Sony Vaio S - Better than X1/X220?

It's very much a personal thing and influenced by age and eyesight. I also find web page text on the X220 at the limit of smallness, in fact, a strain. Rather than change the DPI settings in Windows, I've opted to raise the zoom in Chrome to 120% because the vast majority of my reading is done on the web. This way the rest of the desktop stays the same but only web page text increases. I leave Firefox at default settings.

Incidentally, I've also moved the taskbar to the left. It's a bit weird at first but the extra centimetre of space at the bottom helps with the vertical shortcoming of 1366x768

 

Yes, taskbar on the side is a must on 16:9 displays. I suspect that one of the reasons of taskbar's redesign between Vista and 7 was to fit on the side. In older windows, placing the taskbar on the side was possible but not practical. Also, borders and titlebars are way too big, I scaled them down considerably.

The other thing I use is Less Chrome HD addon in Firefox which hides the address bar when not used.

 

Agreed. I'm out traveling a good bit these days. I don't need or want a flashy computer. I appreciate the mute color scheme and basic design.

 

Which is a benefit, especially in a small form factor. Lower heat.

 

which is terrible if you need the standard power

 

HD+ (sigh)... Once I had the experience of HD+ I'll never go back. Everything (to me) just looks better, more streamlined, less "pixelated." Pick up a 'old' cell phone and compare it to your iPhone's retina display for example.

Sure, you can live with low DPI, but higher DPI should be an option for those that want it. You can cram more things into the screen. Currently no X series computer (Edge or classic) has a HD+ option. What happened to the X201s successor (rhetorical question BTW)?

@David1274
Sure, the HD3000 is quite impressive relatively speaking. It can handle a monitor or maybe two. But what do you do with a 21" screen? You certainly can type a word document. You certainly can email. How about play a game? Video conference? Run a basic graphic simulation for your computer science class? Maybe you want to watch a 3D movie? There are within the realms of a person that can do with an ultraportable. Wouldn't that be nice?

I don't quite understand why people don't need a GPU. Do they 'think' they do not need it? Do people wish they have a weaker GPU? There's some threads about undervolting CPUs, yet Lenovo is offering i7s? All I'm asking for is more power where it 'needs' to be. Maybe I'm the only one? Does pairing a powerful i7 with a lowly GPU bother anyone else? Sure, I can live within integrated graphics, but it sure will be a lot better (for me, and I hope many others) if other options were available (like HD+). And like HD+, a 'decent' GPU doesn't exist in the X series.

 

Which is why I have a W520.

 

You don't need dedicated graphics to run multiple monitors with regular apps.

Regarding low volt processors, I just don't like how Intel rips you off for them.

 

You also don't need a Core i3 for regular apps as well.

 

That's true, but it's besides the point. A modern processor comes with power for when you need it and a power consumption advantage. Discrete graphics comes at higher cost, additional space and cooling, and greater power consumption.

An integrated GPU has no issues whatsoever running a desktop with some browser windows and whatever. You're missing the point. You could argue an Atom processor is good enough, but there's actually a difference you can feel between a proper processor and say some stripped down single core Celeron ULV. I don't think anyone would argue that for productivity, CPU comes first (or storage), and GPU comes last.

 

In my case, mainly use the external 22" Dell for watching movies. Actually, I used that monitor with my x220 for the first time today, with a new Displayport to HDMI cable, and then a hdmi to dvi adapter. It automatically ran at the monitors native resolution of 1680×1050 (16:10).

To be frank, I didn't find the picture as sharp as I usually do from my six-year old desktop PC with discrete gpu. The colours seemed a bit washed out and the picture more pixelated while streaming content from an online tv channel (BBC iplayer).

I can live with it but I do feel somewhat upset that the HD3000 isn't delivering a completely convincing picture to the monitor. I wonder if using the cable plus adapter could possibly be a factor here?

The X220 only has 2GB ram but I doubt that would affect picture sharpness and colour vibrancy.

 

It really depends on what you are doing. "Productivity' can mean different things. Businesses and students that do light work in engineering for example would rank GPU a little higher than you would. I would like to be able at least browse a SolidWorks or AutoCad file without having to resort to another computer. In this case I would gladly sacrifice CPU for GPU in order to borden tasks that the computer can undertake. At least in this case, you are now able to do something that you couldn't before, sure it may not do it well (I'm not expecting miracles of course), but at least it can.

 

I don't think businesses want discrete graphics on the X2xx line. If they did, Lenovo would probably comply, and if Lenovo is too stupid to do so, HP and Dell will gladly provide an alternative. I'm fairly sure the Elitebook 2560p doesn't have discrete graphics option nor does the Dell equivalent. I thus think that either large corporate buyers that buy most of these laptops do not want a dsicrete GPU in their ultraportables, or desire it but are unwilling to accept the compromises that Sony did, whatever they be, to have discrete graphics.

The X1, however should have discrete graphics. It's more consumerish than the X220 and possibly the X120e. I think that Lenovo wanted to do something that no one has done before and stuff a quad core rather than discrete graphics into it though, bad choice imho. However, if we think at this from the standpoint of the X1 being aimed at corporate buyers, the choice may make sense. There are lots of business applications that benefit from a quad core, such as huge Excel spreadsheets, and some that benefit from discrete graphics as you mentioned. If they can only fit one, they will probably choose the one that has the most demand which may very well be the quad core.

 

Yea probably is the adapter, since DisplayPort and HDMI/DVI aren't compatible so there is conversion going on. There's no reason for the integrated video to be any worse than a dedicated GPU, seeing how a GPU can run the desktop without drivers. Of course if it's an older desktop with VGA only output for the integrated, then that's a different story.

 

This exact same conversation comes up time and time again, comparing some consumer model brand to the latest Think brand offering.
Put simply, if you have to compare a Thinkpad to a shiny new XPS/Vaio/MBPro, you are not their target market.
Their target market is a large IT department deploying hundreds of computers at a time with all the same software on it, and if any of the hundreds of Thinkpads have a broken part, it can easily be fixed quickly in house regardless of the age of the machine.
Lenovo (and in the past IBM), has not, and never will, care what individual consumers think about the Thinkpad line, you're not the target market.

Why did I buy a Thinkpad? Because my dad works for BP and has had a Thinkpad T series variant dating back to the first one, T20, up to the most recent models. He and his coworkers put those things through he!! and never experience a day of downtime.
The first week I had my T420 I dropped it three feet (twice in one day actually) onto hard concrete floor in school and it slid several more feet, not a scratch on it.
I would love to watch a Vaio go through that with its plastics still intact. Seriously. Go buy the Vaio and throw it onto concrete and lets see what happens.

And for your comment as to who wouldn't want a GPU? People who use their computers for work or school and don't have time to screw around with games. No extra drivers to screw with (go see what people are complaining about with buggy Optimus, specifically Dell XPS users, sux to be them), no additional heat, lower cost, the benefits go on if you dont need a GPU.

 

Graphics power is usually not necessary on the road with a small screen and all. But if you need it at home, try a Vidock or a DIY variant.

 

The difference in benchmark scores between the lower-voltage and full-voltage i5's is really not that much, and would rarely be used or noticed unless you're doing a lot of serious graphics (but then you'd probably want a dedicated graphics card) or serious number crunching. And most people who do that will have another machine.

The difference in heat, noise, and / or size is substantial, and is noticed every time you use the computer.

Every decision involves tradeoffs, but I think many people always opt for the fastest processor without thinking whether it actually benefits them - like more megapixels in a camera.

The series 9 is a pound lighter than the X1, has a beautiful matte screen, is virtually silent, and has a very fast SSD. For me those benefits completely outweigh any gains from a full-power processor.

I also like the X220 and the Sony SB (though I don't think I'd ever buy one of those), but I just don't see the reason for the X1, apart from having a glamor product for their new marketing.

 

That's good news.

However, I doubt the displayport to hdmi cable is responsible because, if so, other people would be complaining. It's probably the hdmi to dvi adapter (in conjunction with the cable) that's doing the damage because that makes two lots of conversions:

DVI MALE TO HDMI FEMALE ADAPTER CONNECTOR CONVERTER | eBay UK

I guess I need to either buy a displayport to DVI cable OR a new monitor with HDMI input instead of just DVI. Obviously, the former option is far cheaper. Arhhhh!

 

After looking at the X1 a bit (and Lenovo's silly little video), I have to agree with this. It does not seemed targeted at tradtional corporate buyers (glossy screen, backlit keyboard, Dolby sound, chiclet keyboard), but rather young professionals in small businesses/self-employed who want something "cool, fresh, hip." In other words, you can have the great things about your father's Thinkpad without being as boring and lame as he is. Somehow, I do not think Apple and Sony are quaking in their boots, but we'll see.

I do think there is a reason that they are calling this line the X1, and not X32x.

 

At first I was settled on the Sony Vaio SA but after having both the X1 and SA I quickly realized the difference in quality. The SA is terrible....it is the loudest hunk of junk i have ever used. Try taking the SA in a class or business meeting and see how many people give you an odd stare because your computer sounds like its taking of into outer space. Also, this is with stamina mode on and the display at 40%. Also, the hinge does not stay in one spot and this is on everyone's SA. Lastly, the screen....you gotta be kidding me, why would you put a good res screen on such a ty display.