Print 23 comment(s) - last by TomZ.. on May 18 at 9:20 AM

Lenovo X60 Tablet
Lenovo readies its "Santa Rosa" follow-up to the X60 and X60 Tablet

Lenovo rolled out its ThinkPad X60 Tablet PC back in November to complement its existing ThinkPad X60 notebook. The 3.8 pound, Core 2 Duo-based Tablet PC comes with a 12.1" screen which can be had in resolutions of XGA (1024x768) or SXGA+ (1400x1050).

Now that Intel's Santa Rosa platform has been officially announced, Lenovo has begun to slowly transition its product lines to the latest technology. The company has already made the T60 to T61 transition as well as the R60 to R61 switch. Next is the Santa Rosa follow-up to the X60 and X60 Tablet.

The X61 and X61 Tablet PC retain the same chassis as their X60 and X60 Tablet PC predecessors along with the XGA and SXGA+ screen resolutions. The switch to Santa Rosa brings 800MHz FSB Core 2 Duo processors, the Intel GM965 Express Chipset, GMA X3100 integrated graphics chipset and Intel Wireless WiFi Link 4965AGN network adapter.

According to Notebook Review, the X61 will also have the option of up to 1GB of Intel Turbo Memory. Although Intel has been touting Turbo Memory as being beneficial to notebook performance, recent testing has shown that performance is mixed.

Expect pricing to stay close to the current X60 and X60 Tablet PCs which start at $1,251.75 and $1,495.50 respectively. The new notebooks will be available in June.

Comments     Threshold

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

1990 Resolution
By TomZ on 5/17/2007 1:32:36 AM , Rating: 0
I remember upgrading to 1024x768 resolution back in 1990. It was really groovy. I'm glad to see mainstream laptops finally just now achieving and starting to surpass that.

I mean, really, do people actually buy laptops with such low resolution?

(Typed from my 5-year old Thinkpad with 1600x1200)

RE: 1990 Resolution
By robert5c on 5/17/2007 2:29:15 AM , Rating: 2
well one could upgrade to the SXGA+ and get 1400x1050 resolution, but honestly you must not have done alot of work with a tablet pc. with a 12" screen, any resolution higher then 1400x1050 would not make sense unless the stylus was able to be as accurate...even at 1024x768 the icons and text looks plenty small...yes you are limited in desktop space, but this isn't a 17inch notebook or 20" LCD

RE: 1990 Resolution
By TomZ on 5/17/2007 8:39:14 AM , Rating: 1
Icon and text size is a function of the software, not the hardware. In other words, if the resolution of this 12" display was 2048x1536 and everything was drawn are twice the height and width in pixels, it would be effectively the same size, but with higher definition and clarity.

While not every Windows app is designed well to scale in this way, increasingly more and more are.

RE: 1990 Resolution
By Chadder007 on 5/17/2007 10:19:02 AM , Rating: 2
But Windows doesn't have Resolution Independence built into the OS yet. Apple is just now getting to Resolution Independence themselves with the next OSX version.

RE: 1990 Resolution
By TomZ on 5/17/2007 10:48:55 AM , Rating: 1
I'm not sure what you mean by that. Windows has for a long time given the ability to set the DPI as well as adjust the sizes of other visual elements. Typically this is the large fonts versus small fonts setting, but at least in Vista (and IIRC XP) you can also set custom DPI.

But of course this doesn't solve the problem of applications that don't properly support non-standard DPI settings. Most older applications were designed with fixed pixel sizes for everything, and changing the DPI screws that up. There's nothing keeping application designers creating fully scalable applications today, however.

RE: 1990 Resolution
By goku on 5/18/2007 3:45:24 AM , Rating: 2
Dude, you could set the DPI in windows since like Windows 95 at least, the problem is, it doesn't work as well as it should. I hope future operating systems that support resolution independence at least allow for visual size reduction so that not everything looks like 1024X768. It would work by making any resolution screen work for anybody. If grandma has bad eyes then you can increase the size of everything, if you want more screen space with smaller text, it'd allow for that too. While changing the DPI setting does work like this, it doesn't do it for all programs and doesn't work as well as it should.

If I have good eyes, I should be able to make everything smaller so that I can have more on the screen at a time regardless of resolution. If I have bad eyes, I should be able to make everything bigger so that I can see it regardless of resolution. Thats what I hope resolution independence does, though I'm worried that it won't be able to be adjusted like you can with the DPI setting in windows.

RE: 1990 Resolution
By TomZ on 5/18/2007 9:20:42 AM , Rating: 1
As I said, the OS supports all this; it is only a question of getting application developers to design their GUIs to work properly with it.

RE: 1990 Resolution
By Masterrer on 5/17/2007 7:48:33 AM , Rating: 4
It amuses me how people jump on the resolution bandwagon...

Hey look at me, my 99 inch plasma has an uber resolution of 1600000000x120000000, it is so awesome, and so much better than that crappy 19 inch 1280x1024 monitor I had, I hook my pc to the plasma to work with Word and Excel, and browse the web and it is so much better…

Please do not assume something like "higher res = better" without some facts to support this statement, believe me there is so much to monitors than higher res and viewing angles…

If we are talking about resolution, bare in mind that it is actually the pixel density that counts known as dpi (or dots per inch). You can see how dpi varies with monitor size, and affects object/text size here:

RE: 1990 Resolution
By TomZ on 5/17/2007 8:37:17 AM , Rating: 1
No, that's wrong - higher resolution - especially higher DPI - is always better. You'll see that in the future with higher resolution displays on computers, and you're already seeing it in some consumer electronics, e.g., Apple iPhone.

Higher DPI gives you better graphical experience from both an aesthetic perspective and a functional one. Aesthetics are improved because obviously more detail can be drawn. Functionality is also improved because it allows you to show more of a document, more of your spreadsheet, more of your code editor, more of your desktop, etc. As long as you have high DPI, you can use smaller text sizes and have it still readable (assuming you have good vision of course).

I run dual 2048x1536 20" monitors on my main computer, which gives me lots of desktop screen real estate. In my experience, more screen real estate gives a positive productivity boost.

I do agree, however, that you can't get too carried away with resolution away on a 12" screen. But people thinking about things the way I do would never consider such a small screen, except maybe just as an e-mail only ultra-portable.

RE: 1990 Resolution
By TomZ on 5/17/2007 9:09:20 AM , Rating: 2
sorry, I meant " can get too carried away with resolution on a 12" screen..."

RE: 1990 Resolution
By Masterrer on 5/17/2007 9:09:40 AM , Rating: 2
I do agree, however, that you can't get too carried away with resolution away on a 12" screen. But people thinking about things the way I do would never consider such a small screen, except maybe just as an e-mail only ultra-portable.

Well I don't think that the engineers intended this Tablet PC for professional work, it was designed with mobility and usability in mind, and I don't think it was intended for designers/artist as a desktop replacement...
What I do think, is that such a tablet is good what it's designed for, it allows one to stay mobile (check e-mail, surf the web, basic edit of documents be it some php code or an annual report)
Now if only someone would make a similar device for around 800$… wishful thinking

RE: 1990 Resolution
By TomZ on 5/17/2007 10:51:43 AM , Rating: 1
I certainly understand that, but the reason for my criticism is that it seems like nearly all laptops have low-resolution displays. I would have hoped that high-res displays would have become mainstream more quickly than they have. Obvioulsly the cost is related to the volume, and since most people are choosing low-res displays, it doesn't help.

RE: 1990 Resolution
By tekzor on 5/17/2007 1:31:02 PM , Rating: 2
yes it is designed for the professional
Why would you use it to check email when a PDA already does that? Obviosuly the low resolution is perfect for office tasks. This ISNT a UMPC!
The point of the form factor and tablet ability IS to bring it out with you into the world for business use wether inside or out.
What you expect to do on it? Play games?

RE: 1990 Resolution
By goku on 5/18/2007 3:47:37 AM , Rating: 2
I think you're confusing digital cameras and monitors considerably. Most monitors are of relative decent quality so more pixels=better picture, however for digital cameras, they seem to push more pixels but they don't bother upgrading the sensor so it's really just all for waste as the pictures are much crappier on a cheap 8mega pixel P&S then a 3 megapixel SLR.

"When an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song." -- Sony BMG attorney Jennifer Pariser
Related Articles

Latest Headlines
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
The Samsung Galaxy S7
September 14, 2016, 6:00 AM
Apple Watch 2 – Coming September 7th
September 3, 2016, 6:30 AM
Apple says “See you on the 7th.”
September 1, 2016, 6:30 AM

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
Snapchat’s New Sunglasses are a Spectacle – No Pun Intended
September 24, 2016, 9:02 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

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