Lenovo updates ThinkPad lineup with 16:10 screens and more

f00barbob

Ars Scholae Palatinae
649
Did enough people finally realize that 16:9 is just not a great aspect ratio for general computer work? Too narrow to really run two common "office" applications side by side, and ineffective for working with 16:9 content due to inflexible UIs. Speaking primarily about 1920x1080 and smaller panels, as they represent the vast majority of available screens.

The onslaught of 16:9 computer displays seemed to unfortunately coincide with other iffy trends like giant horizontal "ribbon" controls, and general tendency towards waste of screen real estate. Fortunately, 16:10 displays never really went away, though they did tend to be on the pricier side of things.
 
Upvote
103 (103 / 0)

cosmicjesus

Ars Scholae Palatinae
880
16:10 is cool, but you know what's really cool? 3:2.

I would use them if they were available - I'd have to rank the common aspect ratios roughly:

3:2 - sadly rare in desktop displays - very balanced proportions
16:10
4:3
5:4
16:9
Hell yeah. I'd kill for a couple good 24 or 27 inch 3:2 desktop monitors.
 
Upvote
29 (30 / -1)

Vincent294

Ars Scholae Palatinae
1,123
I wonder if they'll stop relying on Hotkey Features Integration which needs to be reinstalled every few months to unbreak it for whatever reason. I also wonder if they went back to socketed RAM. Other than those uncertainties it looks great.
Edit: Before anyone suggests not installing Hotkey Features Integration, you can't, because it breaks the regular hotkeys if it isn't installed. I don't install it for the star key no one uses, I install it because I have to to use the mute hotkey and others. Only volume up/down works without it.
 
Upvote
6 (6 / 0)

Trekoid

Seniorius Lurkius
13
Subscriptor++
Fortunately, 16:10 displays never really went away, though they did tend to be on the pricier side of things.

Yeah, but then we're stuck being docked at a desk. Outside of Macbook Pros, all laptops went 16:9 for a long while there. Three years ago I was hunting for a laptop to run Ubuntu on and could not find any with a 16:10 screen. That extra height is helpful not just for reading documents, but displaying code too.
 
Upvote
23 (23 / 0)

Trippynet

Wise, Aged Ars Veteran
107
Yeah, but then we're stuck being docked at a desk. Outside of Macbook Pros, all laptops went 16:9 for a long while there. Three years ago I was hunting for a laptop to run Ubuntu on and could not find any with a 16:10 screen. That extra height is helpful not just for reading documents, but displaying code too.

Same here, I've put off buying new laptops for quite some time due to the lousy screen ratios on modern machines. Stuck with an old X201 for ages - primarily because of the more comfortable aspect ratio.

My wife's current laptop is a Huawei MateBook with a 3:2 screen and the display is gorgeous. Still, it's nice to see these coming slowly back into fashion. Who knows, maybe the next time my work laptop is due for a refresh I'll be able to get one that isn't 16:9. The gigantic bottom bezel on my work HP Elitebook is simply ridiculous.
 
Upvote
12 (12 / 0)
16:9 is not a good aspect ratio for laptop screens. It's fine on a 1440p 27" or 32" desktop monitor. By that point you have enough vertical resolution and screen real estate that it works well. But 1440p on laptop size screens requires scaling. I would think 1920x1200 would be a good 16:10 resolution on many laptops. Usable without scaling. More vertical resolution than 1080p. I always liked 1200p on 24" professional monitors.
 
Upvote
29 (29 / 0)

close

Ars Tribunus Militum
2,497
The new T-series laptops still have 16:9 displays, though that admittedly makes a bit more sense for laptops that offer 4K Dolby Vision display configurations, discrete graphics, and other specs and features oriented around media consumption.
Yes... T-series Thinkpads were always aimed at media consumption, weren't they?
 
Upvote
29 (29 / 0)

evan_s

Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
7,514
Subscriptor
Did enough people finally realize that 16:9 is just not a great aspect ratio for general computer work? Too narrow to really run two common "office" applications side by side, and ineffective for working with 16:9 content due to inflexible UIs. Speaking primarily about 1920x1080 and smaller panels, as they represent the vast majority of available screens.

The onslaught of 16:9 computer displays seemed to unfortunately coincide with other iffy trends like giant horizontal "ribbon" controls, and general tendency towards waste of screen real estate. Fortunately, 16:10 displays never really went away, though they did tend to be on the pricier side of things.

Yeah I held onto my 1600x1200 monitor for a long time because I didn't want to go to a 1080p monitor and loose vertical space. A lot less selection and more expensive to try to find the rare 1920 x 1200 monitors. I finally ended up going to a WQHD monitor at 2560x1440. While it's still a 16:9 ratio it's at least enough vertical real-estate to be useful. Next to that I've got a portrait 1920x1200 monitor that I picked up cheap used that ended up replacing my old 1600x1200 monitor that had been my portrait display. Off to the side of that I've got the 1080p monitor work provided that holds email and chat etc. Also the one I share when presenting so other people at least have a decent shot of being able to see my screen.
 
Upvote
5 (5 / 0)

GreenEnvy

Ars Scholae Palatinae
1,267
I wonder if they'll stop relying on Hotkey Features Integration which needs to be reinstalled every few months to unbreak it for whatever reason. I also wonder if they went back to socketed RAM. Other than those uncertainties it looks great.
Edit: Before anyone suggests not installing Hotkey Features Integration, you can't, because it breaks the regular hotkeys if it isn't installed. I don't install it for the star key no one uses, I install it because I have to to use the mute hotkey and others. Only volume up/down works without it.

We don't install the hotkey apps on our T series lenovo's, and we have no problem with volume and brightness controls.
We use a stock windows image, then install apps like antivirus and office, but no Lenovo specific software.
 
Upvote
14 (14 / 0)
Will the AMD T14 support Thunderbolt this time around? I've got a T495 AMD model that doesn't and it therefore doesn't support eGPU solutions out there, which is a minor bummer (hoping to get rid of my desktop with a bigger gpu in it). I was a little surprised that the T495 didn't have this since I kind of thought it was standard at this point in midrange+ laptops.
 
Upvote
0 (0 / 0)

Vincent294

Ars Scholae Palatinae
1,123
I wonder if they'll stop relying on Hotkey Features Integration which needs to be reinstalled every few months to unbreak it for whatever reason. I also wonder if they went back to socketed RAM. Other than those uncertainties it looks great.
Edit: Before anyone suggests not installing Hotkey Features Integration, you can't, because it breaks the regular hotkeys if it isn't installed. I don't install it for the star key no one uses, I install it because I have to to use the mute hotkey and others. Only volume up/down works without it.

We don't install the hotkey apps on our T series lenovo's, and we have no problem with volume and brightness controls.
We use a stock windows image, then install apps like antivirus and office, but no Lenovo specific software.
Not on my E485, and I've also seen it required on an E570 and other models. I like my ThinkPad but just cause your T-series ThinkPad works with stock drivers doesn't mean all models get that attention. Hotkeys that don't work, mute/FnLock LEDs that don't work, the list could go on. I'm sure they could pay someone to debug and fix the issues but apparently that's too much to ask Lenovo for.
 
Upvote
-5 (0 / -5)
Didn't the Thinkpad T "s" variants used to be thinner than the non "s" variants?

In the pictures the thickness ratio for T14/T14s and T15/T15s appears to be close to 1.0.

We have a T420 and W530 where the bases are 22 and 23 mm thick, not counting the feet. The bases of the new ones appear to be much thinner. Surely the new ones are lighter as a result but I liked the old ones in large part because they were not so thin that they became flimsy, which is a problem on many newer laptops.
 
Upvote
1 (1 / 0)

PaulM24

Seniorius Lurkius
36
Using a Dell U2413 monitor for my desktop, set at 1920 x 1200. This is fantastic for most uses and is a good compromise for media. However it will be really difficult when it eventually needs replacing to find a reasonably priced 16 x 10 monitor. Here is hoping that manufacturers see sense and offer a choice in the future.
 
Upvote
1 (2 / -1)

WordWarrior

Wise, Aged Ars Veteran
162
2560x1600 on a 13" hardly makes sense. It'd be great on a 15" screen tho.

16:9 displays for computing devices need to just die. 16:10 or taller.
Why doesn't it make sense? It's 1280x800 doubled. It's also what every 13" Retina Mac has used.

Assuming your OS does fractional scaling well. Ubuntu has only added this feature recently.
 
Upvote
3 (4 / -1)

SuperJ

Smack-Fu Master, in training
84
"Lenovo also overhauled the T-series lineup. The new T-series laptops still have 16:9 displays, though that admittedly makes a bit more sense for laptops that offer 4K Dolby Vision display configurations, discrete graphics, and other specs and features oriented around media consumption."


16:9 only makes sense if you keep the vert of 16:10 and add width. It never makes sense to take pixels away (especially if you're leaving a bigger bezel in their place). Most 16:9 laptop screens are aren't wider, they're just shorter. I'm staring at a Dell Precision 7720 with a giant forehead and chin (my old 6500 had 16:10).

I'm jealous of the Macbooks, they never really got suckered by "HD" resolutions and ratios to the same extent as PCs.
 
Upvote
5 (5 / 0)

Honeybog

Ars Tribunus Militum
2,785
Fortunately, 16:10 displays never really went away, though they did tend to be on the pricier side of things.

Yeah, but then we're stuck being docked at a desk. Outside of Macbook Pros, all laptops went 16:9 for a long while there. Three years ago I was hunting for a laptop to run Ubuntu on and could not find any with a 16:10 screen. That extra height is helpful not just for reading documents, but displaying code too.

The 13” Airs have been 16:10, too since at least the second generation (11” was 16:9 if I recall).
 
Upvote
4 (4 / 0)

LDA 6502

Ars Tribunus Militum
1,573
Subscriptor
Using a Dell U2413 monitor for my desktop, set at 1920 x 1200. This is fantastic for most uses and is a good compromise for media. However it will be really difficult when it eventually needs replacing to find a reasonably priced 16 x 10 monitor. Here is hoping that manufacturers see sense and offer a choice in the future.
I'm rocking a U2410 over here. I would totally kill for a 27" 3840x2400 Q-LED IPS monitor to replace it.
 
Upvote
4 (4 / 0)
I wonder if they'll stop relying on Hotkey Features Integration which needs to be reinstalled every few months to unbreak it for whatever reason. I also wonder if they went back to socketed RAM. Other than those uncertainties it looks great.
Edit: Before anyone suggests not installing Hotkey Features Integration, you can't, because it breaks the regular hotkeys if it isn't installed. I don't install it for the star key no one uses, I install it because I have to to use the mute hotkey and others. Only volume up/down works without it.

I recently bought a Thinkpad X1 Extreme Gen 3 and it has user upgradeable ram. Upgrading the ram was one of the first things I did after I got it. It has two slots that can take up to 64GB total. I hope they bring it back on some of their other models. Not a fan of soldered ram.

It can also take two m.2 NVME SSDs. I'm hoping the ability to take more than one storage drive becomes a more common thing now that the drives are so small.
 
Upvote
8 (8 / 0)
16:10 is cool, but you know what's really cool? 3:2.

I would use them if they were available - I'd have to rank the common aspect ratios roughly:

3:2 - sadly rare in desktop displays - very balanced proportions
16:10
4:3
5:4
16:9

My first LCD was a 4:3 20" display - a direct replacement for a 19" 4:3 CRT. It was a Viewsonic with 1400 x 1050 resolution - awesome for the time.
 
Upvote
3 (3 / 0)