Best thin laptop on the market?

FerraraZ

Senior member
Feb 10, 2008
649
3
81
Since the macbook air there have been many competitors. My question is, has there been one that stands above them. The Dell adamo is a failure in my opinion, epic fail if you will.
 

corkyg

Elite Member | Peripherals
Super Moderator
Mar 4, 2000
27,370
238
106
The X Series Thinkpads merit consideration.

X
 

me123

Member
Jan 5, 2009
123
0
0
I have to say the Acer Timeline. It cant be beat for price and quality. No other battery even comes close to it.
 

corkyg

Elite Member | Peripherals
Super Moderator
Mar 4, 2000
27,370
238
106
BTW - the new issue of Maximum PC has a pretty good review of the ultra-portables. They conclude with this performance ranking:

1. HP-2530p
2. Toshiba Portege R600
3. Lenovo X200s
4. Fujitsu P8020

Benchmarks:

Proshow (Min.sec): Lenovo 38.47; HP 39.04; Toshiba 51.54 Fujitsu 52.57
Photoshop (Min.sec)): Lenovo 3.53; HP 3.52; Toshiba 4.50; Fujitsu 5.36
Quake 3 (fps): Lenovo 155; HP 156; Toshiba 107; Fujitsu 95
Battery (Hrs): Lenovo 4.00; HP 4.10; Toshiba 4.17; Fujitsu 4.26

Cost of Tested model:

Lenovo $1495; HP $2100; Toshiba $2150; Fujitsu $2330

Best value = Lenovo X200s
 

FerraraZ

Senior member
Feb 10, 2008
649
3
81
Originally posted by: me123
I have to say the Acer Timeline. It cant be beat for price and quality. No other battery even comes close to it.

Yeah but I wouldn't call this 'light' considering how thin and small it is, it still weights 5 pounds which defeats the purpose of being a thin and light notebook.
 

corkyg

Elite Member | Peripherals
Super Moderator
Mar 4, 2000
27,370
238
106
Right - the ultraportable laptop standard is 3 lbs. give or take the battery.
 

unfalliblekrutch

Golden Member
May 2, 2005
1,418
0
0
Originally posted by: FerraraZ
Originally posted by: me123
I have to say the Acer Timeline. It cant be beat for price and quality. No other battery even comes close to it.

Yeah but I wouldn't call this 'light' considering how thin and small it is, it still weights 5 pounds which defeats the purpose of being a thin and light notebook.

The OP only said "thin" not "light"

You assumed "thin and light" when you saw "thin," but OP might want to clarify is light is also an issue.
 

IlllI

Diamond Member
Feb 12, 2002
4,927
10
81
here are some potential others
HP Pavilion Dv2
HP Elitebook 2530P
Asus U6V
Samsung X360

and MSI X-Slim X320, X340 is about to come out soon
 

firewolfsm

Golden Member
Oct 16, 2005
1,848
29
91
The Latitude E4300 should be mentioned. It comes with a great 6MB cache, 2.26GHz+ processor standard, and an LED backlit keyboard and LCD at 3.2lbs with great battery life.

The only downside is the Intel graphics, which is good enough if you don't plan to game.

It can also be had for under $800 on the Dell outlet.
 

sxr7171

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2002
5,079
40
91
X200s, which I have and would recommend to anyone.

Or Dell E4200 check the outlet for sweet deals.

When you buy an ultraportable you don't buy it to "game", you buy it to get stuff done on.

When it comes to laptops especially ultraportables, the last thing I look at is CPU and GPU, I look at the machine, it's build quality, it's design, battery life, heat production etc. The basic things you do on such a laptop will run just fine regardless of CPU/GPU and the thing you need most if durability, battery life etc.

These are products that you must look at as a finished product/package. This is not CPU/GPU comparison time here, there are far more important characteristics that you are paying for than mere CPU/GPU specs.
 

sxr7171

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2002
5,079
40
91
Originally posted by: corkyg
Right - the ultraportable laptop standard is 3 lbs. give or take the battery.

These days it getting to be 2.5lbs. Which is why I don't even count the Macbook Air which I think weighs a pathetic amount for what it is.

Mac fans think that is light? All I have to say is that aluminum is for soda cans. Magnesium alloy and carbon fiber are for ultraportable laptops.
 

MrX8503

Diamond Member
Oct 23, 2005
4,529
0
0
Originally posted by: sxr7171
Originally posted by: corkyg
Right - the ultraportable laptop standard is 3 lbs. give or take the battery.

These days it getting to be 2.5lbs. Which is why I don't even count the Macbook Air which I think weighs a pathetic amount for what it is.

Mac fans think that is light? All I have to say is that aluminum is for soda cans. Magnesium alloy and carbon fiber are for ultraportable laptops.

Lol chill dude.

Macs aren't the lightest of the bunch, but I don't see any laptops .95" thin.
 

sindows

Golden Member
Dec 11, 2005
1,193
0
0
The MSI X320/X340 and Macbook Air are about thinnest laptops you can currently buy. The X200 can reach up to 1.4" at the rear which is very thick. IMO anything lower than 1.1" can be considered "thin". I personally love the 13.3" Acer Timeline. It thin(1.1"), cheap ($600) and has great battery life (over 6 hours). The display is also big enough to have a comfortable dot pitch without everything feeling too small. Its a bit underpowered but for the price of a Lenovo X200, you can buy the Acer and build a desktop that will easily outrun it.
 
Dec 10, 2005
24,049
6,848
136
Originally posted by: sindows
The MSI X320/X340 and Macbook Air are about thinnest laptops you can currently buy. The X200 can reach up to 1.4" at the rear which is very thick. IMO anything lower than 1.1" can be considered "thin". I personally love the 13.3" Acer Timeline. It thin(1.1"), cheap ($600) and has great battery life (over 6 hours). The display is also big enough to have a comfortable dot pitch without everything feeling too small. Its a bit underpowered but for the price of a Lenovo X200, you can buy the Acer and build a desktop that will easily outrun it.

Don't those MSI notebooks use the Atom processor?
 

Commodus

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 2004
9,210
6,809
136
Originally posted by: Brainonska511

Don't those MSI notebooks use the Atom processor?

The X340 uses a CULV processor -- a 1.4GHz Core 2 Solo. It's not spectacular, but it's infinitely faster than an Atom. It's the X320 that uses the Atom and is the one you should definitely avoid, although I've heard both are fairly cheaply made (no big surprise given most Taiwanese PC makers' lineups these days).
 

corkyg

Elite Member | Peripherals
Super Moderator
Mar 4, 2000
27,370
238
106
Thinness is not particularly good criterion for an ultra portable laptop. I would be concerned about the effect of thinness when placed in a backpack - and any stress occuring whenone bends forward or flexes shoulder - too thin could lead to bending and breaking the lcd screen. So, it would seem prudent not to put a thin one in a backpack, but in a case that does not put bend stress on the unit.

I suppose you could put a board in the backpack to preclude such stress over the curvature of one's back. :)

I prefer to focus on weight rather that thickness. 2.5 to 3 lbs seems like a decent number.

It also makes me chuckle when I see travelling wide bodies worrying about the weight and thickness of their laptops. :)
 

sxr7171

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2002
5,079
40
91
Originally posted by: MrX8503
Originally posted by: sxr7171
Originally posted by: corkyg
Right - the ultraportable laptop standard is 3 lbs. give or take the battery.

These days it getting to be 2.5lbs. Which is why I don't even count the Macbook Air which I think weighs a pathetic amount for what it is.

Mac fans think that is light? All I have to say is that aluminum is for soda cans. Magnesium alloy and carbon fiber are for ultraportable laptops.



Lol chill dude.

Macs aren't the lightest of the bunch, but I don't see any laptops .95" thin.


It's because you aren't looking beyond pop culture advertising.

Lenovo x300: 0.73"
Dell E4200: 0.79"

Numerous Toshibas, Fujitsus, Sharps and Sonys are thinner than .95"

They are ALL lighter. They are ALL made with much more advanced materials than any Macbook Pro or Air.

I'm not as anti Apple as I used to be, I use an iPhone now. I'm not saying anything about their OS which I'm sure is great, but their laptop hardware isn't all that. It's like Best Buy high end at best. ESPECIALLY in the ultraportable market, they are ouclassed in every which way. There are thinner, lighter, stronger ultraportables in the world than Apple machines.

Maybe the 15" is a competitor given it's size and weight, but the Air and 13" Pro are not top ultraportables.
 

sxr7171

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2002
5,079
40
91
Originally posted by: sindows
The MSI X320/X340 and Macbook Air are about thinnest laptops you can currently buy. The X200 can reach up to 1.4" at the rear which is very thick. IMO anything lower than 1.1" can be considered "thin". I personally love the 13.3" Acer Timeline. It thin(1.1"), cheap ($600) and has great battery life (over 6 hours). The display is also big enough to have a comfortable dot pitch without everything feeling too small. Its a bit underpowered but for the price of a Lenovo X200, you can buy the Acer and build a desktop that will easily outrun it.


X200s is 1.1"

The Lenovos are expensive but they last and come with service and support like few others.

It boils down to how much you really need durability. If you need it, then the extra cash for a Thinkpad is well spent. If you don't then other options are worth considering.
 

sxr7171

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2002
5,079
40
91
Originally posted by: corkyg
Thinness is not particularly good criterion for an ultra portable laptop. I would be concerned about the effect of thinness when placed in a backpack - and any stress occuring whenone bends forward or flexes shoulder - too thin could lead to bending and breaking the lcd screen. So, it would seem prudent not to put a thin one in a backpack, but in a case that does not put bend stress on the unit.

I suppose you could put a board in the backpack to preclude such stress over the curvature of one's back. :)

I prefer to focus on weight rather that thickness. 2.5 to 3 lbs seems like a decent number.

It also makes me chuckle when I see travelling wide bodies worrying about the weight and thickness of their laptops. :)

Thinkpads have that roll cage reinforced LCD housing that makes them very sturdy. Just playing with mine and trying it get it to bend shows how much of a difference it makes even compared to the older Thinkpads.

But these magnesium alloy cases are simply unbelievably rigid, I mean I stepped on one of my Thinkpads accidentally and no damage.

Watching these is always fun also: http://www.google.com/search?q...&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:eek:fficial&client=firefox-a

I have a friend with a 17" Macbook Pro who sat on it accidentally and the HDD was damaged leaving her with her data lost. I realize this is anecdotal, but I've done some crazy things with my Thinkpads including sitting on them, throwing them (with a neoprene case), stepping on them and they all just work. Even my nearly 6 year old X31.
The case design protects the HDD very well.


At the discounts they go for these days, I think if you carry a machine around a lot, there is no better value than a X200s or X61s. If you are a light user, then maybe considering some of the even lighter and thinner Dell/Sony/Toshiba/Gateway/Fujitsu/Sharp/Acer might work.
 

MrX8503

Diamond Member
Oct 23, 2005
4,529
0
0
Originally posted by: sxr7171
Originally posted by: MrX8503
Originally posted by: sxr7171
Originally posted by: corkyg
Right - the ultraportable laptop standard is 3 lbs. give or take the battery.

These days it getting to be 2.5lbs. Which is why I don't even count the Macbook Air which I think weighs a pathetic amount for what it is.

Mac fans think that is light? All I have to say is that aluminum is for soda cans. Magnesium alloy and carbon fiber are for ultraportable laptops.



Lol chill dude.

Macs aren't the lightest of the bunch, but I don't see any laptops .95" thin.


It's because you aren't looking beyond pop culture advertising.

Lenovo x300: 0.73"
Dell E4200: 0.79"

Numerous Toshibas, Fujitsus, Sharps and Sonys are thinner than .95"

They are ALL lighter. They are ALL made with much more advanced materials than any Macbook Pro or Air.

I'm not as anti Apple as I used to be, I use an iPhone now. I'm not saying anything about their OS which I'm sure is great, but their laptop hardware isn't all that. It's like Best Buy high end at best. ESPECIALLY in the ultraportable market, they are ouclassed in every which way. There are thinner, lighter, stronger ultraportables in the world than Apple machines.

Maybe the 15" is a competitor given it's size and weight, but the Air and 13" Pro are not top ultraportables.

Those are both 12" laptops, weak, and much more expensive than the 13" Macbook Pro.

The 13" Macbook Pro is not considered an ultraportable.
 

Fox5

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2005
5,957
7
81
Originally posted by: sxr7171
Originally posted by: corkyg
Thinness is not particularly good criterion for an ultra portable laptop. I would be concerned about the effect of thinness when placed in a backpack - and any stress occuring whenone bends forward or flexes shoulder - too thin could lead to bending and breaking the lcd screen. So, it would seem prudent not to put a thin one in a backpack, but in a case that does not put bend stress on the unit.

I suppose you could put a board in the backpack to preclude such stress over the curvature of one's back. :)

I prefer to focus on weight rather that thickness. 2.5 to 3 lbs seems like a decent number.

It also makes me chuckle when I see travelling wide bodies worrying about the weight and thickness of their laptops. :)

Thinkpads have that roll cage reinforced LCD housing that makes them very sturdy. Just playing with mine and trying it get it to bend shows how much of a difference it makes even compared to the older Thinkpads.

But these magnesium alloy cases are simply unbelievably rigid, I mean I stepped on one of my Thinkpads accidentally and no damage.

Watching these is always fun also: http://www.google.com/search?q...&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:eek:fficial&client=firefox-a

I have a friend with a 17" Macbook Pro who sat on it accidentally and the HDD was damaged leaving her with her data lost. I realize this is anecdotal, but I've done some crazy things with my Thinkpads including sitting on them, throwing them (with a neoprene case), stepping on them and they all just work. Even my nearly 6 year old X31.
The case design protects the HDD very well.


At the discounts they go for these days, I think if you carry a machine around a lot, there is no better value than a X200s or X61s. If you are a light user, then maybe considering some of the even lighter and thinner Dell/Sony/Toshiba/Gateway/Fujitsu/Sharp/Acer might work.

I had the exact opposite experience with my thinkpad X41T.

Dropped it 6 inches the first day I had it, chipped off an edge of the case (where the pen holder is) and cracked the back of the LCD screen. Still works, but there's cosmetic damage. The bottom half of the laptop feels surprisingly study, but the LCD screen is less so, I wouldn't say thinkpads are enough of an improvement over other laptops to think they can survive things others can't.

Additionally damage occurred through normal use over time as well. The locking latch broke, but the x41t had an extremely poor design for that made out of cheap plastic. The bottom half of the thinkpad is warped so it no longer sits flat on a desk (not a big issue since it's not way off, but it's a known issue with many older thinkpads).

The biggest issue was that after enough times turning it back and forth, the tablet swivel started getting EXTREMELY loose. It would rock back and forth and was practically out of the chassis. I could even rotate it 180 degrees in the opposite direction is was supposed to rotate. I sent it in for repairs, and was told repairs would cost $1600, aka they were just going to charge me for a new laptop and sent it out. I took apart the laptop myself and only had to tighten a single screw to fix the screen. It took less than an hour of labor for my unskilled self to figure out and do.

Also, the Hitachi hard drive....oh the hitachi hard drive. The x41T used a custom 1.8" hard drive meaning it was impossible to buy normal 2.5" drives for the system. It had horrible performance (4200RPM and its write cache may have been disabled, took over 3 minutes to boot and was extremely sluggish in usage...at least ubuntu fixed that), and constantly made clicking noises as the machine was overly aggressive in its power saving and shock impact attempts. The Active Braking Mechanism of the thinkpads sounds great in theory, protects your drive from any sudden impacts, except there is a very low limit on the amount of times the hard drive can undergo the braking mechanism before...breaking.
Additionally, Hitachi hard drives are made with the most brittle and fragile platters in the industry, leading to a higher chance that the platters will just shatter.
Anyhow, after about a year and a half of use, my hard drive died. I was able to use linux to continually locate the bad sectors and partition them out, but they kept growing and growing.
Replacement hard drives were only available from IBM for $300 for their slow 40GB proprietary pieces of crap.
I'm currently running a 32GB compact flash card hooked in with an adapter. It's not ideal, but it was way cheaper and works. Read speeds are insane for the laptop, but write speeds are insanely slow and it suffers the problems of the worst SSDs, possibly even worse.

I've only owned one Thinkpad, but I am not impressed. The current crop of Netbooks offer less weight, similar performance, and better battery life for a whole lot lower price point. The only reason I don't get one is that the Thinkpad works well enough, I love trackpoint (even though it has a tendency to wander, I won't use touch pads) and the tablet functionality is a neat trick. Still, I would have been better served by a $500 cheapie laptop (or currently, <$500 netbooks) with a standard sized harddrive, better performance, and I wouldn't have felt guilty about replacing after a year or two.
Spending a lot of money on a laptop will only leave you heart broken as you watch prices fall sharply and every spec of it be eclipsed.

BTW, to the original poster, the HP DV2 is less than 1" thick, can have an AMD dual core and HD3400 graphics, and fits in at the top of the ultra portable weight scale.
Though imo, the ultraportable category should be ~3 pounds or less. I would just barely call my X41T an ultraportable with the stock 4 cell battery (about 1 hour of battery life), and it's definitely in full size laptop weight with the extended battery (about 3 hours of battery life, ie, required).
 

WackyDan

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2004
4,794
68
91
The X40 series of ThinkPad was a cluster. Won many design awards, but that latch and drive sucked. The drive wasn't custom, it was just a new industry spec that was available. Not only were they slow but hitachi had a very large bad batch of thos 1.8's and they failed all the time. The X61's were way way better and the x200t is sweet. You unfortunately had one of the poorest ThinkPad designs and the one with the crappiest hardware that they near had in their entire history.