New tabook.pdf is out!

Message

domi · #1 Post by **domi** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 5:21 pm

ftp://ftp.software.ibm.com/pc/pcinstitu ... tabook.pdf

January 2006, version 301. Has 1 page for the X60 (1706), 1 for the X60s (1702) and 1 for the T60 (1951). Strangely enough, the travel weight for the X60s (which should be the lightest) is indicated with the 8-cell battery, whereas it is given with both the 4-cell and the 8-cell battery for the X60.

Website · #2 Post by **tfflivemb2** » Wed Jan 11, 2006 6:48 pm

Am I missing something? I clicked on the link, as well as the one that I have bookmarked and netiher of them list the T/X 60.

domi · #3 Post by **domi** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 2:06 am

Maybe you got an old copy from your browser's cache or your ISP's proxy server. Empty your cache and make sure you get a copy directly from IBM's server.

RS_003 · #4 Post by **RS_003** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 5:25 am

OH cool!

I am going to read it rightnow

WildEye · #5 Post by **WildEye** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 6:01 am

Interesting reading:

Dimensions:
X60s : without UltraBase X6 - 10.5" x 8.3" x 0.8-1.1"

X60 : without UltraBase X6 - 10.5" x 8.3" x 0.8-1.39"

???

How can the X60 be from 0.8" to 1.39"... Thats a 73% height difference.

I presume it must have a higher backend wedge shape than the X60s.

davidlg16 · #6 Post by **davidlg16** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 10:09 pm

Any estimates how how big of a performance difference betw the 1.83Ghz and 1.66Ghz CPUs?

Could someone enlighten me as to whether the Duo Core (1.83Ghz for example) is the speed of the two CPUs combined? or 1.83Ghz per core

riceboy54 · #7 Post by **riceboy54** » Thu Jan 12, 2006 10:15 pm

I don't think the dual core is double the regular pentium m. I believe dual core only benefits when your running more than one program at once. Otherwise one core (1.83 or the 1.66) will run at its stated speed and the other core will not do anything.

Someone correct me if im wrong.

RS_003 · #8 Post by **RS_003** » Fri Jan 13, 2006 4:53 am

o, I think you are at the money, it’s the same story with dualcore amd's ... if the program supports a dual cpu yes it can be up to 60% faster.
But if not, the second cpu will just be picking its nose

Therefore (I am a diehard text editor

) I shall buy a single core.

And like I said before, my X31 with a 1.4 GHz @ 250 MHz is fast enough for me... so I don't need the speed increase at all.

Skywing · #9 Post by **Skywing** » Fri Jan 13, 2006 9:51 am

WildEye wrote:Interesting reading:

Dimensions:
X60s : without UltraBase X6 - 10.5" x 8.3" x 0.8-1.1"

X60 : without UltraBase X6 - 10.5" x 8.3" x 0.8-1.39"

???

How can the X60 be from 0.8" to 1.39"... Thats a 73% height difference.

I presume it must have a higher backend wedge shape than the X60s.

Yes, the regular X60 does have a little bit of a fat butt, this is to accomidate for the added cooling the dual core chip needs.

WildEye · #10 Post by **WildEye** » Fri Jan 13, 2006 2:25 pm

Both machines have the dual core chip (Duo)...

One has the LV version at 1.66GHz and the other has a regular one at 1.83GHz... must be a big difference in heat on those two then...

First Light · #11 Post by **First Light** » Fri Jan 13, 2006 4:14 pm

domi wrote:Strangely enough, the travel weight for the X60s (which should be the lightest) is indicated with the 8-cell battery, whereas it is given with both the 4-cell and the 8-cell battery for the X60.

I believe both the X60 and X30 are projected to come with an 8 cell battery standard, and the 4 cell will be an option.

Won't that be a switch!

WildEye · #12 Post by **WildEye** » Fri Jan 13, 2006 5:10 pm

Anyone know what the dimensions will be with the added optional battery under the unit (X60s)? For the 10+ hours battery life... I'm thinking about getting this, but not without knowing the dimensions.

Increase in width... Will it be ticker than the X60?

domi · #13 Post by **domi** » Fri Jan 13, 2006 7:50 pm

WildEye wrote:Anyone know what the dimensions will be with the added optional battery under the unit (X60s)?

http://www5.pc.ibm.com/us/products.nsf/ ... p/_40Y7005
Weight: .44lbs
Height: .58in
Width: 6.96in
Depth: 2.71in

riceboy54 · #14 Post by **riceboy54** » Fri Jan 13, 2006 8:20 pm

is the tabook.pdf ever wrong? I mean it says the X60s is 3.46lbs which is heavier than the X41 (3.3lbs) and the X60 is not much heavier either. I thought these were supposed to be lighter.

#15 Post by **JaneL** » Fri Jan 13, 2006 8:24 pm

riceboy54 wrote:is the tabook.pdf ever wrong?

I'm sure that over the years there has been the odd incorrect spec or two in tabook, but there's a reason item #16 in the FAQ exists.

riceboy54 · #16 Post by **riceboy54** » Fri Jan 13, 2006 8:31 pm

I was hoping it was wrong because on the X60/X60s tour it says starting at "2.7lbs" I guess they removed the battery.

The tour also says X60 starting at 3.2lbs which is true though...I don't know what to make of the X60s "heavy" weight

davidlg16 · #17 Post by **davidlg16** » Fri Jan 13, 2006 11:24 pm

riceboy54 wrote:The tour also says X60 starting at 3.2lbs which is true though...I don't know what to make of the X60s "heavy" weight

Could it be because X60s will come standard with 8 cell? hence the heavier weight

riceboy54 · #18 Post by **riceboy54** » Sat Jan 14, 2006 1:33 am

but I think the difference between the 8 cell and 4 cell is just .4lbs so even with a 4 cell it should be 3.06lbs for the X60s which doesn't match up with the tour's "2.7lbs"

simms · #19 Post by **simms** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 12:49 pm

Apprantly the 1951-44u has 512 GIGABYTES of memory...

New tabook.pdf is out!

New tabook.pdf is out!

Re: New tabook.pdf is out!

Who is online