Thinkpads Forum

pianowizard wrote:
On the bright side, in recent years it has been easier to view two windows side by side.

I would like to know if you actually do this, and if so what sort of applications you put side by side and at what width. It may sound like a stupid question, but I know you are very experienced and I feel like I could be missing out on productive ways of using screen width.

pianowizard wrote:
But please remember how this discussion started: we were trying to help Lenovo by finding *currently available* panels, because Lenovo probably wants to save money (as they always do!) by adopting panels that other manufacturers are already using. 15.0" 4:3 and 14.0" 4:3 are long gone. 14.42" 3:2 doesn't exist. 15.4" 16:10 is viable though, since the current 15-inch MacBook Pro is 15.4" 2880x1800. I would love to have a Wintel laptop with this exact panel. I would use it without any scaling because I can handle 220.53 DPI reasonably well, assuming the panel is very high quality. A TN panel or dim IPS panel with this resolution would be a disaster.

That is one way to go, but Lenovo's problem is that it is in a cut-throat war of commoditisation whereas at one time the Thinkpad was something that business was prepared to pay a significant premium for. I would have thought that the retro Thinkpad would be an opportunity to produce a differentiated product that would command such a premium, especially as there must be quite a few people, even those who have never previously used a Thinkpad, who would pay good money for a 4:3 laptop. Enormous numbers of people use a computer mainly for reading and writing, for which 4:3 is ideal.

Clearly, I don't know very much about the economics of screen manufacture, so I could be wrong. On the other hand, the panel might be adopted by other companies - if Lenovo was prepared to underwrite the development costs, perhaps it could recoup that if wider sales ensued.

I totally agree that panel quality is also very important.

tiorapatea wrote:

pianowizard wrote:
On the bright side, in recent years it has been easier to view two windows side by side.

I would like to know if you actually do this, and if so what sort of applications you put side by side and at what width. It may sound like a stupid question, but I know you are very experienced and I feel like I could be missing out on productive ways of using screen width.

I do, a lot of times. When sorting files; two explorer windows side-by-side with each 50% of screen width (win+arrow keys).
And when you do a tutorial in Solidworks, it sets the tutorial description-window to about 1/3th the width of your screen and the actual Solidworks windows to the remaining 2/3th.

I also do it with video and a web browser, with two browsers, with Word and Adobe reader, etc.

jcvjcvjcvjcv wrote: I do, a lot of times. When sorting files; two explorer windows side-by-side with each 50% of screen width (win+arrow keys).
And when you do a tutorial in Solidworks, it sets the tutorial description-window to about 1/3th the width of your screen and the actual Solidworks windows to the remaining 2/3th.

I also do it with video and a web browser, with two browsers, with Word and Adobe reader, etc.

Thanks. It's true that file browsing\organisation is a good application for width. I actually always open Explorer with the "/e" command-line switch to get my folder structure in a separate pane, and you can even run Midnight Commander under Windows if you prefer more customisation.

When I worked as a stock market analyst, I had a nice multi-monitor setup with a Matrox display driver that was very good at snapping windows to arbitrary widths (rather than just half and half as in Windows 7), and the Reuters terminal application also had its own windowing functionality, which was very useful.

I am currently using a 15.4 inch 16:10 laptop, but I can't say I find dual browser windows or text documents that useful except for some occasional side-by-side textual comparison, or for working in multiple views with spreadsheets. I usually find that "I know" what is there more or less, even without looking at both docs simultaneously, and if I really need to do a detailed check, it is usually sufficient to have the width of a 4:3 display, or to put the docs one on top of the other.

I do agree that in special applications where you can dump toolbars, palettes, or subsidiary information in adjacent parts of the screen, then whatever screen you have is good screen - but 4:3 screens tend to be larger by area because they don't stick out as much in any one dimension, which becomes a bit of a limiting factor. EDIT: Now that I think about it, this isn't actually true. If you posit a model of working in which a 4:3 window provides the most useful aspect ratio (e.g. because you find it helpful for reading), then if you also desire subsidiary windows to display other data, then on a 4:3 screen these windows could have a bigger impact on the area of your main window than if you had "spare screen" to the sides of the main window on a wider aspect display. So it would depend on the relative value you attach to the size of your main window compared with your need for subsidiary windows that would determine the optimum aspect ratio. I suppose I find that on laptops the overall screen size is small enough that I tend to prioritise the main window at the expense of other data, whereas when sitting at a desk I definitely want at least one more "thing" to the side of my main window.

You can save yourself the /e hassle.
Go into Explorer, click on Organize/Layout/Navigation pane

tiorapatea wrote:I would like to know if you actually do this, and if so what sort of applications you put side by side and at what width. It may sound like a stupid question, but I know you are very experienced and I feel like I could be missing out on productive ways of using screen width.

Actually, I rarely use laptops, but instead use my main desktop at work most of the time, which has a 40" 3840x2160 monitor flanked by two 27" 2560x1440 monitors -- see http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.php?t=52525 . I routinely have >5 windows in view simultaneously, and feel very crippled if I am forced to see just one window at a time. Growing up with low-resolution CRT monitors, I was used to viewing just one window at a time, but after getting used to "parallel processing" on high-res monitors, I cannot go back to "serial processing". On my Sony laptop (1920x1080) and HP Elitebook (1920x1200), which are barely wide enough to support side-by-side tiling of windows, I can still get some light work done. But my Panasonic laptop is so narrow (1400x1050) that I cannot do any work on it at all, unless I have an external monitor attached.

If Lenovo or anyone else brings back 4:3 laptops, I would be interested only if they are at least 2048x1536. For a while I did have two R50p and one T43p Thinkpads with 15.0" 2048x1536. Multitasking was pretty good on those, although their screens were so dim and dull that they were rather painful to see.

tiorapatea wrote: I would have thought that the retro Thinkpad would be an opportunity to produce a differentiated product (...) Enormous numbers of people use a computer mainly for reading and writing, for which 4:3 is ideal.

Hear, hear. That could work if Lenovo had both the commercial vision and the will to educate the consumers. Alas, this cannot happen with this company as it stands.

RealBlackStuff wrote:You can save yourself the /e hassle.
Go into Explorer, click on Organize/Layout/Navigation pane

Ha! I never noticed that, because I seem to recall about twenty years ago, some version of Windows removed that pane unless you added a command line switch. I have just had it set up as a shortcut ever since.

Of what I know the retro will be a reworked x301 with 16:10, so seems we can just continue dreaming of different rations. Seems Hill wanted to realize his design (the one that started it all) from day 0, so all that polling and asking was generally a scam.
However, I believe when/if this comes out, it will sell so well that it's bound to make them think. Or Think.

evening_hunger wrote:Of what I know the retro will be a reworked x301 with 16:10, so seems we can just continue dreaming of different rations. Seems Hill wanted to realize his design (the one that started it all) from day 0, so all that polling and asking was generally a scam.
However, I believe when/if this comes out, it will sell so well that it's bound to make them think. Or Think.

I wouldn't mind a x301 copy (but with a better screen!). It would be fine with me. Would be way better than anything that is on the market right now.

kony wrote:I wouldn't mind a x301 copy (but with a better screen!).

I wouldn't mind either. The X301 was the last Lenovo Thinkpad that got me excited. If the Retro reincarnation (can we call it "X302"?) weighs 2 - 2.5 lbs and has 2560x1600 resolution (same as the 13.3" Retina Macbook Pro), I would consider upgrading to it from my Sony Pro13. If it weighs under 2 lbs, I wouldn't be interested because to get it so light Lenovo would certainly be cutting lots of corners, like it did to the LaVie Z which is a near disaster. If it weighs over 2.5 lbs, I would hold on to my 2.3 lb Sony. 1920x1200 would be even better than 2560x1600 because I wouldn't have to fiddle with scaling, but since there aren't 13.3" 1920x1200 panels, the chance of the "X302" having one is virtually zero.

kony wrote: I wouldn't mind a x301 copy (but with a better screen!). It would be fine with me. Would be way better than anything that is on the market right now.

+1 on an updated X301

An upgraded X301 (keeping the same materials and design!) but with added docking port would be great. 4:3 looks out of the question at this point, but 16:10 isn't much worse and is more feasible.

To my knowledge, the only 4:3 machine still produced today that does not have measly XGA is the Amrel Rocky RK10 with optional SXGA+ LED display. They also have an optional 17.1" 16:10 WUXGA+ display for their RF10 model. Not sure on display quality, since these are fully rugged machines meant for tough environments, not photo editing. Still, they have impressive (though slightly outdated) specs.

For me, I don't care if it's a 16:9, 16:10, 3:2 or 4:3 screen or whether the keyboard uses a chiclet or scissor mechanism. All I want is the f%^king big delete and esc 7-row layout. That's all I want.

brchan wrote:An upgraded X301 (keeping the same materials and design!)

Careful there. The ThinkPad Retro won´t just be an upgraded X301. It might take heavy inspiration from the X301 design.

For example_ One of the features of the X301 that the Retro won´t offer is a DVD drive. The votes in the polls were clearly speaking against a DVD drive/UltraBay. Also, the screen size might be 14" (built in a 13" frame), 14" was also preferred in the polls.

The more (whether true or false) I hear about this RetroPad, the less I believe that it is going to be a useful machine for business users.
David Hill should change his name to DownHill... same direction as his employer, so why am I not surprised?

RealBlackStuff wrote:David Hill should change his name to DownHill... same direction as his employer, so why am I not surprised?

Or Down's Hill... but I don't want to give in to personal attacks and political incorrectness.

brchan wrote:
To my knowledge, the only 4:3 machine still produced today that does not have measly XGA is the Amrel Rocky RK10 with optional SXGA+ LED display. They also have an optional 17.1" 16:10 WUXGA+ display for their RF10 model. Not sure on display quality, since these are fully rugged machines meant for tough environments, not photo editing. Still, they have impressive (though slightly outdated) specs.

The 4:3 machine weighs 12.13 lbs! It looks pretty rugged though, and is available in black or "NATO green". The SXGA+ option would seem to have a resistive touchscreen, which wouldn't do much for display contrast.

RealBlackStuff wrote:The more (whether true or false) I hear about this RetroPad, the less I believe that it is going to be a useful machine for business users.
David Hill should change his name to DownHill... same direction as his employer, so why am I not surprised?

Well to be fair, the chiclet idea was Sapper's and not Hill's:
http://blog.lenovo.com/en/blog/richard- ... d-keyboard

Apparently IBM rejected the 'island' style chiclets, but Sapper convinced Lenovo it was the way to go.

As for the 6-row layout, it's interesting that all of the ancient ThinkPads sport a 6-row / they went to 7-row when they adopted the space saving keyboard layout. But now Lenovo has devolved it back to a 6-row for some reason... hmmm.... De-evolution = progress?

Methinks David Hill is telling more UNtruth (a.k.a. BS), again!
Sapper NEVER designed chicklet keys, and he certainly also NEVER aspired to have that crippled chicklet key mechanism!
And Sapper also did not come up with those crooked keyboard layout ideas that Hill seems to sprout incessantly!
Down Hill is just doing what HE thinks is nice, NOT what CUSTOMERS think is nice!

I think that Hill is sticking his neck out to bring back at least some of the original ThinkPad DNA.
I don't think anybody else at Lenovo is going to do that.

C'mon guys, he's not the problem at Lenovo.

I agree, he is trying to save the ThinkPad brand from a total damage Lenovo is heading it with every new models. First they have dropped features, now quality.

I think the lack of information about the Retro project is due to internal no support by Lenovo because it is going the exactly opposite way than Lenovo wants.

RealBlackStuff wrote:Methinks David Hill is telling more UNtruth (a.k.a. BS), again!
Sapper NEVER designed chicklet keys, and he certainly also NEVER aspired to have that crippled chicklet key mechanism!
And Sapper also did not come up with those crooked keyboard layout ideas that Hill seems to sprout incessantly!
Down Hill is just doing what HE thinks is nice, NOT what CUSTOMERS think is nice!

Even if it were Sapper who proposed the chiclets design, D. Hill has still been praising it publicly. So he's guilty as well.

bit_twiddler wrote:C'mon guys, he's not the problem at Lenovo.

When you do damage control on behalf on Lenovo and tell people to embrace chiclets because it's change for the better (lol), you are very much part of the problem. Collabos must be trialed and D. Hill won't escape the Thinkpadders' judgement.

Somehow I doubt that David Hill is proposing a chicklet keyboard for the Retro Thinkpad.
If he is, then he should be committed to an institution.

Speaking of cr*p, have any of you seen the new 12" Macbook? The main design goal seems
to have been to make it flatter than a pancake, you have to order all of the RAM and mass storage
that you think you'll ever need up front, because everything is basically glued/soldered together!

http://www.geek.com/apple/2015-macbook- ... t-1620427/

bit_twiddler wrote: C'mon guys, he's not the problem at Lenovo.

While Mr. Hill himself is not the problem, he's definitely a part of it. A lot of harm has been done to the ThinkPad brand on his watch.

The way that the LCD "election process" was rigged from the start has left me with a very bitter taste in my mouth, and I know that I'm not the only one.

They'll have to come up with one heck of an impressive Retro-machine to wash that one down.

As for Mr. Hill, my take is that he's trying to save - or reinvigorate - his own design legacy and I wish him success on that route although I've become incredibly skeptical regarding the whole venture.

bit_twiddler wrote:Speaking of cr*p, have any of you seen the new 12" Macbook? The main design goal seems
to have been to make it flatter than a pancake, you have to order all of the RAM and mass storage
that you think you'll ever need up front, because everything is basically glued/soldered together!

http://www.geek.com/apple/2015-macbook- ... t-1620427/

Usually, we shouldn't care what apple is trying to do,
but the sad truth is that soon enough the rest of computer manufacturers are going to copy this 'cr*p'.

wouldn't 'real people' prefer to add few millimeters to add a little maintainability and maybe A SECOND USB PORT, or even a dedicated charger port

Is there any single piece of information about the Retro project progress except this one http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.ph ... 86#p776986

I heard that Lenovo is prototyping the device internally and with their manufacturing partners, which means that a release is highly likely. No idea when though, but it might be next year.

If that information is correct they must have chosen the screen aspect ratio format. Would they bother to share the information ? I remember the project supposed to be "open" but I can not find the statement we could refer to get some information whether it is going the right direction or not (as everyrthing else Lenovo do now).

Whenever I see articles/headlines on how thin the newest Macbooks are, this Thinkpad X300 advertisement always comes to mind.

It's like a big middle finger to Steve Jobs and whatever he was smoking.

This is a favorite video of mine too.

The problem with it is, that Lenovo has broken their promises in this advertisement later on.
e.g. IIRC the flexible UltraBay is not a granted feature in a Thinkpad anymore,
same for DockingStations (without cable), etc.....

Ultrabay isn't as necessary anymore today with current technoloy. People rarely use DVD drives and mechanical HDDs. With it gone, the laptop flexes less, and you can still design the the unit to fit multiple msata or pcie ssds into motherboard under the same area. The only real drawback is that you can't swap in a battery anymore, but they never lasted very long anyway.

The problem with it is, that Lenovo has broken their promises in this advertisement later on.
e.g. IIRC the flexible UltraBay is not a granted feature in a Thinkpad anymore,
same for DockingStations (without cable), etc.....

That's what you get with visionless leadership -- follow the leader (or popular one), chase the money. *sigh*

On the opposite end of the stick, there are leaders who vehemently stick to their vision even after it becomes obvious that it isn't a good one.