Thinkpads Forum

NathanA wrote: ...we should keep in touch about each other's rebates...that's the only part of this deal that potentially worries me. I haven't submitted mine yet, but will soon (very soon).-- Nathan

NathanA,
Have you or anybody else with one of these submitted your rebate yet and if so what was the result?

The reason I'm asking is the rating for onSale.com at Reseller Ratings http://www.resellerratings.com/ is pretty bad, as is PCmall's by the way.

This sounds like a really good deal but I don't want to become another disgruntled buyer on a site with a bad rep.

Please let us know of any further experience, especially those of you with a little more time on the Forum.
thanks,
DenTPr4m

DenTP4rm wrote:Have you or anybody else with one of these submitted your rebate yet and if so what was the result?

I just submitted it today. Even if I had submitted it when you posted your question (or even before that), it is doubtful I would have gotten a response back already. I've played the rebate game before, and it's really a game that I don't like playing, but for $300 on a T60p I'll do it.

I sent both my T60p rebate and my 'free shipping' rebate (what a crock) in. Both specifically state that they allow for photocopies of the invoice/packing slip AND the UPC code. I made two copies of the invoice and scanned in the UPC sticker from the side of my T60p's box and printed two copies of those out as well. Because of the amount that I've got riding on the T60p rebate, I decided it was worth the price of mailing it First Class Certified, which basically means that I have Delivery Confirmation-like tracking and I guess the other side also has to sign for it (!). This way, there is no way that they can weasel out of it by saying that my claim got lost in the mail or had the wrong postmark date or whatever.

I'll let you all know what transpires.

-- Nathan

NathanA wrote:Even if I had submitted it when you posted your question (or even before that), it is doubtful I would have gotten a response back already.-- Nathan

This is true. It would have been nice to know though if they do honor the rebate.

As I said, I'm a little concerned about the reliability of OnSale.com (as well as their "twin" sites PCMall and MacMall). I don't know if you noticed, but, the rebate form available at OnSale.com has three different deadlines for the rebate application. The rebate form is available here:
http://www.onsale.com/Promotions/gifVie ... e.gif.aspx

If you read the form carefully you will find THREE different deadline dates listed: (Capital letters are mine for emphasis)
1.) "Rebate materials must be submitted and postmarked within 20 days of INVOICE date."
2.) "The envelope must be postmarked with 20 days of the SHIPMENT date..."
3.) "The envelope enclosing your completed original coupon etc... must be postmarked within 20 days of your PURCHASE date."

Depending on how you judge their responsibility for the rebate that's bordering on deceptive.

One of the complaints about OnSale.com at Reseller Ratings was problems with them not honoring rebates due to ambiguous wording in the rebate form. Some reviewers complained about the length of time it took OnSale.com to actually ship items ordered from them. If they delay shipping and/or invoicing for a week, then claim the deadline is based on your "purchase" date that could leave the purchaser with only a few days to file his rebate, depending on how quickly he received it. If the clock starts ticking the day you purchase it, but you can't actually send in the form with the UPC bar code until you receive it that leaves you with very little time to send in your rebate.

Check out the reviews at:
http://www.resellerratings.com/store/Onsale

Half of the reviews on the first page are "Very Dissatisfied" and if you read through the reviews on other pages you find part of the problem is with rebates and shipping delays.

I hope everything works out with your rebate. I like your idea of sending it Certified. You just want to be sure it also has Return Receipt requested. That way you've got a Post Office confirmation in hand should you need it. However, I would caution other members about ordering anything from OnSale.com (or their "twin" sites PC Mall and MacMall).
DenTPr4m

tomh009 wrote:I don't believe there have ever been any non-Flexview UXGA screens

I might be wrong but I think the UXGA screen on my A21p is non-IPS.

Barry

In case the rants at Reseller Ratings aren't convincing enough, check out the reviews of OnSale.com over at Price Grabber: http://reviews.pricegrabber.com/onsalec ... 4048525ed3

From about the tenth review on down it gets pretty grim. Be sure to check the second page as well.

Like they say, caveat emptor!

DenTP4rm wrote:This is true. It would have been nice to know though if they do honor the rebate.

Well, as I said earlier, I don't plan on letting them off the hook on this one. Some rebates just aren't worth the trouble, but in this case, if they are prepared to weasel their way out of this rebate, then they better be prepared for a fight with me. If necessary, I'll take it to my credit card company and just have them charge back the rebate amount to them. One way or another, I'm getting my $300 back.

I did not request a Return Receipt from the Post Office; I figured that the on-line tracking should be proof enough that it was received by them. I believe that whether or not I pay extra for the return receipt, they are still required to sign for it, and that record is still with the post office.

I didn't notice all of the "weasel words" in the rebate; thanks for pointing that out. Fortunately, I wasn't really tricked by them, I guess, since I have treated this rebate offer from day 1 as if it needed to be postmarked no later than 20 days from the purchase date. As long as you interpret it that way, I don't think you can lose, unless they end up delaying shipment of your item to you. In my case, I purchased on a Saturday afternoon via the web site, it shipped out Monday, and I had it by Friday. My rebate was postmarked 13 days after my Saturday purchase, 11 days after it shipped, and 7 days after taking delivery. Not sure what the "invoice date" would be; I'm guessing in my case it would probably either be synonymous with my purchase date or my shipping date (though I'm pretty sure they actually charged my card on Saturday!).

So I think by taking all of the precautions that I did (Certified delivery) and by interpreting the rebate terms conservatively (assuming the '20 days' applies to the earliest event possible, that being the purchase date), I should be in the clear. On the printout of the coupon I sent, I also made sure to take a blue highlighter to the phrase "OR A PHOTOCOPY" in the wording describing the UPC code that you need to enclose, just so that they can't come back to me and tell me that I'm denied because I didn't send in an original UPC.

If you also try the same defensive tactics when preparing your rebate, you should be in the clear as well, unless for some reason your shipment gets delayed by them because of insufficient stock-on-hand of the laptop, in which case I'm pretty sure you are screwed anyway, even if it arrives within the 20-day from-purchase window (rebate terms say "Rebate is only valid for in-stock items"!). Even so, I'd fight it out given that their ability to communicate "in stock" status on their web site is pretty sad.

I'll keep in touch and let y'all know what happens.

-- Nathan

Oh yeah, I also saved complete copies of all of the relevant parts of their web site on the day I ordered it (I took snapshots of the product description page with the $300 rebate offer mentioned, as well as the page describing the rebate). It clearly shows what the price of the machine was on the day I ordered it (for the clause "Rebate is only valid if the product is purchased at advertised price, on the day it was purchased"). I'm guessing that this clause exists to prevent people from stacking coupons/promotional codes on top of the rebate, but it could also be used to weasel out by claiming that there was an additional automatic discount that was applied to the item (and sure enough, 2-3 days later after I purchased it, the before-rebate price went up $80!)

I also made digital scans of my completed coupons as well as my packing slip and UPC sticker on the side of my ThinkPad box, all of which can be reproduced for them upon request.

-- Nathan (still typing on the DDU, still loving it!)

NathanA,
I'd hate to be the merchant trying to pull a quick one on you! Sounds like you got all the bases covered you could cover. Hope it all works out. The DDU is indeed a fine machine. Do let us know what you hear back.
DenTP4rm

Please let us know when your rebate is received...

...thanks...

Brad

I too got my rebate in the mail yesterday - 6 days after placing my order. Sent certified mail - my usual method. OnSale has a rebate tracking site so I will keep an eye on it and let everyone know if they look like they are playing games with it.

Perhaps I'm missing something...
For the same price, I can get the far more advanced T61p with:
20%+ faster CPU/memory subsystem, x64 capable
80% faster graphics
better, higher res screen (1920x1200 vs 1600x1200)
For the 4:3 fanatics, give it up. 16x9 at WUXGA res lets me see two pages side by side. Not to mention its actually useable on an airplane. At this res, there is no possible downside to 16:10.

So tell me again why I would want a two year old laptop?

Proteus wrote:So tell me again why I would want a two year old laptop?

1) As you mentioned, some people refuse to try to get used to widescreens.

2) The T61p's WUXGA doesn't have FlexView, which is very important for certain users.

3) Things look bigger and are thus easier to read on the T60p's 15.0" UXGA.

4) Even though the T60p is two years old, it's still powerful enough for at least ten more years for most people.

Proteus wrote:So tell me again why I would want a two year old laptop?

First, your dating of this particular model borders on hyperbole.

Second, I'd be interested to know where I can get a T61p with similar specs for < $1,600. I just priced out a T61p on Lenovo.com with the same or similar components (upgraded to XP Pro, downgraded to Intel non-'n' wireless, same RAM, HDD, and so on, added 3yr depot) and it came out to $1,845 (after tax to ID), and that's with the MasterCard discount and the various upgrade promotions.

Third, this model is upgradeable to C2D with x64 instructions via a processor swap for a C2D "Socket-M" chip, so even if it is not Santa Rosa-driven, this model is somewhat futureproof-able.

Fourth, there is some dispute as to whether the WUXGA really is a "better" screen, aspect ratio issues aside. The UXGA is already fairly dense pixel-wise (although I grant the WUXGA DPI is a little higher), and I've been using an IPS screen for the last 2.5 years so I'm spoiled. If you want the option of being able to do Photoshop work on your laptop, the IPS is a must for color accuracy.

I will grant you the faster graphics subsystem argument. To my mind, that is the one distinct, unarguable advantage that the T61p has over the T60p. However, the T60p is still no slouch.

Finally, it just all around isn't a completely fair apples-to-apples comparison. Because of the differences between the models, each has its pros and cons. Not every option on one model is even available on the other, so you can't compare the prices completely fairly (for example, I may be blind, but I haven't found a way to get a WWAN card in a T61p, CTO or not, but T60p doesn't have Firewire or Media Card options). As for me, I highly value the particular screen on this model, it is still a Core Duo (upgradeable to C2D with chip swap), and gives me the performance I need for now and forseeably for the next couple/three years.

The difference in price of ~$250 between the T60p and the T61p (with the T60p being the cheaper of the two) seems fair to me given that it is an older model, plus I still think the screen on here is worth much more.

Others may (and probably will) disagree with me. This thread was really supposed to be a "heads-up" for anyone looking for a FlexView T60p at a good price, not a comparison between it and the T61p. We already have plenty of threads for that topic. I was assuming that those who would be reading it would be doing so fully informed already of the differences between the T60p and the T61p. If you'd rather a T61p, then by all means, don't let me stop you...individual tastes vary, and I think there is enough variety in this world to accommodate almost everybody.

-- Nathan

Bravo! NathanA
Very capable defense of the venerable T60p. I've got two of them and wouldn't trade them for any T61. There's also the question of build quality which some members have already raised. But, as you said, this thread was about something else so, let's carry on. No dueling over this one, gentlemen.
DenTPr4m

Well, in terms of pricing, you're quoting retail pricing.
IBM/Lenovo employee pricing is easy to get, through friends and family (up to 25 per year). Not to mention shareholder pricing. One share of IBM stock is more than worth it.. At those prices, the T61p is surprisingly cheaper.

IPS is nice, but tend to have slow response time.
That Core2duo CPU upgrade is going to cost you an additional $300 minimum. I won't even mention the benefit of turbocache, expresscard, wireless-N, faster FSB, chipset, etc. BTW..WLAN adapters can be added.

But..go ahead and get what you want....

Proteus wrote:Well, in terms of pricing, you're quoting retail pricing.

No, I had stacked some discounts on there. Straight retail would have been even more expensive (> $2,000).

Proteus wrote:IBM/Lenovo employee pricing is easy to get, through friends and family (up to 25 per year). Not to mention shareholder pricing. One share of IBM stock is more than worth it.. At those prices, the T61p is surprisingly cheaper.

Sssshhhhh! It is verboten to speak of "the EPP" here.

Anyway, not everyone can get EPP, and it sounds like it has lost some of its attractiveness recently, while the offer I posted was one anyone could take advantage of if they did it within a certain amount of time. I went ahead and did the math, and you're right, with EPP it would have been comparably priced to mine, but it still wouldn't, however, be cheaper.

Proteus wrote:That Core2duo CPU upgrade is going to cost you an additional $300 minimum.

I know, but I don't have to do it immediately, and in the meantime, the CD meets my needs.

Proteus wrote:I won't even mention the benefit of turbocache

If you mean Intel Turbo Memory, most of the posts I've seen on this board seem to doubt its advantage. If you mean nVidia TurboCache, this is the same thing as ATI HyperMemory.

Proteus wrote:expresscard

Where did you get the idea that T60 doesn't have ExpressCard?! Even T43 had ExpressCard (first T model to do so).

Proteus wrote:wireless-N, faster FSB, chipset, etc. BTW..WLAN adapters can be added.

I'm assuming you mean WWAN? If so, well, A) that would be an exercise in pain-in-the-[censored]-ness because you'd have to run an extra cable to the LCD and then either modify your LCD cover physically or get a new one with the WWAN antenna option and transport everything else over to it, B) there still is no T61p with WWAN listed anywhere, so I'll have to look at the T61 HMM but it is questionable whether this would work anyway, and C) Lenovo engineers have already publicly stated that if you have Intel Turbo Memory, it is impossible to have the WWAN option; you have to pick one or the other. (This might explain why I have yet to see a T61p with WWAN.)

Also, as long as you are going to argue that WWAN can be added to the T61p that way, well, then in the same way it is possible to upgrade the T60p to 802.11n, which renders the "T60p doesn't have 802.11n" argument useless. So which way do you want to argue it?

Faster FSB would be nice, and if I had Santa Rosa chipset then CPU upgrades would be cheaper, but I'm only 1 generation behind (if you want to call Santa Rosa a 'generation'), and with the next chipset always 6 months on the horizon, I don't feel too badly. I will upgrade from this computer when I need to, and I'm sure that until then, the pre-SR chipset will do me just fine.

Proteus wrote:But..go ahead and get what you want....

Thank you, I will. Didn't know I needed your permission to do so, either.

-- Nathan

I purchased a 2623-DDU from PCMall in June and received my rebate about 10 days later. I simply scanned the white label on the ThinkPad box and sent photocopies of the packing slip. No problem. I've never had a problem with PCMall, but that doesn't mean people won't run into problems.

Conmee wrote:I purchased a 2623-DDU from PCMall in June and received my rebate about 10 days later.

Holy crap! That's an amazing turnaround time given that they claim they need 6-8 weeks! Good to hear!

Question, though: you say you bought from PCMall instead of OnSale? What rebate were you able to take advantage of? (I see by doing some Googling and searching around that there may have been a $75 rebate offered on this model by PCMall.com; is this what you're referring to?) Or did you buy from PCMall but send in the OnSale rebate, and they were willing to honor it?

-- Nathan

Can anyone comment on the temperature of the 2623-DDU? Does it run hot? I have a new T61 15.4 which runs quite cool. How about battery life as well?
Thanks.

Turbocache=turbo memory in my previous post.
It makes a substantial difference in responsiveness, if you're running Vista. Obviously, XP doesn't support it.

T60P is nice, don't get me wrong. If it was $500 cheaper, it would be a good buy. Given the same pricing though, the T61p wins, hands down. After all, you're buying it for the graphics capability, otherwise you wouldn't need a "P" model.

Of course this is a matter of personal taste, but you couldn't pay me to use WUXGA on a 15.4" display. Text is simply too small. Yes, Vista has the ability to do DPI scaling, and yes, it's better than XP's implementation; but it's still not usable, IMHO. (Too often you'll find text extending outside of the boundary of a window or otherwise obstructed.)

For graphic design, photo editing, etc., I'm sure WUXGA on 15.4" is welcome. For everyday applications involving text, IMHO it's completely impractical. It doesn't matter what the other specs of the machine are. The display is the primarily means by which you interact with your machine.

If someone gave me a T61p I wouldn't see much use for it. (I'd probably use it as a media server, with the display permanently closed.)

dagordon wrote:Of course this is a matter of personal taste, but you couldn't pay me to use WUXGA on a 15.4" display. Text is simply too small.

Actually, I do disagree with this, as I have said on many occasions.

Software will eventually get better and better to the point where it is completely resolution-independent; I'm sorry to hear that Vista is not there yet for those of you who have experienced it and tried its improved display scaling.

However, even with the state things are in, I much prefer higher-res screens anyday. The higher the resolution, the better. On my UXGA screen, reading text from PDFs is near-paper-like good. I can only imagine how good they would look on higher DPI displays such as the WUXGA or the QXGA for the R50p.

DPI is king. In the future (near future, IMO), displays will not be sold with the resolution as the main selling point/spec quoted; instead, you will shop for displays based on physical size and DPI/pixel density; physical size will dictate real-estate (which of course will be adjustible by the end-user as a function of his or her scaling preference) and DPI will dictate the fineness/sharpness of the display. Total logical resolution will (finally) be irrelevant, as it should be.

-- Nathan

NathanA wrote:

dagordon wrote:Of course this is a matter of personal taste, but you couldn't pay me to use WUXGA on a 15.4" display. Text is simply too small.

Actually, I do disagree with this, as I have said on many occasions.

Software will eventually get better and better to the point where it is completely resolution-independent; I'm sorry to hear that Vista is not there yet for those of you who have experienced it and tried its improved display scaling.

However, even with the state things are in, I much prefer higher-res screens anyday. The higher the resolution, the better. On my UXGA screen, reading text from PDFs is near-paper-like good. I can only imagine how good they would look on higher DPI displays such as the WUXGA or the QXGA for the R50p.

DPI is king. In the future (near future, IMO), displays will not be sold with the resolution as the main selling point/spec quoted; instead, you will shop for displays based on physical size and DPI/pixel density; physical size will dictate real-estate (which of course will be adjustible by the end-user as a function of his or her scaling preference) and DPI will dictate the fineness/sharpness of the display. Total logical resolution will (finally) be irrelevant, as it should be.

-- Nathan

I don't want to further side-track this thread, but your main point here and in the post that you link to seems to be that at some point in the future, with a better OS scaling feature and the growing use of vector graphics, a higher resolution display won't have to result in text and images being smaller. I'm not sure that I disagree with this, and I hope you're right. But the point is that for many of us, when we purchase a computer, we want to be able to use it now. And as it is, the DPI scaling feature of the current Windows operating system doesn't work too well, and the web has mostly bitmap graphics. I don't want to purchase a computer whose display will only be usable for everyday computing at some point in the indefinite future.

dagordon wrote:But the point is that for many of us, when we purchase a computer, we want to be able to use it now. And as it is, the DPI scaling feature of the current Windows operating system doesn't work too well, and the web has mostly bitmap graphics. I don't want to purchase a computer whose display will only be usable for everyday computing at some point in the indefinite future.

LOL, well, what can I say to that other than that it's a b*tch being an early adopter. (That and being a tech head who must have the best technical solution at all costs, which describes me pretty well at times.)

I'll say my peace on this issue here in this thread and then drop it; if y'all want to continue the discussion then I'm happy to in a different thread.

I fully admit that there is the practical component that many people must consider, depending on their needs and what they use the machine for, but although I think that the future can only get better from here, one of the points I was trying to make in the above posts is that in certain ways, the future is already here now. Text is *already* resolution-independent and has been for years now (thanks to vectored fonts like Adobe Type 1, TrueType, and OpenType). TrueType was available to the common everyday PC user with the advent of, what, Windows 3.0? 3.1? It's just that only NOW is our display technology getting to the point where its advantages become obvious. Even on Windows XP, if you scale up the fonts on a high-DPI display, everything will be readable...extremely readable. In fact, I would argue it is more readable than on a lower-DPI display, for the same reason that a higher-DPI printer produces crisper, more readable text in the same physical space than a lower-DPI one. When you get a 1200dpi laser printer, text doesn't print out at half the size of a 600dpi printer.

Higher DPI is the technically best option, all things being equal (which is what I was referring to in my opening paragraph up there). (Granted, not all things are equal yet for many people, but we'll get to that in a second.) Reading a (to use a previous example) PDF zoomed to fill the screen on a 15" UXGA is so superior to reading the same document zoomed to fill the same amount of physical space (which consequently also means the lettering is exactly the same size, too) on a 15" XGA screen that trying to compare them is ridiculous. I could never go back to XGA again (and this is coming from a guy with very nearsighted vision; heck, I wore bifocals as a kid). The UXGA is much, much sharper, because there are more and smaller dots being used to render the outline of each letter.

Scaling fonts might have other unexpected (or expected, if you've previously dealt with them before) problems in XP (and even Vista, if reports are to be believed) such as blockifying bitmaps, but readability of the text is not one such problem. The small/unreadable text argument of people who prefer lower-DPI displays is a red herring argument. My contention is that people who gripe that high-DPI displays are "too small" to be able to read without squinting are really not complaining about the readability of text, because everyone knows that can be readily fixed with current software. No, they're complaining about being inconvenienced by the other problems that are caused by not-completely-resolution-independent software, problems other than text size. And since they've lived with low-DPI displays for eons now, they'd prefer to wait for software to catch up first all the way and deal with the devil they do know in the meantime.

There's nothing particularly wrong with that stance; again, this all depends on your own needs and the ways in which you use your computer. It's just kind of frustrating to see the same ill-informed argument about "small text" being put forth over and over again. I am personally willing to put up with the (IMO, relatively few) inconveniences caused by a high-density display paired with today's software because the superiority of the high-density display, especially for text, is self-evident when I compare it side-by-side with a low-density one. If you are just planning to use your ThinkPad for everyday computing tasks, then yeah, you probably don't need a high-DPI display at this point, and may be more comfortable with a lower-DPI one so that you don't have to deal with new problems for now. However, if you do serious work with text on your PC (reading off the screen for hours at a time, composing lengthy tomes, etc.), I just don't see how getting a lower-res screen makes any sense whatsoever. Would you rather be reading text on something that is almost as good as paper now (razor-sharp), or would you rather be constantly reminded that you are working on a computer screen?

Anyway, buy what you want (to take Proteus' expression ); I'm getting the > 120dpi displays myself from now on (and may the average display DPI become even higher than that! 120 is nothing. Actually, 150 is even nothing. A telephone facsimile is 200dpi for goodness sake, and we all know how crap those are.)

-- Nathan

Booyahh Batman for blockifying bitmaps.

I would appreciate a more verbose reply.

Having been hooked on UXGA since November of 2000 when my first A22p was delivered and the Flexview UXGA with my T43p this April I agree with NathanA 100%.

Brad

Nathan is absolutely right..
And, coming from a QXGA R50p, the T61p will actually be a downgrade in resolution. However, the improved brightness, and faster response time (no IPS motion blur!) will more than make up for it. Obviously, everyones needs are different.

My needs are:
Lightweight formfactor for travel (17" not an option)

16:10 widescreen - Have you actually TRIED to open a 15" 4:3 on an airplane, with the guys seat in front reclined? Not gonna happen.

Great graphics, for gaming - Quadro 570M is a DX10, 8600GT equivalent.

Great durability - Thinkpad is the only way to go.
Highest res screen

Decent price - <$1.6k loaded
There are only TWO laptops on the market that meet these specs, and I'll never, ever buy another Dell.

NathanA wrote: Scaling fonts might have other unexpected (or expected, if you've previously dealt with them before) problems in XP (and even Vista, if reports are to be believed) such as blockifying bitmaps, but readability of the text is not one such problem. The small/unreadable text argument of people who prefer lower-DPI displays is a red herring argument. My contention is that people who gripe that high-DPI displays are "too small" to be able to read without squinting are really not complaining about the readability of text, because everyone knows that can be readily fixed with current software. No, they're complaining about being inconvenienced by the other problems that are caused by not-completely-resolution-independent software, problems other than text size. And since they've lived with low-DPI displays for eons now, they'd prefer to wait for software to catch up first all the way and deal with the devil they do know in the meantime.

There's nothing particularly wrong with that stance; again, this all depends on your own needs and the ways in which you use your computer. It's just kind of frustrating to see the same ill-informed argument about "small text" being put forth over and over again. I am personally willing to put up with the (IMO, relatively few) inconveniences caused by a high-density display paired with today's software because the superiority of the high-density display, especially for text, is self-evident when I compare it side-by-side with a low-density one.

OK, I suppose at this point we're disagreeing merely over whether it's appropriate to call the problem at hand the problem of text being too small on high-resolution displays. You'd rather call it the problem of operating systems not having good DPI scaling technology and websites not being optimally designed for scaling.

That's fine. FWIW, though, I don't think that it's at all inappropriate to refer to the problem in the former way -- that is, to say that a 15.4" UXGA display will make text to small. The point is that it will make text to small unless one opts for a way of not making the text too small that is very problematic. Everyone knows that you can run the display at a non-native, resolution, for example; that would be a way of making it so that the text isn't smaller. But, of course, running the display at a non-native resolution isn't at all optimal. Everyone knows that you can attach a giant magnifying glass to the screen. Again, not optimal.

Similarly, one can use XP's of Vista's DPI scaling. One can even scale website in IE. But these don't work very well. On Vista, whose DPI scaling is supposed to be so much better than XP's, using Large fonts messes things up even before Windows has a chance to load up. The bottom line of text on the Fingerprint login screen is cut off on the right. Well done. I don't care if this is Vista's fault, or if the Fingerprint software isn't properly designed. I just need my computer to work.

That is, unless you want to use these problematic features, text will be too small on a 15.4" WUXGA display.

Thus, I don't think that it is at all "ill-informed" to say that text will be too small on such a display.[/b]

Must...resist...urge...to respond!

Gaaaaaah, can't do it. I'll just give a quickie response to this one point, then: the main issue that I have with the labeling of the problem as "small text" is precisely that it lays the blame at the feet of the wrong people. You, as a user, rightly stated that you don't care whose fault it is and that it should just work. And, yes, I think that things should "just work," too, and that from the end user's perspective it doesn't much matter who is to blame.

But, at the same time, if you misapply the wrong label to the problem, then how are we going to move ahead and address the problem correctly? The fault IS that of the software being inflexible and making too many assumptions about the output display device. If you don't want to deal with that until the software gets fixed and we are out of "beta" so to speak, then fine, that's your prerogative. When you insist on calling the problem "small text," though, all you are doing is continuing to circulate the idea that the problem lies in the inherent nature of higher-resolution displays (which it most definitely does not), and this will in turn only scare people away from them because if that's the case, it means that the problem is unaddressable and the displays useful only if you have 20/20 vision or better.

Brad wrote:Booyahh Batman for blockifying bitmaps.

Actually, in retrospect, I think that I used the wrong form of the word. Really, it should have read, "Scaling fonts might have other unexpected problems in XP such as the blockification of bitmaps."

Proteus wrote:There are only TWO laptops on the market that meet these specs...

Out of curiosity, what is the other one? You hint at Dell. Do they actually have a lightweight 15" WS with WUXGA and performance graphics options? I took a look at the D630 that so many people seem to be talking about these days, and not only does it look a little thicker than a T (also seems to use 12.7mm optical drives, too), but the highest-res screen option I found was 1440x900...


Okay, to bring this thread back on topic, this is the last day for the OnSale rebate deal if you want to take advantage of it! Looks like they still have stock, too...

-- Nathan

NathanA wrote:Out of curiosity, what is the other one? You hint at Dell. Do they actually have a lightweight 15" WS with WUXGA and performance graphics options?

The Dell Latitude D830. It's about the same weight as the T61p.

Looks like the deal is done now, but it seems PCMall/OnSale still has these in stock! Did Lenovo make a LOT more of these than previously thought, or is it only a select few "chumps" buying them (that is to say, all the suckers in this thread, clamoring to buy last year's technology...LOL)?

Anyway, since there were a couple of questions asked about T60p earlier in the thread, I thought I'd give a report on my T60p after having it in my possession for almost two weeks now:

- ONSALE REBATE: I just got notice today that the USPS delivered my Certified mailing of my rebate coupon to OnSale, and that they signed and accepted it yesterday, so delivery has been confirmed as of July 31st. I'll let you know when the actual check arrives.

- KEYBOARD: My keyboard starting showing signs of becoming "shiny" within the first 24 hours. Oh well, they all do that. (Anybody hear about or have any real experience with HP business-class laptops with the DuraKeys coating on the keyboard? Curious to know how well this helps/works: "HP DuraKeys - A clear coating applied over the notebook keyboard helps protect the finish and the printed characters on the keys." They claim that they keys are "50 times more resistant to visible wear than keyboards without it." Sounds like something Lenovo should look into imitating!) Still enjoying the touch of the T60 Alps...it feels vastly different than the T42 Alps that I had before, but it is a "good" different; it's definitely superior, but requires just a little more force to complete a keystroke (there is a lot more travel on the keys of this keyboard). Took about half a day to get used to it (made a few early stumbles touch-typing), and then I had no problems afterward. The feel and sound of it kind of remind me of some "retro" computer keyboards, like, ohh, it's been a while, but I want to say Commodore/Atari...that is, really deep travel (feels like a desktop keyboard), and really smooth action. Hard to describe.

- FAN/HEAT: The fan is definitely louder than my T42p, but it doesn't really bother me THAT much. Some people don't like any fan noise. Well, I know it comes with the territory, and it doesn't sound like a jet engine or anything, so I'm not bothered by it. I think the main reason why it is "louder" is because it spins faster on average and is on more often than on the T42. But I would also say that this laptop, believe it or not, runs cooler than my T42 by far. So pick your poison, heat or noise. (Or, I guess if the rumors are true, with the T61, you don't need to choose.)

- GRAPHICS: The graphics are definitely an upgrade over what I had in the T42p. I was able to load up a couple games that I have to play in 800x600 on the T42p/FireGL T2 for acceptable performance (Halo PC for one), and they ran beautifully on the T60p's native resolution of 1600x1200 (and looked beautiful at that res, too!). Haven't tried tweaking anything yet or play around with drivers too much (flirted with Omegas for about 30 minutes, but they messed up ATI Theater Mode more than the stock ones, and I can't have that, so out they went).

- SCREEN: Of course, I love it. We've been over this before, so I won't belabor it, but UXGA + IPS == mmmm mmmm good! The IDTech screen is great, but I have no frame of reference other than my old T42p, which also had an IDTech (never seen a Hydis or LG FlexView panel). Still haven't gotten to see the friend with the 15" T60p SXGA+, so still don't know what panel he has and still haven't done a direct comparison, but I will get around to it soon, I hope. Even with this being an IDTech, the screen is WAY superior in brightness and coloring than my T42's IDTech! So much brighter, and so much "white-r!" I will also soon have the opportunity to see either a new or recently refurb'd T42-era IDTech panel, which should tell me whether my T42's panel just has "aged" or if all T42-era IDTechs are like this. I will report back.

- CONSTRUCTION: The base is much more solid than my T42p. I do have a sliiiight creak on the lower right-side of the palmrest where it meets the base of the laptop, but it's not bad, and my 15" T42 had a similar creak. Lenovo engineers could probably afford to put a couple screws up at the very front of the laptop to secure the palmrest a little better, but no real biggie. It only creaks if I REALLY press on it/stress it purposefully, not during general use and shifting around of my palms during typing.

- NETWORKING: I have no use for the WWAN at this point. Intel gigabit ethernet chipsets are great; I especially love the auto-MDIX feature as it means I don't have to worry about carrying both a straight AND a crossover cable with me (T4x gigabit models had this feature, too). Oh, and not only can it interpret 802.1Q-tagged packets and generate tagged packets itself, but that functionality is even exposed by the Windows drivers; awesome.

I'd like to say a few brief words about the wireless, which I hope will help others who might find themselves in my predicament.

My T42p came with an Atheros ("IBM") card, while this unit came with an Intel 3945ABG. Please let me just pause for a second and say now that I have no desire for this thread to go the way of the recent Atheros vs. Intel thread that was just closed by a mod, so please, let's try to keep this discussion civil.

I work for a local, regional WISP, and the general consensus among the engineering staff (and I think the tech support people's experience dealing with supporting them bears this out) is that Intel Centrino wireless cards have several problems with stability and compatibility. Heck, our AP vendor had to release a software update specifically to work around issues with Intel cards, which wouldn't even show our APs in a scan! (This despite the fact that every other wireless client we've ever thrown at them have worked fine, and a Kismet snoop showed our APs beaconing properly.) Centrino laptops are also constantly filling up our AP logs with "Connect/Disconnect" messages like, every two minutes. They are doing something strange and non-standard, and have given us a few headaches, especially as they become more and more common and we find ourselves supporting more and more people with Centrino laptops.

Naturally, I was not really looking forward to owning a laptop with an Intel card, given my experience with having to help support them on a commercial network. But I decided to give it a fair shake and only swap it out if it was necessary.

At home, I have an older Linksys wireless router (WRT54AG) that I loaded OpenWRT on, and am only using as an AP at the moment (all ethernet ports are flat-bridged to the wireless interface, not doing DHCP or NAT on it; there's a PC-based router sitting behind it). It contains a PRISM WorldRadio chipset (the A/B/G version of PRISM GT) which I am running in 11a mode. I had 0 troubles with the AP combined with my T42p's Atheros card, but 5 minutes out of the box, I was wrestling with my new Centrino laptop, trying to make the connection to my AP at least usable.

Performance was absolutely miserable. Transfers were not consistent and fluid, but felt rather stop-and-go (they would go slowly, then stall...there was extreme jitter/variable latency). And it also acted like it was disassociating and then re-connecting to the AP an awful lot (yellow bubble below the wireless icon in the system tray telling me I was connected was showing up every 5-15 minutes). But worst of all, after using the connection for, oh, I'd say 30 minutes on average, my AP would lock up and stop beaconing! All laptops connected to it at that time would drop off until I powercycled it.

At first, I thought this was only happening when I had both my T42p and T60p associated to the AP, but even when I had the T42 shut off, I discovered it would still do it. It does not do it, though, when the T60's Intel card is switched off. So the Intel card is doing something to cause the AP to crash. Lovely.

It got so bad that at one point, I had the T60 connected to the T42 via ethernet and Internet Connection Sharing enabled on the T42 with the T42's wireless connecting to the AP, just so that I could download things reliably from the Internet. It was pathetic.

I dealt with this for a few days, then finally just threw up my hands in frustration, said "screw it" and ended up purchasing an Atheros a/b/g/n Mini-PCI-Express card just this afternoon.

However, this evening, I discovered that after turning off ALL power-saving options on the Intel card (card properties -> Configure -> Advanced -> Power Management -> set to Highest, then Power Management (tab) -> uncheck "Allow the computer to turn off this device to save power"), it works way better. Speed is fine, transfers are consistent and stable, jitter is no longer an issue, latency to AP went down from 7ms at lowest to 1ms, received signal is actually showing stronger; I mean, it's like a whole new card.

I was also going to write in the above paragraph "and it stopped crashing my AP," but as I was typing this while listening to a live audio stream, it crashed again. LOL. So it still isn't perfect, although even the AP lasts way longer between crashes now than it did before the change. (My current running theory, which is merely an educated guess at this point, is that one of the power saving techniques that Intel employs results in what looks like disconnects and reconnects from the AP's perspective [this would certainly explain what we've seen at work], and I'm thinking my AP doesn't handle several dis/reassociations within a short time period by the same host very gracefully.)

If any of you are experiencing problems with the wireless on your Centrino laptop, you too might just try changing your card's power management settings. Sure, this will probably nullify any power consumption advantage that the Intel card has over the Atheros, but what good is it if its unusable?

I'm happy to "convert" over to Atheros anyway, not just because I hope that my AP stops crashing (!), but also because the other strong advantage that Atheros has over Intel is much stronger Linux support, thanks to the bad-[censored] MADWiFi driver/software suite.

That's it for now. Has anybody else who purchased their laptop from OnSale/PCMall received it yet, and if so, what are your impressions? A build manifest with parts used would also serve as an interesting comparison (keyboard, HDD, drive, battery, etc.)

-- Nathan