features (e.g., playing HD content under MCE, etc.). 3.6 is more than enough to handle the new UI.