Thinkpads Forum

I am not asking for much ...

- DVI port (for god's sake Lenovo please listen)
- 850/1900/2100MHz Tri-band UMTS HSDPA
- an 8 hour battery life that doesn't stick out

Oh Please...... allow me to enjoy my new X60s, T60 and Z60m before they become "old"....

Oh this is an easy one for me!

LED backlight as custom order option
SXGA+ screen
touchpad + trackpoint
real docking station with pci express slot
And boot from PCMCIA (booting from flash and keeping the hd offline most of the time is going to become possible very soon)

sugo wrote:I am not asking for much ...

- DVI port (for god's sake Lenovo please listen)

YES, please give me a DVI port!!!

Ok....Ok... I give.... I must admit that I really want a DVI Port.

And a 10 hour slim battery that does not protrude in any direction...

I would like Lenovo to shave about a 1/2 lb. off the weight; that would be nice for extended travel which is what this notebook is designed for in the first place.

Also, Sony's dual integrated/discrete graphics chip would pretty much make this a killer notebook and make the T-series obsolete for me.



cj

and put the hot palm rest away.

+ non-protuding slim battery wiht 8h
+ the traditional keyboard (without Windows keys!)
+ silent and cool: no hotspots at all, ultra silent fan, no buzzing from cheap electronic components and...
+ a solid state disk

Mmm, I would want a DVI port, longer battery life per cell, and the option to go to SXGA+ on a 12.1" screen. That is pretty much it.

But I don't foresee a touchpad, not enough room, or a solid state disk even as a special order; SSDs are quite expensive right no and offer little real gain for most users. If the client needed one that badly, they would probably order one themselves and install it. Perhaps they can add the option to have discrete graphics, but nothing like discrete/integrated as it has dubious usefulness; simply tell the card via drivers and software to use more system memory than on-board if you want to (HyperMemory tries to do this). It would also make it far more complex, and therefore costly, than simply giving the customer the option of discrete vs. integrated in the first place.

I'd go something in between what most folks are asking for and what is available currently. An SXGA (not +) screen with 1280X1024 resolution, or 1280X800 in a 12" widescreen). DVI would be nice for giving presentations, but I care far more about battery life. Give me a lower-voltage processor, I'd even go "backwards" to a ULV Pentium-M if it meant longer battery life and less heat.

Finally, make it work with existing X6 ulrabases and accessories. I love how the last X32 worked with all of the accessories of the 3-years-older X30. Honestly, the X60s should have been built to share accessories with the 2-year-old X40, but since they switched jsut now, hold the form factor of the current models for a while. That used to be a big selling point with IBM. I still have an AC adapter from the T20 I bought in 1999 that works perfectly on the last T43p. Batteries from the T4x and R5x are also interchangeable. We need to go back to that.

I think a touchpad is definitely doable...smaller laptops than the X60 have them. Not worried about SSD because I'm sure that will be user swappable. Actually, I'm more interested in booting from flash in the PC Card slot, since:

A. I can do the majority of my work in 16GB and the hard drive will be spun down most of the time as a result
B. Adds to the hard drive, doesn't replace it

I wouldn't kick discrete graphics to the curb, but given the tradeoffs of a ultraportable, I probably wouldn't want it.

It's just like an integrated optical drive...am I going to turn down a model with it if it has everything else I want? No. But all things considered, I know they could have used that space for more battery, RAM slots, HD, etc.

I think something much more cool would be a docking station with a PCI express X16 slot...if that's at all possible.

I am not sure how well they can fit a decently sized touchpad in there with both the Trackpoint buttons *and* the FPR directly upstage of them towards the user. That might be more than just a little difficult and require yet another change in the chassis/form factor. Besides, the X Series hasn't had a touchpad since the X20, which didn't have a trackpad either; in terms of not intruding on a limited amount of palm rest real estate, the trackpoint is a better solution since it only has the Trackpoint button set right below the space bar.

christopher_wolf wrote:I am not sure how well they can fit a decently sized touchpad in there with both the Trackpoint buttons *and* the FPR directly upstage of them towards the user. That might be more than just a little difficult and require yet another change in the chassis/form factor.

I'm sure Lenovo is open to moving the battery to the front and extending the case a few inches to cover the 8-hour battery.

I know there's some manufacturer which lets the fingerprint reader act as a scroll wheel -- maybe that functionality would make most of those wanting a touchpad happy. I think they should play with the TrackPoint settings until they're happy with it instead, but that's just my opinion.

I'd like to see a high-res, high-power ThinkPad tablet as one tablet configuration. I don't need all-day battery power.

Tab wrote:

christopher_wolf wrote:I am not sure how well they can fit a decently sized touchpad in there with both the Trackpoint buttons *and* the FPR directly upstage of them towards the user. That might be more than just a little difficult and require yet another change in the chassis/form factor.

I'm sure Lenovo is open to moving the battery to the front and extending the case a few inches to cover the 8-hour battery.

Whaaaa?!

As if they have nothing else better to do.

I can just hear them:

"Sure guys, we are going to change the entire form factor of the next X Series for that. No, don't worry about the cost incurred by changing our production lines...We will gladly do that to make a change for no real benefit to us"

Not to mention moving the battery up front would might cause other problems; and, should a flight of pigs land at JFK and this actually *does* happen, I will gleefully take a LART to the next user that complains about "too much heat from the palmrest."

The fingerprint reader *should not* be turned into a scroll-wheel-like device; there is a pretty large amount of work you have to do on top of the drivers to even emulate it as a scroll-wheel. Next, it would have to share the functionality with the third trackpoint button, which goes through the hardware is a significantly different way than on the T Series and R Series systems where there is a proper touchpad and drivers for it.

Such a scrollable trackpoint would be a nightmarish concept from the support and engineering point of view; not to mention listening to the amount of people complaining when they run into areas where they expect it to work like a regular scroll zone on a touchpad; then I *know* there will be more complaints about the drivers necessary for it to emulate a scroll-wheel on top of the FPR biometrics drivers....

Why would anyone even need to scroll using the FPR, the X-series have always had that great third button to make the TrackPoint into a scroll wheel. Far more convenient and with much better feel, imho.

asiafish wrote:Why would anyone even need to scroll using the FPR, the X-series have always had that great third button to make the TrackPoint into a scroll wheel. Far more convenient and with much better feel, imho.

Yup, I agree that the Trackpoint and scroll button is a more elegant and sensible solution; it was just the thought of a scrolling FPR struck me as so...redundant and difficult-to-implement for no real purpose.


Now, if you will excuse me, I will go to a dark corner and have a series of hyperventilating fits brought on by the thought of an upfront battery, usable touchpad, and scrollable FPR on the X61s.

christopher_wolf wrote:Yup, I agree that the Trackpoint and scroll button is a more elegant and sensible solution; it was just the thought of a scrolling FPR struck me as so...redundant and difficult-to-implement for no real purpose.

IIRC, the tablet which had it had the FPR located so it was usable while in tablet mode as well.

It's too bad Lenovo doesn't commission/publish some studies about productivity with the TrackPoint versus the touchpad. Especially under Linux, I can feel the seconds I save every time I use the TrackPoint to select and the middle button to paste.

I'm against adding a touchpad. I don't think most thinkpad owners would use it at all (the only people I've ever seen use it are people who haven't discovered the glory of the red dot)

I use the windows key all the time, so I'd like that to stay on the keyboard. I've never accidentally hit it when I wanted to hit ctrl or alt. If you are having that problem, you should order a special typing wand by mashing the keyboard now.

DVI is something that they should include. I don't personally have a use for it, but it is completely backwards compatible w/ VGA if you use a simple and cheap adapter.

Solid state hard drive is a maybe. I'd say definitely put some solid state storage in there: the ideal case would be the new hybrid drives I've been hearing about. The problem being that windows sucks and doesn't seem to be able to figure out how to do caching well. This results in frequent disc accesses which prevent the HD from spinning down in an optimal way. A solid state cache would allow persistent disc caching without having to do a full cache write-though.

I'm still ambivalent about a higher-res screen. I'd want one if there was a good way to scale everything dynamically, but the windows infrastructure still has the problem of people using 32x32 pixel icons, pixel fonts, etc. These will be way too small to read if the resolution goes any higher. I bet OSX would make this much more readable because it uses large format icons and dynamically scales them, etc.

And of course the UL screens should be much easier to obtain.

The other gripes (battery for instance) seem like things that can't be fixed without advances in other technology areas. For instance, I don't see how they could "shave 1/2 lb" off the laptop without using some crazy future technologies.

Tab wrote:

christopher_wolf wrote:Yup, I agree that the Trackpoint and scroll button is a more elegant and sensible solution; it was just the thought of a scrolling FPR struck me as so...redundant and difficult-to-implement for no real purpose.

IIRC, the tablet which had it had the FPR located so it was usable while in tablet mode as well.

Yeah, but that had a purpose with a real benefit. Either moving the FPR on the X61 to make room for a trackpad that *might* work or to be used for a scroll device that *might* work is not a sound decision.


[quote='trentblase"]Solid state hard drive is a maybe. I'd say definitely put some solid state storage in there: the ideal case would be the new hybrid drives I've been hearing about. The problem being that windows sucks and doesn't seem to be able to figure out how to do caching well. This results in frequent disc accesses which prevent the HD from spinning down in an optimal way. A solid state cache would allow persistent disc caching without having to do a full cache write-though.[/quote]


And, no, Windows doesn't suck. Having used OSes from Windows, to BSD to zOS, they all have their benefits and downsides; being the real fool is using the wrong operating system for the job and then poo-pooing the other. Let's not get into the populist OS bashing here (neither do most such tend to be too sharp either...but I digress). The real issue at hand is whether or not SSDs are actually a good replacement for HDDs; no, they are not. First, they cost far too much to be used as a replacement for even a 40GB drive. Second, it isn't known how much of a benefit they will actually provide. Granted, they have virtually no latency and seek time as compared to HDDs, but then they have to deal with the hardware limits of the interface and bus controllers.

Even if it is used for continual disk caching, it won't be a worthwhile proposition given the high cost. Consider the example; a 2GB system with a standard HDD and little use of swap space and a <1GB system with a SSD and a large amount of swap space usage. The memory is faster than the SSD in any case, we know that much; so, if you are using something like Photoshop and are having it use mostly RAM, you will come off better, performance-wise if performance is to be gauged be speed per quantity data processed retrieved through memory, than the <1GB RAM + SSD swap system.

Therefore, SSDs are suited to a particular "niche" section of the market; namely, high-performance secondary storage replacement devices that have no moving parts and emit little to no noise and/or heat. Cost per unit storage notwithstanding if the application is important enough and the total size requirement small enough.

christopher_wolf wrote:The real issue at hand is whether or not SSDs are actually a good replacement for HDDs; no, they are not. First, they cost far too much to be used as a replacement for even a 40GB drive. Second, it isn't known how much of a benefit they will actually provide. Granted, they have virtually no latency and seek time as compared to HDDs, but then they have to deal with the hardware limits of the interface and bus controllers.

Even if it is used for continual disk caching, it won't be a worthwhile proposition given the high cost. Consider the example; a 2GB system with a standard HDD and little use of swap space and a <1GB system with a SSD and a large amount of swap space usage. The memory is faster than the SSD in any case, we know that much; so, if you are using something like Photoshop and are having it use mostly RAM, you will come off better, performance-wise if performance is to be gauged be speed per quantity data processed retrieved through memory, than the <1GB RAM + SSD swap system.

Therefore, SSDs are suited to a particular "niche" section of the market; namely, high-performance secondary storage replacement devices that have no moving parts and emit little to no noise and/or heat. Cost per unit storage notwithstanding if the application is important enough and the total size requirement small enough.

Well, what you say is true for the moment. The performance advantages are too costly for most people at this point in time.

However, flash memory is on a steeper growth curve than hard drives right now...a roughly 9 month cycle vs 12 months for hard drives. Flash also holds some serious advantages such as completely silent operation, 5% of hard drive power consumption, graceful degradation and more reliable (unlike the usual catastrophic failure of hard drives).

There's also the ability to manufacture lower capacities and different form factors for really cheap...unlike hard drives, which have a fixed overhead with all of the crap outside the platters themselves. For example, ExpressCard, PC Card, and any flash memory slot could all conceivably be used to augment the storage of your notebook significantly a few years from now. This is something that will never happen with hard drives due to their size.

Some of us geeks may jump on the bandwagon earlier when the cost is a bit high because the battery life improvements and silent operation are appealing.

Also, take a look at http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000562.html. There are plenty of examples of how much power hard drives draw in notebooks. I've read around a 10-15% increase in battery life.

I already took into account the power, noise, and heat advantages they offer. That's nothing to add.

However, they are far from having a low manufacturer defect rate as well as higher MTBFs than HDDs. With HDDs, a 100GB is a de-rated 120GB...So you actually have a non-functioning platter surface and head in there as well; those heads and that platter surface are the ones that didn't make the quality cut, but you can't just throw them away.

With Flash, it is just like memory; there has to be an analog of memtest to check a significantly *larger* batch of flash. Same thing has to be applied to SSDs. Also, have you ever heard of a bad memory stick being repaired? No, they aren't repaired. The manfacturer generally replaces bad memory sticks, this is costly for a, say, 32GB SSD...Then, to save money, you have to tell the controller to re-map the areas (more complicated, especially for flash), etc. This also goes for most of the IC fab industry in general, there is alot of waste, and therefore large cost, generated by the manufacturer of such devices. With a HDD, should you have a small portion of 120GB, 2-platter/60GB per platter HDDs that have a defect on one side, all you need do is to make it into a 100GB as a de-rated 120GB by ignoring the non-functional portions. The SSD industry will have to grow even *faster* should they have even a decent niche market segment to simply overcome the cost associated to the manufacturers in such a situation. Until something like Hybrid drives or hi-cap SSDs become more popular, they will remain in small-production lines and only as an, expensive, option.

christopher_wolf wrote:

trentblase wrote:Solid state hard drive is a maybe. I'd say definitely put some solid state storage in there: the ideal case would be the new hybrid drives I've been hearing about. The problem being that windows sucks and doesn't seem to be able to figure out how to do caching well. This results in frequent disc accesses which prevent the HD from spinning down in an optimal way. A solid state cache would allow persistent disc caching without having to do a full cache write-though.

And, no, Windows doesn't suck. Having used OSes from Windows, to BSD to zOS, they all have their benefits and downsides; being the real fool is using the wrong operating system for the job and then poo-pooing the other. Let's not get into the populist OS bashing here (neither do most such tend to be too sharp either...but I digress). The real issue at hand is whether or not SSDs are actually a good replacement for HDDs;

I maintain that I, the user, am the final arbiter of whether an OS sucks. Of course, I didn't mean that Windows was unusable -- I was talking specifically about it's cache management techniques. My statement did not arise out of a fan-boy love for one of the other OSes you mentioned, as I'm sure they all suck at something. But if they all have their weaknesses, as you say, then even you must admit that they all suck -- at something. And if they all suck at something, then it is not incorrect to state that Windows sucks.

Perhaps the tablet edition is better at this, but XP seems unable to head off disc accesses from all the random services and background processes (many of them are Thinkpad specific). I've spent many hours trying to eliminate these periodic accesses with tools like filemon, and ultimately failed. One example is that the power manager keeps accessing the same files on a periodic basis. Files that do not change. Yet Windows allows the access to occur. Even my naive college OS project would do better and I frankly expect better from the most highly valued corporation in the world. Now, I know that there are probably things going on under the covers that I couldn't hope to understand, but that doesn't change the fact that much improvement is needed.

Regarding SSD, I agree that hybrid drives are where it's at right now. But I disagree that solid state technologies will have to grow faster than they are to overtake magnetic media in lower-capacity applications. At their current pace, they are primed to replace mechanical storage for laptops. Magnetic will long be king in high-capacity storage, but it's not too hard to imagine a 20 or even 60gb affordable SSD for the main OS and random data files in the near future. The re-mapping circuitry is fairly mature, and if you can bring the OS in on the deal, longevity should not be an issue. There are already small linux distributions made specifically for solid state storage which minimize OS "disc" writes. Sure, some people will need sheer capacity of a regular HD in their mobile platforms, and I'm sure they'll be able to configure them that way. But I think most people who buy ultraportables will be willing to accept lower capacity in exchange for lower noise, power, and weight requirements.

I suggest getting rid of the SD cardreader. Maybe a multicardreader would be a nice replacement.

I would also like the option to have it shipped without any of they key stickers/labels. I know my machine well enough. I don't think it would take too much to implement this, just skip the manufacturing stage where they keys are labelled, stick an option on the website.

DVI would be nice, next generation screen probably sounds good.

the keyboard dream is highly unlikely. they have to carry two kinds of every model then for the 3 people in the world that will want it.

i wish i could get a french keyboard or dvorak keyboard in the us, but that seems almost as unlikely.

I'll be buying a Korean keyboard for my X41 when I go to Seoul in the winter.

where do you get such things?

At the IBM/Lenovo service center in Seoul

First post here.

lucas wrote:i wish i could get a french keyboard or dvorak keyboard in the us, but that seems almost as unlikely.

Oh, it's very likely. Go to the "Service parts list index - ThinkPad General" site here, find your series, and select "Keyboard Service Parts" in the drop-down box. You'll find the FRUs for the different language specific keyboards. Then call IBM's parts dept. (1-800-388-7080), and hit option 2, then 1, then 1 again.

That's what I just did for my X31. Unfortunately, it was expensive ($50! ). I'm probably crazy for getting it, but after seeing a friend's LG-IBM X31 that she brought from Korea, with a Korean keyboard, I said to myself that I had to get that keyboard. At least I won't have to deal with stickers that come off after a lot of use.


69

I just got the Korean keyboard for the X41 through IBM parts. It was $68 for the NMB version (the Chicony was $50, but I prefer the NMB) and I should have it by Wednesday.

trentblase wrote:

christopher_wolf wrote:
And, no, Windows doesn't suck. Having used OSes from Windows, to BSD to zOS, they all have their benefits and downsides; being the real fool is using the wrong operating system for the job and then poo-pooing the other. Let's not get into the populist OS bashing here (neither do most such tend to be too sharp either...but I digress). The real issue at hand is whether or not SSDs are actually a good replacement for HDDs;

I maintain that I, the user, am the final arbiter of whether an OS sucks. Of course, I didn't mean that Windows was unusable -- I was talking specifically about it's cache management techniques. My statement did not arise out of a fan-boy love for one of the other OSes you mentioned, as I'm sure they all suck at something. But if they all have their weaknesses, as you say, then even you must admit that they all suck -- at something. And if they all suck at something, then it is not incorrect to state that Windows sucks.

Of course I can, that is the whole point. You aren't the final arbiter in anything but your own experiences. Regardless of what whizz-bang features are included in an OS or program, *somebody* will complain that it isn't done right; of those, only 1% either have enough mental ability to actually have a point of it and 99% of the rest are simply saying it because it happens to be the "anti" stance or simply for the fact that it provides something to whine about and, thereby, makes it look like work is being done. This is what I have seen time and time again on any project; well, that and "Feature Creep" which is equally insidious.

If Linux was astonomically better than Windows in everything, why isn't it on the "Ordinary Desktop Users'" system? Same goes for all the other OSes. Are they "OMG that much BETAR?" then each other? Not really. Would you use Windows XP home to run a central server? No Would you run zOS for a simple desktop application? Probably not. They each have their advantages and drawbacks. That said, Windows cache management hasn't been changed nearly as much as other parts of Windows have been. They should focus more on it, perhaps; yet not at the expense of other features of Windows that are the primary goal since Windows suffers from the fact that it has to appeal and perform somewhat well for a broad range of users and niches. Saying Windows sucks as a catchall is kinda like doing surgery with an axe; it doesn't outline the feature that needs improving or is perhaps better implemented on other OSes.

Oh, and if you are quoting, please take *only* the snip that you need and not the whole message; it makes it annoying to read on certain devices and screens as well as more difficult to sort out the message when another part is being quoted.