T510 - I like but ...

[Mr Blek]

Finally decided to go for a top of the range T510 15.6" to replace the T60p with the 15" IPS display. Only regret I have is that I didn't go for a 15" display at a higher resolution. Not sure if these panels are still being produced and it certainly wasn't an option when purchasing. I prefer the 4:3 aspect ratio.

It seems the world is still in a frenzy over widescreen. Surely there is a market for 4:3 15/17" high resolution displays?

[ZaZ]

Surely there is a market for 4:3 15/17" high resolution displays?

Of course there is, but then the question becomes is that group big enough to move the broader market? I think the answer to that question has so far been no. I prefer 4:3 screens too. If anyone ever made a 14" SXGA+ IPS notebook, they'd have a customer in me as long as I could afford it. The bigger concern for me is the lack of quality screens. You've got very few choices these days and you better open your wallet wide to get one.

[penartur]

If anyone ever made a 14" SXGA+ IPS notebook.

In order for anyone to make 4:3 notebook, that "anyone" should purchase 4:3 screens somewhere, and that means some LCD manufacturer should made a 14" SXGA display unit, and that means that some LCD manufacturer should open new production line just to fulfill the needs of some laptop manufacturer which is going to use that screens in the single laptop model which is not going to sold well. All that will make OEM price for such a screen so high that i doubt you will purchase such a laptop (consider T400N with a narrow screen for twice a price of regular T400 with the same specs).
Then, if we will speak not about "anyone" but about lenovo, everything is even worse than that was said before. Lenovo doesn't like to depend on one manufacturer of some component (so that if said manufacturer will stop producing that item, lenovo will be forced to shut off the entire laptop model), they're working with three or more independent vendors for each component, so, in order for lenovo to make 4:3 thinkpad, at least three LCD manufacturers should start producing 4:3 screens just for that thinkpad, and such T400N could cost five times more than a regular T400 with the same specs.
And of course, for such a price, nobody would purchase that laptop.

[killer]

Some of us like widescreens.

[anthean]

Some of us like widescreens.

That's fine. No one wants to take them away from you.

But in this great big world, one would think there was room for different screen ratios to co-exist.

After all, we have a choice of processors (AMD vs Intel), graphics (Intel vs AMD vs nVidia), SSD vs traditional platter hard drive, etc.

And 4:3 screens still remain in use for ruggedized laptops, and on some small devices.

It is not a matter of which is better. It is a matter of choice. And currently, we don't have one.

[penartur]

And 4:3 screens still remain in use for ruggedized laptops,

If you're talking about panasonics - they say that panasonic uses some old stock remains as screens for their toughbooks. There is no new 4:3 large screens produced now. Panasonic could afford it because their production is so small that there is enough old screens for that. If lenovo began to produce 4:3 laptops with the same remains panasonic had, they would have probably been out of stock after a day or a week.

[ThinkRob]

If you're talking about panasonics - they say that panasonic uses some old stock remains as screens for their toughbooks. There is no new 4:3 large screens produced now.

This is correct.

There may still be 4:3 panels produced, but only for industrial/custom applications. AFAICT, none of the major panel manufacturers (AUO, Chi Mei, Toshiba, LG-Phillips, Samsung, et al.) still make 4:3 panels in the sizes/resolutions required for notebook computers.

[anthean]

This is correct.

There may still be 4:3 panels produced, but only for industrial/custom applications. AFAICT, none of the major panel manufacturers (AUO, Chi Mei, Toshiba, LG-Phillips, Samsung, et al.) still make 4:3 panels in the sizes/resolutions required for notebook computers.

Good enough.

But I did rather carefully word my statement to only say they were in use, thus indicating there was a demand. But I hear you that they are not in production.

Anyway, I do not believe this changes my argument.

And just to continue with some of the other choices available in laptops (besides processor, graphics, and hard drive):

1. Slate versus convertable versus clamshell configuration
2. Optical drive versus no optical drive
3. Chiclet keyboard versus standard (and with or without 10-key)
4. Back-lit keyboard versus Thinklight versus none.
5. Metal versus plastic versus composite body
6. Metal frame (aka "roll cage") versus none.
7. Glossy versus matte screen.
8. At least three common operating systems (Windows, OSX, and Linux)
9. Touchpad versus trackpoint (and external mice are another possibility).
10. And a variety of sizes, colors, finishes, output ports . . .

But no, when it comes to screen ratio there is just one choice.

[Colonel O'Neill]

A lot of people want to see a return of tallscreen laptops. Doesn't look like it's in the immediate forecast. Unless Lenovo wants to build their own LCD factory.

[pianowizard]

Unless Lenovo wants to build their own LCD factory.

Actually Lenovo might indeed want to build their own LCD factory, not to make tallscreens, but to make EVEN cheaper LCD panels than the cheapest ones already in the market. I went to Micro Center today and saw an R500 Thinkpad, which reminded me of a very sad truth: Lenovo considers the LCD to be the least important component of a laptop. There were about 40 laptops on display at that store, and this R500's screen was *by far* the worst. This was the second time I had seen an R500 in a computer store, and the first time was exactly the same: the R500's screen was much more disgusting than all the other laptops'.

BTW, at this same Micro Center, I also saw the T410 and the T410s for the first time. I was not impressed by their build quality at all. When compared side by side with the other laptops at the store, most of these other laptops felt better constructed and looked more polished. And both T4**'s rough touchpads are terrible! I am finally convinced that Lenovo has ruined the Thinkpad line.

[penartur]

Actually Lenovo might indeed want to build their own LCD factory, not to make tallscreens, but to make EVEN cheaper LCD panels than the cheapest ones already in the market.

If lenovo had to produce LCD screens for their laptops by itself, even the worst such screens would cost times more than ones they're using now. You seem to underestimate the costs of setting up a LCD factory.
What lenovo should do next? Build a factory that produces HDDs for their laptops? Build a factory that produces platters for said HDDs?

[penartur]

But I did rather carefully word my statement to only say they were in use, thus indicating there was a demand. But I hear you that they are not in production.

They are not in use in a mainstream laptops.
Some ATMs out there are using 4:3 CRT screens with size of about 5". Does that mean that mainstream laptop manufacturers should start using these?

Anyway, I do not believe this changes my argument.

Again, this is not a lenovo fault that there is no 4:3 thinkpads. Even if lenovo strongly desired to produce 4:3 thinkpads, prime cost for such a thinkpad was probably couple or more times higher than the retail price of similar 16:9 thinkpad right now. And because virtually nobody would pay twice for such a laptop, demand would be too low, so the production would be low, and fixed production costs would be divided between lower number of laptops, so that prime cost doubles again etc.

And just to continue with some of the other choices available in laptops (besides processor, graphics, and hard drive):

1. Slate versus convertable versus clamshell configuration
2. Optical drive versus no optical drive
3. Chiclet keyboard versus standard (and with or without 10-key)
4. Back-lit keyboard versus Thinklight versus none.
5. Metal versus plastic versus composite body
6. Metal frame (aka "roll cage") versus none.
7. Glossy versus matte screen.
8. At least three common operating systems (Windows, OSX, and Linux)
9. Touchpad versus trackpoint (and external mice are another possibility).
10. And a variety of sizes, colors, finishes, output ports . . .

But no, when it comes to screen ratio there is just one choice.

1 and 2 is purely a manufacturer choice.
3: Keyboards are much easier to produce than screens, so that, although you could count LCD manufacturers on the fingers of hand, keyboards could be produced on much higher number of factories (and establishing such a factory is not so expensive). Keyboards are custom-made for an individual laptop, but there is virtually no laptop with custom-made screen or HDD or CPU.
4, 5, 6, 9, 10: see 3.
7: It might as well disappear soon, if LCD manufacturers will stop the production of matte screens.

[anthean]

Just to make clear, I am not blaming Lenovo--certainly not more than any other laptop manufacturer. I am just lamenting the lack of choice.

Secondly, I really fail to see why widescreen advocates are so determined that everyone use widescreen also.

Are you afraid that you will be accused of using your notebook for nothing besides watching DVDs ?

[jennifer]

A lot of people want to see a return of tallscreen laptops. Doesn't look like it's in the immediate forecast. Unless Lenovo wants to build their own LCD factory.

Build their own LCD factory.That is a good idea.

[artic_squirrel]

You guys have forgotten that Lenovo is a company thinking 15000 orders to start retailing laptops with IPS displays is way unlikely to get

I quote

For readers of this blog, yes, I had our team run the math. In order to provide a high end IPS display option, we'd need well over 15,000 confirmed orders to make it even worth considering. This is due to minimum order quantities, creating models, stocking replacement parts for years to come, etc. If someone enterprising wants to create a database of (legitimate) credit card numbers of confirmed, non-cancellable orders, I'm sure that it would get some attention around here. (For you legal types, this does not constitute an offer to sell.)

http://www.lenovoblogs.com/insidethebox/?p=220


How can Lenovo be considered as serious when you read that ? This statement is preposterous and 15000 orders is ABSOLUTELY nothing for a worldwide company.

For the record, Lenovo sells tens of millions of laptops and has increased its market share in the USA recently,
http://localtechwire.com/business/local ... t/8451648/



Now, the usual arguments of the display companies --- hence manufacturing wide screens --- are :
- it matches the natural vision of a human
- this is wrong, for instance, why all the books of all mankind have non-wide format ? They are unreadable, I bet.

- anybody wants that, we produce what people want
-part1, wrong, average people don't give a sh17 about displays
-part 1, wrong, for instance, a good deal of website is in a non-wide format. Even recent ones like twitter are not, we must be totally reckless according to the first argument.
-part 2,wrong, they produce what is the cheapest they can do but they cannot sell ostensible total cr4p, too flagrant.

-movies are super kwel in wide format
---- well of course, since every single movie is produced in non 4:3 format, but not every people watches movies on a 12'' laptop, especially laptops dedicated to business. So why manufacturing these in 1280x800 ?

With the ipad coming in 4:3, we have another proof of the superiority of this format for reading [which, again, shouldn't be because it is not the natural vision !] and browsing.Moreover, 4:3 screens are equivalent to wide screens for typing, in the worst case scenario [ having too many words on a single line does not increase the easiness of reading, actually]


Why Lenovo does not sell 4:3 IPS panels ? Because they are not bold and they do not care, at all, about nit-picking customers like us.

But hey, remember, The customer is always right, at least they try to get us buy that....

From that, we are sadly bound to think Lenovo is nothing but a huge joke. I think the saddest part is Lenovo being actually aware of our disappointment ....

[penartur]

You guys have forgotten that Lenovo is a company thinking 15000 orders to start retailing laptops with IPS displays is way unlikely to get

I quote


http://www.lenovoblogs.com/insidethebox/?p=220


How can Lenovo be considered as serious when you read that ? This statement is preposterous and 15000 orders is ABSOLUTELY nothing for a worldwide company.

So do you think that lenovo wants too little, and they should want 100000 preorders on laptops with IPS screen?
15000 is the minimum for them to make agreements with some LCD manufacturer that they will purchase some other model (which is already on the market). Not redesigning the laptop case, not creating the new model, not the establishing of new tall LCD production line. Just to install some already existing LCD model in an already made thinkpad model.

With the ipad coming in 4:3, we have another proof of the superiority of this format for reading

Then why new macbook air is not in 4:3?
It is possible that there already was some 10" 4:3 IPS screen made by some manufacturer (and wasn't 10" 16:9 IPS screen), so apple just used these to cut down costs.

- anybody wants that, we produce what people want
-part1, wrong, average people don't give a sh17 about displays
-part 1, wrong, for instance, a good deal of website is in a non-wide format. Even recent ones like twitter are not, we must be totally reckless according to the first argument.
-part 2,wrong, they produce what is the cheapest they can do but they cannot sell ostensible total cr4p, too flagrant.

Did you conducted some market research before saying that? Or are you implying you know market better than lenovo?
Your arguments may be true when applied to LCD manufacturers. These are not true when applied to laptop manufacturers, because, i believe, even if Lenovo will move all their thinkpads on a 4:3 screens, the fixed LCD production line cost will add a huge markup to such a laptop.

Why Lenovo does not sell 4:3 IPS panels ? Because they are not bold and they do not care, at all, about nit-picking customers like us.

Lenovo does not sell 4:3 IPS panels because lenovo does not make LCDs and nobody who makes LCDs produces such screens.
And if we're talking about iPad - apple could allow itself to establish new LCD production line. There are 7 millions of ipads sold in 2010 (for 8 months), and forecasts are there will be 20 to 30 millions of these sold in 2011. That's for a single model.
Lenovo made 60 million thinkpads in 18 years. Currently, there is about ten models, with at least 5 different screen sizes (11", 12", 14", 15", 17"). Single thinkpad model production numbers are hardly comparable to that of ipad.
And still apple charges pretty much extra for their ipad.

But hey, remember, The customer is always right, at least they try to get us buy that....

I want my thinkpad to make me coffee!

[anthean]

Your arguments are logical, penartur.

But this all has the feel of being told that I must have peas with my dinner, and not carrots.

I feel like I am being told "You will use widescreen, and you will like it."

[penartur]

But this all has the feel of being told that I must have peas with my dinner, and not carrots.

All farmers in the world burnt their carrots seeds and begun to cultivate peas instead. You should blame farmers for that, not the pizza makers for not using carrots in their pizza anymore.

[anthean]

All farmers in the world burnt their carrots seeds and begun to cultivate peas instead. You should blame farmers for that, not the pizza makers for not using carrots in their pizza anymore.

However, just as an example of a non 16:9 screen now in use, here is the Sony Vaio P series with a 1600:768 8 inch screen (I believe that is 25:12): http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/sto ... 1644608896

I just mention this to make the point that there are screens other than 16:9 available, although this is wider still. Heaven help us if this becomes the new standard.

[penartur]

However, just as an example of a non 16:9 screen now in use, here is the Sony Vaio P series with a 1600:768 8 inch screen (I believe that is 25:12):

1) Sony makes LCDs itself; lenovo only makes laptops. Also, as the consequence of that, in order to some new sort of screen to appear in thinkpad, at least three manufacturers should start making these; for vaio, it is enough if only sony will make such screens.
2) It is possible that such a screen is used somewhere else (although i doubt that). Anyway, Sony makes a lot of other things, so even if such a laptop wouldn't sell well, it is at least possible for sony to use these LCDs in some other appliance. There is no such option for lenovo.
3) There is a huge premium on this laptop (1k$ for something with atom, 8" screen and case not even made of carbon fiber... only X series goes further; by the way, the base price for X is about 3k$ in Russia).
4) Sony's business model in regard to laptops is AFAIK a way different from that of Lenovo. While lenovo tries to earn some profit from ThinkPads, Sony produces some great out-of-competition laptops (P, Z, maybe something else) to earn some more brand recognition and loyalty and to sell some crappy no-better-than-competitors laptops (W for example) with a huge markup. Sony's main profits are coming from such crappy and expensive "ordinary" laptops which are selling well because there is a VAIO logo on the lid which is valued because there are Z and P (which sony could sell with a zero margin or even cheaper than production costs of these).

[anthean]

Look, I truly like Thinkpads.

But if Sony were to offer a 4:3 version of the Z series, I would seriously have to consider it.

[pianowizard]

If lenovo had to produce LCD screens for their laptops by itself, even the worst such screens would cost times more than ones they're using now.

Of course I understood that. I should have said "Lenovo WISH they could make their own ultra-cheap LCD screens."

How do you explain why Lenovo has chosen to eventually phase out 16:10 panels? 16:10 laptop LCDs are still in production, right? The only reason I can think of is that 16:10 panels cost more than 16:9 panels, and Lenovo (and most other laptop manufacturers besides Apple) are migrating to 16:9 so they can make cheaper laptops.

Sony produces some great out-of-competition laptops (P, Z, maybe something else) to earn some more brand recognition and loyalty and to sell some crappy no-better-than-competitors laptops (W for example) with a huge markup.

The screen of the Sony W Series does have narrow viewing angles and looks washed out, but its 1366x768 resolution still makes it better than most other netbooks.

But if Sony were to offer a 4:3 version of the Z series, I would seriously have to consider it.

Sony actually did. The Z1A in my signature was the earliest Sony Z Series model, with a 14.1" 1400x1050 screen. It's a great laptop. It was the counterpart of the T40 Thinkpad and in many ways it is better than the T40.

[anthean]

Sony actually did. The Z1A in my signature was the earliest Sony Z Series model, with a 14.1" 1400x1050 screen. It's a great laptop. It was the counterpart of the T40 Thinkpad and in many ways it is better than the T40.

Actually, I was referring to now or the future where Thinkpads no longer come in 4:3.

But in fact I did own a Sony nine years ago. It was a 1 GHz PIII consumer model. Quite powerful for the time. And while not of Thinkpad durability, it remained operable long after I gave it away to a friend (until 2009, I think).

[penartur]

Look, I truly like Thinkpads.
But if Sony were to offer a 4:3 version of the Z series, I would seriously have to consider it.

There is G series, and it is 4:3 (i assume that they source the screens in the same way Panasonic does).

I should have said "Lenovo WISH they could make their own ultra-cheap LCD screens."

The benefits of making LCD screens by yourself is not only reducing the costs, but also reducing the need to place orders to at least three independent manufacturers.

How do you explain why Lenovo has chosen to eventually phase out 16:10 panels?

Aren't X201 and T410 still made with 16:10 screens?
And there could be a lot of reasons for moving 15" line to 16:9. Immediately at least four options are coming to my mind:
1) 16:9 are a bit cheaper (that's your suggestion);
2) 16:9 are easier to source than 16:10 (e.g. there is only two manufacturers who produce 15" 16:10 screens, or all manufacturers are going to phase out 16:10 in less than a year)
3) Only with 16:9 lenovo could give the customer such a wide range of screen options (e.g. FHD screen with RGBLED backlight, which AFAIK people claim to be one of the best TN screens)
4) Lenovo had to invent a new chassis design for their Arrandale-based laptops, and there was a high chance that after more than a year all manufacturers are going to phase out 15" 16:10, so, in order to avoid designing two different chassis for T510 and T520 they moved to 16:9 in advance.

The screen of the Sony W Series does have narrow viewing angles and looks washed out, but its 1366x768 resolution still makes it better than most other netbooks.

How much better? W is 2x the price of a plain asus/acer/msi netbook here in Russia. That extra amount is paid either for the "better" screen (which means that custom screens are just awfully expensive) or for "VAIO" label (which confirms my previous post; if there would have be no P or Z etc, then nobody would purchase such an overpriced W).

Sony actually did. The Z1A in my signature was the earliest Sony Z Series model, with a 14.1" 1400x1050 screen.

It is not "the earliest Z model". It is completely different model, which happened to share the same letter as current VGN-Z (which belongs to the PCG-S->PCG-SR->VGN-SZ->VGN-Z->VPC-Z IIRC).

But in fact I did own a Sony nine years ago. It was a 1 GHz PIII consumer model. Quite powerful for the time. And while not of Thinkpad durability, it remained operable long after I gave it away to a friend (until 2009, I think).

There is a huge difference (except for maybe thinkpads) between laptops of some brand nine years ago and today. Back in these days, everything was pretty durable.

[anthean]

There is G series, and it is 4:3 (i assume that they source the screens in the same way Panasonic does).

Oh wow. Thanks.

[pianowizard]

But in fact I did own a Sony nine years ago. It was a 1 GHz PIII consumer model. Quite powerful for the time. And while not of Thinkpad durability

The Z1A that I have is built like a tank, and feels sturdier than most of the 44 Thinkpads I have owned. The K Sereis Sony that I used to have was also extremely well constructed.

There is G series, and it is 4:3 (i assume that they source the screens in the same way Panasonic does).

The G Series is only made for the Japanese market, and I believe all models only have 1024x768.

Aren't X201 and T410 still made with 16:10 screens?

I said "Lenovo has chosen to eventually phase out 16:10". The X201 and T410 are the last 16:10 Thinkpads.

How much better?

1366x768 versus 1024x600.

There is a huge difference (except for maybe thinkpads) between laptops of some brand nine years ago and today. Back in these days, everything was pretty durable.

Most of my 44 Thinkpads were from "back in these days". This Sony Z1A is better built than these Thinkpads.

[penartur]

The Z1A that I have is built like a tank, and feels sturdier than most of the 44 Thinkpads I have owned. The K Sereis Sony that I used to have was also extremely well constructed.

Again, many years ago all was not the same as today. I myself had a Lifebook and also used some consumer-grade Toshiba, consumer-grade Dell, and even a local russian "brand" which actually resells chinese OEM devices. All of these were quite good.
Now, lifebook and enterprise-grade dell are not that solid/sturdy as that old laptops were; from what i have heard, enterprise-grade toshiba are rather weak; and our local brand now sells a complete crap which may fall apart even before you will touch.
New-generation products are usually worse than previous-generation ones; you can see the same with cell phones (except for keitais), mp3 players etc: ten years ago, even the cheapest models were better than the expensive ones are today in terms of build quality/materials/solidness/sturdiness.

The G Series is only made for the Japanese market, and I believe all models only have 1024x768.

Panasonics are also made mainly for Japanese market IIRC (actually, the stuff on japanese market is much better than on the western one; i already mentioned cell phones / keitais).
But you're right, it is XGA only albeit being based on a rather modern hardware (Penryn platform, just like in X200s). Strange enough.

I said "Lenovo has chosen to eventually phase out 16:10".

Your next sentence ("16:10 laptop LCDs are still in production, right?") confused me.
If you're talking about future lenovo plans - in what way it is related with whether 16:10 laptop LCDs are still in production or not?
Hasn't LCD manufacturers chosen to eventually phase out 16:10? Wasn't lenovo decision just a reaction to LCD manufacturers decision (just like it were with 4:3->16:10 transition)?

1366x768 versus 1024x600.

Oh, i see now, that's 70% more pixels - it is really 70% better, hence 70% more expensive.

Most of my 44 Thinkpads were from "back in these days". This Sony Z1A is better built than these Thinkpads.

So what? "Back in these days" all laptops were built good (some are better, some are worse). Nowadays, thinkpads are built just like "in these days", and other laptops are built just terrible (no matter how was the same branded laptops built "in these days"). Of course, "back in these days" thinkpads might have been not the better ones. So what?

[pianowizard]

Again, many years ago all was not the same as today. I myself had a Lifebook and also used some consumer-grade Toshiba, consumer-grade Dell, and even a local russian "brand" which actually resells chinese OEM devices. All of these were quite good.
Now, lifebook and enterprise-grade dell are not that solid/sturdy as that old laptops were

I vehemently disagree, at least for the non-ultraportable laptops that are sold in the U.S. Since you mentioned Dell and since I am quite familiar with that brand, I will use it as an example. Before around 2004, the majority of their laptops (both consumer and business) had very flimsy construction. They sold well only because at that time most other laptop brands were significantly more expensive. The Inspiron 700m, which came out in 2004, was the earliest Dell laptop that I consider well-built, and the quality of Dell laptops has gotten even better since then, especially for the Latitude line -- most of the pre-D620 Latitudes were garbage! In the last couple years, Dell laptops did have a high failure rate, but that was largely due to the infamous Nvidia GPU issue.

On the other hand, as far as ultraportable laptops are concerned, I sort of agree with you, because manufacturers have been trying to make these laptops thinner and lighter by cutting corners.

Panasonics are also made mainly for Japanese market IIRC

Mainly, but not exclusively. We can easily purchase many different models of the ToughBooks (with U.S. keyboards) in the States, directly from Panasonic's U.S. web site. The Sony G Series that you mentioned is much harder to get in the States, and I don't think a U.S. keyboard is available for it.

Your next sentence ("16:10 laptop LCDs are still in production, right?") confused me.
If you're talking about future lenovo plans - in what way it is related with whether 16:10 laptop LCDs are still in production or not?

It's relevant because you had previously said that the reason Lenovo doesn't make 4:3 laptops any more is that 4:3 panels are no longer in production.

Oh, i see now, that's 70% more pixels - it is really 70% better, hence 70% more expensive.

I pointed out the resolution because you had previously referred to the Sony W Series as "some crappy no-better-than-competitors laptops", suggesting you were not aware of the much higher resolution of the W Series.

So what? "Back in these days" all laptops were built good (some are better, some are worse). Nowadays, thinkpads are built just like "in these days", and other laptops are built just terrible (no matter how was the same branded laptops built "in these days").

Again, my observation has been the opposite. Thinkpad quality (not just LCD quality, but quality in general) has been in decline, whereas many other brands have been getting better. Large-scale reliability surveys from the last half decade support my observation, e.g. compare the 2004 PC World survey with the 2010 one.

[w0qj]

Speaking as a satisfied customer of both the 2004-era (T42, 2373-K5H), and the 2010-era (T410, 2522-RE3), I can say that the high Thinkpad standards have been adhered to, same high quality!

[killer]

Speaking as a satisfied customer of both the 2004-era (T42, 2373-K5H), and the 2010-era (T410, 2522-RE3), I can say that the high Thinkpad standards have been adhered to, same high quality!

Well said, I agree with this statement wholeheartedly.