Live data from Hacker News

Lenovo announces the first Arm-based ThinkPad

arstechnica.com

91–100 of 257 posts

Re: Lenovo announces the first Arm-based ThinkPad

#92
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's easier to run LCD production lines if all the panels are produced on the line at the same aspect ratio. Given the prevalence of 16:9 video panels, this made it easier to produce 16:9 panels for laptops. (So, you're essentially correct.)

Does that apply across sizes? I'd expect laptop screens, having a different pixel density, to be manufactured on different lines so that having the same aspect ratio as some other size wouldn't count that much.

If the Pixel density differs ( a lot ) then yes it doesn't matter. But you still need economy of scale. This doesn't matter as much now because current LCD panel industry is essentially left over by Smartphone market. So you get a lot more flexibility than trying to print millions of the same 16:9 panels.

Re: Lenovo announces the first Arm-based ThinkPad

#93
post #73
post #48

>The ThinkPad 13s will start at $1,099 This $1099 config better have 16GB Memory and 512GB by default. Otherwise it is a machine that cost about the same as MacBook Air M2, with lower Display Res, slower CPU and GPU and No Touch ID. This is perhaps for the first time in history Apple has a better "spec" machine for the same price. With the scale of iPhone and iPad, Apple is now at a point where the whole PC industry…

> Biggest lie ever. People want 16:10, but for years the industry shove 16:9 to your customer because it was the cheaper panel. Any background on this? I always assumed 16:9 became popular because of videos.

I have a MacBook Pro with 3456 × 2234 (around 16:10.5) resolution and it is perfect. I don't know why people would want laptops at 16:9 at all. I can play videos just fine on this thing and the other 95% of the time it's a better resolution for doing things like coding and spreadsheets.

Re: Lenovo announces the first Arm-based ThinkPad

#94
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious if they even considered the A78C, the variant with a similar cache (except L2) that replaces all LITTLE cores with big and possibly costs less to license as it's probably a roadmap core like the A78. It's chronologically a step behind but could unlock better performance (than A78+55) with a negligible/nonexistent hit to battery life.

Snapdragon 8cx Gen 3 is 4xX1 + 4xA78, with no A55s.

I eat my statement. That looks like a better configuration than an octa-A78C, but only if the licensing cost is the same or you REALLY have a need for the latest extensions.

Re: Lenovo announces the first Arm-based ThinkPad

#95
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have a T480s now, why do you want to upgrade? It's quite modern.

It only takes maximum of 24GB RAM. Right now I'm ok with it but I'd like to have some future proofing at some point, everybody is going crazy with containers nowadays. I've been moving my work off the desktop and while I can upgrade NVMe as I please I'm stuck with memory limit.

I have 40GB ram in my T480s, but it is single-channel.

I have also put a NVMe in the WWAN-port, I found out that the Transcend MTE452T (TS512GMTE452T) has the right M.2-port (B+M), and it is a compatible NVMe-drive and not a SATA-drive which some of the disks of that form factor is.

Re: Lenovo announces the first Arm-based ThinkPad

#97
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It only takes maximum of 24GB RAM. Right now I'm ok with it but I'd like to have some future proofing at some point, everybody is going crazy with containers nowadays. I've been moving my work off the desktop and while I can upgrade NVMe as I please I'm stuck with memory limit.

I'm pretty sure it can take 40GB RAM, see e.g. here: https://www.reddit.com/r/thinkpad/comments/bb1xwm/t480s_upgr... I also have 64GB on my work T480 (non-s) despite "max" being 32GB. The Lenovo-reported max RAM specs often do not take into account newer larger memory modules released after the laptop (or at least I believe this is the reason for the discrepancy).

There seems to be some discrepancies in this area, this is the CPU in my T480s (with 40GB RAM): https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/sku/124967/...

Even Intel says it can maximally have 32 GB of RAM.

Re: Lenovo announces the first Arm-based ThinkPad

#98
post #73
post #48

>The ThinkPad 13s will start at $1,099 This $1099 config better have 16GB Memory and 512GB by default. Otherwise it is a machine that cost about the same as MacBook Air M2, with lower Display Res, slower CPU and GPU and No Touch ID. This is perhaps for the first time in history Apple has a better "spec" machine for the same price. With the scale of iPhone and iPad, Apple is now at a point where the whole PC industry…

> Biggest lie ever. People want 16:10, but for years the industry shove 16:9 to your customer because it was the cheaper panel. Any background on this? I always assumed 16:9 became popular because of videos.

If you are authoring 16:9 content, something like 16:10 allows for some UI controls to be displayed along with 16:9 video at native resolution during previews. When programming, more space is better. So for creators, 16:10 is unambiguously better.

Re: Lenovo announces the first Arm-based ThinkPad

#99
post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Biggest lie ever. People want 16:10, but for years the industry shove 16:9 to your customer because it was the cheaper panel. Any background on this? I always assumed 16:9 became popular because of videos.

I have a MacBook Pro with 3456 × 2234 (around 16:10.5) resolution and it is perfect . I don't know why people would want laptops at 16:9 at all. I can play videos just fine on this thing and the other 95% of the time it's a better resolution for doing things like coding and spreadsheets.

New MBPs are exactly 16:10 for full-screen, non-"notch-aware" apps - the screen is basically 16:10 below the notch, plus the two side areas. Rather neat solution imho.

Re: Lenovo announces the first Arm-based ThinkPad

#100
post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Biggest lie ever. People want 16:10, but for years the industry shove 16:9 to your customer because it was the cheaper panel. Any background on this? I always assumed 16:9 became popular because of videos.

I have a MacBook Pro with 3456 × 2234 (around 16:10.5) resolution and it is perfect . I don't know why people would want laptops at 16:9 at all. I can play videos just fine on this thing and the other 95% of the time it's a better resolution for doing things like coding and spreadsheets.

On a related note, how much I wish 1440 / 1600 vertical had become dominant for PCs, rather than just "bigger number better".

It's so much more of a performance : sharpness sweet spot than 1080p - sorry, I can see pixel effects on a typical laptop - or 4k - which even desktops typically don't drive well.

Post reply on HN