From: Mike Capone (drgrant_at_ziplink.net)
Date: Thu Apr 06 2000 - 16:29:31 EDT
To be honest, I think the 600 is still a bit of a brick.
My 770ED still only "weighs in" at the weight of an average cheapo
laptop with a 12.1 in screen, so I'd hardly consider it a luggable, for
what it does. A dell I7K is a luggable, nearing around 9 pounds
The 600 _is_ lighter, but it's still not a 570 or a 240.
Oh, and the 770 with the 1280 x 1024 is 13.7 in, not 14.1, not
that it matters much. :)
The bottom line is there a lot of us that are p*ssed at IBM for
dumping the 770, but oh well, such is life. It's all good anyways,
>from the 240 to the 600 to the 770, you got the computer-built-around
the best keyboard. That's mainly what I bought my TP for, and I'd probably
be happy with any one of them, just because of the keyboard, screen, and
hard disk. Everything else is kinda so-so, but the stuff I mentioned
outweighs all that by a mile.
At 12:49 PM 4/6/00 -0700, you wrote:
>At 11:59 AM 04/06/2000 -0700, you wrote:
>>For those of you who hold to the Corvette and i-Corvette [née Camaro]
>>I'd like to hear your comments on the 770 vs 600. After all, the 600 was a
>>more "budget minded" system for the business guys, as opposed to the 770
>>series, which was meant to be for "power users".
> Not even close!
> The 600 was *not* a "budget" 770. It was a "Thin and Light while
>not sacrificing major features" laptop. To support that argument, I point
>to the simple fact that there are *no* 770's currently being marketed by
>IBM and the 600's are now the "top of the line" available.
> The 770 had only 3 things over the original 600: (1) Video
>capability (presumably in or out), which is of limited use to most people,
>(2) Hardware-assisted MPEG playback (now in current versions of the 600),
>and (3) the largest 14.1" screen with 1280x1024 resolution (600's have a
>13.3" screen at XGA). EVERYTHING else the 770 had or did, the 600 matched
> More importantly, the 600 did it in a form factor that was nearly
>2 lbs. *lighter* and 1 inch thinner. There's a lot of us out there that
>scramble through airports, must have a machine that does more than the
>ultra-lights are capable of, and yet didn't want a monster brick like the
>770. The 600 filled the bill nicely. The 600 is a power user's machine in
>a portable form factor. The 770 was practically a luggable.
> A *lot* of 770 users were positively *envious* of the 600 when it
>came out, and all but the most hard-core "gotta have my big screen" freaks
>still are. I guarantee you there wouldn't be any envious Corvette owners
>if an "i-Corvette" came out. The 600 has always been a worthy competitor.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 09:55:57 EST