Thinkpads Forum

I think the X60 is the machine for me and now that it has dual core and an 80 MB HD, I would buy one if it wasn't for the low resolution. At this size and weight I will opt for the similar Toshiba model which has higher res. I hate to switch as I've had Thinpads for over 10 years.

Anyone in the know here?

Yeah, I too wish the X series offered higher resolution than 1024X768. Most ultraportables don't go above that though, perhaps because higher resolutions would require components that add to the weight (but that's just my uneducated guess -- correct me if I'm wrong!).

The LCD manufacturers probably don't make it a higher resolution for the 12" screen size. To request a higher resolution for a small screen, which isn't very popular, would raise the price. Then the laptop price would go up, then sales would decline. At least that's what I think.

quite simply the majority of people don't want it.

personally I love my high resolutions and my eyes aren't particularly good but I am amazed by the number of people who seem to moan running SXGA+ on a 14" or 15" screen so you can imagine what this would result in on a 12" screen

As of January, the lead X series manager stated that they will not increase the resolution of the X60 since business customers do not want higher DPI on smaller screens.

when I was at CES I saw the Toshiba with a 12.1" SXGA+ panel and wasn't impressed. it seemed quite grainy and washed out.

I agree that the resolution should be higher, especially with Vista's support for higher resolution panels, but I doubt there are more than one or two suppliers of these panels.

I would love a higher resolution.

Simple *business* reason. Outlook 2003 does not display as well on 1024x768 when you use the preview pane.

But I agree that I am in the minority. Most of the people buying this laptop simply do not want the higher resolution - which is a shame.

Perhaps this will change with Vista.
With XP, you can use larger fonts, and change the DPI of the screen to make a high-res screen seem more like a standard-res screen, but it's klugey, and there are some things that just don't work right afterwards.
If Vista can fix the screen-scaling problems, then everyone could get high res-screens.

I'll look for one in my quad-core X80 in three years. <G>

-=Nick=-

Been over at the IBM / Lenovo stand at the Cebit 2006.
And no.. not this year or on the X60 series anyway.

Great board with lots of very good input from reliable sources. Based on this information I've decided to abandon the Thinkpad after 11 years of owning nothing but.

I just purchased the Sony SZ180P/C. Here are the specs:
-13.3" 1280x800 screen with Hi Brite technology
-120 GB HD
- Cingular Edge built in
- 2GB Ram

All that for 3.7 lbs.!

I"m not sure Lenovo is keeping up as much as IBM. The X series used to always be first to market with largest HD, fastest processor, best keyboard, etc.

ZZLeGrand wrote:Great board with lots of very good input from reliable sources. Based on this information I've decided to abandon the Thinkpad after 11 years of owning nothing but.

I came close to buying the same machine, but the keyboard felt really strange and the screen was a bit grainy. have you tried one in person?

aside from those two issues, it's a very nice machine - I love the carbon fiber look and the built-in webcam. congratulations!

I owned a 10" WXGA Sony vaio T1XP ... but I hated it for its keyboard, and its slow 1.8" Harddisk. (The harddisk I Could have lived with .. but that keyboard ... no, notting but an ThinkPad keyboard is good enough for me )

This is what I don't understand: Nobody complains about the 1400 x 1050 resolution on a 14.1" T-Thinkpad.

If you do the ratios, then a 12.1" screen with SXGA would have ~the same dot-pitch as the T-series:


1400 x 1050 : 14.1" --> 99.29 x 74.47

(99.29 x 74.47) x 12.1" = 1201 x 903


So a 1280 x 1024 12.1" screen is NOT ridiculous at all. Toshiba had a tablet with this resolution. Was it a flop?

I realize that 14.1" and 12.1" might be nominal sizes, but the point is, a high-res 12.1" screen is somewhere in the ballpark, dot-size-wise as what the bigger screens are offering. And, with the X-series, you get a real keyboard!

- Chris

The only problem I envision is people having difficulty reading stuff on it. Keep in mind that a large majority of X4X Series users, at least the ones that I know, use the Thinkpad anytime, anywhere, and generally under the most comfortable of circumstances; i.e. sitting upright in bed using it. I do this with my T43 and going to something over UXGA on a 14.1" screen is too much, I can even see how SXGA+ on a 14.1" screen would be too much, or too little as the case may be, for some people.

I can see some complaints arising from SXGA+ on, say, an X40 Screen,

Well... It doesn't have to be standard, but I would like an option for an highresolution...


Since I could live with 1280x786 on a 10" Screen ( found it to large )

greenlakechris wrote:This is what I don't understand: Nobody complains about the 1400 x 1050 resolution on a 14.1" T-Thinkpad.

If you do the ratios, then a 12.1" screen with SXGA would have ~the same dot-pitch as the T-series:


1400 x 1050 : 14.1" --> 99.29 x 74.47

(99.29 x 74.47) x 12.1" = 1201 x 903


So a 1280 x 1024 12.1" screen is NOT ridiculous at all. Toshiba had a tablet with this resolution. Was it a flop?

I realize that 14.1" and 12.1" might be nominal sizes, but the point is, a high-res 12.1" screen is somewhere in the ballpark, dot-size-wise as what the bigger screens are offering. And, with the X-series, you get a real keyboard!

- Chris

1280x1024 is pretty ridiculous for a 4:3 12.1" screen, as 1280x1024 has a 5:4 aspect ratio

1280x960, on the otherhand, would be great

dyne wrote:1280x1024 is pretty ridiculous for a 4:3 12.1" screen, as 1280x1024 has a 5:4 aspect ratio

1280x960, on the otherhand, would be great

Aren't all non-widescreen screens 4:3 in ratio? And everyone still uses 1280x1024. Hardly anyone uses 1280x960.

dr_st wrote:

dyne wrote:1280x1024 is pretty ridiculous for a 4:3 12.1" screen, as 1280x1024 has a 5:4 aspect ratio

1280x960, on the otherhand, would be great

Aren't all non-widescreen screens 4:3 in ratio? And everyone still uses 1280x1024. Hardly anyone uses 1280x960.

I believe pretty much all 17" and 19" LCDs (which use 1280x1024) are 5:4

I don't believe there's any consumer LCDs that use 1280x960 (and are 4:3), which is why you don't hear about it

Well, there are higher resolution panels available on the market, but the better once with a SXGA+ resolution and wide viewing angles (AFFS technology based) are mostly meant for TabletPCs here. Take a look at this thread here...

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showpos ... ostcount=4

...there you can see, that Boe Hydis for example, is offering some better 12.1" SXGA+/WXGA TFT-panels for Tablet PCs.

So at least Boe Hydis is actually offering some better AFFS (Fringe Field Switch - based on IPS) panels in sizes of 10.4" XGA, 12.1" SXGA+/WXGA/XGA and also in 15" and 18" sizes. - However, such panels are much more expensive than the usual 12" TFT-panels which can be found inside X-Series Thinkpads, with the exception of the X41Tablet, which I believe also has a Boe Hydis panel build in.

greenlakechris wrote:Nobody complains about the 1400 x 1050 resolution on a 14.1" T-Thinkpad.

T43's are available with the following displays: 14.1" XGA, 14.1" SXGA+, 15" XGA, 15" SXGA+ and 15" UXGA. I've no idea how sales split between these, but I'd think models with the 14.1" SXGA+ display have a pretty marginal share in the lot.