little x200 buzz

[quillaja]

I'm a little surprised that there isn't more discussion of the x200. I remember when the x61 became available, there was lots of activity here. There was even a thread of people saying, "I just ordered it! Only X more weeks to wait."

But it seems that the x200 isn't generating that kind of excitement.

[makito]

Personally I think the X200 is a bit underwhelming. I mean when you compare the X61 and the X200 there's not much that warrants fanfare...

Wide but lower resolution screen (big disappointment, WSXGA+ expected)
Dual direction hinge (minor convience)
20-40% more battery life (standard in all newer SL cpu laptops)
Slightly improved touch (but still resistive not capacitive)
Very similar weight and size (slightly wider)

It feels more like when Intel releases a step up in speed. It's nicer, it's newer, but not really earth shattering.

Haha - but that's not to say I'm not going to still get one!

[JSleemanII]

Ordered 21 days remaining

[blashphemy]

ordered as well, 6 days remaining until shipment...

[quillaja]

Wide but lower resolution screen (big disappointment, WSXGA+ expected)

True, the screen is a real disappointment. I'd like to see something higher res (for more DPI / ppi) than wxga--as long as they let us get high res AND touch.

I'm not going to get an x200 anyway, since i just got this x61 last year. I plan to get at least 3 years of use from this, if not more. I usually get a new computer every 5 years.

[eatbuckshot]

Ugh I agree as well. It seems lenovo for whatever reason eschews high resolution. I really wanted a 14.1" UXGA when I was getting a thinkpad... But I had to opt for a T61P with only sxga+ (although there are some crazy mods out there to replace it with a uxga screen). I was looking forward to lenovo's x200 tablet and they did improve it in many aspects: very good outdoor visibility, LED backlight and consequently higher brightness, dual direction swiveling, full size keyboard, new +3 db speakers, supposedly better touch capability (compared to x61t),x4500, ddr3 ... but ... x61t's 1400x1050 vs that 1280x800 43% more estate!..

from lenovo (starts talking about x200t at 5:30)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zz9ErmQg2eU

I think the major aspects is the brighter screen + improved outdoor visibility and full size keyboard

capacitive touch is more durable, accurate, and responsive than resistive but resistive can be activated by any physical touch not just a finger or a special input device. That would be a selling point. It would be interesting if lenovo had both to choose from, but I would have a hard time deciding

[quillaja]

i'm mostly interested in the high-resolution screens for the DPI, not the "real estate." I want nice crisp detailed icons and silky smooth text! It's true that high-res on a small screen would make everything too small, especially for touch. But that's only with the DPI set to 96... It should be fine if the OS is actually set with the correct screen DPI. But the average person (or the PC manufacturers) don't understand that, and associate high-res with small text, and therefore stick with low-res screens for the sake of "viewing comfort." bah!

ok, i'm done ranting =)

[blashphemy]

i'm mostly interested in the high-resolution screens for the DPI, not the "real estate." I want nice crisp detailed icons and silky smooth text! It's true that high-res on a small screen would make everything too small, especially for touch. But that's only with the DPI set to 96... It should be fine if the OS is actually set with the correct screen DPI. But the average person (or the PC manufacturers) don't understand that, and associate high-res with small text, and therefore stick with low-res screens for the sake of "viewing comfort." bah!

ok, i'm done ranting =)

+1 if you're using a resolution-independent OS - maybe around Windows 7.

Go ahead, reset the DPI in Windows to Large (120 DPI) and restart, it looks like crap. 'Nuff said. Resolution independence fixes this though, so wait until Windows 7 (supposedly) or Snow Leopard.

[quillaja]

Well, vista is pretty good at 120dpi. i'm using that now with no issues. however, if i set it higher still, then things start to break-- for example, the firefox toolbars become un-proportionally huge (though IE and Chrome seem to handle it fine).

i suppose my point was partially that because past Windows, and even now (reading the Windows 7 blog), always said DPI is a way to change font size. Also, it was buried and never used, so when people got new high-res screens, they also got stuck with a tiny UI. Therefore, now people are stuck with a misconception that DPI = font size and high-dpi (high resolution) screens = real-estate / tiny UI.

but yea, there really wasn't a lot of support for resolution independence before vista. in vista, it's mostly older non-WPF applications that break, not windows itself. hopefully windows 7 will take it all the way and everything will be wonderful. =)

[makito]

I have to agree, if MS just got their shell programming right and implimented DPI settings consistently throughout the OS, we;d all be in high resolution heaven.

Luckly, I'm near sighted so I'm still okay haha...

Any idea when Win7 coming? I heard 2010 at the soonest....