Why are people upset by the X220's resolution?

The MBP 13-inch is 1280 by 800
The X220 12.5 inch is 1366x768

What's so bad about the resolution?

 

Dude, its the internet, people are always upset about something.

 

Because previous x series went from 4:3 to 16:10 then to 16:9?

In all honesty, my Latitude 13 1368x768 resolution isn't bad though I would prefer 1280x800. 1368x768 isn't horrible on sub 14" notebooks. But anything over 14" is bad.

 

While you get a wider screen resolution (1366 to 1280) you lose vertical space (768 to 800). In my experience while doing office documents and design work, I constantly find the need to scroll up/down more to compensate the lost pixels. If you do these works a lot then the 1366x768 resolution will get rather tedious (made even worse on a 15.6" notebook!).

 

Some people prefer high-resolution screens and would like the X220 to have that option. I think it really is that simple.

 

Bingo.
http://forum.notebookreview.com/lenovo-ibm/566370-x200-s-last-1440x900-ultraportable-thinkpad.html

 

This. No two people use a laptop the same, thus the reason why people want different resolutions and aspect ratios.

 

So true.. read some recent forum posts and you'll find that X220 is bad because it doesn't have 1600x900 res, T420 is bad 'cause it doesn't have an Ultrabay battery and no quadcore, T420s is bad because it doesn't have a 9 cell battery and no dedicated GPU, W520 is no good because the adapter is too heavy..

Basically to some people there are no good Thinkpads on the market, never have been and never will be.. (even though I suspect some of these people actually complaining while using a thinkpad )

Ontopic: Personally I think a 14" with a 1440x900 resolution is my favorite, guess I'll have to wait until Lenovo starts producing a 16:10 X420 (which will probably be never)

Until then I will use a 16:9 T420 1600x900 and be happy with the 160 extra horizontal pixels.

 

+1

Early January, there was nary a mention of IPS. Now even X220 with IPS is not good enough because either you lose vertical resolution or you don't have pixels packed densely enough. i5 without USB 3.0, what a deal breaker!

Man, I thought Sandy Bridge would take care of everything.

 

There are a lot of very good Thinkpads on the market, and really, nothing else comes close to getting things right. The problem is, there's never a perfect Thinkpad on the market. As soon as they include a missing feature, they take another crucial one away.

Hell, with Windows 7's big fat taskbar and Office 2010's ribbon, there's hardly any room to even edit a Word document with 768 or 800 pixels. I was actually looking forward to 16:9 because we'd gain 160 horizontal pixels while sticking at 900 tall, but that just didn't happen. I wouldn't mind the moves to wider screens if they'd stop screwing us out of vertical space.

 

I totally agree, bought my first Thinkpad (X40, typing on it now) 7 years ago, am addicted to the trackpoint and build quality and will probably never buy another brand again (although lately some HP business class laptops are tempting)

As for 'crucial features' some of them seem marketing induced, as soon as for example USB 3.0 is out, nobody can live with USB 2.0 any more.

 

I'm still impatiently waiting for Lenovo to produce a ThinkPad netbook with 1900 x 1200 resolution. Until then, Lenovo sucks.

 

You could always move the taskbar to the side, thanks to the big fat taskbar, it doesn't look so bad.

As for ribbon in Office, I auto hide it.

I am picking up a high degree of sarcasm on my sensor, look like I have to get it fix.

 

Was the rumor for x220 having 1600x900 a rumor? tabook makes no mention for an HD+ screen.

I'd love an 11.6" ThinkPad with QXGA+ resolution.

 

I tend to use "Small Icons" to reduce the size of my Windows 7 taskbar. As for Office I use the 2003 version so I guess i'm immune to this scenario!

 

I'd sooner buy the new Latitude series, though I haven't gotten my hands on one yet. The HP keyboard's keys are just too flat, and a complete deal breaker for me. I don't know how the Dells do in that category, but I've generally heard that Latitude keyboards are second to Thinkpads.

 

Working on a 1366x768 resolution is painful. I need more vertical resolution in order to work effectively. Its not just "people on the internets complaining", but a legitimate concern from professionals that require certain specs. Imagine a mechanic that needs a 12in long extension in order to reach a certain bolt and only having an 8in long extension. The task at hand will be impossible or at the very least extremely difficult and painful. Well for professionals like myself a 1366x768 screen resolution is that 8in extension. Luckily there are those of us that have extended older technologies and can still work fine, but that wont last forever and some of us are worried that the stores are running out of 12in extensions and plan on only carrying 8in extensions.

I can make another analogy if youd like, but this one should suffice. So to sum it up its nt a bunch of people whining for no reason, rather its legitimate concerns.

 

I do too, but it's still larger than XP, which was larger than 2k.

Right now I'm still on my X61s, so that's not an option. If I were to get an X220, that's what I'd do, but I'm still considering other options, waiting to see what the X1 is, and hoping those 1600x900 IPS rumors are true.

 

Some people just want to complain because they have too much time on their hand or that they have a real grievances and want to vent about.

I guess with lot of consumers on Macbook, they are more worried about other parts of the system then the final resolution of the LCD.

Also, for people whom purchases Macbook from stores, they are not overtly fussed about resolution (it is also not something that Apple discusses a lot about other than in the specification sheet), they just want something that works and has a long battery time.

Thinkpad users can sometimes be more fussy, since many of them tend to be older and have more experiences with hardware, so they are really into the detail side of things.

I think the HD resolution on the X220 is okay for 95% of the users, while the other 5% of the users may need to adapt or stay with their older higher resolution laptops until something better comes along.

 

Forgot to add try using RDP or VNC sessions let alone code with 1366x768. Scrolling in an RDP/VNC is painful, and lowering the resolution on the RDP/VNC is even more painful and most times makes working literally impossible. Even running at a painful 1024x768 in full screen the session requires scrolling and Id love to see people administer a win 7 system at that resolution and be happy...heck even a win xp system.

Now try coding anything longer then 35-45 lines of code on a 16:9 resolution like 1366x768 and youll see how painful it is.

 

Actually, Apple fan are complaining about not getting a higher resolution on their recent refresh. My view on this subject are that the one that complain the most are either die-hard fan or they are die-hard haters.

 

RDP is ok, but I don't even try using VNC anymore unless I'm docked. That and any sort of diagramming program are a total pain at 768 pixel height, and Gimp and Excel follow close behind. A lot of websites also have menus which are taller than my browser window can possibly be. Yet I need something extremely portable, because I'm constantly dragging the thing around with me between various sites at work and school.

But yeah, we just like to complain. Nobody could possibly need more than 1366x768 in an ultraportable.

 

Yeah just like nobody would ever need more then 640k ram... Sad that people think that we complain to complain or that are either die hard fans or die hard haters. Legitimate concerns.

 

Well I got a Latitude E6420 right next to me!



The KB layout seem to more shallow for the Latitude than previous, well shallower than my T61 anyway.




Back to the resolution debate, the E6420 has 16:9 HD+ resolution and it looks fine actually, not as dense as I thought it would be. I think the HD+ are the way to go for a 14" notebook these days.

 

This site being a perfect example, at 1024x768 only the adds show when I open the forum, I wonder if there's an add-on/plug in/script/browser that can skip the top 600 pixels or so from a certain URL?

 

It's hard to tell from photos, do the keys have an adequate curve to the top surface? The problem I have with Elitebooks and Macbooks is that it can be difficult to feel where you are on the key, and I end up sliding around the home row a bit.

There are certainly addons to take care of that, and allow you to whitelist sites which are more responsible. I do believe I'll get in trouble if I go any further, I may have already said too much.

But if you think that's bad, go to Draft Express

 

Hearst555,
The Dell doesn't look as bad as I thought it would. How do like the design on the latitude?

 

That latitude E6420 looks hideous. Not sure why Dell is changing the E6xxx design so many times.

 

For me, I wouldn't mind at all, as long as a high-resolution option were available as in the X201s and X200s (although both had serious supply issues).

For NBR at least, you could use the vBulletin default skin, which is what I use. There are no ads.

 

Yeah I gotta agree with lead_org. The only Latitude refresh that looks half decent is the E6320 replacing the E4310.

One shouldn't be doing serious serious work on a 12" ultra portable. Yes Office and web browsing would be better with extra vertical pixels, but as the trend continues towards widescreen, the x series wasn't immune to it earlier.

 

I think it's far better than the last one, and the build quality is supposed to be much better as well. Those silver batteries sticking out of black laptops were just awful. These are the first two tone laptops I actually like the look of, though maybe the new Edges are in that category.

 

The keys feel fine on the Latitude, despite looking shallow there is enough contour on the keys to distinguish from each other. And this coming from a veteran TP keyboard user!

The Latitude feels strong I give it that from the Tri-Metal casing. But I am a bit polarised with the design, you either love it or hate it. Personally I think the E6410 is more prettier than the E6420.

*Edit - Manage to pinch a E6410 along with the E6420!

 

And what do you propose we do on our $2000 laptops? Browse around on youtube all day? These aren't netbooks, I think it's fair to have high expectations.

I guess I'll have to more seriously consider that. Though, if I'm looking at a 14", I'm not sure why I wouldn't just get a T420s. I'll still have to wait for some reviews.

 

x220 isn't a 2000 dollar laptop. I mean you shouldn't be doing CAD or rendering on an ultra-portable.

 

They very easily become $2000, especially when you're looking at warranty extensions and ultrabases with optical drives.

 

That's true. The X220 design and components are those of a full-fledged professional notebook. Only the screen and the overall form are smaller.

Cheapo netbook it isn't. And a loaded configuration could reach $2000 easily. Now, having made such an expensive purchase, should one make it one's "mobile office" for all sorts of heavy-lifting tasks that require a decent visual workspace, both in terms of physical size and pixel density?

That's a question only you can answer for your own situation. (In my case, the main business/design work is done on the bigger notebooks, and I bought an X201 for mobility, doing presentations, reviewing documents, checking email, etc. while on the road.)

 

My screen resolution is WXGA+ 1440x900 (16:10). The Dell on the left uses HD+ resolution 1600x900 (16:9).

 

Unless the angle is off or something else, the Lenovo's look better then the Dell. I hope that is not the case for the 1600x900 ThinkPad T420 version as well. Any comments on this ?

 

The issue with the new dell pseudo chicklet style is its too flat. When I use one for a while its fine, but trying to transition back to another keyboard I find can be quite painful.

 

So what's the net of this thread? People aren't happy with the panel and resolution options for the X220?

I think what you get is all you get. I seriously doubt there will be any changes or new skus for the X220.

12.5" is too small for me but I'm looking forward to seeing the 1600x900 14" T420s when I can get my hands on one.

 

Lenovo should make one with 4096×3072 pixels and a magnifying glass-pen - Magnys

 

People complain because they went from 1400x1050 (X61) to 1440x900 (x200) to 1366x768 (x220).

x768 was a nice resolution for an affordable CRT in the '90s, not for a high-end notebook in 2011

Now, we still have a long way to go. Most movies are 2.35:1, not 16:9

Look forward to 1410x600

Btw: my phone has 800 vertical resolution.


If a 12" is not for CAD, please tell me what size I should buy if I want x1050? Why do we have to go bigger and bigger each cycle of more dumbed down screen?

 

I have enabled the auto-hide option of the Win7 task bar (I've started doing this after getting the x201). I also shrink the Ribbon in Office Docs. The latter is most convenient and I was an idiot for not even knowing that such a facility existed till very recently. I discovered this by accident.

I use my x201 to write long 300-400 page documents and for presentations. The mobility factor also helps.

 

There is also a shortcut to minimized and maximize ribbon, Ctrl + F1. Have to learn the shortcut, so everything fit on my netbook.

 

Thanks. I did not know that. I always use the small arrow button on the top right of the Ribbon. This will be most helpful. Thanks.

 

You'd advocate a 140-150 pixel density? I'd say that's too high for most users. I think WXGA, be it 1280x800 or 1366x768, is a good resolution for a 12" notebook. The pixel density is 125, which I'd think is comfortable for most users unless you've got vision problems. I also find the stick very easy to scroll, which I think mitigates to some degree the loss of resolution. You can only look at one thing at a time anyway.

I wish they'd offer one of these screens on the T420. I got rid of my R60 cause it was too big and heavy. I went the opposite direction with the X series the next time. While I like my X200t, I wouldn't mind a bit more resolution as I don't need a ton of portability. The X30x with a good screen might have been the perfect notebook. If they ever do I might consider getting one, but I'd take my AFFS over a TN with more resolution every time.

 

There's a point where it does matter imagine 1680x1 pixel, yeah that's a 1 pixel. These are legitimate concerns, for the most part I've gotten use to it, but I hate to see it go even wider. It's starting to push what is comfortable.

 

Ha... but Zaz what do you use the R60 for? since you have the mini supercomputer desktop system.

 

Now having used 12", 14" and 15" machines, I agree - I think the 13" is probably the best for me but I don't think Lenovo would be issuing that series again...