Thinkpadders, do NOT Rejoice, WEEP and/or DESPAIR!

[Summilux]

Admit it all of you - this whining about 16:9 has been going on forever, and will go on forever, but if Lenovo hadn't done the one thing they really should not have done - kill off the classic keyboard - this thread would never have happened. The discussion about the need for a "retro" project would never have happened. The special "post-classic Thinkpad" section on this forum would never have happened. There would be no need for it.

There were always discussions about bringing 4:3 back from the dead. There were always calls for 4:3 Thinkpads, and people clinging to their older 4:3 machines. Maybe there wouldn't have been a dedicated forum section such as this one, but the righteous whining would have continued to permeate the other Thinkpad discussion spaces. So it isn't honest to make it as though Lenovo could have shut us down by throwing us the meager keyboard bone.

Everyone knows what Lenovo's worst sin since the acquisition of the brand was - now they seem to, at least partially, undo it. I'd say it's more "yay" than "nay".

It's a matter of context. This would have been good news if the keyboard had been brought back right after the controversial *30 generation. Instead, the generation after that was even more controversial.

And just when we thought that there was a slight possibility that Lenovo had come to their sense, started being innovative by releasing a user-friendly design (proper keyboard, better screen ratio, status LEDs, etc.), no, even this was too hard for them.

So seeing that Lenovo repaired their mistake is one way too look at it. But that's not the complete picture. Another way to look at it, is seeing that it took them four generations (!) to repair this mistake and that two years after the initial Classic announcement, all they would give us is a mere keyboard.

When Google was selling its Pixel laptop since 2013 and Microsoft had been selling thousands of Surface 3 since 2015 - the very year the Classic project was announced - meaning there was definite availability and wide acceptance for 3:2 screens. A screen ratio that many 4:3 believers would have settled for.

So what's Lenovo excuse for not delivering more than an old keyboard design (which nobody asked them to mess up with in the first place) after all this time, all these surveys and all the products which competitors were releasing ? What's Lenovo excuse for blatantly lacking ambition ? There's none. Grasping at "costs" only goes so far.

Lenovo showed yet again that they have no vision and little commercial skills beyond cutting costs and copying Apple. Considering this, it certainly isn't unfair to bash them for their incompetence and how they've ruine the Thinkpads.

[dr_st]

So seeing that Lenovo repaired their mistake is one way too look at it. But that's not the complete picture. Another way to look at it, is seeing that it took them four generations (!) to repair this mistake and that two years after the initial Classic announcement, all they would give us is a mere keyboard.

It's not a matter of completeness. Unless you worked in a corporation as big as Lenovo for some time, you probably don't understand a lot of the nuances regarding how these corporations function, so your picture would also be incomplete.

As an end-user and a potential customer it's a matter of choosing what to focus on - "glass half-empty or glass half-full" kind of thing.

When Google was selling its Pixel laptop since 2013 and Microsoft had been selling thousands of Surface 3 since 2015 - the very year the Classic project was announced - meaning there was definite availability and wide acceptance for 3:2 screens. A screen ratio that many 4:3 believers would have settled for.

Would you have also settled for <11" screen size for your dream retro Thinkpad? Because that's what those tablets you quoted give you. IIRC, screen size was also one of the things the survey asked about. My feeling (and I bet the surveys reflected that) is that a mainstream-sized 16:9 screen would better suit the needs of most people than a tiny 3:2 (BTW, how would you fit a classic keyboard on a 10.8" 3:2 screen exactly? )

There's always the option of securing an exclusive screen component, but it just does not make sense to do it for a one-of-many product, with uncertain market future. Lenovo is not Apple that sells huge volumes of the same product with very little variety. The cost would be too high, the product would be dead-in-the-water in terms of sales, and then folks that share your point of view would be the first to complain that Lenovo willingly failed the project.

[Thinkpad4by3]

You can write and defend all you like, but the facts remain:
- switching over to 16:9 is the most stupid thing ANY laptop manufacturer could have ever done, and
- killing the classic keyboard is the most stupid thing Lenovo has ever done (so far).

Precisely. So now Lenovo is undoing exactly the most stupid thing it has ever done. What more do you want them to do? Fix the flaws of the entire industry? Solve the problem of world hunger?

Admit it all of you - this whining about 16:9 has been going on forever, and will go on forever, but if Lenovo hadn't done the one thing they really should not have done - kill off the classic keyboard - this thread would never have happened. The discussion about the need for a "retro" project would never have happened. The special "post-classic Thinkpad" section on this forum would never have happened. There would be no need for it.

Everyone knows what Lenovo's worst sin since the acquisition of the brand was - now they seem to, at least partially, undo it. I'd say it's more "yay" than "nay".

But "being disappointed" is different from acting like this is an insult or anything like that. Its just a compromise and still a victory for ThinkPad fans. And a possible opportunity to influence Lenovo. So I can´t act like this is the worst thing ever, which is what some people do.

Very well put.

If this project is a commercial success, it will influence Lenovo to listen more to the die-hard fans of the brand. And if it is what it appears to be, it's still going to be the best Thinkpad for a die-hard Thinkpad fan since *30 era which could be modded with a classic keyboard. People should be a little more positive.

Thinkpads are known for their beautiful screens, *cough* A31p *cough*

Uhm... Thinkpads, both in IBM and early Lenovo era were known for... a handful (on specific models only) of good-quality IPS LCDs (the best thing was being IPS at all, spec-wise they were nothing special), and a packload of the worst quality TN+Film sh!t.

Honestly, I wish that this entire project was never started. And that's not how I felt in the beginning. At all.

Sorry that I have to express my disagreement with you, my friend, but look it from my a different point of view: Thanks to this project it seems that I will finally have something to upgrade to. Ideal or not, it will still be a lot better than anything else, and it's a laptop with modern hardware that can last me 5-7 more years. And I am sure I am not the only Thinkpad fan that feels the same.

While you are right on the 16:10 part, why dont we take a little trip over to the 3:2 section. Also, about the TN awful panels, they are still some of the better panels. Compare the T60p 14.1" panel to the X240 TN panel and its a world of difference. Add the W700s panel to that mix, and is TN so bad now? Look at an HP stream next to a T42 and IBMs panels suddenly dont seem so bad.

[Puppy]

Would you have also settled for <11" screen size for your dream retro Thinkpad?

Why? MS Surface has 13.5" screen. Lenovo still reports its #1 PC market position. If Microsoft can, why not much bigger Lenovo?

But the product is as is. I would focus on another issues Lenovo might kill it by more than we can imagine right now.

1. limited availability and configuration options, especially in regions where fixed preconfigurations are available only.
2. insane pricing.
3. no WQHD display option because base T470 don't have it. This would be deal braker for me since FHD on 14" is too low for my taste when text anti-aliasing is forced.
4. technical issues like typical beta BIOS present on early P series.
5. limited offer for short period of time, then it dissapears at all.

[dr_st]

Also, about the TN awful panels, they are still some of the better panels. Compare the T60p 14.1" panel to the X240 TN panel and its a world of difference. Add the W700s panel to that mix, and is TN so bad now? Look at an HP stream next to a T42 and IBMs panels suddenly dont seem so bad.

I've worked with Thinkpad TN panels here and there. Including the T60 14". And the T410 14". Both are pretty bad. Worse than many contemporary TNs. Certainly nothing special. Not as bad as the X300/X301 panel, but nothing is. Dunno how bad the X240 TN is. At least the X240 has IPS options.

Why? MS Surface has 13.5" screen.

Whoops. Missed that one. Well, let's hope that the first generation of the retro Thinkpad is successful, and then we can expect this one in the second gen.

But I guess you already decided that the product is going to fail because of

1. limited availability and configuration options, especially in regions where fixed preconfigurations are available only.
2. insane pricing.
3. no WQHD display option. This would be killer for me since FHD on 14" is too low for my taste when text anti-aliasing is forced.
4. technical issues like typical beta BIOS present on early P series.
5. limited offer for short period of time, then it dissapears at all.

So why bother?

[Puppy]

But I guess you already decided that the product is going to fail because of

Not yet. But I can inagine Lenovo can do all these things

[Summilux]

It's not a matter of completeness. Unless you worked in a corporation as big as Lenovo for some time, you probably don't understand a lot of the nuances regarding how these corporations function, so your picture would also be incomplete.

As an end-user and a potential customer it's a matter of choosing what to focus on - "glass half-empty or glass half-full" kind of thing.

In my opinion and as an end-user, a company should be judged about how it treats us and what it delivers. Are there talented and visionary engineers working on great projects whose objectives are unfortunately countered by the top "managers"' limited vision ? Well, tough luck. But in the end it doesn't make a difference to us, because we still aren't seeing proper laptops being released on the market. As I said earlier, smart engineers should flee the sinking ship that is Lenovo and launch their own company.

Would you have also settled for <11" screen size for your dream retro Thinkpad? Because that's what those tablets you quoted give you. IIRC, screen size was also one of the things the survey asked about. My feeling (and I bet the surveys reflected that) is that a mainstream-sized 16:9 screen would better suit the needs of most people than a tiny 3:2 (BTW, how would you fit a classic keyboard on a 10.8" 3:2 screen exactly? )

You're telling me you wouldn't fancy a modern Thinkpad 240 or PC110 ?!

There's always the option of securing an exclusive screen component, but it just does not make sense to do it for a one-of-many product, with uncertain market future. Lenovo is not Apple that sells huge volumes of the same product with very little variety.

As we have seen above, both prosumers and mainstream consumers do accept the 3:2 screen format. Now if one considers this insight, why couldn't Lenovo reorganise its lineup so as to offer at least one 3:2 model in each segment - tablets, Ideapads, Thinkpads ? With that they would start having respectable volume orders.

And that's not all just for the sake of equipping the Classic project with a proper screen. Does Lenovo not want to compete against Microsoft's tablets and brand new Surface Laptop ? Wouldn't offering 3:2 screens be a supplementary way to attract those users who have come to like this format ?

[RealBlackStuff]

Which then bears the question, WHY does Lenovo have to waste time and money on a horrendous amount of series of laptop models, that begin with numbers and almost every letter of the alphabet?
100
11
13
2-in1
300
700
A
B
E
Edge
G
Helix
Ideapad
K
L
LaVie
Legion
Lenovo
N
P
S
T
Twist
U
V
W
X
Y
Yoga
Z
And many of the above are made as Ideapad or Thinkpad series starting with the same letter?
Utter and total waste of money and showing also an utter lack of brains!

[Summilux]

Which then bears the question, WHY does Lenovo have to waste time and money on a horrendous amount of series of laptop models, that begin with numbers and almost every letter of the alphabet?

Utter and total waste of money and showing also an utter lack of brains!

According to the Chinese link above, Lenovo's mission is to make Thinkpads cheapers so that anyone can buy them. Put this in parallel with a popular marketing concept, whose the idea is to occupy every single segment and sub-segment of the market. All this supposedly helps getting market shares and customers.

But that's pure bollocks to me Just make a few of models at different price points and focus on delivering quality stuff instead.

[Ibthink]

Why? MS Surface has 13.5" screen. Lenovo still reports its #1 PC market position. If Microsoft can, why not much bigger Lenovo?

I wonder why people continue to bring in Lenovos size here. Lenovos size doesn´t help in this case.

Economics of scale only work if you have many models that share the same components. But there is not a single 3:2 14" laptop on the market, let alone one made by Lenovo. Lenovos size helps them to buy components cheaper, but only components that can be shared across many different models, such as 15.6" FHD screens that are shared between different machines - the P51 can use the same display as a gaming-notebook like the Legion Y520 or the E570. That drives down costs.

What does not drive down costs is getting a special, unique screen made for a single model. That is expensive, very expensive. Especially when the product is not a high-volume product, which the ThinkPad 25 is not.

I think I also already explained to you that Microsoft has a different business model and interest in the PC market. Microsoft has a very small PC lineup with three mobile PCs total. All of them expensive premium devices and all targeted at the mass market. For Microsoft, neither marketshare nor high profits from the PC market are important. They make their money elsewhere, the PC market is a hobby for them. Apple is kinda the same. Lenovo is totally different, having a huge lineup of different PCs that target all kinds of price points and different target groups, just like HP or Dell. They are mainly competing on price (which is by the way the key reason why IBM left this market, they didn´t want to compete in such a difficult low-margin market).

ThinkPad 25 was never a product that was going to target the mass-market, its made for a small group of people. This has all kinds of implications. One is that you have a small volume of production, which makes things much more expensive - which also means the price has to be much higher for it to be profitable, especially if you make it completely unique. For that, you need a bigger mass of possible buyers.

I haven´t even studied economics, but this is just basic, logical economical stuff.

As we have seen above, both prosumers and mainstream consumers do accept the 3:2 screen format.

Indeed they do. But so far, they also still accept 16:9 screens. And 16:9 has advantages over 3:2 for some use-cases, mainly for multimedia but also gaming. Or working with two windows side by side. So things are not clear-cut here.

3:2 is an interesting future prospect, but it is not there yet, mainly because the screen manufacturers still want to sell 16:9 screens. In the Convertible segment, it became clear that people prefer it over 16:9, because it makes much more sense for a Tablet. But things are not so clear in the laptop market and thus far, 3:2 has not become a standard in any screen sizes bigger than 12". In the 13" size range, there have been 3 devices from major manufacturers so far with 3:2 screens.

The tipping point could be if Lenovo, Dell and HP would really loose sales in the Premium segment due to 3:2 displays on the Surface Laptop or Huawei Matebook X. Then I can see them do premium consumer models with 3:2 and maybe later 3:2 business notebooks. But so far, it does not seem like they have really lost sales.

Which then bears the question, WHY does Lenovo have to waste time and money on a horrendous amount of series of laptop models, that begin with numbers and almost every letter of the alphabet?

Because they are not a niche manufacturer and cover almost every single segment - that is necessary if you want to be biggest PC manufacturer. HP is their main competitor and they have a big lineup too, just like Samsung in the smartphone market.

[Summilux]

I think I also already explained to you that Microsoft has a different business model and interest in the PC market. Microsoft has a very small PC lineup with three mobile PCs total. All of them expensive premium devices and all targeted at the mass market. For Microsoft, neither marketshare nor high profits from the PC market are important. They make their money elsewhere, the PC market is a hobby for them. Apple is kinda the same. Lenovo is totally different, having a huge lineup of different PCs that target all kinds of price points and different target groups, just like HP or Dell. They are mainly competing on price (which is by the way the key reason why IBM left this market, they didn´t want to compete in such a difficult low-margin market).

It is possible to compete on both price and quality within the same group.
Renault (mainstream) does this with Dacia (very price sensitive). Nissan (mainstream) with Infinity (premium), and Toyota (mainstream) with Lexus (premium).

Thus Lenovo could have kept the Thinkpads as high quality, higher margin products ; and cut all the costs it wants with its Ideapads. And if they like segmentation so much, they could even have made the Ideapads a mid-market brand, sharing some components with the premium Thinkpads (so better economies of scale). And the cheapest stuff would go to the entry-level Cheapads.

Also it should be remembered that higher profits in the consumer electronics industry are usually generated by premium products. That would be one more reason for Lenovo to be serious with their Thinkpads.

ThinkPad 25 was never a product that was going to target the mass-market, its made for a small group of people.

That's why Lenovo could have taken this as an opportunity to reflect not only on the Thinkpads, but on their entire lineup of computers. And make changes accordingly. That would have been a real significant event.

But so far, they also still accept 16:9 screens. And 16:9 has advantages over 3:2 for some use-cases, mainly for multimedia but also gaming. Or working with two windows side by side. So things are not clear-cut here.

3:2 is an interesting future prospect, but it is not there yet, mainly because the screen manufacturers still want to sell 16:9 screens.

I quite agree with you on these things. But I have yet again a problem with Lenovo's attitude.

3:2 is generally better for productivity. If Thinkpads are business laptops, it means productivity should come first and foremost. Therefore shouldn't Lenovo offer at least one Thinkpad model with a 3:2 screen ? And in which case, shouldn't Lenovo throw its weight during the negotiations between computer OEMs and display manufacturers ?

To me this just sounds like the logical thing to do.

Because they are not a niche manufacturer and cover almost every single segment - that is necessary if you want to be biggest PC manufacturer. HP is their main competitor and they have a big lineup too, just like Samsung in the smartphone market.

About this, I would like to point out that according to this link, Apple with its restricted lineup was the second biggest smartphone vendor by units shipped and market shares, after Samsung. There's a notable gap between Samsung (1st) and Apple (2nd), but the gap is huge between Apple (2nd) and LG (6th) - even though LG uses the same stragegy as Samsung.

So the fill-every-segment strategy is not the perfect blueprint to become the leading manufacturer.

[lophiomys]

re: "Lenovo would want to be the biggest..."
That is why I am wondering, why Lenovo is neglecting the pro-sumer niche at premium prices with dedicated intent. After all Lenovo has actually bought the Thinkpad brand. Probably Lenovo lost the engineering capabilities (in hardware and software) and the reliable business connections to crucial external suppliers. Obviously Lenovo cannot buy nor produce by themselves a good 4:3 LCD during 10 years.

[Summilux]

After all Lenovo has actually bought the Thinkpad brand. Probably Lenovo lost the engineering capabilities (in hardware and software) and the reliable business connections to crucial external suppliers.

Neh, they bought all the assets, including the engineering team in Yamato (JP). Competencies are still there (or were, until a few years ago). The problem is with Lenovo's management

[Ibthink]

It is possible to compete on both price and quality within the same group. [...] Thus Lenovo could have kept the Thinkpads as high quality, higher margin products

Yes, you can do both, thats why Lenovo has Premium PCs these days, both on the consumer side (Lenovo Yoga 920) as well as on the business (X1 Yoga, X1 Carbon, to a lesser extend P51, P71) side. I think the Yoga 900 line is the most likely Lenovo laptop line that could implement 3:2 first.

Keeping the ThinkPads high-prized as under IBM was completely impossible, it would have meant continuing to loosing money.

ThinkPads are business products. Businesses care about cost, very much. 10 $ less means a company saves 10,000 $ if it buys 1,000 laptops. So ThinkPads, as business products, have to compete on price. There is no alternative if you want to make money in selling to businesses. Today, ThinkPads make money, unlike when they still were owned by IBM in the early 2000s.

We can actually thank the Ultrabook trend, Smartphones, Tablets and Apple for re-invigorating the prosumer PC market, which made new high-end models like the X1 Carbon possible. This trend came from the consumer market into the business market. This is what consumerization is.

3:2 is generally better for productivity. If Thinkpads are business laptops, it means productivity should come first and foremost. Therefore shouldn't Lenovo offer at least one Thinkpad model with a 3:2 screen ? And in which case, shouldn't Lenovo throw its weight during the negotiations between computer OEMs and display manufacturers ?

The manufacturers know that taller aspect ratios are better for many use cases, thats why they did insist in 2010 that 16:10 production continues in 14.1" and 12.1" for one more year.

But business customers don´t care. They don´t boycott 16.9, just like they don´t care if the screen has 1366x768 or 1920x1080. So why should the manufacturers take a risk with 3:2? This just means that the device becomes more expensive - which in turn costs sales, because companies will just buy the cheaper 3:2 alternative.

If companies actually cared, 4:3 would have never been discontinued. But they didn´t and so 16:10 was adopted and then 16:9. The display-manufacturers have a strong interest in there being only one screen format, because that saves them money, And they don´t need the laptop market - producing laptop screens isn´t very profitable because its so low margin, producing screens for TVs and Smartphones is more profitable. This means that PC-manufacturers are in a weak position in negotiations, they need the screen manufacturers, not the other way around.

About this, I would like to point out that according to this link, Apple with its restricted lineup was the second biggest smartphone vendor by units shipped and market shares, after Samsung. There's a notable gap between Samsung (1st) and Apple (2nd), but the gap is huge between Apple (2nd) and LG (6th) - even though LG uses the same stragegy as Samsung.

So the fill-every-segment strategy is not the perfect blueprint to become the leading manufacturer.

Apple is a special case, because they re-invented this category of device with the iPhone. Their brand recognition is strong. They have a fanatical following who pays almost any price and they also have another advantage: User lock-in. Apple has its own operating system, which locks in users into their ecosystem and thus makes them less likely to buy a product of a competitor.

So you can´t really compare Apple with Lenovo or the Smartphone market with the PC market. Its too different. Smartphones are not low-margin, they also are not under a stranglehold of two companies like the PC market always was (Microsoft and Intel).

There is one significant but also forgotten product which almost no one remembers: The Thinkpad 800-Series. Powered by Power PC and not Intel x86 CPUs. If this would have been a success, Intels monopoly would have been broken. But it was a failure and so Intel continued to reap the profits in the PC market. This is very significant: The Smartphone market is dominated by ARM, not Intel x86. ARM is an architecture open to all manufacturers, so Apple actually produces its own CPUs. They don´t have to depend on Intel or Qualcomm for that.

[Puppy]

The display-manufacturers have a strong interest in there being only one screen format, because that saves them money

Oh yes, that's why Microsoft is able to deliver 3:2 devices for a long time

[Ibthink]

Oh yes, that's why Microsoft is able to deliver 3:2 devices for a long time

So you still don´t understand the difference between standard screens that are ready-made by the screen manufacturers (such as the countless HD panels) and screens specifically and specially made for one manufacturer on a special order? Of course, every display-manufacturer is happy to fulfill a order of special panels for a much higher price.

But what I am talking about is the standard. Having two standards raises the cost. So the screen manufacturers want to avoid it whenever possible, which is understandable. Just one example with the difference between standard and non-standard:

Standard: 12" panels / 3:2 Format - used by many different manufacturers, including Acer, Lenovo and HP

Non-Standard: 12.3" panels / 3:2 Format - used by Microsoft

Standard panels are whats interesting for ThinkPads, non-standard panels are not. Until now, there are no standard 3:2 display-sizes above 12" (which is for detachables), as far as I know at least. Microsoft has 13.5" in the Surface Book, Huawei 13.3" in the Matebook X.

[ajkula66]

Of course, every display-manufacturer is happy to make special panels for a much higher price. But what I am talking about is the standard.

Well, wasn't the Retro supposed to be special in more ways than just one?

Let me be the devil's advocate for a few moments here:

1) If all that we're getting is a T470 with a classic keyboard and a fancy logo, I'd expect to pay $100 more than the standard T470 of the matching specs is listed at.

2) Panasonic makes a couple of 16:10 panels for their Japan-only systems, 10" and 12" I believe. Lenovo has bought panels from them in the past (IPS 3K certainly and possibly others) so why not order a "special" panel for a "special" ThinkPad that we're likely to be charged a "special" price for? A 14" 16:10 IPS sporting a unique 1680x1050 resolution would most certainly be a great tribute to Mr. Hill's X30* brainchild. Now for something like that Lenovo could justifiably charge a premium when compared to the standard T470.

The polls were clear: next to no one wanted 16:9, even with the entire charade of "yes we'll include the 4:3 as an option (so we split the anti-16:9 vote) but don't count on getting it".

So, in the end, what was supposed to be a spiritual successor to X30* series ended up being just another "meh" system after 2.5 years of deceit, smoke and mirrors.

[Thinkpad4by3]

Who is complaining(majorly) about the X62. No one. Would a 12" 3:2 be that bad?

[Ibthink]

@ajkula66,

10" and 12" 16:10 panels are still being made for Tablets, since years actually. So Panasonic likely uses one of those panels. Lenovo uses one too, for the Miix 510, which is a Surface style detachable.

With a 14" 16:10 panel, a new chassis would have to be made, which raises costs immensely. I have a question for you: Would you buy a 3500 $ machine with a 14" 16:10 panel? After all, its not what you want, your preference is 15" - 17" and 4:3 or at least 3:2. You have made clear before that an X300 (which by the way was not David Hills wish, he wanted a new ThinkPad Butterfly instead of the X300) inspired model wasn´t what you want.

This represents another problem: Even if Lenovo goes in for a risk and produces a unique, very expensive machine, it still won´t make everyone happy. Who will pay 3500 $ for a less than perfect machine? There are significant portions of ThinkPad fans who wanted a 12" system and some who wanted 15", some 4:3 or 3:2 (or even 16:9), some wanted Quad-Core CPUs and some Dual-Core ULV etc.

Whereas the ThinkPad 25 may be a worse compromise. But it will be much more affordable at the same time.

The polls were clear: next to no one wanted 16:9

Thats an assumption, we still don´t actually know what people voted for in that poll. So it might be true that 16:9 lost big time or it might be very close, we can only guess. 20 % also voted for the 6 row instead of the 7 row layout.

Who is complaining(majorly) about the X62. No one. Would a 12" 3:2 be that bad?

12" was the least preferred display size in the polls.

[pianowizard]

Would a 12" 3:2 be that bad?

Not at all. In fact, I love the 12" 1920x1280 display on my HP detachable. I even started a whole thread about it: viewtopic.php?f=58&t=124379

12" was the least preferred display size in the polls.

Why did Lenovo listen to that poll but not the other ones?

I still don't understand why Lenovo seems to have done all the things they could think of to disappoint us as much as possible. For instance, let's look at this photo again:



Why cover up the screen? Covering up the screen made some (most?) of us expect it to be a pleasant surprise, e.g. a 3:2 aspect ratio, so of course we were super disappointed to learn that it's a 16:9 shortscreen.

[Ibthink]

I love the 12" 1920x1280 display on my HP detachable [...] a 16:9 shortscreen.

The funny thing with 12" 3:2 is that its actually less tall than 14" 16:9: http://www.displaywars.com/14-inch-16x9-vs-12-inch-3x2

Choosing 12" 3:2 also means choosing a smaller, cramped keyboard,

Why did Lenovo listen to that poll but not the other ones?

Why should that even be a question? There is no reason at all to not do a 14" model if thats what most people chose.

What makes more sense: People chose a 14" 16:10 screen. If you can´t/won´t do that for whatever reason, do you do a 12" 3:2 screen or a 14" 16:9? Lenovo still wants to sell this thing.

[ajkula66]

@ajkula66,

10" and 12" 16:10 panels are still being made for Tablets, since years actually. So Panasonic likely uses one of those panels. Lenovo uses one too, for the Miix 510, which is a Surface style detachable.

No sir. I haven't seen a 10" tablet with a 1920x1200 IPS LCD, and that's what the smaller of the Panasonics that I'm referring to sports. I know for a fact that they make their own panels. And that Lenovo was a customer of theirs on at least one occasion in not-so-distant past.

With a 14" 16:10 panel, a new chassis would have to be made, which raises costs immensely. I have a question for you: Would you buy a 3500 $ machine with a 14" 16:10 panel? After all, its not what you want, your preference is 15" - 17" and 4:3 or at least 3:2. You have made clear before that an X300 (which by the way was not David Hills wish, he wanted a new ThinkPad Butterfly instead of the X300) inspired model wasn´t what you want.

I see no reason why such a system would command a $3.5K price. This is not 2002 anymore. But to answer your question in a slightly different way: while I can't say for a fact whether I would shell out $3K+ for a 14" 16:10 Retro, it's fairly certain that I won't be putting out *any* money for what's on the table right now. I knew that they were not going to come out with a workstation - which would've been my preference as you correctly point out - but I was willing to compromise to a certain degree as long as the end product offered *something* that was not just another boring run-of-the-mill system.

Whereas the ThinkPad 25 may be a worse compromise. But it will be much more affordable at the same time.

Affordability - within reason - is never a top concern for myself. I buy things to use them until they can no longer perform, be it jeans or audio systems or guitars or laptops. I expect to pay top dollar for a top shelf single malt. But that's me.

Thats an assumption, we still don´t actually know what people voted for in that poll. So it might be true that 16:9 lost big time or it might be very close, we can only guess.

LOL. I don't have time to go through all the old Retro-related threads - presuming that they still exist in the first place - but when even you don't deny that 16:9 lost, that's good enough for me.

[Ibthink]

I haven't seen a 10" tablet with a 1920x1200 IPS LCD

Lenovo made one not too long ago: https://www.notebookcheck.net/Lenovo-Th ... 349.0.html There are countless 10,1" Android Tablets still on the market today that sport 1920x1200 screens. Of course, it is possible that Panasonic uses their own panels, after all, they can make them if they want.

I see no reason why such a system would command a $3.5K price

Very small volume + high development costs = high price

To cover all the development expenses for such a model (which would require custom & unique everything), that price seems very realistic to me if you want it in an actually good config. A model like the W700/W701ds sold slightly less than 100,000 units in roughly three years and still barely covered development costs (at least thats what I heard from someone I do trust). And that was actually a very expensive model.

LOL. I don't have time to go through all the old Retro-related threads - presuming that they still exist in the first place - but when even you don't deny that 16:9 lost, that's good enough for me.

You shouldn´t presume that I know the poll result, because I actually don´t know. So I am in the dark on this just like you.

[ajkula66]

Very small volume + high development costs = high price

Let's not pretend that such a system would have to be designed from scratch, because it wouldn't.

A model like the W700/W701ds sold slightly less than 100,000 units in roughly three years and still barely covered development costs (at least thats what I heard from someone I do trust). And that was actually a very expensive model.

Apples and oranges, really. Not the same target market by any stretch of imagination, or price range for that fact. Not to mention that they tried to compete with HP and Dell whose workstations offered immeasurably better LCDs and more GPU options which are very important for the market that these systems were aimed at. Most people saw dual screens as no more than a gimmick...

But all of that is really beside the point. W70* are just a memory now.

And my brand loyalty only goes so far - whether one is talking about ThinkPads, Gibsons or Citroens - all of which would need to re-visit their roots like Jaguar did in order to get my business again.

[Thinkpad4by3]

And my brand loyalty only goes so far - whether one is talking about ThinkPads, Gibsons or Citroens - all of which would need to re-visit their roots like Jaguar did in order to get my business again.

I absolutely agree.Gone were the days that Thinkpads were completely innovative. They were the first to go black in an age dominated by beige. First to offer a good speaker system and a CD-ROM drive. How about all the keyboards that did everything from tilt automatically to fold automatically, to peeling a banana automatically. Why can't Thinkpads just be a boat that breaks the floor when dropped, offer a replaceable hard drive just by flipping up the keyboard, remove every battery in under 1 minute, and most of all, KNOW WHEN THE BATTERY IS CHARGED WITHOUT BOOTING IT!!

[kony]

And my brand loyalty only goes so far - whether one is talking about ThinkPads, Gibsons or Citroens - all of which would need to re-visit their roots like Jaguar did in order to get my business again.

I absolutely agree.Gone were the days that Thinkpads were completely innovative. They were the first to go black in an age dominated by beige. First to offer a good speaker system and a CD-ROM drive. How about all the keyboards that did everything from tilt automatically to fold automatically, to peeling a banana automatically. Why can't Thinkpads just be a boat that breaks the floor when dropped, offer a replaceable hard drive just by flipping up the keyboard, remove every battery in under 1 minute, and most of all, KNOW WHEN THE BATTERY IS CHARGED WITHOUT BOOTING IT!!

That would be too practical for Lenovo.

[dr_st]

1) If all that we're getting is a T470 with a classic keyboard and a fancy logo, I'd expect to pay $100 more than the standard T470 of the matching specs is listed at.

Really? For something that is really only what you described, I would expect to pay exactly the cost of a regular T470. The keyboard is Lenovo's own, existing, design, and whatever little cost differences may exist due to volumes can and should easily be swallowed by them. There certainly isn't a $100 difference hiding there. Heck, a brand new Thinkpad keyboard never cost anything close to $100.

[Puppy]

Really? For something that is really only what you described, I would expect to pay exactly the cost of a regular T470.

Exactly, it still is just a keyboard. The $100 would make sense for 3:2 display everyone, except Lenovo, can deliver if they want.

[Puppy]

With a 14" 16:10 panel, a new chassis would have to be made, which raises costs immensely. I have a question for you: Would you buy a 3500 $ machine with a 14" 16:10 panel?

Why $3500? Lenovo currently offer about twenty or more different devices. To design a new chasis is just a regular work, as with other completely new devices. Microsoft, Huawei, Chuwi and others can do it for much less than $3500 Aren't they redesign the chasis with every new generation anyway? How much did they spent on nonsenses like X1C adaptive keyboard?

The truth is Lenovo doesn't want non 16:9 ThinkPad because it would look different. ThinkPads must be generic

[RealBlackStuff]

Lenovo Thinkpad redesign; good is **NOT** retro!

And talk about tasteless: Lenovo Desktop Computer IdeaCentre Y710 Cube

And time to learn/read some German: Lenovos Zukunft sind die Datencenter / Lenovo's future are Data centers
Are they giving up laptops altogether?