Print 25 comment(s) - last by oTAL.. on Jan 19 at 6:41 AM

Image courtesy Akihabara News
Fujitsu's new T-Series models feature Celeron M, Core Solo power

With the release of Windows Vista just around the corner, many new notebook and desktop system will be announced from a variety of OEMs. Fujitsu has shown off its new Loox T-Series sub-notebooks which will come pre-loaded with Vista Home Premium.

The tiny notebook will be available in four models: the T50/T50U and T70/T70U. The T50 comes with a 1.2GHz Celeron M processor, 512MB of memory and a 60GB hard drive. The T70 ups the ante with a 1.2GHz Core Solo processor, 1GB of RAM and an 80GB hard drive. All models will come with a multi-format DVD burner while the "U" designation on some models signifies an optional 1Seg TV tuner.

The new Loox notebooks weigh in at just 2.6 pounds and can operate for up to 4.8 hours when using the Core Solo processor.

Pricing has not been released but should be available closer to the retail launch of Vista.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Low specs
By edge929 on 1/15/2007 12:11:21 PM , Rating: 3
Those specs are way too low to run Vista, even with turning off the eye-candy. My 3Gz Opteron, 2GB RAM, and 10K rpm Raptor run sluggish even after installing it and no third-party programs running in the background.

Am I missing something here?

RE: Low specs
By InsaneScientist on 1/15/2007 12:31:12 PM , Rating: 2
Am I missing something here?

Yep... the problem you're having with Vista is something wrong, either with your computer, or the drivers that you're running, because your hardware should be able to handle it without breaking a sweat.... :S

I've been running RC2 since it came out on an Athlon 64 3200+ (2GHz, Winchester core), 2GB RAM, and a 7200RPM HDD, and it flies on my machine.
I just got the RTM, and it's even better (less of a RAM hog).

For the most part, based on the computers that I've tested the RTM on, as long as a system has 1GB RAM or better, it'll do pretty well in Vista.

RE: Low specs
By InsaneScientist on 1/15/2007 12:35:43 PM , Rating: 2
It just occurred to me... it could be your video card, too, depending on what you have. You didn't list that.

Vista doesn't actually turn the Desktop Window Manager engine off unless you drop all the way down to classic mode, if I recall correctly.

With that in mind, though, the likelyhood that they'll fit a good enough GPU into that tiny thing to let it run glass (Intel GMA950 or better) is pretty slim...

RE: Low specs
By Ringold on 1/15/2007 12:54:09 PM , Rating: 4
Holy cow.

My laptop, underclocked & volted to 800mhz, with integrated crap graphics and 480mb free RAM, ran Vista Beta 2 fine. As of RC1, it actually got better battery life out of it.

I hope this doesn't turn in to another thread where ten people with insanely high-spec machines whine about Vista performance. I've seen far too many jurassic-period computers run Vista to buy in to that propaganda.

The Core Solo laptop with its 1gb of RAM is plenty powerful enough. Not for gaming or heavy duty use, but then again, you don't get a 2.6lb laptop to calculate the meaning of the universe.

RE: Low specs
By msva124 on 1/15/07, Rating: -1
RE: Low specs
By msva124 on 1/16/2007 1:51:12 AM , Rating: 2
I think it's a fair question, given that another poster "TomZ" has been praising Vista, is believed to work for Microsoft, and failed to disclose this in any of his posts.

Or it could just be the fact that Vista takes roughly 6 minutes to startup on my Thinkpad T42 1.7Ghz Centrino. By startup I mean all icons in bottom right are loaded, hard drive isn't continously swapping, the OS is ready to use.

But the drawing of that dark screen asking permission to do something does go pretty fast. So does IE 7.0. Maybe it's not so much that programs are running slower, as it is my CPU and hard drive seem constantly in use even when I'm not doing anything (indexing, perhaps?). That might take some getting used to. As will the new start menu. While the old one had like 4 columns and took up the whole screen, at least I could remember where everything was. Now I have to scroll up and down to look for it, or do a search. Frequent mouse to keyboard switching is not my cup of tea. Nor is the lack of an "up" button in explorer. The breadcrumb navigation effectively has an up button, yes, but it's always in a different place. I might as well switch to OS X if I weren't so happy with Windows XP.

RE: Low specs
By fcx56 on 1/15/2007 6:09:41 PM , Rating: 2

My dual PIII coppermine 1GHz with a X1600 AGP has been recording OTA HD with Vista Media Center in my living room since RC2, and running Vista just fine since even Beta 2 days. Vista may require more video card than XP, but even old systems work just fine on it, especially if you're not aspiring to use the Media Center part.

RE: Low specs
By InsaneScientist on 1/15/2007 10:10:30 PM , Rating: 2
I don't recall complaining at all....

Quite the contrary, I said that Vista "flies" on my machine. I.E. It performs really well.

I was pointing out that I had a machine with similar specs (somewhat lower) and Vista did fine on my computer, so the problem with his computer couldn't have been Vista itself. ;)

RE: Low specs
By Ringold on 1/16/2007 12:39:49 AM , Rating: 2
I didn't mean to take aim at your post; I was sorta trying to agree with my own experience with Vista. It performs pretty good on my battery-sipping laptop, too. :)

RE: Low specs
By codeThug on 1/15/2007 11:15:57 PM , Rating: 2
but then again, you don't get a 2.6lb laptop to calculate the meaning of the universe

Especially since the answer "42" has been published for quite some time now...

RE: Low specs
By PlasmaBomb on 1/16/2007 3:47:43 AM , Rating: 2
All you have to do is open calculator and multiply 6 x 7 = 42...

RE: Low specs
By jmunjr on 1/16/2007 5:00:29 AM , Rating: 2
nerd humor

RE: Low specs
By oTAL on 1/19/2007 6:41:51 AM , Rating: 2
You got any problem with that?
Do you... punk?

P.S. For the love of all that is holy just TURN OFF the script that focus the title of your posts when your replying... it sucks to be writing a response and have your cursor switch to the title bar right in the middle of a sentence!

RE: Low specs
By vdig on 1/15/2007 1:02:29 PM , Rating: 2
I'm almost certain (personal hunch) that this laptop will not have a strong GPU. Hopefully, one possible solution, the XG Station, will be able to rectify that.

Browsing the web, I find that the XG Station is not the first of its kind. There have been previous attempts to make them external.

RE: Low specs
By tuteja1986 on 1/15/2007 6:28:31 PM , Rating: 2
i am running vista RTM Ultimate on 2x 512MB DDR 1 333Mhz , 200GB WD IDE , 9250 256MB ,Intel P4 2.4Ghz and it work fine.

RE: Low specs
By Samus on 1/16/2007 8:17:57 AM , Rating: 2
I'm running Vista RC2 on a 3800+ dual core, 1gb ram and a 200gb seagate with a 7600gs.

runs great, feels just like xp with the eye candy off, and maybe a tad slower with aeroglass on.

RE: Low specs
By kpb on 1/15/2007 2:13:05 PM , Rating: 2
If I had to guess you probably did an upgrade install of vista and are having problems because of that. Seen several articles indicating that can cause lots of performance issues because of trouble with migrated registry/drivers. Try a clean install on your system and it will probably run alot better.

RE: Low specs
By plinden on 1/15/2007 7:22:45 PM , Rating: 2
Probably you are missing something.

I'm no fan of any version of Windows, but I can run Vista RC2 in a virtual machine using Parallels on my Mac and it's not sluggish. That's without 3D acceleration, and with 512 MB RAM assigned to the VM, and an expanding virtual hard drive. I haven't really used it much so I've had nothing other than a web browser running on it, but I didn't notice anything slowing it down.

Am I also missing something?
By Souka on 1/15/2007 3:26:14 PM , Rating: 3
What makes this "vista ready?"

I don't see the video card spec listed in the brief.

If this laptop is using a GMA card, then youu might as well include any laptop made within the last 2-3 years (with 1GB+ of RAM) as "vista ready".

My $.02

By InsaneScientist on 1/15/2007 10:07:03 PM , Rating: 2
"Vista Ready" doesn't mean Vista Premium Ready... it just means that it's Vista capable...

And the requirements for that would be pretty much all PCs built in the last 2-3 Years.

A Windows Vista Capable PC includes at least:

A modern processor (at least 800MHz1).
512 MB of system memory.
A graphics processor that is DirectX 9 capable.

By Mudvillager on 1/15/2007 1:15:09 PM , Rating: 2
Really heavy compared to the one Panasonic showed on CES.

RE: Heavy
By Mudvillager on 1/15/2007 2:42:46 PM , Rating: 2
Whoops mixed up Panasonic with the Asus U1 which weights in at 1.78lbs. Read about it here:

screen specs?
By agent2099 on 1/15/2007 2:38:39 PM , Rating: 2
What is the screen size and resolution on these models?

How big is the screen?
By Axbattler on 1/16/2007 12:45:18 AM , Rating: 2
For it's weight, it better not be any smaller than 12.1".

Sony's G series offers similar specs but is a little bit lighter and with longer battery life. No Vista/TV Tuner, but OS wise it shouldn't be too hard to offer an OS upgrade path.

The Fujitsu is fine for those who absolutely want to stay clear with Sony, but I don't think it's beating any record.

corporate vs home
By Pirks on 1/15/2007 4:06:47 PM , Rating: 1
slightly off topic: how big do you think the corporate PC market is compared to home PC market? where is more money? got an argument with a Mac fanatic here, and now I can't find any facts/numbers online that would debunk his myth that home PCs are primary market or will be primary market soon, while corporate PC market is secondary, net volume/net income-wise. or is it not a myth at all? could someone point me at some online research/facts on that? thanks :-)

"Mac OS X is like living in a farmhouse in the country with no locks, and Windows is living in a house with bars on the windows in the bad part of town." -- Charlie Miller
Related Articles

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki