Thinkpads Forum

It is a little bigger than I thought ... both thickness-wise and width-wise ...

thanks for the post.

more like a T61"s" than an X series.

barely smaller than the 14" wide T61, much thinner and lighter, though.

They need to stop wasting bezel space.

blackomegax wrote:They need to stop wasting bezel space.

How so?

by shrinking the chassis to fit the LCD, it'd be quite a bit smaller than the T series, instead of just barely.

That might work for the lid, but it would be hard to fit the keyboard and Ultranav in a smaller space.

blackomegax wrote:by shrinking the chassis to fit the LCD, it'd be quite a bit smaller than the T series, instead of just barely.

don't forget that the X300 LCD bezel houses four wireless antenna arrays for UWB, bluetooth, WI-FI, and either EV-DO or HSDPA WWAN.

there is a lot going on there that you aren't seeing.   it's not just dead, wasted space.

i will have an X3400 on friday and i'll post some pix of it along side my X60s and X60T and T60p..

and also next to a few other, older thinkpad models..
like a 240 and a 570..

just for fun..

lets put this in perspective..
this is a new box that is 100% lenovo..
IMO, so far they get an "A" for reviving the cutting edge technology heritage of thinkpads..

and if there is some part of it that falls short, i'll comment on it..
conversly, if it excels (oops, that word is probably the property of M$) uhmm exceeds expectations i'll comment on THAT, too..

The patch antennas used in the T6x series are actually very compact and does require less than than 0.1" of space to fit, but of course the reception should be better with more space.

The x300 looks really nice... just one cosmetic thing - i really, really miss the silver color metal hinges.

Thanks Bill!
I'm looking forward to those pics, such a comparison would be great

Troels wrote: The x300 looks really nice... just one cosmetic thing - i really, really miss the silver color metal hinges.

Actually, I prefer the black hinges - reminds me of the 600X/X2X days!

dark horse thought: I wonder how small it looks when compared to a Z61t... (IMO one of the nicest-proportioned, and most underrated ThinkPad models)

rek wrote:dark horse thought: I wonder how small it looks when compared to a Z61t... (IMO one of the nicest-proportioned, and most underrated ThinkPad models)

X300: ~3.3 lb, 31.5 x 23.1 x 1.85-2.34 cm (12.4" x 9.1" x 0.73"-0.92", from notebookreviews)
Z61t: ~5 lb, 33.4 x 22.8 x 2.66-3.09 cm (13.1" x 9.0" x 1.05"-1.22", from thinkwiki)

The X300 is a bit more square, and thinner (doesn't seem like a lot but I think optically the difference will be huge), but the general size is similar. Weights vary a bit based on what battery and bay device you have in either notebook, but it's going to be 1-2 lb difference.

Personally, even though I have a huge soft spot for Z61t's rounded corners, I think overall the X300 looks better.

nonny,

the thing that worries me slightly is the processor which I had believed previously to be 2ghz, would you be able to compare it to a 1.5ghz centrino (of my R51; 1.3GB ram, probably about 2kb cache on the processor etc...) in real world performance? I would hope it's better as it would replace this system if I bought one, if it's relatively paltry I'd probably go for an x61 or 14" t43p/60p instead.

any idea of when they might use that magic mac air processor?

sidenote; thank god they went back in time rather than forward with the red and blue stripes...can you imagine a black nipple on the thing?

cheers.

I'll have to look and see what I have around here to compare processors with.

Re the TrackPoint cover, older models used to come with both red and black ones.

BillMorrow wrote:lets put this in perspective..
this is a new box that is 100% lenovo..
IMO, so far they get an "A" for reviving the cutting edge technology heritage of thinkpads.

but what's the difference really? aren't they still basically the same people doing it all? (this isn't meant to be rhetorical)

and to give another perspective, they failed to persuade screen manufacturers to provide a 4:3 option (despite Hill's belief that it was necessary!), don't panasonic still manage it with their business range?

nonny wrote:I'll have to look and see what I have around here to compare processors with.

Re the TrackPoint cover, older models used to come with both red and black ones.

thanks. and wow. ok then, how about silver?!

nonny wrote:That might work for the lid, but it would be hard to fit the keyboard and Ultranav in a smaller space.

IMHO if the 4:3 form factor would be used,
the border left and right of the keyboard could be shrinked
(propably also for the widescreen version),
and there could be more room to the front for the touchpad.

lophiomys wrote: IMHO if the 4:3 form factor would be used,
the border left and right of the keyboard could be shrinked
(propabla also for the widescreen version),
and there could be more room to the the front for the touchpad.

I don't think there are any logical reasons for widescreen apart from screen demand. Layout wise it makes no sense, in my view.

the central point is that the design leader believed it possible and necessary to use 4:3 screens but was forced by circumstance not to. You can always find apparent technical reasons why something has been designed this or that way, but I don't think it was technical limitations at play here.

have we not seen 13" 4:3 thinkpads before? I believe we have (http://www.thinkwiki.org/wiki/Category:A22e); plenty of room for a touchpad with the modern ultranav layout there, the keyboard could even be shuffled forward half an inch. Now if you consider the argument that you get more screen space on the widescreen version, you see this isn't true, as the bezel is smaller on this machine. so the only remaining issue is the availability of such a screen, which can easily be made at a high resolution, whether it is or not.

experttease wrote:have we not seen 13" 4:3 thinkpads before?

Yes, it was called the 600 series, and it was wonderful!

Wide-screen is not my preference either, but the reality is that 4:3 screens are rapidly disappearing. This one with its thin-ness and light weight is the first one that I've really liked.

nonny wrote:

experttease wrote:have we not seen 13" 4:3 thinkpads before?

Yes, it was called the 600 series, and it was wonderful!

my former 770Z had a 13.7" 1280x1024 panel if that counts.   that was considered ridiculously high pixel density for its time.

What are the dimensional differences between 13.3 widescreen (hieght/width) versus the 4:3 version? Is the width of the 13.3 widescreen about the same as the width of a 14.1 4:3 screen?

Thanks,

Lawrence

Skysurfer wrote:What are the dimensional differences between 13.3 widescreen (hieght/width) versus the 4:3 version? Is the width of the 13.3 widescreen about the same as the width of a 14.1 4:3 screen?

That was my next question, as it's not really width I care so much about, it's width at the expense of height, so if they are comparable in height then it's not such an issue. it's the shape that riles me

nonny wrote:Wide-screen is not my preference either, but the reality is that 4:3 screens are rapidly disappearing. This one with its thin-ness and light weight is the first one that I've really liked.

me too. the z series were sin, and sadly a 14" t61 is fugly, so I'd be forced to upgrade to either a t60p or an x60 from my r51 if I couldn't afford the x300, and just in case there isn't enough geeky device-naming in this sentence already, do either the t60p or the x60 still have the blue and red stripes on the ultranav?

and does anyone have an idea of what the diagonal screen size of the x300 [visible] screen would be if its area were in the 4:3 form factor? that sounds tricky but conceptually it isn't, I just don't remember my GCSE maths all too well.

Anyone know where the speakers are on this thing?

The speakers are located on the corners of the palm rest like they used to be.

Skysurfer wrote:What are the dimensional differences between 13.3 widescreen (hieght/width) versus the 4:3 version? Is the width of the 13.3 widescreen about the same as the width of a 14.1 4:3 screen?

I just did the math for fun ('cause that's me). The 13.3" shortscreen (wide? bah!) has dimensions of 7.05" x 11.28" (it's a 16:10 display). A 4:3 screen with a width of 11.28" has a diagonal measure of... (wait for it...) ... 14.1".

As for area, the 13.3" short has 79.52 sqin, and the 14.1" 4:3 has 95.4 sqin, or nearly 20% more area.

I would have liked to see the comparison pics between the x300 and a T61 14.1 4:3 instead of a T61 14" widescreen.

This has to be the first ThinkPad in a long time that I have actually thought now that's something I would like to try and perhaps buy.

I've been using my ThinkPad T40 now for some time and I have no real plans to upgrade as it's still running like a champ, with a gig of RAM and a 160GB hard disk.

I'm short of most of the asking price but I can see in a couple of years this becoming my T40 upgrade. Reminds me quite a bit of the 570 which I had some years ago, that was one sweet laptop even if it didn't have an internal optical drive.

Vicky