Which Thinkpad to buy?

[hyde]

Thanks. I will take a trip to one of the big computer superstores where they have huge lot of different thinkpad models and take a look at their screen. I do remember checking some out when I was there last time, but at that time I wasn't really looking to buy one. If they have different models with HD, HD+ and 1600 pixel versions, I will be able to see if they are good enough, surely I understand that it is still a matter of luck, even with the better screens.

[ssd_thinkpad]

The FHD displays are the same. There are different manufacturers of the HD+ display. There is a nice review in the web in some old-school-design-format which elaborates on the HD+ display on the 14 inch model. There is one HD+ 14 inch panel with a more visible grid. You don't know which panel is inside until you open the package. But when you shop directly at a store you can check the display out.

[hyde]

Thanks. I will keep you posted on what I end up doing.

[ThinkRob]

There is a nice review in the web in some old-school-design-format which elaborates on the HD+ display on the 14 inch model.

This one?

[pianowizard]

I will take a trip to one of the big computer superstores where they have huge lot of different thinkpad models and take a look at their screen.

Where have you seen such a store?

[hyde]

J&R Music World turned into computer superstore.
http://www.jr.com/brand/lenovo/

When I was there few months ago, they had a whole lot in display, not necessarily all were available and in stock, but they all could be ordered there. In fact I was also looking at an Asus laptop, and I noticed that it had the best screen (closest to what I currently have on my Toshiba), but Lenovos all looked like they had a thin film on their screen...

[ssd_thinkpad]

Were the asus ones anti-glare or glare?

Anti-glare puts another layer on the screen that avoids reflections, and this layer is also visible. A good layer is almost not visible. There are worse ones. I do not like the anti-glare layer of my T60 so much.

[hyde]

I don't think Asus was anti-glare, I think it was one of those gaming nation laptops. My old Toshiba is also not anti-glare, but it is not "glossy" either. So basically, matte, non anti-glare. If there is any term to define this, they would be that.

I was in Costco, and they had about 10 laptops, including cheap acers and expensive Toshibas, they all had almost the same type of glossy, low contrast, bright screens. They look excellent if you are watching Transformers, but I wouldn't want to watch Fargo on those.. I think you get the difference. Luckily, I am not looking to buy a laptop for multimedia purposes.

[hyde]

After reading about under throttling problems with i7, I decided to take a look at some i5 models...

I went to the store today to check out the display models, and I was surprised at the image quality of an older T420s that was there. This actually proves my theory of newer laptops having worse displays.

Out of all Lenovos there, including Ideapad & Thinkpads, the best screen was on a 4314-DEU (T510). This is running on i5-560M (1st Gen) and it had Hybrid Graphics. The blacks were black, and colors were really vivid. And the screen saver test proved that the screen was black completely and evenly from top to bottom. Tilt test also resulted in nice viewing angle. However, when I was checking the laptops, I did not realize this was 1st Gen i5.

Picture:



The runner up was a 4170-32U (T420s) with i5-2520 with on board gpu. The picture was almost as good as the T510, but not exactly the same. The viewing angle was not as good, and the contrast ratio was definitely less, but still so much better than all others out there.

Picture:



The next one that had an excellent picture was X220 Tablet, but since I am not in the market for a tablet, I did not consider that in my comparison.

Reference link: http://www.jr.com/lenovo/pe/LEN_417032U ... TabSimilar

I really like X1, with a lot of features and competitive price, but not having a dock makes it difficult.
Basically, if would come down to having to choose between USB 3 or 1GB Dedicated GPU.


4170-32U ThinkPad T420s 14"
$1,249
+Lighter
+USB3
-6 Cell Battery
-320GB

4178-6VU ThinkPad T420 14"
$1,189
+500GB
+Dedicated GPU NVIDIA NVS 4200M
+9 Cell Battery
+Fingerprint Reader
+Cheaper

[hyde]

After seeing X220 at the local store, I really loved the size and weight of it, and having a full size keyboard identical to T and W series is another big plus. The only problem seems to be the trackpad & buttons, but with lowered sensitivity, it seems to work OK.

X220 seem to offer two type of displays. Regular and Premium. I assume (based on what I read here) Premium HD is actually the IPS display (thanks ssd_thinkpad for clearing that out). And looking at online comparisons and the youtube videos, it has pretty good picture quality (and darks are dark) hopefully with lower amount of bleeding. If it does have too much backlight bleeding, I guess Lenovo would be kind enough to replace it?

Next step is to decide on which dock to get. (http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.ph ... 12&start=0)

[ThinkRob]

Huh. So it appears that some stores are selling ThinkPads for more than Lenovo.com is...

[hyde]

Far more, but they are willing to reduce to match the coupon price.
Anyway, I ordered my x220 i5 yesterday, while ordering Estimated Ship Date of 8/11 turned into Estimated Ship Date of 8/18 when I received my confirmation.. Weird, isn't it?

[ThinkRob]

Far more, but they are willing to reduce to match the coupon price.
Anyway, I ordered my x220 i5 yesterday, while ordering Estimated Ship Date of 8/11 turned into Estimated Ship Date of 8/18 when I received my confirmation.. Weird, isn't it?

Not really. It's an estimate.

[hyde]

Hahaha, they just felt like adding 1 week to it.

[ThinkRob]

Hahaha, they just felt like adding 1 week to it.

CTO systems often have more of a lead time than uncustomized TopSeller configs (or configurations configured to match existing types/models.)

[sysiphus]

CTO systems often have more of a lead time than uncustomized TopSeller configs (or configurations configured to match existing types/models.)

True. Oddly enough, though, my CTO order gave a lead time of one month, but left Beijing 6 days after the order was placed...

[hyde]

I just updated my order status in the shipping thread under X220 board. It was shipped 8/7, departed Shanghai 8/8.

[hyde]

Arrived

[Agarya]

I'm in the market for a new laptop and after looking at all options I am leaning toward Lenovo. Your needs and line of thinking in this thread follow my decision-making process. Therefore, I'm anxious to hear how you like your new machine. Most of all, how's the screen?

[hyde]

Screen is near excellent; the best I have seen in recent laptops included few ASUS, SONY, Toshiba and HPs. The colors are a bit off due to surface of the panel, but it is still a great picture. Definitely worth the extra $50 to get IPS. Viewing angle is unreal.

I am very happy with my X220, and I am most certainly glad that I actually went with a 12.5" display. The laptop is very light, probably lighter than the bag I carry it in. It works great when I am typing on my bed, I don't even need my laptop cushion to avoid getting burned. The keyboard is great, sound controls are awesome, and the thinklight is very useful. The only complain I have is the touchpad. I wish they just put a cheap simple touchpad there. I can't really use it. I use a mouse or the trackpoint, and I found trackpoint to be very accurate and useful.

If you are picky like me, and if you can live without the touchpad, I think you would like X220. Just don't expect a super computer.
Oh, and I also could not figure out howcome they could not fit an optical drive in this, probably they just wanted to leave it out for battery. Also it is slightly thicker than I expected, but we are not in a beauty pageant so you should be fine with it too.

Get the fingerprint reader. It is extremely useful.

[pianowizard]

J&R Music World turned into computer superstore.
http://www.jr.com/brand/lenovo/

When I was there few months ago, they had a whole lot in display, not necessarily all were available and in stock, but they all could be ordered there. In fact I was also looking at an Asus laptop, and I noticed that it had the best screen (closest to what I currently have on my Toshiba), but Lenovos all looked like they had a thin film on their screen...

I was in NYC yesterday and checked it out -- it's an amazing store! It occupies the entire city block and is divided into 10 different stores: one for laptops, one for desktops and monitors, one for DVDs, one for musical instruments, etc. I spent some time trying the digital pianos they had, but spent most of my time playing with their laptops. I also looked at a few laptops at the Best Buy store near Lincoln Center. Several observations:

1) I confirmed that on average, the Thinkpads had worse screens than ALL other brands!

2) In terms of build quality, the Thinkpads weren't particularly impressive either. It seemed that Lenovo's consumer laptops were actually better constructed. I still believe that the Thinkpads would withstand long-term abuse better, but I have no proof for this.

3) Only one brand was consistently well-built: Samsung. But their prices also tended to be higher, so the high quality isn't a surprise.

4) However, the single most impressive laptop wasn't a Samsung, but an Asus: the Zenbook UX31. IMO, it is the only Wintel laptop that can really compete with the the Macbook Air.

5) As usual, for Dell and HP, only their crappiest Pavilions and Inspirons were on display (though J&R did have the half-way-decent XPS 15z). Why can't they start selling their best Precisions and Elitebooks at retail stores?

6) I had read a lot about the amazing specs of the Sony Z2 and SE but had never seen them in person until yesterday. The Z2 was rather disappointing: it felt very flimsy and its sharp corners hurt my wrists. The SE felt stronger, but I didn't like its needlessly large footprint.

7) *ALL* the non-Apple desktop monitors at J&R were garbage: nothing higher than 1920x1080, and every single one had extremely narrow viewing angles.

[dr_st]

1) I confirmed that on average, the Thinkpads had worse screens than ALL other brands!

Did you see any other brands with better matte screens? That would be interesting.

2) In terms of build quality, the Thinkpads weren't particularly impressive either. It seemed that Lenovo's consumer laptops were actually better constructed.

In what aspects did you feel the construction was better?

3) Only one brand was consistently well-built: Samsung. But their prices also tended to be higher, so the high quality isn't a surprise.

I was burnt too many times by their products that are great on paper, but have terrible longevity, though.

4) However, the single most impressive laptop wasn't a Samsung, but an Asus: the Zenbook UX31. IMO, it is the only Wintel laptop that can really compete with the the Macbook Air.

Do you mean in terms of build quality, or other things?

7) *ALL* the non-Apple desktop monitors at J&R were garbage: nothing higher than 1920x1080, and every single one had extremely narrow viewing angles.

The good IPS monitors generally don't end up in retail stores either. I guess when you ask HP and DELL about why they don't send their best laptops to retail stores, you can ask about monitors too.

[ZaZ]

1) I confirmed that on average, the Thinkpads had worse screens than ALL other brands!

Most laptop screens are junk. The one's I've seen from other brands aren't markedly better with a few exceptions like the Air. I'm surprised this is news to you. I'm typing this on an Air. While it does have some nice contrast, it doesn't have the angles and thusly can't be considered great, only good.

2) In terms of build quality, the Thinkpads weren't particularly impressive either. It seemed that Lenovo's consumer laptops were actually better constructed. I still believe that the Thinkpads would withstand long-term abuse better, but I have no proof for this.

I can't speak for others, but my X220i is as good as any ThinkPad I've used.

3) Only one brand was consistently well-built: Samsung. But their prices also tended to be higher, so the high quality isn't a surprise.

Perhaps so, but how much can one determine about built quality and longevity from a visit to a store?

4) However, the single most impressive laptop wasn't a Samsung, but an Asus: the Zenbook UX31. IMO, it is the only Wintel laptop that can really compete with the the Macbook Air.

We all know you're a resolution freak, but personally, I find the difference between 1366x768 and 1600x900 to be so small, it's hardly worth mentioning. I'd much rather have IPS yumminess of the X220 than HD+. The loss of 4:3, which gets you 1400x1050 the best resolution ever, is much more disappointing. The UX31 is supposed to have a terrible touchpad and average screen, but I've not seen it myself.

5) As usual, for Dell and HP, only their crappiest Pavilions and Inspirons were on display (though J&R did have the half-way-decent XPS 15z). Why can't they start selling their best Precisions and Elitebooks at retail stores?

People who buy EliteBooks and Precisions don't buy them in a store.

7) *ALL* the non-Apple desktop monitors at J&R were garbage: nothing higher than 1920x1080, and every single one had extremely narrow viewing angles.

There certainly are some better monitors out there, but most stores sell junk.

[hyde]

piano,
Also, do you own an IPS screen lenovo? I don't think I can ever go back to anything that's not IPS ever after seeing what this can do.
JR does not carry any models with IPS. Meanwhile, the others just look shiny and fancy, but if you consider lenovo build quality low, I think you need to review others more closely.
As for Samsung, I really don't think they can compete with full time computer manufacturers.
Like I said the only thing in their line up that was worth buying other than Lenovo was Asus gaming laptop (Republic of Gamers) because it had a pitch black screen with excellent specs. However, when I went to another place mid-town who also sells bunch of laptops, they did have the same Asus laptop (keep in mind, that thing is 10lbs) but it somehow had a cheaper screen.

So unless you compare all different specs of one model, it is very difficult to just check one out in the store, and then go buy one online. I am extremely happy with my X220 purchase even with the few problems it gave me so far, but it just feels like an extension of me. I could never feel that way with an airbook or dell. Vaio Z, maybe.. Only because I remember their last gen line was great both spec wise and picture quality wise. I cannot comment on the new ones, they might be a bit pricy, but if they were similarly priced with just a bit more premium for additional features, I could easily consider one as my next laptop, but under $1000 for X220 with everything but SSD was just too difficult to pass..

If you check my other posts, I mentioned my cousin get identically spec'ed Toshiba 13" with addition of DVD+RW drive and two ram banks instead of one for $300 less. It is also something to consider if you are in the market for a daily beater.

[ThinkRob]

Apple ships some very nice TN panels on their laptops, but in my experience their desktop monitors are *massively* overpriced compared to other pro-level displays. They have good industrial design, and they look much better when compared with the average consumer-level desktop monitor with a TN panel. But put them up against a high-end display of a similar price, and you see them for what they are: very nice, but very expensive monitors aimed at the style-conscious consumer.

With regards to Lenovo having the "worst" screens of any business laptop maker... well... that's quite amusing, as many of the panels used in ThinkPads are used in -- you guessed it -- other brands of business laptop.

[pianowizard]

Did you see any other brands with better matte screens?

I didn't differentiate between matte versus glossy because I am fine with either.

In what aspects did you feel the construction was better?

I looked for flexes, squeaks, and fit and finish. By these criteria, the Lenovo consumer laptops were slightly better than the Thinkpads.

I was burnt too many times by their products that are great on paper

When did you use Samsung laptops? In the States, Samsung laptops didn't become widely available until about two years ago, at most, and the ones I have seen ranged from "good" to "excellent".

Do you mean in terms of build quality, or other things?

The Asus UX31 was the best in terms of build quality, weight, and having a reasonable resolution of 1600x900.

Most laptop screens are junk. The one's I've seen from other brands aren't markedly better with a few exceptions like the Air. I'm surprised this is news to you. I'm typing this on an Air. While it does have some nice contrast, it doesn't have the angles and thusly can't be considered great, only good.

This was "news" to me because I hadn't owned Thinkpads in a long time, and also hadn't seen so many Thinkpads in a store until this visit to J&R. Yes, most laptop screens are junk, but there are several levels of "junk" and the Thinkpads' screens seemed to be the worst "junk" at the store. This visit did not convince me to start buying Thinkpads again. It also changed my mind regarding the Sony Z2, to which I had planned to upgrade from my current Toughbook Y5; now the Asus UX31 seems like a far better choice.

I can't speak for others, but my X220i is as good as any ThinkPad I've used.

I am not saying Thinkpad quality has declined. In fact, I have always said that Lenovo's Thinkpads are about as high quality as IBM's. Rather, I am saying that some of the other brands (including Lenovo's consumer lines) have surpassed the Thinkpads. Again, this is based on my brief experience at the above-mentioned stores and says nothing about long-term reliability/durability.

I find the difference between 1366x768 and 1600x900 to be so small, it's hardly worth mentioning.

1600x900 is 37.3% higher than 1367x768. To me, that's very significant.

Also, do you own an IPS screen lenovo? I don't think I can ever go back to anything that's not IPS ever after seeing what this can do.

Look at my signature -- I don't own Thinkpads any more. I bought about 45 Thinkpads between 2002 and 2009 and six were IPS: Two QXGA (2048x1536) and four UXGA (1600x1200). I liked them but am okay with decent TN screens, such as the ones my current Dell Latitude D820 and Panasonic Toughbook Y5 use. But I am not okay with the rock-bottom TN screens that most current Thinkpads use.

For desktop monitors, I am much pickier and so most of my monitors are either PVA or IPS -- see my signature.

If you check my other posts, I mentioned my cousin get identically spec'ed Toshiba 13" with addition of DVD+RW drive and two ram banks instead of one for $300 less. It is also something to consider if you are in the market for a daily beater.

I am happy with my current laptops and am not shopping for any more. (What I said above about upgrading from my Toughbook to the Asus isn't going to happen any time soon.)

With regards to Lenovo having the "worst" screens of any business laptop maker... well... that's quite amusing, as many of the panels used in ThinkPads are used in -- you guessed it -- other brands of business laptop.

You need to understand that while other brands do use lousy panels in some of their laptops, they also use far nicer ones in their other laptops, so that on average, these other brands have better screens. I should also reiterate that my review was entirely based on the laptops I saw at J&R and Best Buy. There were no other business laptops at these stores. I agree that some 14" Latitudes and Elitebooks have equally horrible screens -- this problem seems to apply to most if not all recent 14" business laptops.

[rumbero]

In what aspects did you feel the construction was better?

I looked for flexes, squeaks, and fit and finish. By these criteria, the Lenovo consumer laptops were slightly better than the Thinkpads.

I think that most of the actual build quality of any given machine can not really be seen from the outside by superficial criteria like squeaking and looks. It only really shows when you start disassembling and reassembling it and, in this regard, Thinkpads are famous for being very serviceable. For me, it would require to try the same with other brands to be able to judge the actual real build quality.

As i'm quite curious about this particular topic, which other brands have at least the same level of technical documentation (HMM!) and serviceability like Thinkpads? Is there any match? Are recent Thinkpads still a match to their older brethren in regard to overall serviceability?

[ZaZ]

The Asus UX31 was the best in terms of build quality, weight, and having a reasonable resolution of 1600x900.

I don't know how much one can discern about longevity from a visit to a store. Just cause something feels well built, doesn't mean it'll last. The Asus is a couple weeks old. I'd say the jury is still out on that one.

I am not saying Thinkpad quality has declined. In fact, I have always said that Lenovo's Thinkpads are about as high quality as IBM's. Rather, I am saying that some of the other brands (including Lenovo's consumer lines) have surpassed the Thinkpads. Again, this is based on my brief experience at the above-mentioned stores and says nothing about long-term reliability/durability.

I'd say your and my experience differs on this one.

1600x900 is 37.3% higher than 1367x768. To me, that's very significant.

Most of the extra space comes on the side, which has little value. I can't argue the numbers, but on a typical web page or document that's going to give maybe three extra lines. That's not worth getting overly excited about in my opinion. If see a SXGA+ screen, then we'll talk. I'd much rather have quality than quantity. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that one.

[pianowizard]

As i'm quite curious about this particular topic, which other brands have at least the same level of technical documentation (HMM!) and serviceability like Thinkpads? Is there any match?

HMMs are available for all Dell and HP computers, and for some though not all Panasonic Toughbooks.

I don't know how much one can discern about longevity from a visit to a store. Just cause something feels well built, doesn't mean it'll last.

Hey, I already said at least twice that I understood this caveat.

Most of the extra space comes on the side, which has little value. I can't argue the numbers, but on a typical web page or document that's going to give maybe three extra lines.

The extra space on the side has little value to you but enormous value to me, because 1600 is just wide enough for viewing two windows side by side whereas 1366 isn't. I never cared much for 1440x900 because 1440 was still too narrow and so I have owned only one 1440x900 laptop (a Z61t, for only a couple days) and not a single 1440x900 desktop monitor. Do you view everything in full-screen mode?

[dr_st]

I didn't differentiate between matte versus glossy because I am fine with either.

Glossy coating can make a dull screen look somewhat better. It definitely makes colors look more vibrant and improves perceived contrast. Some say it even makes the viewing angles a bit wider, although I haven't verified that. Under it I am pretty sure that, on average, it's the same crappy TN panels. I believe it is the key reason why glossy coating became so popular on laptops, which tend to use far lower-quality TN panels than desktop monitors. However, business laptops still have matte screens, even though generally they appear worse, because apparently for those machines the ability to work in a variety of environments without reflections is still more important than the perceived quality of the screen.

The reason I asked specifically about matte panels, is because when comparing apples to apples, you can still see big variability in screen quality (compare the respected 15.4" WSXGA+ panels from T/R/Z series, to the rock-bottom 13.3" WXGA+ of X30x, for instance). Unfortunately when comparing apples to oranges (matte to glossy), it is much harder to spot actual differences.

When did you use Samsung laptops? In the States, Samsung laptops didn't become widely available until about two years ago, at most, and the ones I have seen ranged from "good" to "excellent".

Not Samsung laptops, but a variety of other things from them - from portable CD players years ago, to phones and video cameras in the more recent past, and even a Xerox/Samsung printer. My experience has always been the same - amazing features on paper, but either they don't work, or they stop working shortly after the warranty expires, in a way that makes the device unusable.

A separate issue was their phones. I always loved their interface, more than that of comparable Nokias or Motorolas. But whereas these Nokia phones could take almost endless abuse, up to an including being drowned in water, and still work afterwards, the Samsungs I had would pretty much develop irrecoverable corrosion damage if you so much as spit on them.

Maybe with their laptops, especially considering the price, they are better - I have no idea.

The extra space on the side has little value to you but enormous value to me, because 1600 is just wide enough for viewing two windows side by side whereas 1366 isn't. I never cared much for 1440x900 because 1440 was still too narrow and so I have owned only one 1440x900 laptop (a Z61t, for only a couple days) and not a single 1440x900 desktop monitor. Do you view everything in full-screen mode?

I for one view everything in full screen mode. I hate horizontal scrolling, and unfortunately, to have no horizontal scrolling and still enough usable horizontal space for two windows side-by-side you need at least 2048 (twice XGA). Under a limited set of circumstances, the 1920 pixels provided by WUXGA can be enough, whenever you have one main window and a few smaller ones, such as IM, or gadgets. Note that I am not talking about viewing pages of Word/PDF side-by-side in the same window, for this even SXGA (1280 pixels) is usually OK. So to me, wider screens just means more wasted horizontal space in many scenarios.