Longer bars are better
Take a look at the test results that we got out of the X300 and you’ll see that the SSD scores incredibly well in PCMark05. Most laptops get an HDD result of 4000-5000, while the tiny Sony TZ11XN only managed 2107. By contrast, the Lenovo X300 got a score of 15,428, which is twice as high as the four 1TB drives that we recently reviewed.
Longer bars are better
The blistering performance of the Samsung SSD makes up for the rather slow Intel processor and gives the X300 a level of response that is quite unexpected in such a small, quiet laptop.
OMG, a dub-notebook article that's not written by Tony Smith!!!
Where is he and what have you done with him?
A few things.
First, lauding IBM for "catching up" with a widescreen display? Having recently been given a Dell with such I *really* miss my old 4:3 HP. Same screen width, less height=less screen, the resolution hike doesn't compensate at all. Until documents start being produced in A4 landscape by default rather than portrait, widescreen display will be a hindrance rather than a help on work machines. Even code tends to be long and narrow FFS!
Secondly, "......what it will be like when we all drive electric cars and the background noise in our towns and cities drops to a whisper." The answer to this one is "Bloody dangerous!". I came perilously close to getting "Prius'd" the other day when one snuck up behind me in stealth mode. You don't realise how much you rely on your hearing for threat detection until some SOB invents a way of circumventing it.
Finally, defragmentation. Take a well-used XP box and install a quality defrag product. Now run a full on and offline defrag including the MFT and metadata. Once complete check out the performance hike. I was utterly gobsmacked, and this was on a machine regularly defragged with conventional weapons. NTFS doesn't need defragging in much the same way as computers don't need electricity (i.e. you can do your computing on a hand-cranked Babbage engine, but it ain't going to be quick). Still, maybe that's all fixed in Vista........(not holding breath).
subs start with much smaller formfactor... eg 12" screen. its not all about the thickness of the device...thats an incorrect view spouted by Apple marketing. Toshiba Libretto, Asus Eee900, old classico Apple 12" powerbook... these are all sub-notebook.
notebook is 13.3 to 14" screens
Ermm.. wrong comparison?
Comparing the x300 with a Macbook Air is wrong. Try comparing it with a standard 13" MacBook:
x300 Dimensions: 12.4" x 9.1" x 0.73" - 0.92"
Macbook Dimensions: 12.78" x 8.92" X 1.08" (SLIGHTLY thicker, but not much)
x300 Weight: 3.32lbs
Macbook Weight: 5.0lbs (Nearly double the weight - fair enough!)
x300 processor: 1.20GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
Macbook processor: 2.1GHz or 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo (LOTS faster)
x300 Storage: 64GB SSD
Macbook Storage: 120GB 5400-rpm Serial ATA hard disk drive (LOTS more storage)
x300: Nearly £2000!
I know which one I'd rather buy. In fact, I might buy 2, and still have cash left over for a nice weekend break...