Page 4 of 4
Re: SATA-II failure to live up to specifications..?
Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2009 12:26 pm
by Troels
jketzetera wrote:Actually, in the case of the T60 (and other 60-series Thinkpads) no fault lies with IBM/Lenovo as it is only the desktop variant of the ICH-7 chipset that supports 3.0 Gb/sec. The T60 runs the mainbay through native SATA port at 1.5 Gb/sec.
Hmm I see - thanks for clearing that up.
A big fault lies with Lenovo still, for any T60/p in
http://www.lenovo.com/psref/pdf/ltwbook.pdf the following is mentioned regarding the i/o controller hub: "SATA300".
So, lawlen2, you are indeed correct.
Re: SATA-II failure to live up to specifications..?
Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2009 9:25 pm
by jketzetera
I am more miffed about the 61-series crippling. With the 60-series there is basically nothing Lenovo can do, since the chipset itself does not support SATA300. However, in the case of the 61-series, not only have they crippled the system to SATA150 (despite its capability to run SATA300) they have also provided an official explanation that is completely bogus and then refused to comment further when called on their so called explanation.
Re: SATA-II failure to live up to specifications..?
Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 9:49 am
by Rochefort
jketzetera wrote: With the 60-series there is basically nothing Lenovo can do, since the chipset itself does not support SATA300.
Right
But, it will be fine if,at our expense, T60's owners can send back them for upgrade.
I love so much my 4/3 IPS 15' screen that I'm ready to pay for a so useful upgrade .
Re: SATA-II failure to live up to specifications..?
Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 12:36 pm
by Marin85
Such upgrades are simply not possible. Firstly, because only few laptop component can be upgraded that easily, secondly, because I doubt the components you are actually referring to can be upgraded on any motherboard at all, no matter if laptop or desktop, and thirdly, because Lenovo doesn´t make such upgrades. Such upgrades on laptops involve motherboard swap, but newer Lenovo mobos with SATA-300 support don´t fit in T60(p) 15'' chassis at all. I don´t want to disappoint you but despite the fact that you might be willing to pay for such upgrades, those are simply not possible under the current circumstances, and definitely not on older machines. Not to mention that probably from business standpoint such practice would be pretty insane...
Re: SATA-II failure to live up to specifications..?
Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 12:48 pm
by Rochefort
Marin85 wrote:I don´t want to disappoint you ...
....it's that you're doing !

Re: SATA-II failure to live up to specifications..?
Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 3:09 pm
by Marin85
Rochefort wrote:....it's that you're doing !

Maybe..., or you could look at it as encouragement! I´m aware of a few cases where people have put T61(p) 14.1'' mobo in a T60p with Flexview screen. It´s definitely not so easy and there are a few obstacles (you will likely have to sacrifice one or other thing), but it´s doable. So, assuming that Lenovo will some day issue a fix for the SATA-limitation on their Santa-Rosa laptops, one may indeed end with T60p, IPS screen, SATA-300 and somewhat better gpu
Cheers,
Marin
Re: SATA-II failure to live up to specifications..?
Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 3:11 pm
by hellosailor
"Such upgrades are simply not possible. "
Tch, anything is possible.
The question is, did Lenono incorrectly state that some machines support SATA2? Frankly I'm not clear exactly what source claims from Lenono stated exactly what, so I'm unclear on that.
But if Chevy tells me that a 'vette can do 150mph, and then sells me a car than can only do 140mph...Yeah, that can be fixed. And a reputable vendor will, if necessary, recall and replace the entire unit (car, computer, whatever) with a totally new more expensive model if that's what it takes to make the claims real. Some vendors understand that is in fact cheaper than going through the courts and pissing off the customer base, who can and will simply walk away forever.
I've already sent two people to buy HPs instead of Lenovos, because the QC and support on my machine simply have not been up to what an IBM Business System used to be. If I wasn't a junkie for the nubby-mouse (ultranav, whatever)...I'd jump ship as well.
So, what exactly--where--did Lenono say "SATA2" wrong?
Re: SATA-II failure to live up to specifications..?
Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 3:44 pm
by Marin85
hellosailor wrote:"Such upgrades are simply not possible. "
Tch, anything is possible.
OK, maybe I put it too pessimistic, I agree that many things are possible. But I don´t think that such an upgrade
Rochefort was referring to is
realistic. Far more realistic is to swap the T60p mobo by oneself.
Re: SATA-II failure to live up to specifications..?
Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 3:51 pm
by dsvochak
The question is, did Lenono incorrectly state that some machines support SATA2? Frankly I'm not clear exactly what source claims from Lenono stated exactly what, so I'm unclear on that.
The claim of incorrect statement appears to be based on the highlighted portions in this link:
http://ryanclark.net/tabook_excerpt.gif
As I understand it, the highlighted statements were those giving rise to the assertions of fraud found earlier in this thread.
Re: SATA-II failure to live up to specifications..?
Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 10:29 pm
by hellosailor
Well, that's a non-starter. First of all it is an excerpt, and I'd bet dollars to donuts that in the full version there's a line to the extent of "specifications may change".
Second, and driving the coffin nails, is the flat out statement in the "Diskette" section about two inches above the first highlight, that says the Ultrabay is a 1.5GB/s connection--specifically not a SATA2/3GB connection.
Speed available from the internal drive to the CPU? Might be construed as SATA2, but the bay is clearly spec'd for less. A better tech writer would have noted on the chipset spec that the 3GB SATA2 speed was available only to the internal drive, if that. But the Ultrabay limitation IS clearly there.
Re: SATA-II failure to live up to specifications..?
Posted: Thu Apr 16, 2009 9:13 am
by jketzetera
Actually both statements/listings are incorrect.
The Ultrabay is a PATA interface that maxes out at PATA 100 MB/sec (the Ultrabay SATA adapter contains bridging electronics that translates SATA into PATA).
The Main HDD Bay is SATA interface that is restricted to SATA 150 MB/sec
Re: SATA-II failure to live up to specifications..?
Posted: Thu Apr 16, 2009 9:54 am
by hellosailor
Bear in mind that there is no "fraud" without intent.
And on the other hand, the official web page for product specifications is quite clear about not promising SATA-anything-speeds for any devices at all:
http://www-307.ibm.com/pc/support/site. ... -67883#HDD
It just makes no mention of them.
Re: SATA-II failure to live up to specifications..?
Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2009 12:34 pm
by Daniel
hellosailor wrote:
I've already sent two people to buy HPs instead of Lenovos, because the QC and support on my machine simply have not been up to what an IBM Business System used to be. If I wasn't a junkie for the nubby-mouse (ultranav, whatever)...I'd jump ship as well.
That is so true. I buy Thinkpads because:
1) Quality build
2) High end parts not available in other notebooks
3) Innovation
4) Exceptional Service
5) Trackpoint
One can argue 1-4 are gone or not exclusive to Thinkpads any longer. The only thing keeping me around is that trackpoint.
Re: SATA-II failure to live up to specifications..?
Posted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 6:16 am
by Rochefort
Daniel wrote: The only thing keeping me around is that trackpoint.
Me too

HP & DELL too have some trackpoints
Re: SATA-II failure to live up to specifications..?
Posted: Sun Apr 19, 2009 12:50 pm
by hellosailor
HP has trackpoints??
HP borged Compaq which borged DEC, there are still some talented people and ideas down there, even though the glossy keyboards on their Pavilions seem obviously aimed at casual users who stick to the mouse.<G>
But DELL, UGH! Does the phrase "DELL HELL" sound familiar? Yes they have many satisfied customers, folks who bought "mass market" computers with no need for assistance afterwards, so no experience with Dell's support. Four years ago we priced a Dell laptop for my niece going away to college, since they wre bombarding the family with "specials" every month. Funny thing, a Lenovo with a better OS, better software preload, etc., wound up about 15% cheaper by the time all the extras had to be added to the Dell bargain. (Might have been an R51--she's still using it without problems. I envy the hardware serial and parallel ports.<G>)
If I went down the litany of "I couldn't get anywhere with Dell" complaints that I've had from friends, colleagues, and personally, I'd have to write a novella. Never seen a company that had such a great impression of themselves, and was so unable to provide "heros" when the customer needed one. Much less, simple responsible support.
Re: SATA-II failure to live up to specifications..?
Posted: Mon Apr 20, 2009 10:45 am
by Rochefort
hellosailor wrote:HP has trackpoints??
Sure

HP has trackpoints (blue) on its Elite Serie 8530w 15'4 & 8730 (17')
DELL is improving with its Latitude Serie E 6400(14') & E 6500 (15,4)
I'm so upset about this SATA 150 stuff that I'm looking around but I'm sure that I'll stay with Lenovo and its T/W 5** with Windows Seven and SATA 300 if only Lenovo is aware of the SSDs

Re: SATA-II failure to live up to specifications..?
Posted: Mon Apr 20, 2009 1:51 pm
by hellosailor
"Elite Serie 8530w"
And to think, they forgot to ask me if I wanted one!
I'll go lock up the credit cards and then revisit their web page for that series. There goes this year's budget.
Re: SATA-II failure to live up to specifications..?
Posted: Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:37 pm
by bill bolton
hellosailor wrote:HP has trackpoints??
My current client-supplied laptop is an HP 6910p (basically HP's version of a 14.1" T61) and it has a track point.
Cheers,
Bill B.
Re: SATA-II failure to live up to specifications..?
Posted: Tue Jun 23, 2009 6:44 am
by loyukfai