X200 disappointment

Message

iamdmc · #1 Post by **iamdmc** » Sat Jul 19, 2008 1:58 am

After checking out the new X200 and its current lack of processor options with decent cache and power savings, I was a bit disappointed. Being the proud owner of an X61s, I expected the new X series to be substantially thinner, with better battery life, more upgrade options, and a thin bezel (it seems they took a design note from the T61 and super-sized the bezel). In the looks department, it just doesn't deliver like the previous X series that seemed like a statement.

If I had to buy a new ThinkPad, I'd opt for the X300, but since I prefer maximum battery life and lowest weight, I think I'll stick with my X61s for now.

siva · #2 Post by **siva** » Sat Jul 19, 2008 2:51 am

yeah. x200 actually got me excited for a while, but only until i found out it's not universally 0.8x inch thin, more like 1.4 inches towards the back, and from the (p)review pictures, it's a bit disappointing to me how so obviously thicker it is compared to x61, x300, macbook and air...

i wish x200s, which emphasizes more than x200 does on ultraportability, would be thinner, otherwise i'd go for x300, and put my bank's phone number in my cellphone's block list.

that being said, x61 is actually the only notebook that met my humble standard of portability, not even air or x300 as they're quite large in length and width :p, 13 inches...sigh...but x61 has an aspect ratio of 4:3...

it's hard to find your perfect lappy, eh?

bobdsmith · #3 Post by **bobdsmith** » Sat Jul 19, 2008 3:44 am

Yeah, I don't see me going up a few more square inches footprint for the X200. Widescreen also is killing it, as well as the apperant thickness.

Ideal notebook:
X61s with IBM labelling, 10 hour battery, mouse button stripes, IBM design audio/power buttons, more in tune to what I need ports, updated to current chipset, fewer dirt catchers (corners, nooks, and crannies tht collect plenty of debris that have no reason to be on the machine). IPS 1024x768 12" display. Oh, and take off a few grams.

alekseevs · #4 Post by **alekseevs** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:46 am

Agree 100%. X200 is a disappointment to me - size and widescreen factor, which gives up to 25% less vertical viewing space than regular screen, which is pretty important, taking into account that we are dealing with an 12.1 screen.

#5 Post by **archer6** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 11:54 pm

alekseevs wrote:Agree 100%. X200 is a disappointment to me - size and widescreen factor, which gives up to 25% less vertical viewing space than regular screen, which is pretty important, taking into account that we are dealing with an 12.1 screen.

This is all the more reason for all of us with X4x & X6x series to celebrate.....

#6 Post by **erik** » Tue Jul 29, 2008 12:03 am

alekseevs wrote:...which gives up to 25% less vertical viewing space than regular screen, which is pretty important, taking into account that we are dealing with an 12.1 screen.

the X61 is 1024x768 and the X200 is 1280x800. i don't understand how that equates to 25% less vertical viewing area when the X200 display is 256 pixels wider and 32 pixels taller than an X61.

am i missing something?

artic_squirrel · #7 Post by **artic_squirrel** » Tue Jul 29, 2008 3:11 am

for me the greatest flaw of the x61 is the temp

the palm rest is really really hot and i don't even use the wireless card

what an idea to put it just under your hand !

the keyboard is usable, but a larger one is quite sweet

and the 2cm in width are not a crime too

pianowizard · #8 Post by **pianowizard** » Tue Jul 29, 2008 8:36 am

erik wrote:the X61 is 1024x768 and the X200 is 1280x800. i don't understand how that equates to 25% less vertical viewing area when the X200 display is 256 pixels wider and 32 pixels taller than an X61.

alekseevs is a new member and has a lot to learn. I hope he'll find this post helpful.

Blackhold · #9 Post by **Blackhold** » Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:32 pm

what is the disappointment?

now I have a lenovo 3000 v100 that the only thing I don't like is the lenght of batteries, the big one only gives me about 1:45 of batteries, when I bought that about 2 hours, but this is not enough for me.

for the photos I see that the screen is very similar the 3000 v100 than x200 (maybe are the same?), it has good colours and 1280x800 is not as horrible people says, yes, 3:4 screens are great, the only thing I don't like from screen is that is not opaque.

the rest of the hardware is lovely, I'm a linux user and a lot of components work well on debian, only modem, webcam and controlling of the fans are not fully supported (yes, finger works also and used it for few months!)

I think that a laptop such this with the new pinryn processors, this amount of battery (please one of 9cell!), gps, wimax, new kind of RAM, more GB at hard disk, the thinkpads chasis, etc. is great...

I also worked with x61s, and are perfect, but I think x200 gonna be a mixture of x61s and 3000 V100.

I think(pad) I could wait till end september-october-november to buy this laptop.

Release day was 17th july, where are the shops on internet to buy that computer?

snv · #10 Post by **snv** » Wed Jul 30, 2008 12:51 am

erik wrote:the X61 is 1024x768 and the X200 is 1280x800. i don't understand how that equates to 25% less vertical viewing area when the X200 display is 256 pixels wider and 32 pixels taller than an X61.

am i missing something?

Well, I guess some measure it in pixels, but some in millimeters (or inches). IMHO, it's a matter of personal preference. (I would prefer a lot of both

- if I could only live with the extra bulk and weight.)

qviri · #11 Post by **qviri** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 1:47 pm

erik wrote:
alekseevs wrote:...which gives up to 25% less vertical viewing space than regular screen, which is pretty important, taking into account that we are dealing with an 12.1 screen.
the X61 is 1024x768 and the X200 is 1280x800. i don't understand how that equates to 25% less vertical viewing area when the X200 display is 256 pixels wider and 32 pixels taller than an X61.

am i missing something?

Yes. Alekseevs mentioned inches, which is a physical measurement, which implies that he was talking about physical viewing space, which unlike virtual space does not concern itself at all with pixel count.

The fact that the pixel density on the widescreen display is higher does nothing for people who prefer lower density. If the widescreen display had the same DPI as the 4:3 display, the resolution would be 1086*678. Since ultimately our eyes view the physical size, in millimetres or inches, of things displayed on a screen, it is fair to say that ceteris paribus (eg., text of same physical size), the widescreen display does offer less vertical viewing space.

#12 Post by **erik** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 2:52 pm

alekseevs mentioned "vertical viewing space" which can be defined in many different ways including physical area in terms of pixel density as well as linear measurements.

1024x768 @ 12.1" is 105 PPI
1280x800 @ 12.1" is 125 PPI
- 125 PPI is 19% more dense

a 4:3 12.1" display is 9.68" × 7.26" (70.27 in^2)
an 8:5 12.1" display is 10.26" × 6.41" (65.76 in^2)
- the 8:5 display is 14% shorter and has an 8.5% smaller overall area

i fully understand the differences between the above. my confusion comes from why people always say widescreens display less when that isn't always the case. it depends on how you define "space." if the issue was in pixel density then alekseevs should have said that the X200 display is more difficult for him to read, not that it has less viewing space.

viewing "space" is arbitrary since it can refer to either physical area or pixel density. it's up to the user to decide which is more important.

qviri wrote:If the widescreen display had the same DPI as the 4:3 display, the resolution would be 1086*678.

i'd imagine there would be a lot more complaints had the X200's display been released with such low resolution.

edit: corrected measurements.

qviri · #13 Post by **qviri** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 4:27 pm

erik wrote:alekseevs mentioned "vertical viewing space" which can be defined in many different ways

... and you took the one which made his statement incorrect.

I am not sure; are the widescreen displays 12.1" or 12"?

#14 Post by **erik** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 5:45 pm

qviri wrote:
erik wrote:alekseevs mentioned "vertical viewing space" which can be defined in many different ways
... and you took the one which made his statement incorrect.

you are correct. keep in mind, however, that i never said he was incorrect. i stated that i don't understand how that equates to 25% less vertical viewing area when a) it's not 25%, b) he never said anything about pixel density or difficulty in viewing 125 PPI vs. 105 PPI, and c) i personally define "area" in pixels since pixels are one of the biggest determining factors of what a display can actually display. i'm not going to make any assumptions that alekseevs has or hasn't considered the other side of this debate.

qviri wrote:I am not sure; are the widescreen displays 12.1" or 12"?

12.1". 12" was a cut-and-paste error on my part and i've corrected that above.

Puppy · #15 Post by **Puppy** » Sun Aug 03, 2008 5:04 pm

Third link in this thread "Here are the new models!!!" http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.php?t=64219

There are several pictures of new ThinkPads. Am I only one who thinks the X200 looks more fat than X60/X61 ? According the review the maximum height is similar 1.4" but ...

Maccess · #16 Post by **Maccess** » Mon Aug 04, 2008 8:43 am

Does anyone know if the X200 can be attached to an Advanced Dock? IBM/Lenovo seems to have dropped that functionality with the X60/X61.

It would be nice to have a subnotebook that can attach to a dock with a multi-monitor video card, since I'm using a T43p precisely for that reason--that it can be attached to a dock with a multi-monitor video card. I was looking at the X6x series but the specs don't say that they can be used with a dock.

My next best choice would be a high spec X32, but I was hoping there would be a Dual Core subnotebook that could be used in that way.

donzoomik · #17 Post by **donzoomik** » Mon Aug 04, 2008 9:10 am

Maccess wrote:Does anyone know if the X200 can be attached to an Advanced Dock? IBM/Lenovo seems to have dropped that functionality with the X60/X61.

It would be nice to have a subnotebook that can attach to a dock with a multi-monitor video card, since I'm using a T43p precisely for that reason--that it can be attached to a dock with a multi-monitor video card. I was looking at the X6x series but the specs don't say that they can be used with a dock.

X series never had Advanced Dock.
T61 has Advanced Dock though, with optional video cards.

qviri · #18 Post by **qviri** » Mon Aug 04, 2008 9:19 am

donzoomik wrote:X series never had Advanced Dock.

Indeed, but X20 and X30 series did have Dock and Dock II.

iamdmc · #19 Post by **iamdmc** » Thu Aug 07, 2008 12:59 am

Wow, I just checked back after around a month and I expected this thread to be very heavily flamed. Nice to know that I'm not the only one not fully impressed with the X200. It's also frown-inducing that Lenovo loosed such a sub-par sub-note. Why they didn't listen to their customers is beyond me.

LOSE THE THICK BEZEL
LOSE THE THICKNESS
UP THE IMPRESSIVENESS
UP THE OPTIONS

StickyTape · #20 Post by **StickyTape** » Thu Aug 07, 2008 7:17 am

my 15.2 cents:
I recently purchased an X61 and was awaiting the arrival of the X200 either to congratulate or chastise myself. Well, I think the only difference between the current X200s and my X61 is the widescreen and slightly higher screen density.

The x61s have not remained static from 2007 having upgraded processors along the way. Thus my X61, built in May 2008, has a T8300 2.4Ghz which is comparable to the 2.4 Montevina processor in the X200.
On the negative side, the screen border of the x200 is huge and unsightly to my eyes. I would have liked to see an X series upgrade with 4:3 or widescreen options and a 1280 x 1086 resolution option. Me eyes are good and and my X61 density is low enough for me to note the blockiness.
They could have also applied their outstanding engineering skills to upgrading the singular speaker. The speaker on my mobile phone is far more crisp and powerful than the one on my laptop. I would swap a gram and a centimetre for two speakers with half-decent sound. My old T20 from 2001 has better speakerS in a comparably sized container.

Blackhold · #21 Post by **Blackhold** » Thu Aug 07, 2008 8:41 am

for speakers no problem, replace them

stalepie · #22 Post by **stalepie** » Fri Aug 08, 2008 12:21 am

X200 looks nice to me. I don't know WHAT you guys are talkin about!

Here's some videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Gy7yGbzSsk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y22deICL ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYC2Be4c ... re=related

Info at engadget:
http://www.engadget.com/tag/x200

review
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=272634

neenee · #23 Post by **neenee** » Fri Aug 08, 2008 1:51 am

Well, everyone has their own preferences

I feel a thread such as this, where people express their affection for their current laptops and possibly convincing themselves they don't have to pay more money to be satisfied, is a good thing.

Buying the latest models is not for everyone - mainly because we don't have ever-deep wallets, and if you already have a nice laptop which has served you well, threads like this help you confirm you're doing the right thing - not spending unecessary money.

Yup, that's me saying the same thing twice, using different words.

stalepie - if you do not know what they are talking about, perhaps you should read the thread, instead of just posting links. Links don't really add to the discussion; See it as reading a novel and suddenly having someone tell you something about the book which may be contrary to the story you're reading, but in order to know what exactly they're talking about, you have to put your book down and go downtown to the public library to read about it. Chances are you'll ask them either to explain their position or you'll just chalk their words up to them not liking the story so far and them trying to get you away from the story you were enjoying.

Anyway, I just mean to say that it would have been more useful if you responded to what people had posted so far, instead of posting 'I do not like that you do not like this laptop as much as I do', without actually mentioning on which points you disagree.

stalepie · #24 Post by **stalepie** » Fri Aug 08, 2008 2:12 am

OK, my thoughts then, in pure honesty:

Most computers are the same. They all run in Intel designs that have been similar for many years now. They have minor differences which no sane person can truly make a big hubbabaloo about because they are too minor. The x200 is like the x300 with the exception that the name is different by one digit and is slightly smaller and has owl-like fans or something so that it's not as hot. It has a slightly more advanced Intel Celeron processor in it than other models. This makes it better. It doesn't cost that much for a laptop. It is like the X61 as well, except it has a wider screen. The keyboard is also wider now, though, which means that it's easier to hit the ENTER and BACKSPACE keys. The design does not look quite as perfect as when "IBM" was making Thinkpads, because the "Thinkpad" logo is too plain now and doesn't quite have the futuristic aesthetic mark of quality and minimalism that IBM had going for them throughout the 90s. Nonetheless it is probably just as good of a machine. I could probably not tell the difference between it and my X31, although it apparently has a brighter screen, the brightest yet for a Thinkpad. Which is to say not very bright since Sonys had brighter screens over a decade ago. It lacks an optical drive which is okay because you can always download things from the internet and everybody has fast connections that never go down. As long as you get a Thinkpad within the last six years you are good. It should have a wireless card so you can connect to the internet. Just find them on ebay under the $300 range, although if you're dipping down into $90 range or lower, for a Thinkpad, then you're probably getting something too old or broken. The x200 is a good buy in four years' time on ebay. Currently the x31 and t41 are good buys on ebay, maybe x61 soon.

akao · #25 Post by **akao** » Fri Aug 08, 2008 4:49 am

A x31 is a good buy? <shudder> Even to run Linux, I would prefer a newer laptop. Compiz makes my day brighter.

stgreek · #26 Post by **stgreek** » Fri Aug 08, 2008 6:24 am

akao wrote:A x31 is a good buy? <shudder> Even to run Linux, I would prefer a newer laptop. Compiz makes my day brighter.

In terms of quality, affordability and features, X31 is up there with the best Thinkpads ever made (I am talking 600 series). And its *discrete* graphics card, something no newer X series can boast about, can run Compiz without problems. So yeah, I think it is a pretty good buy, if you can get one.

pxa270 · #27 Post by **pxa270** » Fri Aug 08, 2008 6:27 am

stalepie wrote:X200 looks nice to me. I don't know WHAT you guys are talkin about!

[...]

review
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=272634

I hate the big black rim around the X200 screen:
http://www.notebookreview.com/assets/34779.jpg

Blackhold · #28 Post by **Blackhold** » Fri Aug 08, 2008 7:46 am

does X200 have any firewire port?

neenee · #29 Post by **neenee** » Fri Aug 08, 2008 11:47 am

Thanks for elaborating stalepie.

One of your concerns seems to be with the design, which is not specific to this laptop, but, according to what you said, any Lenovo laptop since they took over from IBM. But buying a laptop from when IBM made them, might mean sacrificing on other fronts, such as the performance of the device.

As for screen brightness, I agree that it's not the brightest out there. I have a Sony Vaio myself, which is probably brighter, but it runs on battery much less long, which I think is partly due to the bright screen. I am not sure, but it would make sense it is one of the main factors if it is one of the major differences when comparing Thinkpads to other brands, as the other hardware does not differ as much in most cases.

You are suggesting rather old models. Is this because you do not want to spend over a certain amount on a laptop, as a rule?

What do you use your laptops for?

stalepie · #30 Post by **stalepie** » Fri Aug 15, 2008 4:48 pm

I use laptops for web browsing, email, IMing, computer games, porn, and learning. I think that this X31 is bright enough. Sorry about complaining about that. I almost never want it brighter. However it's not good for watching movies or looking at dark games like Quake and Fallout and Diablo 1. But I don't care that much. As for why I was suggesting older models, it is just because I am cheap. I shouldn't talk like that though because the only reason new products become cheap later is when a lot of people buy them new. I think the X200 looks good, as do most of the other Lenovo products. /shrug I don't care that much. They're never as pretty as Fujitsus, or as rugged as Panasonics, or as home-friendly as HP and Dell, but they're good machines. Good business machines, and I hope that aesthetic continues.

X200 disappointment

X200 disappointment

Who is online