Thoughts on the 560 "Kite"

[Randy Whittle <whittle@usc.edu>]

At 11:39 AM 8/26/96 -0700, jesse montrose wrote:

>I've been wondering about these questions myself, any 560 owners want to share?

>At 09:00 AM 8/23/96 -0700, Randy wrote:
>>        This is a request to those TP 560 Owners and those who know a lot
>>about the machine:
>>
>>        The TFT screen is 800x600, right?  What's the max color depth you
>>can have at that resolution?  64K colors?

        Okay--I got a 560 over the weekend and have been configuring it.
I'll give some initial thoughts (keep in mind I've owned 3 previous
notebooks, two of them ThinkPads--a 750C and a 701C that I currently still
have.  So this sort of compares it to the others):

        AVAILABILITY:  The P120 w/ 810 MB HD isn't too hard to find.  The
P133 w/ 1.05 GB HD is impossible to find.  I chose the P120 route because I
figured its only about 10% slower in the CPU (not a big issue for me,
especially moving up from a 486-75), the 1.05 GB still wasn't as big as I
*really* wanted (while the 810 MB was still a bit bigger than I currently
have in my 701, so I figured it could still suit my needs with the use of
compression).  Besides, I thought, I could upgrade the HD to something more
appropriate later on as sizes get larger and prices get cheaper (I'd like 2
GB).  More on the HD later...

        SCREEN:  Beautiful.  Real nice to have a "big" screen & higher
resolution.  Not so sure if 1024x768 would be worth it in the same space
though--I think all the icons & stuff would just be too small, but 800x600
is very nice.  Yes, it *does* to 64K colors too.  Furthermore, its *very*
BRIGHT!  My 701C on full brightness (which looks significantly better than
my 750C did) doesn't begin to compare with the 560's 12.1" TFT screen
brightness--even when set only at about mid-range.  On fully bright, its no
contest--the 701C's screen, by comparison, looks downright *dull*.

        As a matter of fact, working outdoors (shaded sunlight--I'm in
California, y'know!), the screen is *surprisingly* readable!  I was
pleasantly surprised at the readability of the 701C outdoors (of course I
was comparing that to the pathetic 750C screen which was impossible to see
outdoors), but the 560 is considerably better than that.  Of course, to be
better than the 701C you have to turn up the screen brightness, and that
*can't* be good for battery life.

        The screen, as far as I can see (I haven't run any software that
exposes these things extensively) has 1 pixel that is screwed-up, right at
the very top center of the screen.  Its stuck in the "on" position,
eminating bright white, which IMO is worse than having a dead pixel because
it sticks out like a sore thumb.

        It appears to me that they could quite easily extend the screen size
by another 1/2" diagonal.  I've noticed on my 701C that the top and left
edges of the lid leave room for a larger screen to be used (though whatever
circuitry is required on the edges of the screen probably prevents this--I
don't know).  The 560's screen hugs the top edge of the lid and leaves space
near the bottom.  There's also some space on the left side and even more
space on the right side (enough for the "IBM ThinkPad" diagonal logo).  It
seems to me that screen size could be increased while maintaining the form
factor.  Maybe this is something they'll do in the future, especially if
they want to go to 1024x768 resolution.

        SCREEN WEIRD ALERT:  I don't know why, but upon selecting 24-bit
color mode (which required me to reduce screen size to 640x480--leaving lots
of blank black space around the screen), Win 95 went goofy on reboot.  The
screen was all screwy.  I ended up having to reboot to "safe" mode and
switch it back to 16-bit color (64K colors) just to see anything again.
Does anyone have a clue and could perhaps tell me why it did this?  It has
installed on it the proper video driver...any other 560 owners that can
enlighten me?

        BATTERY LIFE:  I couldn't tell you.  Sorry.  This thing's been
plugged in all weekend while I tried to get it configured.  I will actually
have to sit & use it on battery for a few cycles before I can tell you, and
I haven't been able to do that.  Feel free to E-mail me later for info on
that.  I presume it can't be any worse than the typical 2 1/2 hours most of
us have been getting on our various machines.  I did notice that I got a
battery warning awfully early (maybe 60 to 90 minutes?) one time when I had
it working while not on AC, but this could likely have been because I had it
doing a lot (lots of disk activity, especially swapping, and actively
receiving data via 3Com Ethernet card).  I sure hope it does better than
that under normal usage...

        It uses a Li-Ion battery.  Can anyone tell me about the care &
feeding of Li-Ions?  Do I need to discharge them fully before recharging, or
is that bad?  Typical life & charging cycles?  The 701 was funny in that
although it uses a Ni-MH, the manual specifically counseled *against* full
discharge, saying it could damage the battery, that this particular type of
Ni-MH was "advanced" & didn't need that, etc.  I've never had to deal with
Li-Ions before & don't want to destroy these (very expensive--about 2x the
cost of a similar Ni-MH!) batteries by doing something dumb.

        AN INTERRUPTION:  Also, sorry to interrupt here, but is there a
specific, dedicated mailing list for the IBM 560's or the 701's?  As far as
I know, this is the only "real" ThinkPad list.  Sorry to Digress...

        SPEED:  Slow as snot.  My 701 seems to beat it all to hell, BUT--my
701 has 24 MB RAM, the 560 only 8 MB (I haven't gotten an additional memory
module yet) and that makes that Pentium 120 just crawl under Win 95.  The
benchmark showed the CPU in the 560 to be much faster than the 701, so I'll
wait until the RAM is brought up to par before throwing the thing out.  :-)

        RAM:  By the way, as far as memory goes, I've located what seems to
be a nice source in Miami, called High Performance Cartridges (maybe I got
that from someone on this list?).  The contact name is Bill.  What's nice is
that he has an "insurance policy" at $1 per MB that allows you to upgrade
your memory module:  100% credit of the new price toward a new/bigger module
if exercised within 90 days, and 80% credit if exercised up to 18 Months
after that.  This is nice because I'd like to get a 32 MB module but just
can't afford it, yet prices on the 32 MB modules are expected to come down
in the next 30 to 60 days, so I'll likely go for it.  Meanwhile, the
additional 16 MB should make life better for me.  Bill's E-mail is
bill@cartridge.com.  The 16 MB RAM module for the 560 is $175.  Currently
the 32 MB sells for $740 through him, but his supplier tells him it should
come down to $580 in the next month or two.  Considering I've seen people
talking about $1,000 for 32 MB modules here, this seems pretty decent.

        (After reading some more mail, I just realized Bill is on the list
here, which is probably where I got the name/address to check it out!  So
far Bill has been very good about dealing with me in good faith and I feel
quite comfortable purchasing from him, especially because he went somewhat
out of his way to make up for quoting me an incorrect price and then having
to correct himself a couple days later.  So far, I would have to recommend
him--but rest assured that if somehow I get screwed, y'all will be the first
to hear about it!  I'm sure that won't happen though, right Bill?!  ;-)

        CONTROLS:  Here's where I'm *really* disappointed, as it seems IBM
took a giant step backward.  When I got my 701C, I was delighted to see that
IBM had integrated a lot of controlling mechanisms right into the BIOS
level--from power management to screen brightness to bringing up the BIOS
setup screen at any time.  The 560 has NONE of this.  A flick of a button on
my 701C and I saw my battery guage.

        There's something to be said about the brightness slider switch on
the 560 (its nice to touch & move as opposed to FN-Button controls on the
701C) and also a little dial on the side for sound levels, but the lack of a
BIOS-level battery guage was a SEVERE disappointment.  Basically I have to
load up software to keep tabs on the battery.  That sucks, especially after
being spoiled on the *great* way the 701C did it.  I feel like I'm having to
revert to the klunky way my 750C and my first notebook (a Sharp) did things.
The 560 still has a FN+F2 combination to bring up the battery gauge, but it
won't work unless you've loaded the software already.  The 701C never needed
any software loaded in the first place.

        FIT & FINISH:  Upon first glance, the 560 is remarkable--thinner
than you thought a notebook ever could be.  At the same time though,
its...well, its "Big".  Its hard to get over when you've been running this
tiny little 701C, but it just *seems* like th 560 is just too big.  Yet its
about 1/2" or more thinner and *almost* a whole 1/2 pound lighter than the
701C! (4.1 lbs for the 560 vs. 4.5 or 4.7 (?) for the 701C)  Still, the
701C, because of its smaller dimensions in height & width (though not weight
& thickness), just seems smaller.  I guess that's just something you have to
learn to get over, especially for the privelage of having that big screen.
Also, the "palm rest" area takes getting used to.  One thing I have to say
is that it fits into my backpack better than the 701C--more like a spiral
notebook would than a thick, heavy textbook.

        It seems like the keyboard is too far in and the combination of the
Trackpoint and the buttons for the trackpoint are just too stiff for my
tastes.  Again, this is just personal.  Overall, the 560 walks an odd
balance between feeling "cheap" and feeling sleek at the same time.  I felt
similarly about the 701 (but no longer do), so perhaps I'll either get used
to it or the symptoms will ease up as it get "broken in" a bit.

        As a side note, the thinness of the 560 is apparent when its on the
coffee table and the base section (with the screen up) is the same thickness
as my fairly-thin Sony Stereo remote.

        QUIRKS/ANNOYANCES:  The Hard Drive is NOT--repeat NOT--removable!
The bad news is that a HD upgrade/replacement is going to be like doing
major surgery--I'll have to open up the machine, which would void the
warranty.  As it stands, I can wait--compression works fine, but eventually
I want this 810 MB drive replaced with something more like 1.3 to 2 GB.  The
560 warranty is only 1 year instead of the usual 3, so voiding it is not
quite as big a deal as one would think--or by the time I replace the drive
my year will be up anyway.  I guess the only *really* good news is that
whenever I *do* upgrade the hard drive, maybe--just MAYBE--I won't have to
worry about some funny little HD caddy as all of us with these other TP
models have had to when attempting to upgrade.

        The AC Adaptor is not *quite* as neat as the 701's.  The 701 was
great--a little cord attached to a small "brick" the size of a pack of cards
and folding prongs that popped out to plug into the wall.  The 560 has a
similar "pack of cards" brick, but requires you to plug another cord into
it, instead of popping out the folding prongs to stick into the wall.  This
makes for a cleaner attachment to the wall AC plug, but one more bit of
stuff to carry and/or lose.  Its not a huge thing, but neither is it as
"neat" as the adapter included with the 701.

        Also, as has already been discussed on this list, there is no
built-in modem for the 560.  Dumb.  In an age where "Internet" is such a
buzzword that people look at you funny if you say, "I don't have E-mail",
all machines--especially notebooks--should have a modem in them.  IBM made a
similar mistake in including a 14.4 rather than a 28.8K modem in the 701.
On the good side, at least you don't pay to have a modem you won't ever use
(i.e., I almost never used the 14.4K modem in my 701 because I preferred
using a 28.8K PCMCIA modem).  This move is almost as dumb as not having a
removable hard drive.  How tough would that have been?  Also good, I
suppose, is the fact that there is no tradeoff between modem speed and
whether you get to have sound or not on the 560, as has been the case using
the MWAVE chip on some of the other 75X and 760 models.  What a way to solve
it!  Eliminate the modem altogether...sheesh.

        NEATO:  One of the things I hated about the 701C is the "dongle" you
had to put on just to use the parallel port.  No more with the 560--parallel
port, serial, & monitor out is all on the 560 already.  Traveling could be
as simple as bringing along the AC adapter and the floppy--period.  The 701C
would require that *plus* the port replicator and/or the paralell dongle
too, increasing space usage & weight.  Also, while the 701C had a *strange*
rubber-hinged cap to cover the port used for the floppy/parallel, the 560
has a nice little hinged cover to reveal a hookup for the floppy--very nice.
On the other side, it has *another* very nice hinged cover for the PCMCIA
cards.  An additional nice feature of that is that the buttons to release
the PCMCIA cards "fold"--they stick out enough so you don't have to use a
pen to push them, and then fold over--and you can close the hinged PCMCIA
cover, eliminating your chance to lose it like on other TP models I've seen.
One problem:  The back rubberized cover for the ports--is *not* hinged or
connected in any way!  So accessing the parallel, serial, or monitor port
might cost you a cover if you're not careful to keep track of it.  Really
dumb, IMO--especially after such nice touches on the other port covers.

        The infrared port seems to be an easy setup.  The opposite was the
case with my 701C (I *still* haven't been able to use the IR port under Win
95!).  If only my 701C's infrared would work well, I could transfer files
between these two machines very easily without hooking up cables and once
the 701 is inherited by my wife, this might make things very easy/simple for
us.  Anyone with hints on setting up the 701's IR, please E-mail me!        

        One last silly thought:  Unlike the 701, there seems to be a clear
"indentation" area on the corner of the 560 on which you can add your
nameplate ID.  701 owners sort of made do with whatever spot they could
find.  ;-)

        SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS:  In the end, I'm not entirely certain IBM made
the right choice in eliminating machines with the folding keyboard and going
with bigger, but thinner & lighter, machines.  I guess the market will tell.
Meanwhile there are other Sub-Notebooks on the market like the Toshiba
Portege' which will fill the void the 701 has left behind.  In most features
(not necessarily performance-wise), I think the 701 was a better machine though.

        The crucial mistake I think IBM is making with the 560 is in
positioning it as a "cheaper" machine than they had done with the 701.  In
the first place, the warranty period being cut from 3 years (701 and all the
rest of the 7XX series) to 1 year (the cheaper junk IBM makes, which
apparently the 560 fits into now) doesn't give me the same vote of
confidence in this machine as in the other two 7XX ThinkPads I've owned.  I
think they should have kept the "Kite" as a 7XX machine (name it a 705 or
something, just as they did with the Butterfly being a 701) or created a new
line number range for it.  The 560 just conjures up images of the 500 and
the 510--both pretty poor sub-notebook machines that didn't do all that well
in the marketplace.  When they created the 701, just labeling it with the
7XX moniker & a 3 year warranty let it be known that this was a better
machine they'd stand behind.  The message about the 560 isn't so clear--I'm
not comforted by that.

        At any rate, the market seems best divided up into large, heavy,
full-featured "everything" notebooks designed to be your one & only machine
(e.g. the TP 760's and the Toshiba Tecras) and the smaller, lighter,
less-featured sub-notebooks.  It seems IBM with the 560 and a couple of
others (Digital Hi-Note Ultra II, Compaq Armada) have pursued a strategy
that dumps the sub-notebooks for what one might call the
"Ultra-Thins"--bigger, but flatter & lighter.  I'm not ready to say one
sucks and the other is great.  I still like my 701 immensely and like its
small size, but I'm intrigued by the flatter form factor (and larger screen)
of the 560.

        Thanks to all who recommended various machines to me.  The fact is I
really love the ThinkPads though--and I'm completely hooked on the
TrackPoint pointer (I hate trackballs and touchpads--and nobody has made a
TrackPoint copy that's as good as IBM's own incarnation).

-------
Randy Whittle		rwhittle@usa.net
USC Graduate School of Business    http://www-scf.usc.edu/~whittle