Not sure what you're sighing about besides the glossy part. That's more than enough pixels for a 13" screen. So long as colors, viewing angles and brightness are up to snuff it shouldn't be a problem.
Also the standard battery is only a weak 30 Whr 4 cell. The MacBook Air has a 50 Whr battery, it will last nearly twice as long and weighs the same. The 13" Air is better in all regards I think of.
[1366x768] "That's more than enough pixels for a 13" screen"
No, no way. most app really suck at 768 pixels high. Its difficult, irritating and defintely not enough. The sad thing is that LCD makers and laptop OEM's are shoving down our throaghts and the dull masses are buying them because they dont know any better.
The U300s spec sheet specifies a 1.6 GHz processor that turbos up to 2.1 - the extra 200 MHz in turbo may be the only difference between it and the 2467.
If this is similar to the 12ish inch Lenovo X220 with an eIPS display, then count me in. To me, the Mac Book Air's greatest failing is the screen -- it's pretty good for a TN, but not great in the grand scheme of things. Even more puzzling is the fact that Apple pretty much forced the mobile device high resolution IPS revolution, but seems content with the same old junk in the MBA and MBP. If Lenovo can just swap in the admittedly lower resolution but much higher quality screen in an Ultra book, say no more, and sign me up.
Agreed. The resolution isn't great, but for 13" and lower I probably wouldn't want to read on a higher DPI screen anyway. But if it had an IPS (obviously non-glossy) .. yummy! Did I mention that the T420 could use an IPS as well?
I've been waiting for this laptop since it's predecessor, the Lenovo U260 was released last year. I was able to play with one in Microcenter, and I thought the ergonomics were spot on (.7 inches thin, great keyboard, clementine orange metal exterior, leather-like palmrest and nice screen (matte, 12.5 inches was a nice size). What held me back was the extremely poor battery life (3 hrs) and a slow first gen i5 cpu.
This update addresses most of the concerns I had, though the lack of a vga port in order to shave another .12 inches limits the ability to use it with old school projectors(although there is an hdmi to vga adapter available to buy/lose).
What frustrates me is that most of the reviews ive read today about constantly compares this laptop to the mac air, and insinuates that this is a design rip-off that has to be priced lower than $1k to compete. Far from it, the u300s is an evolution from the u260, and imo, this is the sexiest notebook out right now. The quality of the materials is comparable to the mac air, so I don't know why it has to be in the air's shadow as an also-ran.
The comparisons to Mac notebooks should be obvious. One-piece aluminium chassis? Chicklet-style keyboard? Large, glass trackpad?
Remember when people scoffed at the one-piece aluminium chassis saying it was pointless over engineering? I do. Remember when people complained the keyboard was no good for typing? I do. Remember when people complain about glass on a trackpad with an integrated button? I do. Yet somehow these are become obvious standards in notebooks.
Except it using a chiclet keyboard has nothing to do with copying Apple. Sony was using them long before Apple ever did. And they STILL suck to type on.
Apple also wasn't the first to use an aluminum chassis. Personally I hate the "unibody" approach as it makes getting inside them that much more difficult.
I guess I'll give you the glass trackpad, but even that still sucks since there's no dedicated mouse buttons.
I refuse to buy any notebook that doesn't use dedicated mouse buttons for the touchpad.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
22 Comments
Back to Article
MrCromulent - Thursday, September 1, 2011 - link
1366x768 16:9 glossy display *sigh*quiksilvr - Thursday, September 1, 2011 - link
Not sure what you're sighing about besides the glossy part. That's more than enough pixels for a 13" screen. So long as colors, viewing angles and brightness are up to snuff it shouldn't be a problem.MrCromulent - Thursday, September 1, 2011 - link
Didn't want to start the usual argument, but 768 pixels are much too low in a >$1000 device IMHO.The *one* thing they should copy from the MBA is the 1440x900 screen :)
8steve8 - Friday, September 2, 2011 - link
agreed,The primary reason I bought a macbook air 13" over the other options was to get 900 vertical pixels, rather than 768.
cptcolo - Friday, September 2, 2011 - link
Exactly a 16:9 is terrible.A low resolution 16:9 display is useless.
Good luck selling these for $1200. The 13" is better built, better keyboard and much better trackpad. iPad 3 will have better resolution than this
cptcolo - Friday, September 2, 2011 - link
Also the standard battery is only a weak 30 Whr 4 cell. The MacBook Air has a 50 Whr battery, it will last nearly twice as long and weighs the same. The 13" Air is better in all regards I think of.retrospooty - Saturday, September 3, 2011 - link
[1366x768] "That's more than enough pixels for a 13" screen"No, no way. most app really suck at 768 pixels high. Its difficult, irritating and defintely not enough. The sad thing is that LCD makers and laptop OEM's are shoving down our throaghts and the dull masses are buying them because they dont know any better.
XiZeL - Thursday, September 1, 2011 - link
are those cpu Dual with HT or Quad?undermined - Thursday, September 1, 2011 - link
well since they list the EXACT model of the CPUs couldn't you just look it up on Intel's site?XiZeL - Thursday, September 1, 2011 - link
then please point me to my ignorance, kind sir.Andrew.a.cunningham - Thursday, September 1, 2011 - link
Definitely dual core. It'll be a bit before we can get quad cores in this form factor.XiZeL - Thursday, September 1, 2011 - link
im guessing i5 is a dual core and i7 dual with HTXiZeL - Thursday, September 1, 2011 - link
adding this to my guess:http://ark.intel.com/products/54616
http://ark.intel.com/products/54619/
probably these with a clock bump
Kerdal - Thursday, September 1, 2011 - link
or you know... these :I7 2677M (the exact model mentionned above) :
http://ark.intel.com/products/54617/Intel-Core-i7-...
1.8Ghz, 4MB cache, dual cores with HT, turbo at 2.9 GHz
Couldn't find i5 2457 though but there's a 2467 with the same clock speed, also with HT but only 3MB of cache, turbo at 2.3 GHz
http://ark.intel.com/products/56858/Intel-Core-i5-...
Andrew.a.cunningham - Thursday, September 1, 2011 - link
The U300s spec sheet specifies a 1.6 GHz processor that turbos up to 2.1 - the extra 200 MHz in turbo may be the only difference between it and the 2467.ckryan - Thursday, September 1, 2011 - link
If this is similar to the 12ish inch Lenovo X220 with an eIPS display, then count me in. To me, the Mac Book Air's greatest failing is the screen -- it's pretty good for a TN, but not great in the grand scheme of things. Even more puzzling is the fact that Apple pretty much forced the mobile device high resolution IPS revolution, but seems content with the same old junk in the MBA and MBP. If Lenovo can just swap in the admittedly lower resolution but much higher quality screen in an Ultra book, say no more, and sign me up.MrSpadge - Friday, September 2, 2011 - link
Agreed. The resolution isn't great, but for 13" and lower I probably wouldn't want to read on a higher DPI screen anyway. But if it had an IPS (obviously non-glossy) .. yummy! Did I mention that the T420 could use an IPS as well?MrS
Alexo - Wednesday, September 7, 2011 - link
You may want to take another look at the X220's IPS, as lots of users report serious image retention issues.http://forums.lenovo.com/t5/X-Series-ThinkPad-Lapt...
Elbryan - Thursday, September 1, 2011 - link
I've been waiting for this laptop since it's predecessor, the Lenovo U260 was released last year. I was able to play with one in Microcenter, and I thought the ergonomics were spot on (.7 inches thin, great keyboard, clementine orange metal exterior, leather-like palmrest and nice screen (matte, 12.5 inches was a nice size). What held me back was the extremely poor battery life (3 hrs) and a slow first gen i5 cpu.This update addresses most of the concerns I had, though the lack of a vga port in order to shave another .12 inches limits the ability to use it with old school projectors(although there is an hdmi to vga adapter available to buy/lose).
What frustrates me is that most of the reviews ive read today about constantly compares this laptop to the mac air, and insinuates that this is a design rip-off that has to be priced lower than $1k to compete. Far from it, the u300s is an evolution from the u260, and imo, this is the sexiest notebook out right now. The quality of the materials is comparable to the mac air, so I don't know why it has to be in the air's shadow as an also-ran.
solipsism - Friday, September 2, 2011 - link
The comparisons to Mac notebooks should be obvious. One-piece aluminium chassis? Chicklet-style keyboard? Large, glass trackpad?Remember when people scoffed at the one-piece aluminium chassis saying it was pointless over engineering? I do. Remember when people complained the keyboard was no good for typing? I do. Remember when people complain about glass on a trackpad with an integrated button? I do. Yet somehow these are become obvious standards in notebooks.
Shadowmage - Friday, September 2, 2011 - link
All those points still stand, but the general public for some reason like them so they're getting copied.Solidstate89 - Saturday, September 3, 2011 - link
Except it using a chiclet keyboard has nothing to do with copying Apple. Sony was using them long before Apple ever did. And they STILL suck to type on.Apple also wasn't the first to use an aluminum chassis. Personally I hate the "unibody" approach as it makes getting inside them that much more difficult.
I guess I'll give you the glass trackpad, but even that still sucks since there's no dedicated mouse buttons.
I refuse to buy any notebook that doesn't use dedicated mouse buttons for the touchpad.