W500 WUXGA+ brightness

[affa]

Hi guys / gals.

First of all I don't want to start an IPS / Flexview flamewar...

Even though I do prefer 4:3 for productivity, I dont want to get into that either as I think that's now truly a lost cause given the market forces..

Anyway... I am currently tossing up between the W500, Dell M4400 and the HP 8530w to replace our current (small) fleet of T43p here.

What is bothering me is that although the tech specs / options are similar enough between them, the W500's WUXGA+ lags behind the other offerings by a long way (yes thats a requirement, we need the res, but 17" is too big and heavy). Some reviews I have seen put it at < 200nits measured!! that's pretty awful one has to admit.

How does it compare to the T43p 16x12 screen? Keep in mind this (T43p) screen is fairly useless outdoors already.

I have had thinkpads from 380, 770, 600, T23, T41p, T42p and T43p (decided to skip the T6x as the T43p had enough oomph). And I really dont want to change because:

1. Getting used to different keying is a pain
2. I quite like some thinkvantage stuff like accon, prez manager and the power manager.
3. I can still get EPP from my buddies in my previous life in the machine.
4. I have got most my friends and their businesses onto stinkpads over the years and I'm going to cop a lot of flak if I am the one who switch

Does anyone know if Lenovo will get past 2005 and offer some decent screen on the W500? I'm not asking for LED, RGB LED or edge to edge etc etc. All I want is a bright high res screen fitting for the W500 in occasional outdoor use.

It may read like a rant, but I just want to see if anyone knows anything before I reluctantly switch to the darkside....

cheers, affa.

[ssd_thinkpad]

I'd more prefer high contrast than brightness. You can perfectly read a book even if its pages do not have brightness: 0 nits. Why? Because your book pages have high contrast. There is new paper display technology coming, which you can see in electronic book readers like kindle which works without backlight. The more brightness, the unhealthier it is for your eyes. No one looks into the sun or into a lamp for too long. But it seems to be far cheaper to put a bright (led) lamp behind a low-contrast tn-panel so you can even see worst contrasts. I'd more question: With low brightness, which screen can be seen best?

As much as I read on thinkpads.com, the T500 WSXGA+ display has good contrast which can even be comparable to T4/T6 flexview displays. Its display angles are not that good.

[affa]

I'd more prefer high contrast than brightness. You can perfectly read a book even if its pages do not have brightness: 0 nits. Why? Because your book pages have high contrast.

But the paper is reflective, and the LCD panels we are talking about here are not transflective so it needs bright backlight to overcome ambient light.

The more brightness, the unhealthier it is for your eyes. No one looks into the sun or into a lamp for too long.

Indeed, as I pointed out the brightness issue is more for outdoor use. One can adjust the brightness to a comfortable level indoors or in the dark.

But it seems to be far cheaper to put a bright (led) lamp behind a low-contrast tn-panel so you can even see worst contrasts. I'd more question: With low brightness, which screen can be seen best?

I agree with you on screen quality and on that front the thinkpad X,T,W and Z have always been fairly good on that. But unless the screen is transflective (or similar tech) brightness is the only way to get it readable in daylight.

As much as I read on thinkpads.com, the T500 WSXGA+ display has good contrast which can even be comparable to T4/T6 flexview displays. Its display angles are not that good.

[TTY]

The T43p was available with two different display panels, a 14.1" SXGA+ panel and a 15" UXGA panel. Which of those two do you mean when you ask

How does it compare to the T43p 16x12 screen?

[archer6]

<snip> Some reviews I have seen put it at < 200nits measured!! that's pretty awful one has to admit.
How does it compare to the T43p 16x12 screen? <snip>

I now have two W500's, as a close friend ordered one when I did. Mine is WSXGA+ and the one he ordered is WUXGA. Not being able to adjust to the small fonts, he offered it to me so I bought it. This afternoon I did a side by side comparison with these three ThinkPads of mine, T43p 15" (IPS) UXGA, T60p 15" (IPS) UXGA, W500 15.4" WUXGA. The results were surprising, especially since I had the same hesitation that you are experiencing. Setting aside what we already know about IPS, the overall brightness and clarity of the W series is excellent. Far better than the 200 nits spec suggests. Much like reading a road test and specs on a new car, there really is no way to tell what it's truly like until you drive it.

I'm here to say as a very picky ThinkPad enthusiast that I'm quite pleased with the W500 display. I would rate it about 20% to 25% brighter at a minimum than either of the other two. Also its important to note that since I have so many ThinkPads, I rotate them on a frequent basis, therefore displays of my p models have not lost much of their brightness if any. Then there is the issue of quality of materials used, as I truly believe that makes a difference. Frequently criticized as "just a TN display" I can assure you this is the best of the best. Far from what one one find on so many other brands or models. Corner to corner, edge to edge, no light leakage, no darkening, just a very evenly lit display. Color contrast is great as is color depth. Something that I have a bit of knowledge about as a long time amateur photographer.

Would I like an even better display?... of course, but is this dull, or dim, or fuzzy? Absolutely not. In addition, it has restored some of my confidence in Lenovo as I too had developed quite a bit of concern over all the reports I have read claiming poor displays. Also while talking about brightness, I have a new Unibody MacBook Pro with a full 300 nits LED backlit display. While I'm not comparing that directly to the ThinkPads, the point is simply that having a full range of displays from which to view, I find the W500 is a very good display. In the WUXGA resolution (as well as WSXGA+ for that matter) the small fonts in the menu bar of Word, or Firefox for example are very crisp, clear, and sharp. So, that's my take on it.

Cheers...

[ajkula66]

My ONLY serious complaint about WUXGA W500 that I've been using for six weeks now on a daily basis is dullness (or lack of brightness if you prefer to put it that way) of its LCD. Even compared to a TN panel from a 14" T42p, the panel is simply not bright enough, period.

Apart from that, it's one heck of a powerful machine, and seems very well built as well.

[archer6]

My ONLY serious complaint about WUXGA W500 that I've been using for six weeks now on a daily basis is dullness (or lack of brightness if you prefer to put it that way) of its LCD. Even compared to a TN panel from a 14" T42p, the panel is simply not bright enough, period.

I would highly encourage you to look into getting it checked and or replaced, as by your description it sounds sub par. Mine is far brighter than my 14" std T42 display.

Now that I have two W500's I'm sure it's not a fluke, as the brightness on both of these two is very good. And believe me, although I'm a serious ThinkPad advocate, I'm not married to any brand. I buy quality. Also as a hard core mobile computing enthusiast, I have many other new notebook computers from other makers. Dell, HP, Apple, Sony, Asus, Fujitsu, Toshiba, Samsung and Panasonic. Therefore I have a lot of experience to use as a comparison, and it's quite interesting to see the differences.

Cheers...

[ajkula66]

archer6 wrote:

I would highly encourage you to look into getting it checked and or replaced, as by your description it sounds sub par.

Tough to define "sub-par" nowadays...LCD on my WUXGA T61p was exactly the same, with same brightness issues and abysmal colour reproduction...and I've seen quite a few brand new machines plagued by the same set of issues. Meanwhile, a WSXGA+ T60 I owned at one point had a VERY acceptable LCD...go figure...

My guess would be that it's going to be the same game as it was with T61p machines...if you get one with Samsung LCD, kiss your eyesight goodbye. Lucky enough to spot a LG, you're likely to fall in love with ThinkPads all over again...

I'd never doubt your seriousness, archer6...I do get to see a lot of laptops, and have compared (will post pictures once I get the time to take them) this LCD with quite a few others, not only ThinkPad ones. It didn't do too well...

As for being a ThinkPad advocate...I used to be one myself. Don't know if I fit in that category anymore. Probably not...

[archer6]

<snip> Tough to define "sub-par" nowadays...LCD on my WUXGA T61p was exactly the same, with same brightness issues and abysmal colour reproduction...and I've seen quite a few brand new machines plagued by the same set of issues. Meanwhile, a WSXGA+ T60 I owned at one point had a VERY acceptable LCD...go figure...<snip>

Excellent Post! Your points are well taken as there _are_ variables between the display vendors. And I'm not doubting your report, just hoping for the best for you. After all, we spend a lot of money on these laptops and should receive a high quality product.

Cheers...

[affa]

The $64,000 question:

Will I be able to read the screen effectively outdoors? (I'm reasonable, I dont mean with direct sunlight at noon on a fine day blasting down on the screen @ 45 degree to your eyes.)

Lets use an example: lets say you are sitting outside in a cafe at lunch on an average day (not too sunny, but totally overcast either) trying to get your presentation together for that 2 pm meeting...... will you be able to read that screen and work effectively or will it look like a screen with a failed backlight like my T43p IPS 1600x1200 (UXGA) look like now in the above scenario.

I totally understand and REALLY appreciate feedbacks from those out there with the exact thinkpad W500 with WUXGA+ because as pointed out earlier, review and real life is very different.

Thanks in advance!

[Marin85]

The $64,000 question:

Will I be able to read the screen effectively outdoors?

No, not effectively!

[archer6]

The $64,000 question:

Will I be able to read the screen effectively outdoors?

While its likely to be better than your T43, its still going to disappoint you. That said, my brand new super bright 300 nits unibody 15.4" MacBook Pro is totally useless outdoors due to the horrendous glare & reflections off its mirror like glass screen. The only laptop I've found that is decent outdoors is my X301 ThinkPad.

[affa]

While its likely to be better than your T43, its still going to disappoint you. That said, my brand new super bright 300 nits unibody 15.4" MacBook Pro is totally useless outdoors due to the horrendous glare & reflections off its mirror like glass screen. The only laptop I've found that is decent outdoors is my X301 ThinkPad.

That answers my question. Thank you!! Sadly we need the resolution for our apps so x300 is no good for us. 17" behemoths are just ridiculous to go on the road with.

I totally agree and hate gloss / glass LCD surface with a vengance, its basically a cheat to get more nits on benchmarks. But in practical use its annoyingly cr@p. Yes they look good when the pute is off (read - look good in the display cabinet, to suck consumers in). but as a surface treatment its basically a con. In fact, worse than a con, because not only it doesn't help, it actually degrades practical performance.

However, this does explains why they perdominantly plague the consumer end of the market. Which is a nice way to tell which lappy a buyer should avoid.

Well, now its between the Dell M4400 and the HP 8350w...

I really hope lenovo comes up with the "goods" in the next refresh so I can come back to the fold. I always loved the little touches in the thinkpad (like the drain holes and locating tabs on the lid, the keyboard (selected models ) which only engineering types and nuts will notice and appreciate).... I also find the styling appealing, no nonsense business, understated but elegant, but thats just me.

Thanks guys.

[ajkula66]

I can't say anything about the Dell that you're interested in, but will pretty much vouch that HP won't be up for the job, although it's a fine machine altogether.

Haven't tested X301 in the outside conditions, but the only machines I ever found to be usable outdoors were my tablet ThinkPads...

Good luck with your noble quest.

[archer6]

I can't say anything about the Dell that you're interested in, but will pretty much vouch that HP won't be up for the job, although it's a fine machine altogether. Haven't tested X301 in the outside conditions

I have the Dell, and it suffers from the somewhat predictable Dell condition, and that is it's uneven back lighting. Also it also has the typical light leakage around the edges on the right side. While I do not have that exact model of HP, I have a similar one, and it's the last HP I will buy, as they are getting more expensive, yet not getting much better. When it comes to laptops, having used a ThinkPad for so long, the lesser build quality of the others truly stands out as a liability. My X301 does the best of all the ThinkPad's I've had outdoors, but it's largely for work that does not require much in the way of resources.

Cheers...

[msafi]

My W500 (WUXGA+) when compared to my wife's X61 (XGA) looked brighter. However, WUXGA+ on a 15.4" display makes things really, really small. In my case, I had to squint to see stuff in the taskbar. Add to that the fact that Vista Aero fuzzes things up to anti-alias user-interface elements.

The experience of looking at the WUXGA+/15.4" was like I'm in a dream looking at a computer display. I'm not exactly sure what I'm looking at, but I have a general idea.

To make WUXGA+ useful, my guess is that you'd have to put it on, at least, a 17" display that is EXTREMELY BRIGHT.

I ended up selling the W500 for this reason.

I think the HP EliteBook is a serious contender as a high performance business laptop with a big bright (WSXGA+) display. It also has a pointing stick.

[Marin85]

That´s why many folks get W500 with the WSXGA+ screen BTW, I have a WUXGA screen on my ThinkPad, and with few adjustments it becomes pretty usable in Vista (and even more so in Win 7). And, yes, I do keep the native resolution of the screen.

[archer6]

<snip> My W500 (WUXGA+) when compared to my wife's X61 (XGA) looked brighter. However, WUXGA+ on a 15.4" display makes things really, really small. In my case, I had to squint to see stuff in the taskbar. Add to that the fact that Vista Aero fuzzes things up to anti-alias user-interface elements. To make WUXGA+ useful, my guess is that you'd have to put it on, at least, a 17" display that is EXTREMELY BRIGHT. I ended up selling the W500 for this reason.

I think the HP EliteBook is a serious contender as a high performance business laptop with a big bright (WSXGA+) display. It also has a pointing stick.<snip>

I have an HP EliteBook 8530W. When ordering it, I configured it exactly like my W500 4058-CTO, and I would caution you before buying an HP, especially if it's going to be your only workstation.

Yes, it has a pointing stick, but it's far less accurate and adjustable as the famed ThinkPad TrackPoint. Also the keys are quite different from a standpoint of tactile feedback. Now, if you do not use the keyboard that much they are probably fine, however I find that the shallow travel, the key cap wiggle, and the overall mushy feeling prevents me from typing at my normal speed. It runs rather warm, whereas my W500 is only mildly warm when pushing it. The fan on the W is far quieter than the fan on the HP which runs two to three times as much to try and keep the temps down. The display is nice, but the hinges are average at best and in the several months I've had mine, they are already getting loose. As you know the robust stainless steel hinges on the W500 are very strong and provide for a very stable and wiggle free display. When typing on the HP the screen moves, where the ThinkPad is rock solid with no movement whatsoever. Also when discussing the display the HP's is washed out looking unless you constantly adjust the screen to "just the correct position" then it's ok. But having to constantly adjust it is very annoying.

Finally there is the issue of price. I paid (retail) just $1555 for my W500, and $3157 for the HP. A price that is far too high for the quality of the machine from my vantage point. So, I'm not suggesting that the HP is not a good machine, but it simply does not compare to the ThinkPad. Like anything else there is one heck of a difference between the specs on paper, the reviews one reads, and _actually owning and using one_ !

Cheers...

[dr_st]

After many people in my company were disappointed with T61's, the company purchased a few HP 8510p's. I believe they are similar enough to the 8530p's...

What can I say? Yes, they look nice (much nicer than a T61) and the GPU is powerful. However, from using a few of them briefly, I have to send all the things archer6 mentioned:

1) Trackpoint sucks totally compared to a Thinkpad. The cap does not offer nearly as good control as the Thinkpad one. Granted, you can change the cap to a Thinkpad one, but it's not enough, because the trackpoint mouse buttons' shape and location is terribly inconvenient. It feels as if they added the trackpoint on this model only as an afterthought, to appease the business crowd which was used to the trackpoint after years of IBM's near-monopoly in the segment. Comparing to a Thinkpad trackpoint - night and day.

2) Keyboard does not feel as solid, plus I do not like the locations of the six navigation keys (Ins/Del/Home/End/Pgup/Pgdn), compared to the Thinkpad.

3) It's loud, loud, loud! The fan is on almost all the time (because of the hot FX570M GPU).

4) Heavier and has worse battery life (again due to the hot FX570M GPU).

Granted, the last two might be a bit unfair, because I'm comparing to a T61 with a built-in Intel GPU. A T61p with the FX570M might behave just the same. Then again, archer6 does claim that the W500, despite being an equivalent workstation model is far cooler and quieter.

[archer6]

Weekdays I spend a lot of time on my ThinkPad Workstation, as I do 3D design and other work which is very resource intensive. So I push the computer pretty hard. Having used T-series p models for years now, I will say that my favorite from a standpoint of balance, speed vs. low temps and low fan noise is the T60p, it is even better than my T61p and of course the T60 has the benefit of a gorgeous 4:3 UXGA 1600x1200 IPS Flexview display. While that machine still serves my needs, it's near the end of it's life cycle as I really need the faster processor and resources offered by my W500.

The W is maxed out with a 2.8GHz processor as well as max ram etc. What is perhaps the best surprise with this machine is it's cooling system is in fact quite superior which results in not only a cooler running machine, but it's quieter as well. What makes this significant is the T60 was not what I would classify as noisy at all. Just noticeably louder than the W500 now that I have that to compare to. The HP on the other hand is quite noisy, especially as compared to the W500. All things being relative, the best benefit of my HP Workstation is that it has reminded me of just how good ThinkPads truly are.

Cheers...

[rockefella]

I've got the following Thinkpads (not to brag, but to establish the basis for my opinion):

W500 15.4" WUXGA
T61p 15.4" WUXGA
T60p 15" UXGA
T60 15" SXGA
R60 15 SXGA

I put them all next to each other. The W500 definitely has the dimmest screen of all of them. This is despite the fact that the W500 had the whitest screen of all of them, because it is the newest and hasn't had a chance to go yellow yet. I asked my wife to compare too and she came to the same conclusion I did: W500 was dimmest. When I work at Starbucks, i can see that MacBook Pros next to me have noticeably brighter screens than my W500.

In direct sunlight, fuhgeddaboutit. You won't be able to see much on a W500 WUXGA screen.

That having been said, the W500 is still my main workhorse computer. That's because it is significantly cooler and quieter than even the T61p, and slightly faster (Vista experience score of 5.2 versus 5.0). It also seems to have a longer battery life (I compared using the same battery on both machines).

The dim screen definitely irks me and, for the first time, i find myself eyeing the MacBook Pro with growing envy. Until the W500, I never even looked at non-Lenovo computers! Now my eyes have started to wander... I'm not sure my next computer will be a Lenovo.

None of the above is scientific. I didn't use instruments and gauges. It's just one Lenovo fan's (not sure how much longer I'll remain a Lenovo fan, though) anecdotal report.

[msafi]

Well, if the HPs and Dells have their own set of problems, I don't know what to buy.

I recently bought an old model VAIO FW series from a local store here in Dubai for around $900 after my problems with the W500. The build quality of this machine is...exceptional! The keyboard is great. The 16.4" display is outstanding. It has very sturdy hinges. It's not quiet; it is silent. This is a premium laptop.

You can configure to order:
T9800 2.9GHz
4GB RAM
320GB 7200rpm
ATI Mobility Radeon 512MB
LCD 16.4" XBrite FullHD(TM) (ridiculously beautiful Sony display)

And with Sony, Bluetooth, camera, SD reader and this other stuff come as standard...So, for how much? Under $1,900!

>>> disparaging comments and unacceptable language have been removed by moderator <<<

[freakwave]

Ok, you might like this Sony and the display might be "ridiculously beautiful", but what is this?

1600 x 900

900 pixel - this is getting completely ridiculous. Another year will pass and we are close to the 768px of the XGA resolution.
Perhaps the cinemascope display will come to our business machines soon. If I calculated correctly that would be 1600 x 685

I guess it is some nice toy to play video games or watch movies, but thats all.

Ciao

[msafi]

Ok, you might like this Sony and the display might be "ridiculously beautiful", but what is this?

1600 x 900

The model mentioned above, XBrite FullHD, is 1920x1080. But when you configure-to-order, you can also choose 1600X900, which is what I would choose because I dislike extreme high-res.

So, is it still a toy with this resolution? What wouldn't make this a toy, an ugly design?

[freakwave]

Hi msafi,

nope that would be a bit better. Don't meant to offend you, I am just getting in general tired of this kind of reverse development in the notebook area. I work for a big corporation and people are really getting upset with these widescreen low resolutions. For years they enjoyed a nice 4:3 1400 x 1000 resolution on a 14 inch screen. This is really a perfect form factor. These machines have been slim and had a decent screen. Today they work on 14 inch WXGA or WXGA+ screens and they hate it. Even when I look at my screen, the WSXGA+ it is really tough when you come from a UXGA. In addition the bezel is just ridiculously wide, so that you have the feeling the screen could be one inch wider.

And as I said in another post, now we have 16:10 ratio, the Sony you outlined has 16:9. Whats next, cinemascope?

Going back to the thread subject, it is interesting that the WUXGA+ seems to have a decent brightness. One of the reasons I bought the WSXGA+ was that I thought the WUXGA+ is too dark. Luckily I work 90% on my nice 24" Eizo.

Ciao