SZ vs. TX - has anyone used BOTH?

Hi,

I'm trying to compare the SZ series to the TX series.

If anyone here has seen and used BOTH of these models, could you please share your thoughts and opinions? Why you prefer one over the other... likes and dislikes... etc.

Thanks!

 

I use a UK version, T1XP, and I find it much to slow for anything other than light office/internet use.
With MS office bloatware and IE7 loadedm it struggles.
Admittedly, the TX will be a bit faster, and the form factor is absolutely brilliant. But I have ordered an SZ to use as my main machine.

I will keep the T1XP for holidays etc.

 

Thanks. Anyone else used both of these models?

 

i have a sony t140p, which is the predecessor to the tx.

I also have a dell m1210 which is similar in size and power to the sony sz.

While the t140p's form factor is fantastic (super light, awesome battery life) its simply too slow and the screen can be too small sometimes.

The m1210 is bigger yet still fairly portable and the 12" inch screen is a nice size. The c2d cpu, dedicated gpu, and 5400/7200 rpm hd makes it much better for running more demanding tasks and for running vista. I'm sure the sz is similar.

I loaded vista onto my t140p (which has the 1.1 ghz pentium m cpu , intel 915 integrated gpu, and 4200 rpm hd ) and it was just too slow.

Unless your just doing surfing/email/word, I would go for the sz.

 

I concur with the above two posts.

I have both. The TX is pretty good for normal work like Word and internet and it can handle some older games, like Call of Duty. However if you are going to use it as your main laptop, I advise that you DONT. Mainly because the screen is very small and your eyes start to strain after awhile. Very uncomfortable. I've tried writing essays on it ... and got a headache. it's a great lappy to take on holidays though. Small and keeps you in contact with friends at home, post or email pictures or even transfer your images to the lappy if your memory card gets full. maybe a game on the plane =).

The SZ is a great main notebook. Doesn't have the problems mentioned above. Except it might not be practical taking it on holidays =).

Cheers.

 

So, for travel or as a second computer, you guys recommend the TX. Correct? But if it's going to be the main computer, you suggest the SZ instead.

Is that how most people here feel about these two Vaios?

 

I have a TX (the TX850 to be precise) but I don't have an SZ. I do have a 15.4" Compaq, however, which may serve as a sort of comparison.

I've only had my TX for a couple of weeks. It has: 1.20GHz Core Solo Processor U1400 Ultra Low Voltage/Bus Speed = 533MHz/L2 Cache = 2MB
which I would think runs a bit faster than the Pentium M in the t140p mentioned above. While the harddrive in the TX is a 4200rpm and the graphics is an Intel 950 128MB shared, I find the computer to be plenty fast enough. I must say, however, that all I've used it for so far is word processing and watching DVD's. I don't intend to play games on it... I have three desktops for that purpose... and internet surfing, which is what I mainly use my Compaq laptop for.

I don't understand the "eye strain" complaint during word processing that people speak of using the TX. I do it all the time and with the font set at a decent size in the program (I use Open Office), there is absolutely no problem.

I have no intention of getting rid of my 15.4" Compaq so I think I can agree that the TX would probably not be a good choice for your main/only laptop. I bought my TX850 specifically for its small size, its incredibly light weight, its amazing battery life and its potential as a supurb unit for travel.

HTH

 

netspots, i'll confuse you further by saying to stay away from the TX, unless you're on planes to Europe every week, and go for the new Sony Series C notebook. You simply can't beat the price ($1550), and at 5 pounds it's only one pound heavier than the SZ, but at least $500 cheaper, with the same power.

Another forum member, penetrode, has ordered one and I might order one too. Don't invest too much money now, Santa Rosa is coming next June!

 

Do you mean because the screen is too small, or ???

Thanks, but 5 pounds is getting up there in weight. If I were going for a 5-pounder, I'd probably use coupons and get the Dell m1210 -- but it's a bit too heavy, which is why I'm looking at the Sonys.

 

Yes, I'd like to jump in here and comment about weight. When you are talking about comparing 2-something pounds and 4 or 5 pounds, the difference is astonishing. When you're dealing with a small amount of weight to begin with, a few ounces, let along adding *pounds* can end up being a lot heavier than you think.

 

That would be correct =).

 

I would say get an SZ premium if you have the cash (its not that much more expensive than the TX, a couple of hundred or so...), otherwise go for the regular SZ.
I have used a T240, the FJ270 in my sig, a ThinkPad X41, and a MacBook pretty extensively (the T, X41 and the MB are friends laptops) and I found the T240 to be much too small. The TX is bigger but not by much, and the X41 is also pretty small. I find the macbook to be the best compromise of size, its not too small and not too large. the SZ is approx. the same size as the MacBook, and I personally think that the premium version is the best all around notebook in the market (cept for price, which prevented me from buying even the regular SZ -- Im a broke college student lol) because of the size, screen, and the dual graphics system. The keyboard may be iffy, but its not that bad, and after about 5 minutes in the store, i got used to it.
Go for the SZ, you wont go wrong.

 

Yep, I agree.

I really wish Sony made a TX-like laptop with a 12" screen and 1280 x 800 resolution. That would probably be perfect.

Come to think of it, it might be best if Sony used a native resolution of 1280 x 800 on the TX. The larger resolution they currently use on the TX doesn't make sense on such a tiny screen. Oh well.

Anyone know of a laptop that is similar in size/weight of an TX, but with either a *slightly* larger screen or *slightly* lower resolution?

 

Hey netspots,

Your prayer was answered today!

http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=3320

 

Wowww... That looks GREAT!

I wonder how long it'll take to be released in the U.S.

Hmmm....

 

Keep in mind it has no optical drive and why does it have a disgusting fullscreen display?

 

Ahhh... bummer. I'd rather have a built-in drive.

Guess I'll keep looking.

 

Keep in mind, the article said "features an optional integrated DVD drive (which boosts the weight to 2.17 lbs)." =)

 

OH! Awesome.

Boosts the weight? It's a feather!

 

Read the news of this today.

With the choice Celeron or Core Solo, integrated video, and optional intergrated optical, it's a great work ultraportable.

The main issue for me would be that it's only 1024x768 instead of 1280x768 or 1280x800 (the latter, I'm appreciating on my SZ much more than I thought I would)

 

they made it 1366 x 768 so that the screen can accomodate movies in the16:9 ratio. at 1280 x 800 you get the cars on top abd bottom. also if you do the math 1366 x 768 actually has more pixels on the screen.

btw... the G series is a full screen.. NOT widescreen.

 

I didn't notice that. That really sucks.

Why can't Sony get this right? They seem to have the ability to build the *perfect* ultra-portable laptop, yet they just won't do it.

 

Exactly. Which means everything on the screen is smaller than on a 1280 x 800 res screen.

In my opinion I think they should have put 1366 res on the 13.3" screen, and 1280 on the 11" screen -- not the other way around.

 

it has more pixels, but not by much. the reason why the text looks smaller on the tx is because it has a 11" vs 13" screen.

 

Yeah, I realize that... but I guess my point is that since it's such a small screen to begin with, using a resolution that makes everything even smaller seems kinda silly to me.

Let's put it this way: If Sony figures out how to put a 12" screen with 1280 resolution in a TX body, I'll buy it.