Need help choosing between T vs TR

I made a topic on TR World, but in the interest of foot traffic and getting as much exposure as possible I decided to post the same topic here. So lets hear your opinions.

So I'm in the market for another laptop. My T350 crapped out on me last December and my current SZ240 is going to my mom, basically because she wants it. So I'm considering getting another T or possibly locating a TR since I've always been enamored with the its style. Can anyone, preferable someone that has owned or used both, offer some insight as to both series strengths and weaknesses? Basically I'm looking for comparative reviews with a single choice at the end. And I'm looking for as much input as possible so fire away.

Based on my own research of the two, internally they're similar. I think the bus speed and the ram speed on T is a bit quicker but when it comes to the essentials they're close enough; 1.1ish Centrino, 512 ram, 10"+ lcd, poor on board video. From the pictures comparing the two that I saw in an older thread, the TR seems to be quite a bit thicker than the T. But looking at the specs, the TR measures 10.6x7.4x1.5 inches while the T measures 10.7x8.1x1.3 inches. Thats a difference of 5 cubic inches. The TR is definitely the prettier sister between the two and has the camera to boot. As far as future-proofing, since both laptops are similar in internals I think both are subjected to the same disadvantages as the market moves out of XP and into Vista. I think thats all I have for now. Please comment.

EDIT: http://www.notewiz.co.kr/Notewiz02/MultiBoard/frmMultiBoardView.asp?BoardKey=2&RecordNo=93
Here is that link that compares the two visually. It was pointed out before that the TR is missing the battery which doesn't quite make it a fair comparison.

EDIT P2: Some people can't see the pictures so ill directly link to them
http://nottes.com/notebook/sony/review/2004/t_vs_tr_04.jpg
http://nottes.com/notebook/sony/review/2004/t_vs_tr_07.jpg
http://nottes.com/notebook/sony/review/2004/t_vs_tr_10.jpg
http://nottes.com/notebook/sony/review/2004/t_vs_tr_11.jpg
http://nottes.com/notebook/sony/review/2004/t_vs_tr_21.jpg

 

Is there a reason the TX's aren't considered? I myself went with a TXN15, it has very similar specs, but has the ability to run AERO.

 

the main reason the TX isn't in there is price. I'd probably get a TX if it could be had for under 1k, but those are kinda few and far between.

 

Under 1K is tough, but I routinely see them for 1100-1200.

What is the price difference between the T and the TR? If the difference is only a few cubic inches and a camera, it really depends on how much you need the camera and how much you like the style of the TR. I used to have a T and I thought ti was really nice, but have never seen a TR.

BTW: your link does not work.... for me at least.

 

Updated for links to the pictures.

The price difference between the T and the TR is pretty much nothing, as weird as that may sound. The TR has managed to retain its value quite nicely despite being several years old now. I do happen to like the style of the TR, more so than the T which is a handsome piece in its own right. The camera probably wont work anyway, since many have gone bad or XP SP2 render it useless, but it is nice as a throw in. Also I recalculated the volume of the TR per the dimensions given in abaxter's review of the TR5. The TR measures 1.37"-1.44” X 10.6" X 7.4" and comes out to a volume of about 110.2 c.i. With the T coming in at 116.1 c.i., it makes me wonder why Sony would choose to release a laptop that has more volume than their current offering. I can only guess that they felt a thinner notebook was better, even at the expense of depth and width, which would probably help with keyboard/base geometry.

 

They are almost identical. Does the TR have bluetooth? Sorry I can't offer much help, but I've only used the T and I thought it was pretty nice. There's one on sale now on ebay for about 775.