Real MacBook Air Killer...

Ultralight Lenovo x300

- 13.3-inch LED backlit 1440X900
- Intel Merom Santa Rosa Dual Core CPU (2.0 Ghz / 880 Mhz )
- Up to 4GB RAM
- 64 GB SSD
- 2.5 Pound
- DVD Burner 7mm
- Camera
- Stereo Speakers
- Finger Print Reader
- Bluetooth
- WiMax
- GPS
- WWAN
- 3USB
- Express Card 34
- Ugly but the features make up for it.

Anything else you need?
No release date or price has been announced.

http://gizmodo.com/346797/ultralight-lenovo-x300-series-thinkpad-leaked

 

my god they make ugly laptops
they really have to change that platform..it reminds me of '98

 

Oh no...

Flame On. >_<

 

MBA will be out in 10 days. thinkpad x300 is very likely a fake, that's the problem. even its not a fake, it won't be out until May, i guess.

 

Hey! The ThinkPad look is gnarly old school.

\\edit

And look! That sucker's got 3 USB ports!

 

A medium latte, extra foam, please.

 

of course everybody dreaming now of MacBook Air with these features..

I think if they were able to fit at least 80% of these into the MacBook Air Design then everybody will just buy it and no 100 threads about what is missing and whats not..

 

Of course, the real question would probably be what the price would be on this thing, with all of those specs.

I'm assuming there will be, at the very least, a non-SSD model as well.

But it will be interesting none-the-less to see what all they have done here.... I'm also curious about the 1440x900 13.3" LED-backlit display, since I haven't heard of this being available previously (neither Apple, Sony, Asus or Dell offer 13.3" LED-backlit displays at this res).

I'd be especially curious about the materials and weight though; the Vaio G2 with an optical drive is 2.47 pounds, but that model is completely carbon-fiber and is only a 12" non-widescreen display. The G2 is also quite expensive.

I do sort of wonder if it's real; it does sound like a sort of "dream" machine, especially with 3G, WiMax, GPS, etc. included as well.

EDIT: Looking at the "spec sheet" I see it says it ranges from 2.5 to 3.17 pounds; I assume in that case the 2.5 pounds is perhaps without the optical drive, etc.

-Zadillo

 

I doubt it's real. None of the x-series IBM laptops that I've ever seen have had an optical drive either.

Even if it is real, those features are gonna rack that price up well over what the MBA is.

I wonder when Apple will start adding GPS to their laptops though... I know the real cost of doing it is (see the aftermarket GPS thread in Panasonic.. ), and they could do it for so little...

And seeing that now their iPhones have it (Even if it is just cellphone triangulation), they should start adding it to hardware.

 

Isn't GPS built in a laptop a bit more specialized (i.e. for specific vertical markets, etc.)? I can understand it in PDA's and smartphones, but as a built-in laptop option it seems more limiting (i.e. it isn't that convenient to use a full laptop for directions while driving, etc.).

Outside of that, on the laptop side I'd usually be just as fine with a bluetooth GPS adapter anyway. I think I understand it more in specific cases, especially for ruggedized laptops like the Toughbooks or Tablet PC's.

I do kind of wonder whether this X300 is "real" though; the images in that Gizmodo post don't look all that official, and have some odd typos (PCexpress in one of the spec sheets, for example).

I don't think it is necessarily fake just because it has a drive-bay for an optical drive, second battery, etc.; it wouldn't be inconceivable that Lenovo has worked on improving the current ThinkPad X-series design to allow for these as internal options.

-Zadillo

 

Not sure about you, but I've always loved the Thinkpad look. Doesn't look ugly at all. I like to think of it as a professional, business only design.

 

This Thinkpad is not an MBA killer, because its not against the MBA. The MBA isn't aimed at the same market as Thinkpad users....its more mobile professionals that want a stylish, lightweight notebook. The MacBook Air was never designed to take over the Thinkpad in any way...I mean, the MBA was designed with design and thinness as a priority; Thinkpad priorities are not those.

Now, saying this Thinkpad is better could work, but I would not call it an MBA killer as its not that same type of market...the MBA is a more for a selective group of mobile professionals who want style, while the Thinkpad is more for the general population of professionals.

 

Well, it's not necessarily a great idea to do so, but I've used my toughbook with GPS, and used software for directions. It speaks out loud and is kinda nice.

My brother uses both a dash mount GPS and a laptop with GPS and map software in his work truck, because the dash mount is great for knowing where to turn, but he does repo's, so he wants to know the whole area, which is easier to see on a laptop. It also does waypoints better too...

I do see your point though that the majority of people won't use a laptop for GPS functionality, but it sure is cool to have the laptop rather than a map book. We used mine to drive from Ann Arbor, Michigan to Encino, California, and got to a friend's place that we'd never been to without getting lost once, and we didn't print out directions or bring any paper maps.

 

I think the picture is fake. Lenovo changed the trackpad buttons to all black from the red stripes after they took it over from IBM.

 

They had a poll on this on the official Lenovo blog a while back and people overwhelmingly wanted the red stripes back. I think the return of the stripes is almost a given on next gen Thinkpads..

 

Too bad, the only thing I don't like about the Thinkpad "Deathstar" design are the colors. Otherwise it's cool. It's functional, has edges, and has its own identity.

As for the article: Looks like somebody posted a photo of a bog standard Thinkpad and invented some crazy specs for it. Lame.

 

There he goes trying to defend apple!!! But the real killer has been out for a while know, it is the XPS M1330!

 

The specs are new, but the basic form factor was already leaked a few weeks ago, see
http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.php?t=54801

 

Word! That's been my argument as well. Two different markets here. Apple knows what target market they are going for; so does Lenovo. Both brands -- Macbook and Thinkpad -- have done well in developing a core following of dedicated and passionate users.

FWIW, I run a Thinkpad and my college-age daughter runs a Macbook. For my daughter and I to switch would be silly. We each have different needs and desires, and those differences are reflected in what we choose to buy. Neither of us likes the other's laptop, but we're at peace with that .

In general, it is nice to see a trend towards increasing choice in the small/thin/light market.

The X300 will do well. So will the Macbook Air.

 

Hi smagdy, you're dumping your TZ too? So am I!

 

Meh, cool features, but I would never buy that butt ugly thing.

 

This is not a MacBook Air killer, and neither is Dell. None of them could ever be for the simple reason that neither runs Mac OS X.

Who cares if the laptop hardware has better specs if it looks uglier (subjective, granted) and is prone to viruses, spyware, crashes, etc. and runs much slower (Windows Vista is a monstrosity, an INEFFICIENT monstrosity, I am a tech for a living and I know this first hand).

 

No, I'm not defending Apple for no reason! Because that's what I feel. The MBA and Thinkpad are not targeting the same markets. Do you think the majority of MBA users (ones who really want style) will consider the Thinkpad...and do you think the majority of Thinkpad users (who want the business look, the build quality) will even consider the MBA? That's what I mean by they are targeting different markets.

 

I really disagree when people say that vista is blaotware, my friend has a macbook (I think it's pro) with about the same specs as mine and every-day applications (i.e. firefox, calendar, even safari) take about just as long to load. I have 1gb of ram on my desktop and 2gb on another desktop, both running vista. The difference, although there is one, is only slightly noticeable. I really don't understand when people say that you REALLY need 2gb of ram to run vista smoothly because it never lags for my 1gb (although an upgrade would be nice because games sometimes get lag spikes)

The reason I don't like Apple isn't because of their products, it's just Steve Job's attitude. He's really immature and unprofessional. Apple's products are very innovative and artistic, and I have to say I'm very impressed with the macbook air.

Anyway, the Dell XPS M1330 can get a hell of a lot more performance than the macbook air for the same price (probably shorter battery life though).

 

Awesome if true, but I see no need to get it, I kinda need osx...so I'm stuch waiting for the mba to get a price drop.

 

If you're using multiple demanding programs on vista with 1GB it really shows. Where as the same programs on OS X would run more smoothly since the OS isn't a RAM hog. Not to mention Vista eats battery life. Even Vista BASIC lowers my life by over 1 hour.

 

I want to note that Mac OS X boots up in about 30 seconds .


And just a side rant unrelated...I don't want to sound Windows-bashing and Mac-fanboying, as I definitely am not and truly dislike being called so...but I really hate Vista. My dad's Thinkpad has it, and I didn't have access to my MacBook for two days, and those two days were so frustrating. Vista slowed the Thinkpad down, Vista was annoying, just really soon even the glowing buttons start to annoy you...its like...I don't want you to look pretty, I'd rather you just get to work...

[/Rare Sam Rant]

 

Agreed, I really wish posters of topics of comparable computer products would start topics that we can all relate to. To even start a post on Lenovo or Dell being a killer to the Apple suggests that we (the Mac forum) don't care to use OS X and any Windows notebook will do just fine for us.
Well that's not the case, I can't use Windows, I need to use OS X, my work depends on OS X and there a quite a few things Windows can't do that Mac OS X can so I depend on OS X.
So it would be really nice if posters would place these notebook competitors on Windows forums, it's honestly not helping the Mac forum.

 

What's more annoying is when it blue screens you when you try to start the damn thing up, and restarts your computer. Also the shut down time is insane compared to OS Xs shut down of a whopping 2-3 seconds. I find myself staring that that blue circle saying "please please, just turn off so I can get away from you and go back to OS X."

 

Well, the case is true for Windows users who are switching to Mac...

 

I am not sure if any of you really understand Vista's ram issues, I am not %100 sure but I am pretty sure Vista uses ram thats not being used by anything else, and if you start a program that needs some of that ram, Vista will stop using as much.

 

That is exactly what Vista does. It tries to do its daily maintenance quicker by using more system memory, but is quite alright to give up the memory when another application requires more.

 

then why does everyone say its a ram hog, if at idle your using a gig of ram and you have 2 gigs who cares, the system will stop using some of that ram if you start an application.

 

LIKE ?????

 

These two notebook are for two completely different target audiences, so it doesn't make sense to try to compare them in that way. However, to many, design is very important to users, and in that sense, the leveno shown here doesn't have that.

As for Sam's post about Vista; sure, I use a Mac computer too, and sure, I loove OSX, however, like he said, Vista isn't all that great. I've used it on my dad's laptop too (what a coincidence), and I find that it's very laggy and slow. No, it isn't the laptop, that laptop is bran new with 2GBS of RAM, it's just it doesn't run the way I want an OS to run. I have been in plenty of meetings with friends and things when we want to hookup the Vista laptop to the powerpoint projector, and the computer just lags or freezes. This has yet to happen with my Macbook however.


In the first post you wrote that the "uglyness" of the laptop, is made up for because of the features. I strongly disagree with this. One of my main factors in choosing a laptop is the design and how it looks.

Both laptops here will suceed in their own market. It just simply doesn't make sense to compare laptops when they aren't even in the same market.

 

becuase it is easier to slam vista then to understand that vista was created to deal with up and coming hardware such as quads , much faster memory, on die memory controllers, off die cache, etc.....running vista on something other than what it was created for cuases problems.

the same would be if you tried to run Leopard on a ten year old Mac. Kinda lame results. And Leopord is the same as vista in that it has the ability to fully use the newest technologies if and when Apple starts using them....

 

Well, I can't speak for everybody, but I like the BSD base so I can use unix commands to do things, and also compile BSD apps.

But I'm sure other people have other needs that can't be met with windows.

I've gotta say I disagree. I've used Vista on two brand new laptops (One from Gateway, one from Dell), and it took *Minutes* to boot. Everything was super slow to navigate from there as well. This isn't 3 year old hardware, this is straight out of the box, straight from the manufacture hardware.

My 2 year old G5 running Leopard takes less than 30 seconds from power button to me using it. My brother's Macbook was stolen right before Leopard came out so I can't comment it's speed, but the other Mac laptops I've tampered with have had great response with leopard.

 

I think a lot of the slow boot times on vista have to do with the HUGE amount of bloatware installed on new PC's I installed vista on my moms computer

athlon xp 2500
1gig pc3200 ram
120gig wd hd

And it booted up really quick and ran great, all she used the computer for was email and surfing the web, she has never had any problems with it since.

Thats definitely a good think about OSX, no bullcrap installed.

 

That could very well be. It still seemed excessive though.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQ5_k3x61aM

seems like your average PC, nothing super high end.

I have to agree though the thinkpad I would say is designed for the business crowed and nothing more, people who want an extremely portable notebook thats rugged and they really do not care about looks.

 

I'm not going to dignify that with an answer because your response was pompous and snobbish. You sound Windows fanboish.

 

You can't really be blaming Vista for slow boot times when Manufacturers like Dell, Hp, etc CRAM them full of bloatware! Apple doesn't do that, and therefore right out of the box, of course any Mac would be faster than any equivalent PC...

It's only after cleaning up all that crap can you compare the two. Then the argument there is that Macs don't have to deal with this problem...Well, only Apple doesn't have to deal with all that crap...Not much Vista can do about that.

 

I see nothing wrong with that question, your response I think seems more fanboish then his.

 

I disagree, I think hdlan was very justified in his answer. The other user acted like there was nothing that a Mac could run that a Windows couldn't. Hdlan was simply stating how the other user was acting.

 

Meh, not a great argument. Leopard can run on Apple hardware more than 7 years back and runs beautifully on hardware within the last 5 years.

There's no excuse at all for Vista not to run well on current machines it's pre-installed on. It's insane to buy a new Windows Vista notebook it has laggy performance because the OS was really made to run on more future hardware.

 

Hello!? Do you not consider that all consumer PCs also come with a lot of crap pre-installed! Macs don't have that issue, and therefore are much faster than any similar PC right out of the box! That's not VISTA's fault period.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQ5_k3x61aM

Did you watch that link? thats not really even considerd high end hardware, its designed to take advantage of future hardware but that doesn't mean it wont run great on a computer built today.

 

That link is pretty much useless. So you've found the "one link" that proves that Vista loads quickly. I have articles on the MBP running about the same temperature as a regular Dell laptop, but noone pays attention to it because of all the other people saying that it runs very hot.

Same with this. This movie isn't going to make up ground because it's one of a kind, and there aren't too many out there proving this.

Besides, who says it isn't a movie played full screen on fast forward.

 

Also, a computer with that configuration should still be faster than that. My Macbook loads up in about 15 seconds, and I run widgets and everything. Even the Mac Mini loads up in about 20 seconds.

 

I was just providing an example there were a lot of videos showing boot times, some making fun of how slow it was and some showing how fast it was.

As for the macbook pro temp, I remember someone posting that link, don't remember if it was you or not.