T420S from CES

[sanjuro]

Stories and pics of T420S from CES:

http://translate.google.com/translate?j ... 90528.html

http://translate.google.com/translate?j ... index.html

[Harryc]

Hopefully that will not be the final material used for the bezels. I hate shiny.

[Colonel O'Neill]

Weren't one of the X-series at CES with glossy parts last time?

[erik]

it's just a prototype and missing the soft-touch coating.   production unit palmrests will not be shiny.

with the yamato team moving to yokohama late last year, it reduced their time to work on prototypes.

[pianowizard]

The screen seems to be 16:10, not 16:9 as many of us predicted. But it's hard to tell because none of the photos show the screen straight on.

[erik]

looks 16:9 to me... since that's what it is.

[Colonel O'Neill]

Using Photoshop I get a ratio between 16:10 and 16:9.

Assuming the onscreen icons are default dimensions, it's definitely not 1440x900; I can't get my icons to match up.
So it's either a low-res 16:10 1280x800 or a 16:9 1366x768.

[erik]

it's 16:9.

[amardeep]

I did mention this in another thread, but I guess there's no harm in reposting it, see http://forums.lenovo.com/t5/Lenovo-CES- ... m-p/352357

In particular,

We had the T420s on display, so on some level we essentially pre-announced it. There are a few things I won't be able to comment on, but anything that could be gleaned by playing with it in person is fair game. (A few specifics may change between now and announce)

* 16:9 display HD+ resolution
* Integrated gfx, or NVIDIA NVS 4200m Optimus
* USB 3.0
* Slightly lighter weight
* 720p HD camera w/new even lower light sensitivity

-------
Matt Kohut
Lenovo Product Marketing

Edit :
Also http://www.thinkpads.com/2011/01/21/lea ... -february/

14" HD+ (1600x900) 16:9 aspect, 230 nit

[dallascowboys]

If there really is a t420s coming out, why wasn't it listed on Lenovo's New Product Showcase from CES 2011?
The Edge laptop was listed, but not t420s....which means it might just be a rumor.

http://shop.lenovo.com/us/products/new- ... 0F333#e220

[erik]

If there really is a t420s coming out, why wasn't it listed on Lenovo's New Product Showcase from CES 2011?

it's still in prototype stage and therefore considered an unannounced product at this time.

[w0qj]

I hope that the T420/T520 would also give us USB 3.0 ports.

The reports that I've seen only suggests that *only* the T420S (slim version) would have USB 3.0 ports.

These USB 3.0 ports would provide bitter-sweet compensation for us T410 (T400, etc.) who would be losing their 16:10 ratio screens.

USB 3.0 would provide viable external USB backup for your data, that's for sure.

[dallascowboys]

it's still in prototype stage and therefore considered an unannounced product at this time.

ok, thanks. Since it is still in the prototype stage, what is a ball park release date for something that is "unannounced" ? Like 3 months? or maybe 6 months to a year?

[erik]

look for an announcement within the next couple of months.   unfortunately i can't give an exact date.

[w0qj]

Does anyone know if the upcoming T420 motherboard use SATA 3 speeds?
If it does, it would be brilliant for the new upcoming SSD with SATA 3 support!

Yeah, I know, T420 is still an unannounced prototype, but just curious about SATA 3 (and USB 3).

I think it's a given that is'a 16:9 ratio screen

[Edit: dr_st, many thanks for the correct screen ratio!]

[dr_st]

Oh, for crying out loud.

12:9 is 4:3.

You mean 16:9.

[dallascowboys]

t420s !!!!

[w0qj]

Oops, Freudian slip in a positive manner, just edited my posting, and tks for your heads up!

Oh, for crying out loud.

12:9 is 4:3.

You mean 16:9.

[feklee]

A 16:9 panel has the same physical area as a 4:3 panel of 89.0% its diagonal length. In other words: The T420s screen's physical real estate equals that of a 12.5" 4:3 screen. And its height equals that of an 11.4" 4:3 screen.

As such, wouldn't it be appropriate to compare the T420s to the old X4x series? Then weight and bulkiness seem less than impressive.

I know the X series don't have an optical drive, but who cares.

[dr_st]

And the regular T420 you will also compare with the X series?

Why do you necessarily want to compare screens based on their height? Why not look at the width of the T420's screen? It is comparable to a 15-17" 4:3 screen then.

[feklee]

Did I say that I compare by height only? Take a look at the actual screen real estate, which I mentioned first. Concerning width: As I work a lot with text, and often in crammed spaces when on the road, I prefer less width. The width of a 14" 16:9 display equals that of a 15.2" 4:3 display, by the way.

Do the math: With fixed diagonal length, the area becomes smaller and smaller as you increase width. Display manufacturers love that!

[dr_st]

Oh, I know the math.

However, to each his own. I prefer 4:3 myself, but some see advantages in 16:9 - for example on airplanes you are more likely to be limited by the vertical dimensions of the machine. Also for people who prefer side-by-side viewing, 1600x900 might be preferred to 1400x1050 in the same screen size.

[feklee]

for example on airplanes you are more likely to be limited by the vertical dimensions of the machine

... if the lid actually had small vertical dimensions. But that's not the case: Look at the extra-large bezel around the screen. Completely unnecessary.

Without having done any measurements, I'm certain that the ratio bezel-size:screen-size is much worse with the new 16:9 machines than it was with the 4:3 machines.

[dr_st]

You are right on count of the bezel. Z6Xt series - now those machines had slim bezels! Modern laptops are not designed this way anymore. I believe one reason is the need to place more and more wireless antennas in the bezel...

With that said, the 8:5 Thinkpads are slightly shorter than the 4:3, and the 16:9 are slightly shorter still. Not as much as one would have liked, but the difference is there.

Another thing to keep in mind - if you shrink the chassis as much as you shrink the screen, you will lose valuable space for internal components and external ports.

As I said - overall, I prefer 4:3 form factor in laptops by a lot. It seems most well-rounded. The difference between 8:5 and 16:9 is not so big.

[ssd_thinkpad]

I believe one reason is the need to place more and more wireless antennas in the bezel...

The T60 and x60 series have a very small bezel and every wireless antenna included:

- bluetooth
- wlan
- wwan

Lenovo said "because of the wireless antennas our bezels are so big" but they could make the bezels small with the 60 series.

[feklee]

Just did some measurements of the bezel, after perspective correction with PTLens.

Estimate based on pixel count: The size of the bezel is 47% the size of the display.


outside: 208×143, inside: 186×109

[ThinkRob]

The T60 and x60 series have a very small bezel and every wireless antenna included:

- bluetooth
- wlan
- wwan

Lenovo said "because of the wireless antennas our bezels are so big" but they could make the bezels small with the 60 series.

Actually, the WWAN antenna was external -- it stuck out of right side of the T6x/X6x-series machines. Also, AFAIK those machines weren't designed when MIMO-capable cards were common, so wireless only really needed two antennas. Finally, it's worth noting that (at least for the X6x series), the keyboard was modified to compensate for the reduced footprint. Personally, I'd much rather have a bezel and a 'full-sized' keyboard.

[ssd_thinkpad]

ThinkRob, you are true on both points. The full keyboard leads myself into the x200 series more than the x60 series - I am planing to buy a subnotebook.

[bsoft]

Just did some measurements of the bezel, after perspective correction with PTLens.

Estimate based on pixel count: The size of the bezel is 47% the size of the display.


outside: 208×143, inside: 186×109

That's a misleading figure. A better way to look at it is that the area is 68% display and 32% bezel and hinge (which your outer rectangle includes). Compare with the T410s, which (by my quick image area analysis) is 73% display and 27% bezel.

The total display area on the T420s seems to be about 6.5% smaller than on the T410s, which is noticeable but not a huge difference.