THE Tseries is better than X series so how about a t300?

T400/410/420 and T500/510/520 series specific matters only
Post Reply
Message
Author
jl123
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 1:14 pm

THE Tseries is better than X series so how about a t300?

#1 Post by jl123 » Tue Feb 01, 2011 5:19 pm

what about it folks? I like the T series better than the X. Its better built and has better crash protection (not a car I know!) than the X, so why can't Lenovo make us a smaller T a, T300? Whats stopping them; I mean its not like they have the X300 anymore, as far I can tell the shrink in size by an inch would be eminently doable, no? thanks, j

comps
Freshman Member
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2011 2:56 pm
Location: Prague, Czech Republic

Re: THE Tseries is better than X series so how about a t300?

#2 Post by comps » Tue Feb 01, 2011 6:42 pm

See T400s / T410s.

jl123
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 1:14 pm

Re: THE Tseries is better than X series so how about a t300?

#3 Post by jl123 » Tue Feb 01, 2011 7:03 pm

400s, no, I think many of us would prefer a smaller machine than that. Even a 12 inch screen. Not 4 pounds, more like 3 lbs. And again I want the new technology of the t-series not the old tech of the x. It really would be little problem for lenovo to engineer. j

penartur
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 442
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:05 am
Location: Russia, Moscow

Re: THE Tseries is better than X series so how about a t300?

#4 Post by penartur » Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:37 am

jl123 wrote:400s, no, I think many of us would prefer a smaller machine than that. Even a 12 inch screen. Not 4 pounds, more like 3 lbs. And again I want the new technology of the t-series not the old tech of the x. It really would be little problem for lenovo to engineer. j
What do you mean by "old tech of the X"?
The only differences between the same generations X and T tech i can see (e.g. X201 vs. T410/T510) are:
1) There is no ultrabay in X (the reason being small footprint and weight
2) There is no discrete/hybrid GPU option in X (the reason being small footprint and weight and low power consumption).
3) There are only low-voltage CPUs in -s models of X (e.g. X201s) (the reason being even smaller weight and even lower power consumption). However, you can always go with the regular model (e.g. X201), it has pretty the same CPU features as T410/T510 has.
What do you want from "smaller machine with a 12 inch screen and more like 3lbs"? Top notch GPU and ultrabay with DVD burner?
Lifebook P1032 (1024*600 8.9") => Averatec AV1000 (WXGA 10.6") => Kohjinsha SH6 (1024*600 7.2") => Sharp M4000 (WXGA 13.3") => X200-AFFS, dead => X200s-AFFS, later -PVA => X220 4290RV5 + Intel 310 80GB, T420s 4173KSU + FHD IPS + Sandisk Z400s 128GB

miscthree
Freshman Member
Posts: 59
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 11:04 am
Location: New York NY

THE Tseries is better than X series so how about a t300?

#5 Post by miscthree » Sun Feb 06, 2011 5:50 pm

I'd love to see a T310, 13.3" WXGA+ LED, 160GB SSD, ultrabay, with optional discrete graphics, with eSATA port and HDMI out.

Colonel O'Neill
ThinkPadder
ThinkPadder
Posts: 1359
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 8:03 am
Location: Vancouver

Re: THE Tseries is better than X series so how about a t300?

#6 Post by Colonel O'Neill » Sun Feb 06, 2011 7:11 pm

SSD's should be optional like they've always been. Discrete graphics is a bit hard to cram into a 13.3" without serious thermal issue considerations.

DisplayPort is more useful, but I have yet to see something exploit it to the fullest (where are the USB hubs over DP monitors?!?). HDMI's a bit unlikely for the T-series as a business line.
W520: i7-2720QM, Q2000M at 1080/688/1376, 21GB RAM, 500GB + 750GB HDD, FHD screen & MB168B+
X61T: L7500, 3GB RAM, 500GB HDD, XGA screen, Ultrabase
Y3P: 5Y70, 8GB RAM, 256GB SSD, QHD+ screen

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “ThinkPad T400/410/420 and T500/510/520 Series”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests