From: Randal Whittle (rwhittle_at_usa.net)
Date: Wed Jun 03 1998 - 13:34:56 EDT
Anyone want to hazard a guess about what I just signed for today?
Yep. The Airborne delivery guy mentioned, "Seems like Christmas is every
few days with you!" (I've received a lot of packages in the last couple of
weeks, though his "Christmas" comment is off the mark...if only he knew the
heartache I went through in losing my 560...)
Consider the following a prelude to the more detailed review I'll have for
you in a couple of weeks.
I've barely turned it on, but a few observations as I've opened the package:
- Boxes: Goodness, it came in a big box, then you open it up and there's a
smaller box. Upon opening *that* one up, a *very* small box with handle on
it like a little suitcase (par for the course with IBM laptops--this will
be my 4th, and every time the packaging is very "neat" with the handle &
all). However, opening all those boxes made me feel like that scen in Dr.
Seuss's "Cat in the Hat" where each cat keeps taking off a hat only to
reveal a smaller cat underneath...with another hat. Okay, so they overdid
it a little. I can forgive them for that.
- Opening the final box, looking inside...WELL DONE, IBM.
[SIDE NOTE:]
Those of you who have been paying attention know that not only have I been
on the list since its creation and a precious few of us had our wonderful
little 750's, but also that I strayed from the true and faithful path a
couple of months ago when I stumbled across a good deal on an NEC Versa
5080X--a kissin' cousin to the TP 600, but with a 233 MMX CPU. Much of my
initial observations will be in comparison to the NEC, which I think is
appropriate because most of their features are near-identical and they
compete in the same class of machines that I call "Pretty Light, Mostly
Thin, and Retaining most Full-Features" (certainly very little if any
trade-offs). The NEC is a 5 lb. wonder that is almost identical in feature
set to the 600, so its certainly worth making the comparison on a
head-to-head basis.
I believe I mentioned to this list that I jettisoned the NEC mostly because
I just didn't like the Touchpad (Trackpoint is king--I know that now) and
the keyboard, while not poor in quality, just suffers from the same kind of
stupid key-placement tradeoffs that so many manufacturers (but not IBM) are
making: Poor placement of critical keys, and crowding the keyboard with
worthless items like the stupid "Windows Key".
Allow me to say however, that although it wasn't to my tastes, the NEC
Versa 5080X is a *fine* machine--I believe it is vital to give credit it
where it is due and that one does indeed deserve it. For those who haven't
had the pleasure of owning a Thinkpad, that particular model of Versa would
(and should) have lots of devoted followers. I believe it to be head and
shoulders above most of the laptop market.
However...I without even turning on this TP 600 I can already list the
(much improved) differences.
To whit:
SIZE MATTERS:
The whole time I had the Versa, in the back of my head I couldn't help but
think, "Gee...it sure is bigger than my 560." The difference was
palatable, and though I liked the faster performance of the new Versa, I
longed for the lighter weight and more compact size of the 560. Now this
may seem strange to some of you, but for the faithful users of 701's (and
perhaps 560's), you know exactly what I mean. Ever wonder why so many
people are still using relatively "obsolete" 701's? Here's why--they're
just a *NEATO*, compact little machine that doesn't force them to type with
their pinkies. For those of us who appreciate small design & minimal
weight, it doesn't take any more than 1/2 to 1 lb. for us to notice a
difference. In fact, the move for a 701 user to a 560--though shaving off
1/2 lb. in weight (the 560 is lighter), is still a little traumatic because
of the 560's larger footprint.
Now let me preface this by saying that the TP 600 has virtually identical
dimensions as the Versa 5080X, although I think its weight figures are
actually about 0.1 lb. lighter. Also, the TP 600 is 0.1 inch thinner.
Nevertheless, this *still* makes the 600 0.2 in. thicker than the 560 is,
and nearly 1 full pound heavier (when you remove the CD drive to keep the
comparison fair, since the 560 does not have one).
SHE'S GOT THE LOOK:
But you know what? Its amazing...for all the picking at nits you can do
about the machine being bigger than the 560, I *have* to say this much: It
just doesn't *seem* like it is (at least not nearly as much as the Versa
5080X). Why? I'm not sure, but I suspect there are a couple of factors:
(1) The TP 600, like all ThinkPads, is black. Black by its nature tends to
minimize things (which is why you don't want to squeeze your big butt into
white pants--white does the opposite of black as it makes things appear
larger). By contrast, the Versa was some shade of gray. I think that made
it "appear" to be larger than it was, or rather that the 600 "appears" to
be smaller than it really is. (2) Lines. By this, I do *not* mean fit and
finish, as the NEC's fit and finish was pretty darn good. What I mean is
"lines" in the sense that your car has lines--a Corvette has *very*
different lines than a Volvo. It looks sleeker. For those of you who are
familiar with the 3Com's Palm Pilots, the latest Palm III device *appears*
smaller than its predecessors, but really *isn't*--they just shaved off the
corners and edges to make a device that is less "boxy" in appearance. The
TP 600 is that way. By comparison, the Versa was just plain "Boxy" whereas
the 600 just looks sleeker. The 560 had very few sharp corners, mostly
rounded ones which added to its already eye-pleasing experience. The 600
manages to continue--perhaps even improve--on that design thought. Its
footprint is tapered inward, such that although its dimensions are whatever
they are, the actual amount of machine touching the desktop is less by
about 1/4" on the front and sides (but not the back--but who looks there
anyway?). To put it in ASCII-artwork, it looks something like this when
viewed from the side (Try viewing this in a fixed-width font):
_____
\
| (Forgive my artwork--never was much of an artist)
_____/
Also, the top part of the case (while the lid is open) has a similar taper
to it. This creates the effect of the lid closing down "over" it,
something like your upper teeth closing down over your lower (anyone here
an orthodontist? I've worn braces for nearly four years now and am eager
to get them off next month. Nothing worse than having an MBA, pushing 30,
two kids, and yet feeling like a 14 year-old kid because you have braces...).
I should mention that the fit and finish is very much up to the IBM
standards that we've come to expect. Wow...*really* nice. One thing
though...they've gone to these little spring doors to cover the PC card
slots. That's perfectly fine with me (I broke 2 or 3 little plastic doors
on my 560...fortunately they're only about $3-$5 each to replace and I got
smart and ordered a handful after the first one broke). The upper and
lower spring-loaded doors are supposed to meet in the middle of the
opening. Mine don't quite meet--a bigger space or crack between them than
I would expect. Not a big deal, I suppose. But when I fork over $4,000
for a machine, I expect a lot when it comes out of the box.
SIZING UP THE RESULTS:
In a nutshell...I think the 701'ers on the list would hate anything bigger
than their 701, and would have some difficulty adjusting to a 560, so the
600 may be too much of a shock for them. But as a 701'er myself who made
the semi-difficult transition to a 560 and now beginning my adventure with
a 600...I am pleased. Yes, its a bigger machine, but it is designed in
such way with its tapering & well thought-out look that its only mildly
noticable. The evidence can be seen when comparing it to an almost
identically-featured notebook that *doesn't* have those same attention to
details.
For those of you already used to carrying those big monsters weighing in at
7 or 8 pounds, you'll feel the ache leave your shoulders and breathe a sigh
of relief carrying this svelte beastie--and you won't have compromised any
of the features you've come to love (Unless you're some kind of DVD
nut...personally, I *like* having my TV, Stereo, and Computer as seperate
devices, cheating only to use the stereo system for Dolby Pro Logic
Surround Sound while watching movies).
I know what at least one person on this list is thinking..."Is it flimsy?"
There have been dirty rumors circulating that the 701 and in particular the
560 was too soft--that its case flexed when you torqued it. Hogwash!
They're fine machines, despite that my 560 gave up the ghost when dropping
it on the ground (as near as I can tell, the screen is perfectly intact and
the HD--which was running at the time of the drop--is what crashed. No
"tough" machine in the world would have prevented that). Besides, would
you rather drop a relatively light computer or a heavy beast? Seems to me
they heavier one is more likely to sustain damage of some sort. Just my
opinion...)
BIG (BLUE) BROTHER:
So the burning question: Is the 600 a wimp? The answer, in my estimation,
is "No." Indeed, I think it just *might* be the most solid machine I've
owned. The 750C had that flip-up keyboard, which although cool, *could*
occasionally be a little weird. The 701C had that folding keyboard which
again--very cool--but solid? I never had any problems with it, but it is
something you worry about just a little. The 560...it was just plain
light, and lifting the lid always made me wonder--again, just a little--if
I should be more gentle in opening it. So...the 600? Just like the 560,
*but* it seems to be considerably more substantial. Its like the 560 has a
muscular older brother--you know, the one that would tell those other
little brats that were teasing you to scram or meet the pavement in a swift
fashion (I just wish I had one of those--can you tell I had a rough
childhood?!).
PICKING UP THE PIECES:
The 600 is a semi-slim, mostly lightweight, *modular* computer. What does
that mean? As any 701 owner knows, that means "pieces"--everywhere.
Thankfully, its nothing like the 701 which had more pieces to it than I
care to count (okay, lets count anyway...port replicator, floppy drive,
parallel port dongle, A/C adapter...was there more? Sure seems like
it...), The 560 has a floppy, CD Drive and A/C--that's it. What else do
you need? Oh yes...the "spacer", for those times when you need neither the
floppy or the CD drive and want to keep things as light as possible.
Allow me to digress to NEC territory again, as this is where the
comparison is again the most direct. I thought the Versa's "pieces" were
pretty neat--a slender CD drive, floppy, spacer was a bit boxy but it
served its function, and they included a cable to connect the floppy
externally.
Let me start by saying that IBM blew one thing: There's nothing to keep
the CD drive in when not in use. The Versa included a *nice* little
leather zippered pouch that gave you a place to put one of the sensitive
(Floppy or CD drive) parts and keep it nice and safe. I thought it was a
nice touch. Too bad IBM missed it. Come to think of it, they probably
didn't--they just want you to buy it as an after-market product.
However, let me tell you what IBM *did* do!
I barely recognized the floppy...it comes encased in its own little shell
that also has a "tail" on it which serves as the external connection to the
machine (which, incidently, is the same plug that is on the floppy drive
that goes with my 560--I presume the 560's floppy would work fine with it,
but haven't tried it). I was indeed impressed. I can't tell you how
ugly--and a little unnevering--it was to connect the NEC's floppy
externally. It was just this poor little drive out in the cold with no
clothes on--reminded me of when I shave our cat every year to stop the
shedding (and in the process, reduce her from a gorgeous creature to an
ugly rat-looking thing you'd be inclined to shoot). At any rate, the drive
just seemed out of place and quite vulnerable unless it was used *inside*
the machine where it belonged, even though it had a cable to connect
externally (which was unwieldy too, since the floppy port was on the back
of the machine and the cable placement on the drive itself was odd).
No such problem on the IBM. The shell casing for the floppy makes it look
like it is a natural accessory to this machine (and it is), though it does
make the floppy larger than the one that came with my 701 or 560--but
that's to be expected, give that those floppies aren't meant to be inserted
inside anything while this one serves as a housing for a floppy that does.
Also, I could imagine that NEC floppy cable getting lost. The IBM's floppy
housing has the cable attached, so it seems as though it wouldn't be lost
as easily. It really does just *look* nice and add some level of
protection, though I suppose it is one more bulky item to travel with (if
you wish) while the NEC was as simple as carrying the cable. However,
unlike the NEC, there is no place to put the CD drive when not in the
machine. I suppose you could put it in the floppy housing, but that's a
little strange. Neither IBM nor NEC seemed to have a place to put *both*
items when the spacer is being used to lighten the load.
Speaking of spacers, another little thing: The NEC's spacer design was
square and boxy--seemed to incorporate a lot of unnecessary plastic for
reinforcement too. Meanwhile, someone at IBM must have gotten a better
grade in geometry class, because theirs is shaped triangularly with a blunt
nose on the end, pointed toward the back. That maintains whatever needed
rigidity while minimizing plastic. NEC, go back to school. ;-)
Oh...and more on fit and finish as it relates to form and function: The
NEC drives were a little difficult to handle. Pulling them out of the
machine meant making sure your fingers didn't go into the wrong place.
there was just this narrow hole in the machine and the drive went in and
out of that. Again, IBM paid closer attention to how these things get
handled, and made the front of their drive (or spacer) serve as more of the
front portion of the casing itself. This translates into a "handle" of
sorts on the front of each of the CD & floppy drives (and the spacer),
making for something more substantial to grab and hold when removing the
drive. I believe it also makes for a simpler locking/release mechanism for
holding the drive in place, since the NEC's locking/release mechanism had
to "shoot" the drive out in order for you to get it. With the IBM, you
just release the lever and pull gently.
WHERE DID THAT DOOR COVER GO...?
Did you ever mutter this statement under your breath? I was amazed how, on
my 560, they used a 4-inch long rubber "stopper" to cover the rear ports.
People on the list told me how this was better than a hinged door for a
multitude of reasons, but I never much cared for the explanations--it was
just one more part to get lost. And to prove that, I did indeed lose mine.
I found it a month later, but not before I had already obtained a
replacement... (*sigh*)
Nevertheless, I do understand the counter-argument concerning port covers.
Hingest can break.
So how does the 600 approach this? Hinges--sort of. Its a curiously
fascinating thing that probably has to be seen to be believed or truly
appreciated. First of all, you have to understand they *aren't* hinges--at
least not in the traditional sense that you should think. Think of it
opening, joined at the plastic, but not on hinges. That's the idea.
Dangerous, right? There's only so many times you can open and close that
before the plastic has had enough and it just breaks off, eh? My thoughts
exactly.
But hold off a moment--its not what it seems! You'll probably have to see
it yourself to believe it, but the concept is really simple genious. Each
"door" is really a flap--don't judge it yet, its not nearly as wimpy as you
might think. If you look over the whole machine, you'll note that each
port is covered by this flap-style thing that folds over the door and under
the computer. The flap itself appears to be a semi-flexible rubber-ish
stuff, textured on the outside to be similar to the casing, but on the
inside more flexible. However, you can't see much of the inside, because
each end (one of which is the port door) is reinforced with nice solid
plastic, so you can only see the flexible stuff where the joint bends.
What you end up with is a door that serves its function as a door, yet has
a folding mechanism that appears to me to be virtually impossible to wear
out or even break. Really, I'm impressed. Its a simple yet smart design
and you'd never know the difference without *really* looking close the way
I did.
Oh, the ports? All seem to be in the right place (which was a little
disorienting at first!). Rear has the normal parallel, serial, & video
(behind two different rear doors)--which made me wonder "Where the hell is
the USB?" Well, its by the power switch on the left side, under its own
little hidden door. Incidently, the modem jack is on the other side of the
power switch. Oh, and right above the USB is a few holes in the casing.
Its pretty clear this is for fan airflow to keep those hot little P-II's
>from blowing up like miniature nukes. One article I read insisted this was
the only way they could put P-II's in notebooks, with obvious concerns
about the effect on battery life.
On the right side where the PC card slots are (and some other jacks for
audio & whatnot), there is another port (behind a door) for hooking up the
floppy. This is a great relief, as the NEC forced me to get behind the
machine to hook up the floppy. Also, IBM paid attention to where they put
the floppy port when they designed the floppy shell. The way the cord is
attached makes sense, so no strange contortions are necessary. Nice to
have that, yet I've come to expect IBM to pay attention to those little
things (which is why it surprises me that they didn't include a protective
carrying case for the CD drive).
Oh, and the power switch seems to have the smoothest action on an IBM
machine I've owned since the 750. The 701 makes you break a nail to turn
it on, and the 560 is moderately better, though it always seemed strange to
have the IR port "attached" to the power switch. The 600 has a great,
simple, *normal* power switch that turns the thing on without forcing you
to do strange things to it with a fork.
"THIS KISS, THIS KISS..."
Okay, its an odd heading--but its the latest song by Faith Hill (Don't
laugh...Pop went down the tubes, Rock n Roll & Metal ain't what it used to
be, and Rap was never anything more than crap. Country, Jazz, and
Classical are about the only options left!) and it was her CD that I used
to test out the speakers on the 600.
One of the tremendous disappointments I had when moving from the 701 to the
560 was the quality of the speaker. The 701 really had a good speaker on
it--clean, crisp, rich. Surprising for such a small thing. The 560's
speaker sounds like a piece of tin hooked to a vibrator. Okay, that's
exaggerating, but you get the point. It works, but not particularly well.
Now I should mention that I have Bose satellite speakers in my living room.
I'm not an audiophile in the true sense of the word, but I do like good
quality sound. At the same time, I also realize its more than a little bit
silly to expect anything on a laptop to come close.
So when I put in that CD, I didn't expect much...and didn't receive much.
The sound was clear--at least it isn't tinny like the 560--but its fatal
flaw is the lack of bass.
Furthermore, its a little weird to have the speakers mounted on the
wrist-rest area. Sound coming through vibrates your hands. Some might
like the "massage"...some might even have sex with their wives more often
instead of constantly wasting time on their Thinkpad...but personally it
was just plain annoying to me. Fortunately, if it bugs you, you can either
turn it down easily with a FN + PgDn key combo or just plain turn it off
with a FN + BKSP key combo (very handy!). Truthfully, I liked the Versa
5080X's placement of the speakers at the top of the keyboard better (it
also sounded better), but I suspect IBM wouldn't be able to do that and
maintain the solid keyboard layout. If that's the tradeoff, I'll keep the
crappy speakers in favor of the better keyboard!
I don't miss the sound dial from my 560 all that much, as the key combo is
just as easy, but being digital and not having a huge amount of steps which
is perhaps more easily accomplished with an analog hardware dial. The
result was that I couldn't adjust the sound to the leve I most
preferred--it was either too loud or too soft. If they're going to make it
a digital control like this, they could at least add more steps to the
sampling...
Stereo? Yes, there are two speakers. But if you call a seperation of 7
inches between those two speakers enough to call it "stereo", then you're a
sadder sort than I would have thought. Personally, I don't see the point.
1 speaker works no worse than 2 that are this close together. So why try
to make the space?
SUMMARY: Keep your stereo. You'll need it. Saying this beats the 560's
sound is like saying a Tercel beats a Yugo. Its a true statement, but
nobody cares.
TICKLIN' THE EBONIES...
I touch type at a speed that approaches 80 wpm. I figure I'll never starve
because I can always find work as a secretary. Frankly, when you have
excellent typing skills, keyboards become more important than ever in your
daily use.
The 600's keyboard is the best one I've used since my 750. The 701's
keyboard was fine, but a step down from the 750, and to be expected if you
wanted something that was going to fold in on itself. The 560's never
folded, but had a very similar feel to it--better than the competition's,
but not up to the par that the 750's. If I may digress...the 750's
keyboard was really remarkable. It managed to maintain the full-stroke
travel with zero compromise that you might expect from the finest of
desktop keyboards. It really set that machine apart. Of course, there has
to be a dark side, and that was noise. A lot of people used 750's (and I
think 755's?) in libraries and classrooms only at the risk of being whupped
upside their head for the clackety-clack they were creating. Thinkpad
keyboards since then have been a bit squishier...certainly quieter...and
just not *quite* as good.
The 600 is a pleasant surprise. No, its not quite on par with the 750's
keyboard, but its better than the 560's, with which I expected it would be
on-par with. The strokes seem adequately long, the feedback solid, the
buttons below the space bar "click" in feel, but not in sound. Strangely
enough, it seems to walk a great balance between positive feedback and
"squish". The 701 & 560 keyboards were a bit soft. Its difficult to
describe, but the 600 keyboard seems to feel more substantive. It is
possible, however, than I'm comparing a new keyboard to a 21-month old one
that has been broken in, and thus the comparison may be unfair.
While we're down in this area, I might as well mention the new TrackPoint
II--and its 3 buttons. What do you use the third button for? Good
question. You get to define its use (sort of). You can either set it up
such that you can click (and hold) and then pressure on the Trackpoint
scrolls the window you're in, or you can set it up such that clicking on it
brings up a "magnifying glass" that you can use the Trackpoint to move
around the screen. My 67 year-old father would love this one to better see
small text, but I suspect most people will use it to get a closer look at
their favorite parts of various unmentionable web sites on the net.
The more intriguing new feature of the TrackPoint III is the new pressure
sensitivity. No, I don't mean the pressure you use to make it move from
side to side. I mean the up and down pressure. As is traditional, the
Trackpoint doesn't move--it just senses pressure. The *amount* of pressure
and the quickness with which it is applied is user-configurable, but the
usage is a bit tricky. I kept selecting things on accident when I was
merely trying to push the Trackpoint to the other side of the screen. I'm
sure that this, like using a Trackpoint at all, will take some getting used
to but once you catch on, I'm sure most will be hooked if they can just get
past the learning curve. Its a good thing IBM did this because one of the
whiz-bang features of the latest Touchpads allowed you to just tap on the
pad to click or even drag windows on the screen, all without taking your
finger off the pad. It was infectious enough that even I, a confirmed
hater of the touchpad, grew to like that feature. Now I can have something
very similar in the Trackpoint, if only I can master it.
AND IN CONCLUSION...
I'm not certain I'll write any more on the subject. The 600 has gotten
very little usage, as I spent more time writing this review from my desktop
than actually using the darn thing (are you impressed with my
self-discipline? Could YOU do that?!), so for the most part this has been
an observation of the extrenal features with a smattering of usage issues.
I really don't think there's that much more to tell. I'm assuming that a
P-II performs well and the machine should be pretty fast, etc. (incidently,
this is the first time that I've gotten a notebook machine with equal or
better specs than whatever desktop machine I had at the time. My current
desktop is a Dell Pentium Pro 200 MHz with 96 MB RAM and a 3.7 GB HD. The
TP 600 is a P-II 233 with the same RAM and 3.2 GB HD. For the first time
I'll expect my laptop to be about as fast as my desktop).
Screen is pretty, etc. etc. I think you'll get good screens on just about
any quality laptop, so I don't think that's worth comparing, per se. The
only things I can think of that still need to be evaluated & reported to
the list would be whether its too hot to use on your lap and how long the
battery life is *really*...is that 3-hour figure they put out a load of
bull? I'll try to determine that...
Anything else?
Hope you enjoyed my treatise on ThinkPadding...
-------
Randal J. Whittle whittle_at_usc.edu (213) 740-7775
Director, Electronic Commerce Program
Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 09:54:07 EST