From: Randal Whittle (rwhittle_at_usa.net)
Date: Tue Jun 02 1998 - 20:48:20 EDT
Anyone want to hazard a guess about what I just signed for today?
Yep. The Airborne delivery guy mentioned, "Seems like Christmas is
every few days with you!" (I've received a lot of packages in the
last couple of weeks, though his "Christmas" comment is off the
mark...if only he knew the heartache I went through in losing my
560...)
Consider the following a prelude to the more detailed review I'll have
for you in a couple of weeks.
I've barely turned it on, but a few observations as I've opened the
package:
- Boxes: Goodness, it came in a big box, then you open it up and there's
a smaller box. Upon opening *that* one up, a *very* small box with
handle on it like a little suitcase (par for the course with IBM
laptops--this will be my 4th, and every time the packaging is very
"neat" with the handle & all). However, opening all those
boxes made me feel like that scen in Dr. Seuss's "Cat in the
Hat" where each cat keeps taking off a hat only to reveal a smaller
cat underneath...with another hat. Okay, so they overdid it a little. I
can forgive them for that.
- Opening the final box, looking inside...WELL DONE, IBM.
[SIDE NOTE:]
Those of you who have been paying attention know that not only have I
been on the list since its creation and a precious few of us had our
wonderful little 750's, but also that I strayed from the true and
faithful path a couple of months ago when I stumbled across a good deal
on an NEC Versa 5080X--a kissin' cousin to the TP 600, but with a 233 MMX
CPU. Much of my initial observations will be in comparison to the NEC,
which I think is appropriate because most of their features are
near-identical and they compete in the same class of machines that I call
"Pretty Light, Mostly Thin, and Retaining most Full-Features"
(certainly very little if any trade-offs). The NEC is a 5 lb. wonder
that is almost identical in feature set to the 600, so its certainly
worth making the comparison on a head-to-head basis.
I believe I mentioned to this list that I jettisoned the NEC mostly
because I just didn't like the Touchpad (Trackpoint is king--I know that
now) and the keyboard, while not poor in quality, just suffers from the
same kind of stupid key-placement tradeoffs that so many manufacturers
(but not IBM) are making: Poor placement of critical keys, and crowding
the keyboard with worthless items like the stupid "Windows
Key".
Allow me to say however, that although it wasn't to my tastes, the NEC
Versa 5080X is a *fine* machine--I believe it is vital to give credit it
where it is due and that one does indeed deserve it. For those who
haven't had the pleasure of owning a Thinkpad, that particular model of
Versa would (and should) have lots of devoted followers. I believe it to
be head and shoulders above most of the laptop market.
However...I without even turning on this TP 600 I can already list the
(much improved) differences.
To whit:
SIZE MATTERS:
The whole time I had the Versa, in the back of my head I couldn't help
but think, "Gee...it sure is bigger than my 560." The
difference was palatable, and though I liked the faster performance of
the new Versa, I longed for the lighter weight and more compact size of
the 560. Now this may seem strange to some of you, but for the faithful
users of 701's (and perhaps 560's), you know exactly what I mean. Ever
wonder why so many people are still using relatively "obsolete"
701's? Here's why--they're just a *NEATO*, compact little machine that
doesn't force them to type with their pinkies. For those of us who
appreciate small design & minimal weight, it doesn't take any more
than 1/2 to 1 lb. for us to notice a difference. In fact, the move for a
701 user to a 560--though shaving off 1/2 lb. in weight (the 560 is
lighter), is still a little traumatic because of the 560's larger
footprint.
Now let me preface this by saying that the TP 600 has virtually identical
dimensions as the Versa 5080X, although I think its weight figures are
actually about 0.1 lb. lighter. Also, the TP 600 is 0.1 inch thinner.
Nevertheless, this *still* makes the 600 0.2 in. thicker than the 560 is,
and nearly 1 full pound heavier (when you remove the CD drive to keep the
comparison fair, since the 560 does not have one).
SHE'S GOT THE LOOK:
But you know what? Its amazing...for all the picking at nits you can do
about the machine being bigger than the 560, I *have* to say this much:
It just doesn't *seem* like it is (at least not nearly as much as the
Versa 5080X). Why? I'm not sure, but I suspect there are a couple of
factors: (1) The TP 600, like all ThinkPads, is black. Black by its
nature tends to minimize things (which is why you don't want to squeeze
your big butt into white pants--white does the opposite of black as it
makes things appear larger). By contrast, the Versa was some shade of
gray. I think that made it "appear" to be larger than it was,
or rather that the 600 "appears" to be smaller than it really
is. (2) Lines. By this, I do *not* mean fit and finish, as the NEC's
fit and finish was pretty darn good. What I mean is "lines" in
the sense that your car has lines--a Corvette has *very* different lines
than a Volvo. It looks sleeker. For those of you who are familiar with
the 3Com's Palm Pilots, the latest Palm III device *appears* smaller than
its predecessors, but really *isn't*--they just shaved off the corners
and edges to make a device that is less "boxy" in appearance.
The TP 600 is that way. By comparison, the Versa was just plain
"Boxy" whereas the 600 just looks sleeker. The 560 had very
few sharp corners, mostly rounded ones which added to its already
eye-pleasing experience. The 600 manages to continue--perhaps even
improve--on that design thought. Its footprint is tapered inward, such
that although its dimensions are whatever they are, the actual amount of
machine touching the desktop is less by about 1/4" on the front and
sides (but not the back--but who looks there anyway?). To put it in
ASCII-artwork, it looks something like this when viewed from the
side:
_____
\
| (Forgive my artwork--never was much of an artist)
_____/
Also, the top part of the case (while the lid is open)
has a similar taper to it. This creates the effect of the lid closing
down "over" it, something like your upper teeth closing down
over your lower (anyone here an orthodontist? I've worn braces for
nearly four years now and am eager to get them off next month. Nothing
worse than having an MBA, pushing 30, two kids, and yet feeling like a 14
year-old kid because you have braces...).
I should mention that the fit and finish is very much up to the IBM
standards that we've come to expect. Wow...*really* nice. One thing
though...they've gone to these little spring doors to cover the PC card
slots. That's perfectly fine with me (I broke 2 or 3 little plastic
doors on my 560...fortunately they're only about $3-$5 each to replace
and I got smart and ordered a handful after the first one broke). The
upper and lower spring-loaded doors are supposed to meet in the middle of
the opening. Mine don't quite meet--a bigger space or crack between them
than I would expect. Not a big deal, I suppose. But when I fork over
$4,000 for a machine, I expect a lot when it comes out of the box.
SIZING UP THE RESULTS:
In a nutshell...I think the 701'ers on the list would hate anything
bigger than their 701, and would have some difficulty adjusting to a 560,
so the 600 may be too much of a shock for them. But as a 701'er myself
who made the semi-difficult transition to a 560 and now beginning my
adventure with a 600...I am pleased. Yes, its a bigger machine, but it
is designed in such way with its tapering & well thought-out look
that its only mildly noticable. The evidence can be seen when comparing
it to an almost identically-featured notebook that *doesn't* have those
same attention to details.
For those of you already used to carrying those big monsters weighing in
at 7 or 8 pounds, you'll feel the ache leave your shoulders and breathe a
sigh of relief carrying this svelte beastie--and you won't have
compromised any of the features you've come to love (Unless you're some
kind of DVD nut...personally, I *like* having my TV, Stereo, and Computer
as seperate devices, cheating only to use the stereo system for Dolby Pro
Logic Surround Sound while watching movies).
I know what at least one person on this list is thinking..."Is it
flimsy?" There have been dirty rumors circulating that the 701 and
in particular the 560 was too soft--that its case flexed when you torqued
it. Hogwash! They're fine machines, despite that my 560 gave up the
ghost when dropping it on the ground (as near as I can tell, the screen
is perfectly intact and the HD--which was running at the time of the
drop--is what crashed. No "tough" machine in the world would
have prevented that). Besides, would you rather drop a relatively light
computer or a heavy beast? Seems to me they heavier one is more likely
to sustain damage of some sort. Just my opinion...)
BIG (BLUE) BROTHER:
So the burning question: Is the 600 a wimp? The answer, in my
estimation, is "No." Indeed, I think it just *might* be the
most solid machine I've owned. The 750C had that flip-up keyboard, which
although cool, *could* occasionally be a little weird. The 701C had that
folding keyboard which again--very cool--but solid? I never had any
problems with it, but it is something you worry about just a little. The
560...it was just plain light, and lifting the lid always made me
wonder--again, just a little--if I should be more gentle in opening it.
So...the 600? Just like the 560, *but* it seems to be considerably more
substantial. Its like the 560 has a muscular older brother--you know,
the one that would tell those other little brats that were teasing you to
scram or meet the pavement in a swift fashion (I just wish I had one of
those--can you tell I had a rough childhood?!).
PICKING UP THE PIECES:
The 600 is a semi-slim, mostly lightweight, *modular* computer. What
does that mean? As any 701 owner knows, that means
"pieces"--everywhere. Thankfully, its nothing like the 701
which had more pieces to it than I care to count (okay, lets count
anyway...port replicator, floppy drive, parallel port dongle, A/C
adapter...was there more? Sure seems like it...), The 560 has a floppy,
CD Drive and A/C--that's it. What else do you need? Oh yes...the
"spacer", for those times when you need neither the floppy or
the CD drive and want to keep things as light as possible.
Allow me to digress to NEC territory again, as this is where the
comparison is again the most direct. I thought the Versa's
"pieces" were pretty neat--a slender CD drive, floppy, spacer
was a bit boxy but it served its function, and they included a cable to
connect the floppy externally.
Let me start by saying that IBM blew one thing: There's nothing to keep
the CD drive in when not in use. The Versa included a *nice* little
leather zippered pouch that gave you a place to put one of the sensitive
(Floppy or CD drive) parts and keep it nice and safe. I thought it was a
nice touch. Too bad IBM missed it. Come to think of it, they probably
didn't--they just want you to buy it as an after-market product.
However, let me tell you what IBM *did* do!
I barely recognized the floppy...it comes encased in its own little shell
that also has a "tail" on it which serves as the external
connection to the machine (which, incidently, is the same plug that is on
the floppy drive that goes with my 560--I presume the 560's floppy would
work fine with it, but haven't tried it). I was indeed impressed. I
can't tell you how ugly--and a little unnevering--it was to connect the
NEC's floppy externally. It was just this poor little drive out in the
cold with no clothes on--reminded me of when I shave our cat every year
to stop the shedding (and in the process, reduce her from a gorgeous
creature to an ugly rat-looking thing you'd be inclined to shoot). At
any rate, the drive just seemed out of place and quite vulnerable unless
it was used *inside* the machine where it belonged, even though it had a
cable to connect externally (which was unwieldy too, since the floppy
port was on the back of the machine and the cable placement on the drive
itself was odd).
No such problem on the IBM. The shell casing for the floppy makes it
look like it is a natural accessory to this machine (and it is), though
it does make the floppy larger than the one that came with my 701 or
560--but that's to be expected, give that those floppies aren't meant to
be inserted inside anything while this one serves as a housing for a
floppy that does. Also, I could imagine that NEC floppy cable getting
lost. The IBM's floppy housing has the cable attached, so it seems as
though it wouldn't be lost as easily. It really does just *look* nice
and add some level of protection, though I suppose it is one more bulky
item to travel with (if you wish) while the NEC was as simple as carrying
the cable. However, unlike the NEC, there is no place to put the CD
drive when not in the machine. I suppose you could put it in the floppy
housing, but that's a little strange. Neither IBM nor NEC seemed to have
a place to put *both* items when the spacer is being used to lighten the
load.
Speaking of spacers, another little thing: The NEC's spacer design was
square and boxy--seemed to incorporate a lot of unnecessary plastic for
reinforcement too. Meanwhile, someone at IBM must have gotten a better
grade in geometry class, because theirs is shaped triangularly with a
blunt nose on the end, pointed toward the back. That maintains whatever
needed rigidity while minimizing plastic. NEC, go back to school.
;-)
Oh...and more on fit and finish as it relates to form and function: The
NEC drives were a little difficult to handle. Pulling them out of the
machine meant making sure your fingers didn't go into the wrong place.
there was just this narrow hole in the machine and the drive went in and
out of that. Again, IBM paid closer attention to how these things get
handled, and made the front of their drive (or spacer) serve as more of
the front portion of the casing itself. This translates into a
"handle" of sorts on the front of each of the CD & floppy
drives (and the spacer), making for something more substantial to grab
and hold when removing the drive. I believe it also makes for a simpler
locking/release mechanism for holding the drive in place, since the NEC's
locking/release mechanism had to "shoot" the drive out in order
for you to get it. With the IBM, you just release the lever and pull
gently.
WHERE DID THAT DOOR COVER GO...?
Did you ever mutter this statement under your breath? I was amazed how,
on my 560, they used a 4-inch long rubber "stopper" to cover
the rear ports. People on the list told me how this was better than a
hinged door for a multitude of reasons, but I never much cared for the
explanations--it was just one more part to get lost. And to prove that,
I did indeed lose mine. I found it a month later, but not before I had
already obtained a replacement... (*sigh*)
Nevertheless, I do understand the counter-argument concerning port
covers. Hingest can break.
So how does the 600 approach this? Hinges--sort of. Its a curiously
fascinating thing that probably has to be seen to be believed or truly
appreciated. First of all, you have to understand they *aren't*
hinges--at least not in the traditional sense that you should think.
Think of it opening, joined at the plastic, but not on hinges. That's
the idea. Dangerous, right? There's only so many times you can open and
close that before the plastic has had enough and it just breaks off, eh?
My thoughts exactly.
But hold off a moment--its not what it seems! You'll probably have to
see it yourself to believe it, but the concept is really simple genious.
Each "door" is really a flap--don't judge it yet, its not
nearly as wimpy as you might think. If you look over the whole machine,
you'll note that each port is covered by this flap-style thing that folds
over the door and under the computer. The flap itself appears to be a
semi-flexible rubber-ish stuff, textured on the outside to be similar to
the casing, but on the inside more flexible. However, you can't see much
of the inside, because each end (one of which is the port door) is
reinforced with nice solid plastic, so you can only see the flexible
stuff where the joint bends. What you end up with is a door that serves
its function as a door, yet has a folding mechanism that appears to me to
be virtually impossible to wear out or even break. Really, I'm
impressed. Its a simple yet smart design and you'd never know the
difference without *really* looking close the way I did.
Oh, the ports? All seem to be in the right place (which was a little
disorienting at first!). Rear has the normal parallel, serial, &
video (behind two different rear doors)--which made me wonder "Where
the hell is the USB?" Well, its by the power switch on the left
side, under its own little hidden door. Incidently, the modem jack is on
the other side of the power switch. Oh, and right above the USB is a few
holes in the casing. Its pretty clear this is for fan airflow to keep
those hot little P-II's from blowing up like miniature nukes. One
article I read insisted this was the only way they could put P-II's in
notebooks, with obvious concerns about the effect on battery life.
On the right side where the PC card slots are (and some other jacks for
audio & whatnot), there is another port (behind a door) for hooking
up the floppy. This is a great relief, as the NEC forced me to get
behind the machine to hook up the floppy. Also, IBM paid attention to
where they put the floppy port when they designed the floppy shell. The
way the cord is attached makes sense, so no strange contortions are
necessary. Nice to have that, yet I've come to expect IBM to pay
attention to those little things (which is why it surprises me that they
didn't include a protective carrying case for the CD drive).
Oh, and the power switch seems to have the smoothest action on an IBM
machine I've owned since the 750. The 701 makes you break a nail to turn
it on, and the 560 is moderately better, though it always seemed strange
to have the IR port "attached" to the power switch. The 600
has a great, simple, *normal* power switch that turns the thing on
without forcing you to do strange things to it with a fork.
THIS KISS...
Okay, its an odd heading--but its the latest song by Faith Hill (Don't
laugh...Pop went down the tubes, Rock n Roll & Metal ain't what it
used to be, and Rap was never anything more than crap. Country, Jazz,
and Classical are about the only options left!) and it was her CD that I
used to test out the speakers on the 600.
One of the tremendous disappointments I had when moving from the 701 to
the 560 was the quality of the speaker. The 701 really had a good
speaker on it--clean, crisp, rich. Surprising for such a small thing.
The 560's speaker sounds like a piece of tin hooked to a vibrator. Okay,
that's exaggerating, but you get the point. It works, but not
particularly well.
Now I should mention that I have Bose satellite speakers in my living
room. I'm not an audiophile in the true sense of the word, but I do like
good quality sound. At the same time, I also realize its more than a
little bit silly to expect anything on a laptop to come close.
So when I put in that CD, I didn't expect much...and didn't receive
much. The sound was clear--at least it isn't tinny like the 560--but its
fatal flaw is the lack of bass.
Furthermore, its a little weird to have the speakers mounted on the
wrist-rest area. Sound coming through vibrates your hands. Some might
like the "massage"...some might even have sex with their wives
more often instead of constantly wasting time on their Thinkpad...but
personally it was just plain annoying to me. Fortunately, if it bugs
you, you can either turn it down easily with a FN + PgDn key combo or
just plain turn it off with a FN + BKSP key combo (very handy!).
Truthfully, I liked the Versa 5080X's placement of the speakers at the
top of the keyboard better (it also sounded better), but I suspect IBM
wouldn't be able to do that and maintain the solid keyboard layout. If
that's the tradeoff, I'll keep the crappy speakers in favor of the better
keyboard!
I don't miss the sound dial from my 560 all that much, as the key combo
is just as easy, but being digital and not having a huge amount of steps
which is perhaps more easily accomplished with an analog hardware dial.
The result was that I couldn't adjust the sound to the leve I most
preferred--it was either too loud or too soft. If they're going to make
it a digital control like this, they could at least add more steps to the
sampling...
Stereo? Yes, there are two speakers. But if you call a seperation of 7
inches between those two speakers enough to call it "stereo",
then you're a sadder sort than I would have thought. Personally, I don't
see the point. 1 speaker works no worse than 2 that are this close
together. So why try to make the space?
SUMMARY: Keep your stereo. You'll need it. Saying this beats the 560's
sound is like saying a Tercel beats a Yugo. Its a true statement, but
nobody cares.
TICKLIN' THE EBONIES...
I touch type at a speed that approaches 80 wpm. I figure I'll never
starve because I can always find work as a secretary. Frankly, when you
have excellent typing skills, keyboards become more important than ever
in your daily use.
The 600's keyboard is the best one I've used since my 750. The 701's
keyboard was fine, but a step down from the 750, and to be expected if
you wanted something that was going to fold in on itself. The 560's
never folded, but had a very similar feel to it--better than the
competition's, but not up to the par that the 750's. If I may
digress...the 750's keyboard was really remarkable. It managed to
maintain the full-stroke travel with zero compromise that you might
expect from the finest of desktop keyboards. It really set that machine
apart. Of course, there has to be a dark side, and that was noise. A
lot of people used 750's (and I think 755's?) in libraries and classrooms
only at the risk of being whupped upside their head for the
clackety-clack they were creating. Thinkpad keyboards since then have
been a bit squishier...certainly quieter...and just not *quite* as
good.
The 600 is a pleasant surprise. No, its not quite on par with the 750's
keyboard, but its better than the 560's, with which I expected it would
be on-par with. The strokes seem adequately long, the feedback solid,
the buttons below the space bar "click" in feel, but not in
sound. Strangely enough, it seems to walk a great balance between
positive feedback and "squish". The 701 & 560 keyboards
were a bit soft. Its difficult to describe, but the 600 keyboard seems
to feel more substantive. It is possible, however, than I'm comparing a
new keyboard to a 21-month old one that has been broken in, and thus the
comparison may be unfair.
While we're down in this area, I might as well mention the new TrackPoint
II--and its 3 buttons. What do you use the third button for? Good
question. You get to define its use (sort of). You can either set it up
such that you can click (and hold) and then pressure on the Trackpoint
scrolls the window you're in, or you can set it up such that clicking on
it brings up a "magnifying glass" that you can use the
Trackpoint to move around the screen. My 67 year-old father would love
this one to better see small text, but I suspect most people will use it
to get a closer look at their favorite parts of various unmentionable web
sites on the net.
The more intriguing new feature of the TrackPoint III is the new pressure
sensitivity. No, I don't mean the pressure you use to make it move from
side to side. I mean the up and down pressure. As is traditional, the
Trackpoint doesn't move--it just senses pressure. The *amount* of
pressure and the quickness with which it is applied is user-configurable,
but the usage is a bit tricky. I kept selecting things on accident when
I was merely trying to push the Trackpoint to the other side of the
screen. I'm sure that this, like using a Trackpoint at all, will take
some getting used to but once you catch on, I'm sure most will be hooked
if they can just get past the learning curve. Its a good thing IBM did
this because one of the whiz-bang features of the latest Touchpads
allowed you to just tap on the pad to click or even drag windows on the
screen, all without taking your finger off the pad. It was infectious
enough that even I, a confirmed hater of the touchpad, grew to like that
feature. Now I can have something very similar in the Trackpoint, if
only I can master it.
AND IN CONCLUSION...
I'm not certain I'll write any more on the subject. The 600 has gotten
very little usage, as I spent more time writing this review from my
desktop than actually using the darn thing (are you impressed with my
self-discipline? Could YOU do that?!), so for the most part this
has been an observation of the extrenal features with a smattering of
usage issues. I really don't think there's that much more to
tell. I'm assuming that a P-II performs well and the machine should
be pretty fast, etc. (incidently, this is the first time that I've gotten
a notebook machine with equal or better specs than whatever desktop
machine I had at the time. My current desktop is a Dell Pentium Pro
200 MHz with 96 MB RAM and a 3.7 GB HD. The TP 600 is a P-II 233
with the same RAM and 3.2 GB HD. For the first time I'll expect my
laptop to be about as fast as my desktop).
Screen is pretty, etc. etc. I think you'll get good screens on just
about any quality laptop, so I don't think that's worth comparing, per
se. The only things I can think of that still need to be evaluated
& reported to the list would be whether its too hot to use on your
lap and how long the battery life is *really*...is that 3-hour figure
they put out a load of bull? I'll try to determine that...
Anything else?
Hope you enjoyed my treatise on ThinkPadding...
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 09:54:07 EST