Re: 560 vs. 701

[Randy Whittle <whittle@usc.edu>]

At 09:57 AM 9/5/96 -0700, Paul Rubin wrote:
>Are you saying the 560 is lighter than the 701?  What do
>you mean when you say it carries cleaner in your backpack?
>The 701 is definitely somewhat smaller...  I've been thinking
>of getting a 701 if I happen to see one cheap enough (my "real"
>computer is a 755cx)...

        First, you should know I think the 701 is a *wonderful* machine.
Indeed, I had a hard time letting go of it to give to my wife while I
switched over to the 560.

        But yes, the 560 *is* indeed lighter than the 701--by 1/2 lb. or
more (the 560 is 4.1 lbs.--the 701 is--I think--about 4.7 lbs. or more).

        Size-wize, the 701 is physically smaller in terms of height & width,
but in thickness, the 560 has it beat handily--only 1.2" (and of course, I
already mentioned the weight thing).

        By "fit" in my backpack, let me describe it this way:  If you've
ever been a college student (perhaps even High School), you'll know what I'm
talking about:  Carrying all those spiral-bound notebooks was no big deal,
right?  But remember having to carry that thick Calculus, Chemistry, etc.
type book?

        Even though the weight is very close to the same (though I have to
say that 1/2 lb. makes a BIG difference to me), the 560 carries "cleaner" in
my backback because its more like that spiral notebook--larger, but thinner.
The 701, by contrast, is more like that calculus book--smaller, but thicker.
In my backpack, the 701 seems like a brick, while the 560 seems like a
heavy/dense spiral notebook.  It leaves more space for other stuff, etc.
Other notebooks, etc. can be fit into the backpack cleaner along with it too.

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