Thinkpads Forum

Some great pictures and video as well.

ThinkPad X300 First Thoughts Review

P.S. They've also run a few benchmarks.

I was about to post this ... you beat me to it.

Nice find. This really does look like today's ultimate ThinkPad. I like almost everything except the price.

K. Eng wrote:Nice find. This really does look like today's ultimate ThinkPad. I like almost everything except the price.

I'm very pleased with it. I was leery about the resolution, but I've been able to adjust it so that I can see text without web sites looking all weird - something I've never been able to do with my T60p.

nonny wrote:I'm very pleased with it. I was leery about the resolution, but I've been able to adjust it so that I can see text without web sites looking all weird - something I've never been able to do with my T60p.

how would you rate color accuracy, viewing angles, and brightness on the display?   those are the most important to me as i'd like to get an X300 to display projects to clients.

Looking at the pictures, I may have to take back what I said about the Lenovo logo. It looked worse in the previews when we saw it from the side. Rawr.

The logo was probably shinier and silver-looking because the plastic film was still over it. Once it's peeled off, it's black-on-black. Shiny logo against matte black finish, but very discreet, nonetheless.

erik wrote:how would you rate color accuracy, viewing angles, and brightness on the display?   those are the most important to me as i'd like to get an X300 to display projects to clients.

That's hard to say. With the screen brightness all the way up, it's very bright (too bright in this room) and almost washes out some colors. If I turn it down a bit, colors look normal to me.

I do have to adjust the screen back-and-forth a bit to get it at just the right angle for me as I move around from desk to chair. From side-to-side, viewing angles are fine. Not what I get from my T60p, of course, but usuable.

the T60p's UXGA IPS panel is pretty good with color.   how does the X300 compare to it?

Hi,

I'd really like the X300 specs - the only thing I'm worried about is the processor speed. I've read the article on notebookreview.com, but I'm still uncertain as to whether the processor is fast enough for my needs.

I work as a SAP consultant and it seems like all the office work (Word, Excel, web etc.) are covered based on the review, but how about the SAP applications - I work with business intelligence and the SAP frontend application can draw quite heavily on the client resources, but I'm not sure how much they depend on the memory and how much on the processor.

I currently have a Z60M with a 2.0 Ghz Pentium M - how does that compare to the 1.2 Ghz in the X300.

Any thoughts?

Thanks in advance,
-Jacob

Price and relative poor battery performance (in my opinion) makes me want a 13.3'' T Series... hope they're bringing one out.

my impression for X series thinkpad model is usually small and ultraportable and its battery can last at least >6hrs.

unfortunately, X300 can last 5-6hrs , and abt 3-4hrs moderate use

gunston wrote:my impression for X series thinkpad model is usually small and ultraportable and its battery can last at least >6hrs.

Only with the 8-cell battery on X6* and the extended dock connector battery on X3*.

I am interested how much life can be pulled from a X300 with the thicker main battery and the optical drive swapped for the extra battery.

I've been wondering if you can set up a RAID (for backup purposes) on this thinkpad, doesn't it depend on the motherboard? anyone know?

experttease wrote:I've been wondering if you can set up a RAID (for backup purposes) on this thinkpad, doesn't it depend on the motherboard? anyone know?

no thinkpad has provisions for RAID.   there may be software options available to drive RAID 1 with an external drive but your best bet is with NAS or multi-drive array.

qviri wrote:

gunston wrote:my impression for X series thinkpad model is usually small and ultraportable and its battery can last at least >6hrs.

Only with the 8-cell battery on X6* and the extended dock connector battery on X3*.

I am interested how much life can be pulled from a X300 with the thicker main battery and the optical drive swapped for the extra battery.

Well from the slides that was posted, they said 10hrs with XP and 7hrs with Vista (dunno what's the big difference, Vista on Power Saver or even "Balanced" still gets me close to 4hrs with a 6 cell in my Thinkpad T60 - Same as i did with XP)

i wonder how long until there is a terabyte SSD for the X300 that slides into the CD slot..

when i was taking photos on sunday, the X60 was at 30% while the X300 was still over 80%..

as for the comparison of displays, the T60p with UXGA flexview outshines everything..

ok, here are a few pix of the crowd of thinkpads..
and one interloper called apple..

macbook pro, T60p, X300 and X60s
http://www.thinkpads.com/images/DSC_4328.JPG

T60p, X300 and X60s
http://www.thinkpads.com/images/DSC_4344.JPG

X300 and X60s
http://www.thinkpads.com/images/DSC_4355.JPG

these are not very good but you can get a comparison of a sort..

Thanks for the pictures Bill ... the X300 is thin but not as small as I wish it'd be

K. Eng wrote:Nice find. This really does look like today's ultimate ThinkPad. I like almost everything except the price.

I like the price, I think cost reduction (ie. Dell market force) has ruined innovation in the computing industry and its refreshing to see Lenovo not caring about competitive pricing and just creating a decent system.

Remember back to the days when a fully specced 770x was $8000 - the X300 is a bargain

Crappy Dell and Acer systems should be cheap but the type of users that buy those shouldn't be buying an X300 and if they did, they would only complain that it doesn't have a glossy screen and it can't play crysis

gator wrote:Thanks for the pictures Bill ... the X300 is thin but not as small as I wish it'd be

I didn't expect it to be much smaller than the 14.1" widescreen T61, because 13.3 is only 5.7% less than 14.1.

snife wrote:Remember back to the days when a fully specced 770x was $8000 - the X300 is a bargain

But that doesn't mean the 770X was better in quality than today's T61 or X300. Components were much more expensive in general. For instance, back in the mid 1990s, 4MB of RAM cost hundreds of dollars. Now, a 2GB SODIMM costs under $40.

pianowizard wrote: I didn't expect it to be much smaller than the 14.1" widescreen T61, because 13.3 is only 5.7% less than 14.1.

You are right, 11.28" is almost as wide as the 14.1" regular thinkpads. I remember posting in the 600X forum sometime back about wanting the 600X back with modern innards ... the X300 is as close as I am going to get towards my wish. 13.3" (4:3 ratio) is a very desirable formfactor for me, and if the X300 had been 4:3 it would have been my DREAM laptop.

gator wrote:13.3" (4:3 ratio) is a very desirable formfactor for me, and if the X300 had been 4:3 it would have been my DREAM laptop.

But don't forget, if Lenovo ever brings back the 4:3 13.3" form factor, it would probably have thick display bezels just like the X300. In other words, it would most likely be wider than the 600X. The 600X didn't need to fit so many wires and antennas around the screen.

It's a shame that laptops are getting bigger because people want to have so many options for networking (and if Lenovo doesn't offer all of them they would have trouble selling their laptops).

AFAIK, all the antenna wires are routed BEHIND the display. I don't ever recall seeing one image in the various HMMs (including T61 with the display rollcage) where the antenna wires went above the display (there is no place to attach them if they go over the top anyway).

example:
http://images.digitalmedianet.com/2007/ ... t61-7l.jpg

The thick display bezel is due to the webcam in all probability, for which I have no use whatsoever.

pianowizard - I know, I was just being a bit flippant but due to the higher cost back then, they were less concerned with the cost of the industrial design as it paled in comparison to the to the components, by allowing the extra spend on this for X300 i think they have recaptured the magic of that era. I dont believe the 770 was better quality than the X300, in fact, given the smaller size, the X300 is a much better quality notebook; its easy to make big things strong but much more difficult on smaller things.

gator wrote:AFAIK, all the antenna wires are routed BEHIND the display.

not on the X300.   everything runs on the sides to help maintain the thin profile.   you can see this in both the X300 HMM and service videos.

it would be nice if lenovo built the x300 in a 4x3 aspect display model..

but for now, this x300 is just super..

Yes, I second that. As mentioned earlier elsewhere,
a X300 with 4:3 form factor and a Flexview LCD
would be really great.

lophiomys wrote:a X300 with 4:3 form factor

That would be the lenovo version of 600X

I'm vocal about my preference of 4:3 over widescreen but I dont see it working so well in this form factor as it would probably mean a larger overal surface area

snife wrote:I'm vocal about my preference of 4:3 over widescreen but I dont see it working so well in this form factor as it would probably mean a larger overal surface area

it could work.   the display panel would be narrower because of the 4:3 ratio so the footprint would shrink in width but grow in length as a result.   total footprint area would likely be very similar.