What do you want in the next generation Merom X series?

Message

asiafish · #31 Post by **asiafish** » Sat Jul 15, 2006 4:52 pm

You nailed it. Every OS out there SUCKS when used for purposes for which it was not intended or well-adapted. Unix was not designed for desktop use, and in its base form (no GUI) makes a poor choice for a desktop OS for the masses. That does not mean that Unix sucks as a desktop OS, just that it needs to be adapted to that role, which has been done in varying degrees of simplicity.

Compared to Windows, which was designed from the ground-up for desktop use, Unix still isn't there. Windows has its own weaknesses, mostly stemming form its original purpose as a desktop OS and the requirement (whose requirement?) that it be backwards compatible to software written for older versions. Making Windows XP SP2 in 2005 compatible with software applications written for Windows 95 a decade earlier is great for both individuals and businesses forced to use 10-year-old applications for whatever reason, but likely contirbutes to the bloat and security holes we see in Windows today.

In 2001 Apple [censored]-off the vast majority of its users by using a built-in emulator for older OS 9 applications instead of making the new OS run those applications natively. Worse yet, since it was a software emulator, many hardware features were disabled and the whole mess was very slow. This was fine if you wanted to use a much-loved text editor or word processor (MS Word 5.1 from 1992 has a fanatical following to this day on the Mac platform), but not so great if you wanted to play an old game or work with audio or video. The trade-off was that Apple was able to start from scratch and address issues that had long plagued the classic Mac OS, such as its very poor memory management and lack of preemptive multitasking.

Mac OS today is a very good desktop OS. Windows Vista also is very promising. Linux would be a viable option if somebody finally took the hassle out. I recently tried installing the latest Ubuntu 6.06 onto a ThinkPad X32 and was delighted to find that video, sound and even wireless worked right away. Hot keys for volume and screen brightness worked as well, but try as I may I could not get the center scroll button to work on the X32's trackpoint. More serious was the fact that even after downloading four different video players and a half dozen codecs, every time I inserted a DVD movie I got error messages instead of entertainment. That was six hours wasted just to try and watch a movie on a laptop, something that Windows and Mac OS do with terrific ease right out of the box.

Maybe I'll try Linux again in a year or three, but for now, my MacBook runs OS X and Windows XP and my X41 runs Windows XP and Vista.

devilsrejection · #32 Post by **devilsrejection** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 1:47 am

how did this thread turn into a discussion about os's?

anyway, i want longer battery life, and a higher resolution screen.

i'm all for a mega battery that makes the thing 2 invhs thick but gives me 14+ hours of battery life.

if you make it wide screen then please use an 11 inch screen, not 13.

asiafish · #33 Post by **asiafish** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 2:24 am

1280X1024 on a standard aspect-ratio 12" would be fine, or 1280X800 on an 11" widescreen, no large panels or super-tiny text please.

As for size and battery life, something with the longevity of the X40 would be ideal. Keep it at the same size and weight as the current X60s, but with 7-8 hours unplugged with the big battery, 11+ hours with an auxiliary attached to the bottom.

christopher_wolf · #34 Post by **christopher_wolf** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 3:24 am

asiafish wrote:1280X1024 on a standard aspect-ratio 12" would be fine, or 1280X800 on an 11" widescreen, no large panels or super-tiny text please.

As for size and battery life, something with the longevity of the X40 would be ideal. Keep it at the same size and weight as the current X60s, but with 7-8 hours unplugged with the big battery, 11+ hours with an auxiliary attached to the bottom.

^ That I like. More battery life, slightly larger resolution, and maybe a spill over option to something like the Widescreen Z Series. That would be really good.

lucas · #35 Post by **lucas** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 1:33 pm

i thought the x60s currently got about 7-8 hours..

asiafish · #36 Post by **asiafish** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 9:31 pm

Is that advertising hours or real world hours? The X41 is advertised at 7 or so hours but even with screen dim and processor slow is only good for five.

lucas · #37 Post by **lucas** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 12:00 am

the x60s is advertised at 8 hours with the 8 cell by lenovo.
pcmag got 7:23.
laptopmag got 8:42 (wifi on), 9:34 (wifi off).
cnet got 8:16.

so what do people get here?

asiafish · #38 Post by **asiafish** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 12:04 am

Yeah, the X41 was advertised at 7 hours, but it cannot deliver it. I don't care what it is advertised at, I care about real world.

lucas · #39 Post by **lucas** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 12:05 am

as do i. you're saying that pcmag, laptopmag, and cnet all lied as well?

regardless, i'd love to see what these users get in the real world.

(edit: sorry, i thought i was here: [t60 runtime thread http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.php?t=27747])

asiafish · #40 Post by **asiafish** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 12:10 am

I don't know what anyone has gotten real world on the X60. I'm expressing my desires for real world 7-8 hour battery on the NEXT model.

My X32 did deliver its advertised battery life, as did the T42p I had before that. The X41 only delivers 5 hours instead of 5, and that I hope the next X-series doesn't pull a battery-life fast one like that.

lucas · #41 Post by **lucas** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 12:37 am

okay, but maybe this model runs for the advertised amount of time as well..

pianowizard · #42 Post by **pianowizard** » Sat Jul 29, 2006 2:21 pm

cj3209 wrote:I would like Lenovo to shave about a 1/2 lb. off the weight; that would be nice for extended travel which is what this notebook is designed for in the first place.

I too think that further reduction of the travel weight would be the most important thing. My Toshiba R100 is 0.4 lbs lighter than my X40, and the difference is VERY obvious. I always travel with the R100 because it's much easier to carry it, even though the X40 has a slightly better keyboard, much better mousepad buttons and brighter screen.

em500 · #43 Post by **em500** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 9:24 am

With the 8-cell battery, Ars got between 5 and 10.5 hour in their X60s review.

http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardware/x60.ars/4

surg · #44 Post by **surg** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 10:56 am

Actually arstechnica tested a X60 without the s in their review.

devilsrejection · #45 Post by **devilsrejection** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 1:11 pm

a laptop with wireless turned off is useless unless you're writing a paper or something

even then you might want to look something up on wikipedia for quick reference

its an impressive number no doubt, but personally a laptop without internet is just incomplete.

asiafish · #46 Post by **asiafish** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 1:48 pm

That depends entirely on what you are doing. I went to a legal conference last month and battery life was king. I was taking notes from experts in their fields, and could care less about wireless as I was too busy taking notes. At the end of a ten hour day, still having power left in my X32 (with plate battery) was far more important than the distractions of email when I didn't want or need it.

Likewise on a flight unless flying a very new aircraft there is no internet available, and even when there is, I'd often rather watch movies, where again, battery life is king. I fly back and forth to Asia twice per year and only once has there been power available at the seat in coach. You could buy a brand new laptop and a half dozen batteries for the price of a first class seat, so again internet takes a back seat to battery life.

Those are just my examples, everyone has their own priorities, which is why you can buy laptops with 19" screens and desktop graphics or machines like the X-series that run seamingly forever on a charge.

em500 · #47 Post by **em500** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 2:58 pm

devilsrejection wrote:a laptop with wireless turned off is useless unless you're writing a paper or something

even then you might want to look something up on wikipedia for quick reference

its an impressive number no doubt, but personally a laptop without internet is just incomplete.

You know, people have found good use (and payed good money) for PCs and laptops before the masses ever heard of the word "internet", let alone "wifi". Even today, the majority of the time that I'm working on my laptop there is no wireless network available.

devilsrejection · #48 Post by **devilsrejection** » Mon Jul 31, 2006 5:02 am

valid usage models guys, some people are just different

Saml01 · #49 Post by **Saml01** » Mon Jul 31, 2006 12:17 pm

I would like a light up keyboard. I think thats not to much to ask, and is probably dead simple to implement. When I had my 17inch G4 lightup keyboard was by far the awesomest part of it.

asiafish · #50 Post by **asiafish** » Mon Jul 31, 2006 12:37 pm

All ThinkPads since the T20 have had built-in keyboard lights. No, its not as slick as Apple's implementation, but its a whole lot simpler and no doubt less expensive an addition.

Saml01 · #51 Post by **Saml01** » Tue Aug 01, 2006 3:52 pm

asiafish wrote:All ThinkPads since the T20 have had built-in keyboard lights. No, its not as slick as Apple's implementation, but its a whole lot simpler and no doubt less expensive an addition.

You know how simple apple implementation is?

The keys are transparent and the lighting is a translucent peace of plastic with lights connected to it. kinda like fiberoptics.

asiafish · #52 Post by **asiafish** » Tue Aug 01, 2006 4:43 pm

Yup, I had a 15" PowerBook and loved that feature, but it is more complex and expensive than a tiny diode at the top of the screen bezel. Apple uses not only a light and see-through keys, but also a light sensor and dimmer.

lucas · #53 Post by **lucas** » Tue Aug 01, 2006 5:33 pm

in other words, $2 of electronics versus $3 of electronics.

asiafish · #54 Post by **asiafish** » Tue Aug 01, 2006 5:37 pm

$3 of electronics and $100 of patent and license fees.

christopher_wolf · #55 Post by **christopher_wolf** » Tue Aug 01, 2006 6:01 pm

Also consider these points in addition to what Asiafish pointed out.

1.) Cost to do it *right*; I would rather have them not do it then to do it in a cheap way, complicate the install procedure for a new keyboard, or otherwise raise the price for dubious reasons as compared to a simple and effective ThinkLight that not only illuminates the keyboard, but the area laterally to the Thinkpad as well....allowing for other uses.

2.)Why? Why change the ThinkLight? It has been on Thinkpads since the T20 and is one of the trademarks; it does a great job of illuminating the keyboard plus the immediate surroundings.

3.)In regards to the $2/$3 thing, well, that is just the difference between a ghetto-rigged amatuer job and a professional, industry applicable solution from IBM.

4.)In addition; do you know how much of a pure pain in the rear it would be to not only develop drivers and support for a backlit keyboard changeover from the ThinkLight, but to also support it and make sure the drivers work on OSes other than Windows? Even the MacBooks and MBPs didn't do that as Windows installs on them didn't have the driver for the keyboard backlight available.

5.) Then comes the extra hardware; you need a switch for it right? Even better would be a dimmer. Is this going to be controlled through the BIOS and EC? That is alot of data to be sending through and back to the keyboard for something that a very bright LED linked to the BIOS and EC could do with a simple press of two buttons in *any* OS.

asiafish · #56 Post by **asiafish** » Tue Aug 01, 2006 6:13 pm

There are advantages and disadvantages to both IBM's and Apple's approach. Apple's looks better in use as each key is clearly lit with a lot of contrast. IBM's lights up the area around the computer as well, but is not the most even lighting as it centers on the G key.

All ThinkLights and all backlit keyboards are not equal either. The white ones on the T series are terrific as are the new backlit MacBook Pro and latest PowerBook versions, while early PowerBooks were dim. The amber Thinklight on my X41 is kinda weak as well, barely lighting the keys enough in a darkened room, though its more than adequate serious darkness.

Saml01 · #57 Post by **Saml01** » Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:10 pm

christopher_wolf wrote:
4.)In addition; do you know how much of a pure pain in the rear it would be to not only develop drivers and support for a backlit keyboard changeover from the ThinkLight, but to also support it and make sure the drivers work on OSes other than Windows? Even the MacBooks and MBPs didn't do that as Windows installs on them didn't have the driver for the keyboard backlight available.

5.) Then comes the extra hardware; you need a switch for it right? Even better would be a dimmer. Is this going to be controlled through the BIOS and EC? That is alot of data to be sending through and back to the keyboard for something that a very bright LED linked to the BIOS and EC could do with a simple press of two buttons in *any* OS.

4. What drivers? its OS controlled on the mac. Remember it never had a bios that was linked to the OS. Open firmware works differently. Probably just an additional keyboard command in the operating system.

5. As for the dimmer, it never really dimmed. it just had steps in terms of birghtness and just used light sensing to turn on and turn off. The keyboard lighting would only be enabled when it was dark, so that light sensor was just a switch for the function.

its not that complicated when you really think about it.

asiafish wrote:$3 of electronics and $100 of patent and license fees.

I have a 10 dollar chinese keyboard that has lightup keys, I dont think they payed 100 dollars in licencing to do it.

christopher_wolf · #58 Post by **christopher_wolf** » Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:33 pm

There are drivers required for the backlit keyboard on the MBPs; on a Windows install on the same machine, they weren't made available and you couldn't use the backlight for the keyboard if I remember correctly. You could hook it *directly* to the BIOS/EC with a toggle switch, like the ThinkLight, but that would, again, require a design change that costs quite a bit of money.

For a dimmer, you would either want it to be controlled through a hardware-only dimmer through the BIOS/EC, or via drivers if it isn't desired to put that much cost and effort into extra keyboard hardware.

It may be cheap for a single keyboard, but remember that companies that produce such products, like Thinkpads, on a massive scale are very akin to reducing cost where possible. I know certain Storage Technology companies, like HitachiGST and WD, make large efforts to reduce the cost per drive by only a few cents; when adding the units produced up, that is *alot* of money saved. Being cheap to buy is one thing, being inexpensive to implement on the systems in question is another entirely; that would bring the cost up quite a bit if we are also to expect a reliable implementation up to Thinkpad quality. Remember that Apple set out to have a backlit keyboard on the Powerbooks and they did a very good job of just that. IBM/Lenovo probably already see the ThinkLight doing that. I would like it on a new Thinkpad, but not if it meant that they would have to cut more costs and not bring it up to par with the rest of the system. People are already picky, rightfully so, about the type of keyboard they get in their Thinkpad(s).

I don't see IBM/Lenovo moving to a backlit keyboard anytime soon; not that it is bad, just different. For what is done now, however, the ThinkLight has advantages in that it is a very cost effective solution that meets, and in a good number of cases, exceeds the expectations and requirements that the user has.

What do you want in the next generation Merom X series?

Who is online