From: ReveilleX_at_aol.com
Date: Thu Jul 20 2000 - 22:18:54 EDT
i've been looking for a laptop for college for some time now, as bill morrow can attest. i originally wanted a 701c, but decided on something a little newer after being told about their dismal battery life. performance was not really an issue; howerver, a realistic college-type budget was. as such, i think a 560-series machine will fit the bill. all i really need it for is typing, and maybe a few other office docs. after doing all the research i could through the web, i found that an independent test of the 560 with the 120 mhz non-mmx cpu yielded 3 hours and 38 minutes, which i could definitely live with. then i found a review in the pc magazine archives that stated that its battery test got a time of two hours and nine minutes- and "is right in line with the original ThinkPad 560 (impressive, given its MMX CPU)." what gives? how can they be so similar and yet so obviously not? if anyone can give me any technical data on current draw of the two different series, or the real-l!
!
ife battery life you guys get with your machines, please let me know. are they different processors entirely, or is the latter just upgraded with l2 cache and mmx extensions? i searched the ibm site, and nothing really solid came up. any links to this info would be appreciated just as much. thanks. i think i can scrounge up the extra money to snag the 166 mhz model, but not at the expense of battery life!
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 09:56:15 EST