From: STeve Andre' (andres_at_msu.edu)
Date: Thu Apr 06 2000 - 14:22:59 EDT
I''ve been collecting people's comments about the i series machines for
several days now,
but this last comment makes me respond right now.
Randy, how can you say that an i series machine isn't a TP? Its made by
(or for) or under
the control of IBM. It uses the same ram that other TP's use. It uses the
same hard disks.
CD rom drives, floppies. In short, the i series is simply another branch
in the history of IBMs
ThinkPad offerenings, no more, no less.
To say that the only similarity is that they're both black is
nonsense. You may not like the
i series--thats a perfectly valid opinion regardless of what I think of
it. But trying to differenciate
IBMs other offerings from the i series just doesn't make sense.
I've worked with the very first TP (a 700c), various 300's, 500's, 770's, a
600 (x and e) and several
i series. My problems with IBM are more that *all* models produced lately
seem to have more
bugs in them--all models. Just as I know of several 770 machines which
have worked perfectly
I could show you i series that have performed the same. ...I just got a
600x in a week or so ago
which was perfect, except for the comma key. ...and had the same problem
with an i machine
too, about a year earlier.
So liking or diskliking the i series units is one thing, but trying to lump
them somewhere else
just doesn't make much sense to me.
--STeve Andre'
At 11:01 AM 4/6/00 -0700, Randal Whittle wrote:
[snip]
> Except the more apt analogy in the Thinkpad/i-series comparison
> would be if Chevrolet just made up another car similar to the Camaro and
> called it a "Corvette i-series". THAT would piss off Corvette owners
> because it is *NOT* a Corvette. By the same token, the i's really are
> *not* ThinkPads, despite that IBM called them such. The only similarity
> they share is that both machines are black.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 09:55:57 EST