New HP machines vs X60(s)?

Message

foodle · #1 Post by **foodle** » Thu May 11, 2006 8:14 pm

The new HP machines (nc2400, nc4400) seem pretty nice.

News article:
http://www.notebookreview.com/default.a ... 400+nc8400

nc2400 review:
http://laptopmag.com/Review/HP-Compaq-nc2400.htm

The nc2400 is a Core Solo wide screen 12" and the nc4400 is a Core Duo 4:3 12". Both have integrated optical drives and full-sized keyboards. However, both machines have just been announced, so who knows when they'll be readily available. Also, I'm not sure how big the HP user-base is. It's probably a lot smaller than the Thinkpad user-base.

I'm still waiting on my X60s (170469U) to arrive (already shipped). Hopefully I won't have buyer's remorse.

intelbrain · #2 Post by **intelbrain** » Thu May 11, 2006 11:38 pm

Compaq/HP laptop is pretty good, better than dell, but still behind lenovo. I own a n600c and it's pretty solid (i think they use the same material as lenovo), no flex or anything unlike dells.

You won't be disappointed with your x60s. I have 170258U and the battery is awsome. I get 8hrs w/ 9 cell surfing the web. They use express shipping so it will be here before you know it.

hutty2000 · #3 Post by **hutty2000** » Fri May 12, 2006 3:05 am

Yea, I agree that HP is better than Dell and far behind the Lenovo ThinkPad. But I do not think that HP N600c uses the same material as ThinkPad, because the later use the Titanium and Magnisium alloy as their cover materials, it is far more strong than any other laptops.
I purchased a X40 last Oct. From the Lenovo's webside, it seems that the new x60s is smaller and lighter than x40, is that right? Because from the picture, it seems that x40 is thinner.

christopher_wolf · #4 Post by **christopher_wolf** » Fri May 12, 2006 3:11 am

The keyboards that are currently used on the HPs and Compaqs lag far behind IBM/Lenovo in terms of tactile response and overall feel. I did think that HP would change the keyboards they used since my ze5170 blew up, but apparently not...

dfumento · #5 Post by **dfumento** » Fri May 12, 2006 7:49 am

Don't forget service, service, service. I had to call HP for printer service and it isn't nearly as good as the IBM/Lenovo service and support. For instance, at IBM you can get a 2nd level support tech and at HP they at first refused until I threatened to call the presidents office and give the case number. Then they relented and they got me on the phone with someone who was much better at fixing the problem.

foodle · #6 Post by **foodle** » Fri May 12, 2006 10:50 am

christopher_wolf wrote:The keyboards that are currently used on the HPs and Compaqs lag far behind IBM/Lenovo in terms of tactile response and overall feel. I did think that HP would change the keyboards they used since my ze5170 blew up, but apparently not...

This brings up a question I have always wondered about: why doesn't any other manufacturer use the same/similar quality keyboards as IBM/Lenovo? Everyone always raves about Thinkpad keyboards, and many cite them as one of the main reasons they went for a Thinkpad, so why don't any of the other makers follow suit? Compared to the CPU/GPU/LCD, the keyboard is a very cheap part.

hutty2000 · #7 Post by **hutty2000** » Fri May 12, 2006 11:08 am

May be it is not that easy to manufacture a key board as good as Lenovo ThinkPad.
Also, ThinkPad is the best not only for its keyboard, but also for nearly all others, such as sturdy design, security, user friendly - - -
For instance, my friends bought a small Dell laptop, but he really got bad experiences, and he said that he will never ever consider Dell whatever cheap it is.
All in all, there are too many good things on a thinkpad.

foodle · #8 Post by **foodle** » Fri May 12, 2006 11:24 am

hutty2000 wrote:May be it is not that easy to manufacture a key board as good as Lenovo ThinkPad.

But IBM/Lenovo don't manufacture their own keyboards. They buy them from Chicony/NMB/etc. I would expect that the companies that make the keyboards would be happy to have other customers.

No doubt that Thinkpads are great for other reasons.

Puppy · #9 Post by **Puppy** » Fri May 12, 2006 1:19 pm

If there was an X series with internal DVD drive I'd go for it.

valiar · #10 Post by **valiar** » Fri May 12, 2006 7:21 pm

foodle wrote:The new HP machines (nc2400, nc4400) seem pretty nice.

One thing that I have immediately noticed about the nc2400 is that it uses the dreaded 1.8-inch hard drive.
Yes, the same drive used in the X40 and the iPod.
Which means that it is slow as hell and not upgradeable.
Even though the nc2400 comes with this awful drive and the relatively slow 1.2GHz Core Solo, its battery life and weight are more or less the same as for X60.
Of course, with nc2400 you get the built-in DVD drive.
Other than that, don't worry about your choice.

hutty2000 · #11 Post by **hutty2000** » Sat May 13, 2006 2:56 am

Puppy wrote:But IBM/Lenovo don't manufacture their own keyboards. They buy them from Chicony/NMB/etc. I would expect that the companies that make the keyboards would be happy to have other customers.

It probably that the key board is designed by IBM/Lenovo and only manufactured by Chicony/NMB/etc. So they are not allowed to use the same techonolgy on others.

hutty2000 · #12 Post by **hutty2000** » Sat May 13, 2006 3:02 am

Puppy wrote:If there was an X series with internal DVD drive I'd go for it.

But why don't you choose T series??

X is for ultraportable, if it comes with the drive, how could it be?

For me, I do not think the drive is really usefully for every day. I only use it several times a year.

But i think, if the X series can have better graphics, it will be better.

Puppy · #13 Post by **Puppy** » Sat May 13, 2006 4:45 am

T is not 12"

I'd like to have a model which would be something between X60 and Z60t, something like Fujitsu-Siemens P7120 or Sony VGN-TX2XP with ThinkPad keyboard, design and quality.

hutty2000 · #14 Post by **hutty2000** » Sat May 13, 2006 7:47 am

Puppy wrote:T is not 12"

I'd like to have a model which would be something between X60 and Z60t, something like Fujitsu-Siemens P7120 or Sony VGN-TX2XP with ThinkPad keyboard, design and quality.

I also hope Lenovo-ThinkPad can introduce a 13.3" TFT, wide screen, and ultraportable one. Actually, Lenovo sells it in China under Lenovo brand name, but we do not know whether Lenovo will also introduce similar one into the ThinkPad family.

Puppy · #15 Post by **Puppy** » Sat May 13, 2006 7:58 am

hutty2000 wrote:I also hope Lenovo-ThinkPad can introduce a 13.3" TFT, wide screen, and ultraportable one.

The P7120 is even 10.6" wide screen. The design is not bad but I couldn't stand its keyboard layout (no separate keys for Home/End/PgUp/PgDn).

hutty2000 · #16 Post by **hutty2000** » Sat May 13, 2006 12:38 pm

Puppy wrote:
hutty2000 wrote:I also hope Lenovo-ThinkPad can introduce a 13.3" TFT, wide screen, and ultraportable one.
The P7120 is even 10.6" wide screen. The design is not bad but I couldn't stand its keyboard layout (no separate keys for Home/End/PgUp/PgDn).

I do not like a screen like that small.

#17 Post by **daeojkim** » Sat May 13, 2006 1:44 pm

I use virtual drive and never had the need for a optical drive while I am on the road. It is more convenient, faster, less power consumption, etc.

1.8" HD is dreadful. I think X60 still has better balance of power, portability, upgradability, reliability, and all other -bilities.

JK

Puppy · #18 Post by **Puppy** » Sat May 13, 2006 3:42 pm

I understand that it could be small screen for some people (personally I can't use 15" XGA because I see the pixel raster therefore it looks 'unreadable' for me) or not everyone need a DVD drive so current X60 is perfect. But such model is still missing in ThinkPad portfolio.

budugu · #19 Post by **budugu** » Sun May 14, 2006 10:38 am

THe new gray-blue/black business models are good. They use the same mg-alloy frames, with active disc protection and the keyboard though a little stiff is good. I actually like the small texture that they have on the keys (it gives a feeling of nice grip). I am not sure it came with so many applications as the thinkpad though. The laptops are constructed well and fairly rigid (on a certain level better than my R52 /z60m). I use their nc4200 Tablet PC. It performs very well! Hope it helps. Between them ... IMHO the only thing you need to consider is the price difference ...

cj3209 · #20 Post by **cj3209** » Mon May 15, 2006 10:31 am

hutty2000 wrote:Yea, I agree that HP is better than Dell and far behind the Lenovo ThinkPad. But I do not think that HP N600c uses the same material as ThinkPad, because the later use the Titanium and Magnisium alloy as their cover materials, it is far more strong than any other laptops.
I purchased a X40 last Oct. From the Lenovo's webside, it seems that the new x60s is smaller and lighter than x40, is that right? Because from the picture, it seems that x40 is thinner.

I use both an X40 and X60s for work and the X40 is noticeably more compact than the X60s: thinner and slightly lighter. The problem with the X4x series and the new HP ultraportables is the dreaded 1.8" hard drive: it is agonizingly SLOW. Slow bootup times and slow hibernate times. You need a lot of RAM (I have 1.25 gb) to make it acceptable. Of course for surfing and word processing, I think it's fine but I like to do a little more which makes the X60s seem like a godsend with 'normal' 2.5" SATA hard drives - it's as fast as our T43p!!

My two cents...

foodle · #21 Post by **foodle** » Mon May 15, 2006 11:35 am

cj3209 wrote: I use both an X40 and X60s for work and the X40 is noticeably more compact than the X60s: thinner and slightly lighter.

It's interesting that your experience is that the X40 is smaller/lighter, since the specs indicate that the machines are virtually the same in size and weight. With the ultralight LED-lit screen, the X60s should be even lighter.

cj3209 · #22 Post by **cj3209** » Mon May 15, 2006 11:44 am

foodle wrote:
cj3209 wrote: I use both an X40 and X60s for work and the X40 is noticeably more compact than the X60s: thinner and slightly lighter.
It's interesting that your experience is that the X40 is smaller/lighter, since the specs indicate that the machines are virtually the same in size and weight. With the ultralight LED-lit screen, the X60s should be even lighter.

Our X60s does not have the ultralight LCD although it's pretty bright.

Now you've got me curious - I'll have to compare the X40 and X60s side-by-side now! I was just going from memory.

foodle · #23 Post by **foodle** » Mon May 15, 2006 12:39 pm

The notebookreview.com review ( http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=2828 ) has some comparision pics between the X41 and the X60s.

hutty2000 · #24 Post by **hutty2000** » Mon May 15, 2006 2:15 pm

cj3209 wrote:[quote=".

I use both an X40 and X60s for work and the X40 is noticeably more compact than the X60s: thinner and slightly lighter. The problem with the X4x series and the new HP ultraportables is the dreaded 1.8" hard drive: it is agonizingly SLOW. Slow bootup times and slow hibernate times. You need a lot of RAM (I have 1.25 gb) to make it acceptable. Of course for surfing and word processing, I think it's fine but I like to do a little more which makes the X60s seem like a godsend with 'normal' 2.5" SATA hard drives - it's as fast as our T43p!!

My two cents...

[/quote]

I also hate that 1.8" hard drive, but we just can not change it without changing the whole laptop. I also felt that the booting time for x40 is really too too too long. It usually takes around 3 minutes to finish it. Now I have a 512M Memory, do you think the booting time will be far more shorter if I add another 1GB memory? Because others say that we nearly can't tell the difference between 512M memory and 1.5GB memory all other things equal. And also, from the windows task manager I can see that usually my system only use half of the 512M memory.

hutty2000 · #25 Post by **hutty2000** » Mon May 15, 2006 2:29 pm

foodle wrote:The notebookreview.com review ( http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=2828 ) has some comparision pics between the X41 and the X60s.

The review says that "The X60s is light enough at 3.4lbs (with 8-cell battery, it's about 3 lbs with a 4-cell battery)", while the x40 is 2.7bs with a 4 cell battery and 3.2bs with a 8 cell one.

dfumento · #26 Post by **dfumento** » Mon May 15, 2006 4:43 pm

Well, now you know the weight of a CPU. The X41 has one and the X60s has two and that is the difference in the weight. I grew up in Champaign-Urbana.

#27 Post by **archer6** » Wed May 17, 2006 1:52 am

hutty2000 wrote:
foodle wrote:The notebookreview.com review ( http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=2828 ) has some comparision pics between the X41 and the X60s.
The review says that "The X60s is light enough at 3.4lbs (with 8-cell battery, it's about 3 lbs with a 4-cell battery)", while the x40 is 2.7bs with a 4 cell battery and 3.2bs with a 8 cell one.

There are 3 batteries for the X60 & X60s models. The slim 4 cell, the enhanced 4 cell and the 8 cell.

I have both the slim and the enhanced 4 cell. I put my X60s on the scale with the slim battery and it read 2.7lbs. With the enhanced 4 cell it's an even 3.0 lbs. With the slim battery the profile of the X60s is indeed very thin.

#28 Post by **archer6** » Wed May 17, 2006 1:54 am

Forgot to mention in my earlier post here, that there is a big speed difference between my X60s and my old X40.

New HP machines vs X60(s)?

New HP machines vs X60(s)?

Re: New HP machines vs X60(s)?

HP compaqs are generally good.

Who is online