X2 is not for business

Message

fixup · #1 Post by **fixup** » Thu Sep 18, 2008 7:57 pm

Well, I love my X21 (I have 3) because they run so [censored] cold and quiet, other laptops are no compare. Performance is also decent, very smooth for all my business and entertainment applications. I love them so much, I was going to use them in all my rooms as my primary and only computer(s). I even stopped looking for one of these new UMPCs such as the MSI Wind or the Fujitsu U820, as X21 is as lightweight.

However, the aged BIOS really has these and those issues with XP. For example: it never turns off the monitor after 15 min idle (actually it does but then turns it on shortly for no reason) or go into sleep mode; it crashes into blue dead screen sometime right after wake up or a network failure (WiFi PC card or built-in Eithernet); the mouse and some keys do not work sometime after wake up; the modem driver freezes X21 into black screen every second time it wakes up from standby, so I have to disable it. Such unpredictable crashes is unacceptable for business, so I no longer use my X2* as my primary computer but for entertainment only. Sigh.

Further more, its 1024x768 screen is really not quite enough these days. And to make this matter unacceptable: it is virtually impossible to use a 1280x1024 external monitor. It always defaults to dual monitor mode and set the external monitor to 1024x768, once wakes up from standby. Another big limitation: if I extend the external monitor, my X21's screen is then locked to 800x600.

Also, it is too heavy to be used while I lie down in bed.

Now waiting for the Fujitsu U820 to come to U.S., then it will be my primary and only computer for years to come, hopefully.

ajkula66 · #2 Post by **ajkula66** » Thu Sep 18, 2008 9:44 pm

Let's not forget how old X21 is...seven years and counting, right?

The machine itself was never meant to run XP, maximum of 384MB PC100 RAM is unacceptable for smooth sailing within this OS. This was resolved on later X2 units that max out at 640MB PC133, and can provide acceptable, if not mind-blowing, performance.

The very idea of using any machine that has the specs of X21 as a primary business computer in today's day and age is incredibly optimistic, to say the very least.

Finally, have you considered replacing the keyboard instead of complaining about it?

fixup · #3 Post by **fixup** » Thu Sep 18, 2008 10:48 pm

I have no problem with the performance with 384MB memory. I always clean up all the craps from my computers, so they all are very efficient with lots of memory for my applications. It is the old BIOS that has so many issues with XP. I can live with all the issues except the crash.

I know X21 is too old for today's business, but do you know of any new laptop that runs as cold and quiet as X21? I have been keeping an eye on this, so far the MSI Wind is the only laptop might be cold enough to be acceptable (by me).

Did I complain about the keyboard? All 3 of my X21 have the same keyboard/mouse issues. It can't be a hardware problem but a BIOS incompatibility with XP or the buggy IBM drivers. Forgot to mention: if I press Ctl-Alt-Del, the mouse always come back - this trick works on all my three X2.

ajkula66 · #4 Post by **ajkula66** » Thu Sep 18, 2008 11:18 pm

fixup wrote:

All 3 of my X21 have the same keyboard/mouse issues.

And all of them are of the same age...I don't recall having that problem on a X21, and I've had a few of them...

fixup wrote:

It can't be a hardware problem but a BIOS incompatibility with XP or the buggy IBM drivers.

You lost me with the BIOS incompatibility...as for drivers, many other machines use the same hardware/drivers and people haven't been complaining about the issues that you are, such as modem and LAN...bluescreening and blacking out...

Finally, if the BIOS is indeed incompatible with XP (

), why not revert to W2K and speed up the machine at the same time?

tom lightbody · #5 Post by **tom lightbody** » Thu Sep 18, 2008 11:26 pm

deserving all of OP fixup's praise, my x20's run cold and quiet--even the 500mHz one--with complaints from
neither trackpoint nor keyboard: but the OS is not from micro$oft. Fixup, is your hardware dear enough to you,
that you would consider a different OS?

fixup · #6 Post by **fixup** » Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:19 am

All my X21 are also locked to 500MHz.

I would love to run Win2000 - my favorite OS, but I need the AppLocale which is only available on XP. Some of my business applications are not unicode aware, need this little converter.

I would also love to run, say, Linux, but is there a QuickBooks for Linux now? Without QuickBooks, without business. This is the deal-break for me to live with crash - if one day the QB database is corrupted, my business is over. I also have several other applications I have to use for my business (CAD, CNC etc.), which can only run on Windows.

#7 Post by **erik** » Fri Sep 19, 2008 7:30 am

fixup wrote:I know X21 is too old for today's business, but do you know of any new laptop that runs as cold and quiet as X21?

the X300 runs cooler and quieter than the X21. i've owned both.

my project X61s runs cooler and quieter than the X300 thanks to a few engineering tricks of my own along with a samsung SSD.

the X32 is probably next in line for running cool and quiet. i bought one for my mother this spring and it's been a solid machine. it runs XP like a champ.

my former s30 was also cool and quiet. in fact, the s30 is known for rarely ever turning on its fan.

i'd take any of the above over an X21—especially to run my business.

fixup · #8 Post by **fixup** » Fri Sep 19, 2008 1:05 pm

Thank Erik, that gives me a very good direction to look for an alternative. But at this moment, the Fujitsu U820 is the one in all my head. I don't need the "huge" full size keyboard; I went for X21 all because it is the only not-hot (cold actually) and deadly quiet computer I've ever touched. The U820 uses the new Atom CPU, so it should be not so hot. Even it is, it is still not a much concern as it has no palm bay and is not to be used on laptop. This is for myself; for all my friends and relatives who don't like tiny computers, X serious are still the very best, beating all the new UMPCs (except maybe the MSI Wind that seems run as cool and quiet).

ragefury32 · #9 Post by **ragefury32** » Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:46 am

I personally favor the X31/32 series. It's a Banias Pentium-M, keep it clocked down and it'll beat an Intel Atom in both battery life, heat production and performance, hands-down. The keyboard is also very good indeed. The one major advantage of the X3 is that it uses the 2.5" HDDs, which implies cheap fast replacements.

Oh yeah. The X21s have an ATi Mobility M1 with only 4MBytes of VRAM. With VRAM count that low, it'll definitely not drive a high resolution screen on the second display.

fixup · #10 Post by **fixup** » Fri Sep 26, 2008 1:20 pm

The 4MB VRAM do 1280x1024 fine. The problem is it always go back to the internal after wake up from standby.

Since I updated the audio driver from IBM's to CS's (see my other thread for details), I have not encountered crash yet. I'll keep watching, if it no longer crash, then these X20 are still my primary.

They can be found around $100, unbeatable. There is one of X20 in each room in my house, never want go back to messy desktops or other noisy and hot laptops. All of them can watch (stream) TV from a DVB-S server (also a X20), can print/scan to/from multifunctinal printers via an airlink101 wifi printer server. I also run one X20 as a home server for EVDO Internet sharing, SIP switching and Skype.

It is very nice to have an always online skype server, because skype does not use a central server for off-line message delivery. I also made a script to let skype receive files automatically and email to my push mail account as soon as a message arrives.

Raceboy · #11 Post by **Raceboy** » Tue Oct 07, 2008 4:45 am

Weird, I have had my X20 for a year now running XP SP1 and absolutely NO issues whatsoever. With 320 megs of ram it runs XP smoothly enough for me.

eddy eddy · #12 Post by **eddy eddy** » Tue Oct 07, 2008 7:34 am

My X21 is the primary laptop because you can't beat $110 anywhere. It's cheaper than my HP48 calculator! And in Brazil there's a serious concern about laptop theft.

I know it's a thinkpad forum but I would suggest you to take a look on the NC4000 series from HP. It can run XP and you can get some for a little lower than X3x series.

#13 Post by **Harryc** » Tue Oct 07, 2008 7:38 am

There's more than a few HP nc2400 fans around here...for good reason. It's a core duo machine, not much more money than the X3X series used machines. Check it out.

sparta.rising · #14 Post by **sparta.rising** » Tue Oct 07, 2008 11:08 am

Harryc,
Have you every gotten your hands on a Latitude D430? How would you compare it to the HP nc2400? I have a friend with a D430 and its not bad... I'm looking forward to the E4200... not that I'm likely to buy a new machine for a few years.

fixup · #15 Post by **fixup** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 1:46 pm

$400 is too much for an 1.2 GHz old laptop (even dual core), considering eee PC 900HA is only $350, lighter, smaller and longer battery life, and quiet and cold too.

sparta.rising · #16 Post by **sparta.rising** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 2:17 pm

But the eeePc keyboard is so undersized its not practical for a touch-typer. And a dual-core 1.2GHz would blow away the atom processor.

#17 Post by **Harryc** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 2:34 pm

Real men don't do Netbooks

.

fixup · #18 Post by **fixup** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 6:47 pm

I do like smaller keyboard - my fingers fly less. The 900HA is by no means a netbook, it has everything including a 160GB hard drive.

#19 Post by **KristianJ** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 7:26 pm

Harryc wrote:There's more than a few HP nc2400 fans around here...for good reason. It's a core duo machine, not much more money than the X3X series used machines. Check it out.

I'm one of them - and to clarify, some of them are actually Core Solo based. Mine's a Core Duo and is fabulous.

fixup, I have to wholeheartedly disagree (respectfully, of course) with your post. The U2500 dual core CPU has been benchmarked and, despite the 1.2GHz clock speed, it stacks up very well (see this benchmarking graph for examples - asa comparison, the N270 Atom CPU has a score of just 240). The nc2400 packs in an integrated optical drive into a package that weighs around 3lb, and battery life IMO is very decent.

The nc2400 is only a couple of years old as well and if you look far enough you may be able to find one with a goodchunk of HP warranty remaining. A 12.1" 1280 x 800 LCD is IMHO far more usable and pleasant to view than an 8.9" 1024 x 600 (which, based on your statement in your OP that your X21's"1024x768 screen is really not quite enough these days", would seem to render a netbook/whatever you would wish to call it unsuitable for you. For what they pack into it, I see $400 as quite a bargain myself.

fixup · #20 Post by **fixup** » Fri Oct 17, 2008 4:19 pm

Got home two eee PC 900a from BestBuy for $300/ea, cannot be happier. Quieter and cooler (except the palm rest bay) than my X20, faster too, and much lighter and smaller of course, 4hrs battery life... This is the computer everyone should have one.

No, my X20s are not on sale. For $100, they are still the very best for desktops and utilities (home server, Skype, VOIP, sprinkle, EVDO router, DVB server...).

The netbook designers really should put the battery underneath the palm rest area like X20 and Libretto. Not only comfortably cold, battery swapping is easier and extended battery does not add an ugly tail.

Raceboy · #21 Post by **Raceboy** » Sat Oct 18, 2008 2:53 am

You should compare eeePC's to X22-X24 and those are faster than eeePC's and have real screens also. Fan on my X23 (866MHz Mobile Tualatin, 512kb L2) barely comes on in CPU intensive tasks.

#22 Post by **KristianJ** » Sat Oct 18, 2008 5:21 am

The Atom based EEEs (and any other netbook, it would seem - the order of the present day seems to be the 1.6GHz Atom CPU and 1GB DDR2 RAM) would surely perform much better than an X2x. Even the old Celeron M 900MHz would probably just edge out the PIII CPUs. When I had a 701 last year I never benchmarked it to see how it performed, but if the following link is anything to go by, the CPU rating is only beaten by the Tuatalin 1.2GHz:

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/low_end_cpus.html

comptiger5000 · #23 Post by **comptiger5000** » Sat Oct 18, 2008 6:54 am

Don't bash the PIIIs. They had good power for their time, and were a pretty efficient architecture. In the server world, 2x PIII 866mhz (coppermine) is 75% as fast as 2x 2.0ghz P4 Xeon (prestonia).

#24 Post by **KristianJ** » Sat Oct 18, 2008 8:12 am

comptiger5000 wrote:Don't bash the PIIIs. They had good power for their time, and were a pretty efficient architecture. In the server world, 2x PIII 866mhz (coppermine) is 75% as fast as 2x 2.0ghz P4 Xeon (prestonia).

I wouldn't say I'm bashing them...besides, I've owned a T23 so I know that they are very reasonable CPUs. And since the Pentium Ms evolved from the PIIIs, I know that the architecture is good. But I just can't fathom how an X24 can be faster than one of the Atom based netbooks...it's not bashing, it's just recognising the advanced technology in the netbooks compared to the PIII days

Raceboy · #25 Post by **Raceboy** » Sat Oct 18, 2008 11:45 am

I was referring to Celeron M and compared to this, PIII-M is pretty much on par. But by adding fast hard drive and maximum of 640 mb of memory makes X22-24 much better laptop (more HDD space, bigger screen, definitely NOT slower etc) and it's a quality laptop, one of the best ones ever made in terms of build quality.

fixup · #26 Post by **fixup** » Sat Oct 18, 2008 3:05 pm

For those who have to have a large 12" screen, X20 is still the very best. But I want the smallest that's still usable, this 900a or 900ha is so far the only choice. Other netbooks are bigger and heavier. Smaller UMPCs are all not so perfect: OQO is a handtop only; U820's screen is too small and it is too expensive; Everun Note has a too short battery life.

I don't care about a thing about CPU speed, as they are all too fast to me. I only care how cool they run and how less battery they drain. The 900 uses Celeron M that drains much more battery and generates much more heat than the Atom used in 900a and 900ha; so no 900 for me.

Portable computers are not about top performance but about the most on battery life, usability and portability. Currently the 900a/ha is the winner. To me it can be even better if the screen is 1280x800 or the body is smaller, but for most folks it is already the ideal.

fixup · #27 Post by **fixup** » Thu Nov 06, 2008 3:15 pm

I noticed a very interesting thing:

As long as don't use the lid switch and Fn+F7, my X20 has no problem at all - no more blocked keyboard keys, no more crash, no more missing mouse pointer.

j-dawg · #28 Post by **j-dawg** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 11:23 am

Raceboy wrote:You should compare eeePC's to X22-X24 and those are faster than eeePC's and have real screens also. Fan on my X23 (866MHz Mobile Tualatin, 512kb L2) barely comes on in CPU intensive tasks.

Dunno about that speed claim. I have an X24 and it's not pokey, but it's no speed demon, either. It's also limited to 640MB RAM.

That's not to say it's not usable as one would use a netbook, though. I carry my X24 around when I don't want the weight of the tablet and I just need mobile interweb access, and for that it works great.

X2 is not for business

X2 is not for business

Who is online