Talk:ThinkPad T series

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

{{Requested move/dated|ThinkPad T Series Laptops}}

User:Trevor coelho/ThinkPad T Series Laptops → ThinkPad T Series Laptops – This is a new page. I created it since the different series of ThinkPad laptops aren't really represented on Wikipedia. I'm a new user and have created the page as closely in keeping with Wikipedia's guidelines as possible - I'd appreciate any feedback, and input in case I've made any errors (this is my first attempt at creating a Wikipedia page). I'm planning on slowly introducing pages for all major products from Lenovo - like the different product series, and the various product lines (ThinkCentre, ThinkStation, IdeaCentre, and so on - which aren't represented on Wikipedia at all).

Since this page hasn't been reviewed (except by me) I didn't want to put an uncontroversial move request. Accordingly, I'm requesting a move this way, which I hope will allow the page to be checked and then moved to live Wikipedia.

Trevor coelho (talk) 10:58, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I further moved it because we normally do not ened to qualify a brand name with the products it brands, unless there is some ambiguity. So far the only ThinkPad T series is for laptops that I know of.

Making this page searchable[edit]

Hi,

I've added categories to the T Series page, but when I use Wikipedia's search function to look for it, I can't find it. Is the redirect function involved in this, somehow? If anyone can help me out, I'd appreciate it.

Trevor coelho (talk) 06:55, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what you mean? Categories have nothing to do with the search function. The search database takes some time (sometimes hours) to be updated consistenly since it is so huge. I find this fine. What exactly are you searching for, and what are you finding instead? I did notice that T series goes to a Suzuki T series motorcycle, T-Series goes to Super Cassettes Industries, while T-series (Toronto subway car) is also an article. This is a job for a disambiguation page, which I can create. Also found the Bentley T-series and Canon T series and Rover T-Series engine and Juniper T-Series, while ThinkPad T-series goes to the general article instead of this one. As suggested on the feedback page, I would propose moving this one to ThinkPad T Series since that seems sufficient to identify the topic. W Nowicki (talk) 21:33, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Follow up: moved as proposed, and T series is now a disambiguation page. T Series perhaps not needed since search "does the right thing" and T-Series is kept to point to the India song label, since there are many links to that one, with a hatnote. W Nowicki (talk) 20:23, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious[edit]

In October 2000, the ThinkPad T20 was upgraded...

Very doubtful, since the T20 was not announced until 2001. Suspect a typo in the source, since that is what it says. This is just a blog entry anyway, so it not a reliable source. Alas, there are many citations to this posting. They probably all need better sources. W Nowicki (talk) 22:20, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]


the T420, the T420s, and the T520, have been lauded for their battery life – up to 30 hours with a 9-cell battery slice.[63]

My T420 barely lasts 3 1/2 hours on a brand new 9 cell battery, and 2 hours on the 6 cell, under light load. Running with an i5-2540m and Windows 10. Is this referring to battery life in sleep mode? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryankrage77 (talk • contribs) 13:56, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image[edit]

The image on the left does not show one of the last IBM Thinkpad models. From T40 on, they had a touchpad additional to the TrackPoint. This one is either a T20,T21,T23 or T30. The last model that was (at least partially) made by IBM was the T43. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.178.234.88 (talk) 00:04, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Recent Models[edit]

Is this marketing material or dictionary? Where are the models like T21 or T61? Searched information for T61 and found out this obscure wikipedia article. //arl

History Section Cleanup?[edit]

Much of the History section might be better presented as a table. There are also several places throughout that sound like marketing copy, making unsubstantiated value judgments (e.g. "powerful") or using press terminology as fact instead of quoting those sources (e.g. "arch-rival"). 216.50.142.194 (talk) 21:47, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's always bothered me that older models are in History as text, and newer ones are in the table. I would be all in favor of putting all the models in the table. I am also all in favor of removing the unsourced ad copy. Kendall-K1 (talk) 23:26, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on ThinkPad T Series. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:09, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

T450 Missing from List[edit]

The list includes the T450s but skips the T450. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.71.1.1 (talk) 05:06, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done.

T60/T61/T61p Missing[edit]

I like the narrative structure but the first Lenovo T-series laptops are missing from this post. Copy indicates that they're "replaced" by the W-series but it would be more logical to include these here.

Jamesfx3 (talk) 12:15, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

T410/T510 soldered ram[edit]

That information has been incorrect. They both models have a 2 DIMM slots (one for a top side of mainboard and one of bottom side). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.154.157.20 (talk) 19:28, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:51, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Excessive Color Coding[edit]

The color coding added to the table in the last few edits is, in my opinion, quite ecvessive and just makes the whole thing harder to read, as it makes all the cells disjointed from each other and makes things look u organized. Many of them are also highly subject to opinion on the thresholds. Who's to say that everyone agrees 1080p screens are "just ok" (yellow) and 1440p is the threshold for green? Or that 16 GB of memory is "just ok", 32 GB is the threshold for good, and 8 GB is poor (red)? Keep in mind this also highly depends on historical context, as 8 GB was quite a good amount for the older models at the time they were released. Should we also start marking all the processors on the older models as red too, even the i7s, since they are not very good by today's standards? Personally I think it was fine (better, even) the way it was before. GlenwingKyros (talk) 08:32, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The coloring helps you to select a laptop. I have removed redundant coloring to help reading.
Ignore the coloring labels. They show a feature level, not that something is enough.
The mass thresholds are designed proportionally according to the data. 217.162.112.133 (talk) 18:53, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It is not a shopping guide :P It is clear from your edit notes that you are rating each spec, and even if you say otherwise, that is how it will be interpreted. I don't mind color coding the weight/mass, but beyond that I don't think we really have any business coming up with a rating system for the rest of the specs. GlenwingKyros (talk) 19:39, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It IS a shopping visualization aid. You can't find the data presented like this anywhere else, it is easier to filter the offers with the colors.
It is just objective levels, not rating. The only value assertion is about soldering RAM, like it was already done for the CPUs.
No attempt will be made to rate CPUs or graphics. What the table is missing is listing the USB version.
The legends are synchronized with the Thinkpad E page. The thresholds take into account both series (I did not find other tables).
The Thinkpad E page is missing the storage information (you can find current models with HDD+SSD unlike for Thinkpad T, maybe the neutral storage level would happen there). 217.162.112.133 (talk) 21:26, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You just added the coloring on the E page yourself around the same time, if you are implying you were just changing the T series page to match with existing pages. This is an encyclopedia, it might be used for shopping by some people but that isn't its primary purpose. Deciding the thresholds and color codes is not objective, since it depends on your opinions about where the thresholds should be. Coloring things red, yellow, and green is effectively a rating system, saying "that's not how it's intended" doesn't make it any less so. GlenwingKyros (talk) 22:03, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It is like saying that the temperature coloring on city pages tell you when to go on holidays. This is just visualization.217.162.112.133 (talk) 22:32, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, 217.162.112.133! Thanks for a huge and inestimable job, and your work is a awesome. But ya, the "background-color" is a powerful, but crude tool. Maybe, can i get you a little advice for using the draft articles instead of a pages in a main namespace (sometimes, only if you provide a conceptual and discursive page update)? So, i also use a draft articles like this (and i'm also steal a part of your content for update my T series update page, so, thanks). Also: the draft article may be used for templates testing (another one for example). 176.59.96.5 (talk) 10:45, 21 July 2019 (UTC), known as 85.202.228.67[reply]
Hello, thank you. I looked at your draft, there are too many weight levels. Also my thresholds are not arbitrary, but are based on analyzing the characteristics of products and allowing for small tolerances. 217.162.112.133 (talk) 14:17, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I correct. The levels look fine. The problem is that there are too many greens. Try 2 blues and 2 greens. 217.162.112.133 (talk) 18:38, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks fot tip, the new version is looking more useful. 176.59.99.176 (talk) 20:14, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I tried using drafts once to transfer tables to templates but I gave up as some reviewers were too picky and just wasted my time when all I was doing was moving data. 217.162.112.133 (talk) 21:34, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
仕方がない です, so, we both do not have a optimal working temp: you be a fast and impressive editor, but i'm so extremely slow, and using of templates is more comfortable for me. But sometimes you improve the articles some inaccurate (sorry), and little slowiness is not a bad thing for you (maybe, so). 176.59.99.176 (talk) 20:14, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Also, your palettes is unusable for old laptops (pre-CoreDuo era). You may test palettes with tables like Dell Latitude#Technical_specifications: some tables gets a solid red colums, because all laptops in column have a <4 GB of RAM and IDE HDD (or 2 IDE HDD, or 3. Or SCSI. This is a sort of special headache).176.59.99.176 (talk) 20:14, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I made the palettes for the current Thinkpad T and E tables, they can be revised when more models are coded. If templates similar to LaptopWeight are used the colors can be easily changed (the right approach). 217.162.112.133 (talk) 20:42, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The two greens are easier to see, but they are too close. The difference is not immediately visible. 217.162.112.133 (talk) 20:52, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
So, now the current CPU palette have a close-look greens: "socketed high-power" and "soldered high-power". Also, the basic mid-range color (white in header palette and light-gray in table) is not a visually separable (they looks like a unsorted cell). Also again, the current soldered CPU's gets a basic grey/white background, that's why? 176.59.96.175 (talk) 11:11, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Uh, so, the Intel currently does not have a mid-range CPU line (Y is ultra-low, U is a low-power, and H is high-power; standard power line is obsolete now, and U series is not a M series successor). So, yes, their lineup is a harsh-noisly anytime. 176.59.96.175 (talk) 11:37, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I took 25-35W as standard power, 17W as low power, 7W as ultra low power 217.162.112.133 (talk) 14:45, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The classification has to be revised. Sometimes I took 25W from the configuration limit, not the standard TDP. 217.162.112.133 (talk) 15:08, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Also again... Why the "1 M2" option marked better that "1 M.2/SATA + 1 M.2"? There is no logic here, or maybe i can't something get? (little remark: i'll dream about dividing the SATA-based and NVME-based M2 slots, but PSREFS is a bad source for this research, and objective external information source is a hard to find). 176.59.96.122 (talk) 12:06, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Whoever made the storage column listed the WWAN slot as M.2 or mSATA. I agree that this is confusing. I think the best will be to add "WWAN" to it. 217.162.112.133 (talk) 18:06, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I started adding tables to the X1 Carbon. 217.162.112.133 (talk) 20:59, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Coloring started on EliteBook
Palettes seem ready for Precision laptops. Added the legends. 217.162.112.133 (talk) 20:32, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Started coloring ZBook 217.162.112.133 (talk) 22:24, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I can't get border-style, border-right, etc. to work (remove border) 217.162.112.133 (talk) 11:25, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is getting ridiculous. The amount and complexity of color coding is extremely excessive now, it takes several pages of scrolling just to get through the legends. This is entirely unnecessary and adds far too much clutter to the page. GlenwingKyros (talk) 15:49, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree, I attempted to reorder the legend and remove the pointless storage table (which has zero meaning, because models aren’t governed by year and is completely redundant because it is already listed by model) it appears that talk has removed almost all of my attempts at simplification of this article. This article will not be able to help anyone because it’s way too confusing. 1832 Heritage (talk) 18:39, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The storage table does not have zero meaning. Example: Do you want 1 PCIe x4 + 1 SATA? Look for light green cells. The same color for 2 PCIe x4 because you cannot say one configuration is better than the other. You increase level by offering faster technology or additional drives. 217.162.112.133 (talk) 19:25, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The year when a technology was introduced or specified also helps you. You want M.2? Do not look for anything older than 2013. 217.162.112.133 (talk) 19:43, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have collapsed the general legends. 217.162.112.133 (talk) 20:16, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Again, this is an encyclopedia article, not a shopping companion. The old table was sufficiently detailed and readable. If you want to make an ultra-detailed and ultra-comprehensive breakdown you may want to take it to a more dedicated platform like ThinkWiki or something like that. I don't think these edits are an improvement to this page. GlenwingKyros (talk) 20:29, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't want to see colors, you can use a browser extension. Other people find colors useful because they don't read the tables linearly.
If you don't want to use a browser extension, ask wikipedia to implement a B&W button. 217.162.112.133 (talk) 20:34, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
ThinkWiki is only about Thinkpads. 217.162.112.133 (talk) 20:37, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
An encyclopedia is better if it provides data visualization. 217.162.112.133 (talk) 20:45, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Making a custom browser extension or asking WP to implement a B&W mode are frankly ridiculous "solutions" to this, and I am sure this is obvious to you. Color codes become less useful when they are used excessively. I didn't realize you were doing this to all the other laptop pages too. This truly is something that would be much better handled with drafts, subject to more extensive review, instead of making hundreds of changes to the live article trying to tune it and get it "just right". And there is a difference between providing some color coding for ease of identifying a few key aspects, and the extremely excessive and complex system that you've implemented. GlenwingKyros (talk) 20:53, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You can switch to grayscale on Windows with Ctrl-Win-C. iOS has a hotkey. Android can have a hotkey. I think Mac does not offer a hotkey out of the box yet. 217.162.112.133 (talk) 20:59, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The coding is not excessive. Uniformity requires handling decades of hardware (somebody complained that the RAM table does not go low enough, so I extended it a bit, but covering the full range in a discernible manner to not get solid blocks on the very old stuff as requested will be challenging). The other stuff does not have this problem.
I am not tuning and abandoning. When I change the coding I adjust everything.
This is a wiki. The articles evolve.
Some other user is implementing templates slowly so that the coloring can be performed in a less basic manner. Then all pages can refer to a legend template instead of duplicating code.
This has been a lot of work. I would not have been doing it if I did not find it useful. 217.162.112.133 (talk) 21:24, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Do you really think "people should just switch their system to grayscale while reading this article if they don't like the color codes" is a practical solution? You are trying to frame this as if "the color codes are there for people who want them, and if you don't like them you can just turn them off". I don't think you're going to convince everyone that that's the situation here. I know you don't think the colors are excessive, but that really isn't the point. GlenwingKyros (talk) 00:24, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You can remove the colors by switching to grayscale. You can't add colors if they are not there.
Having colors in the document is the general solution. 217.162.112.133 (talk) 00:35, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Pressing a hot key or a button in the browser is not hard. 217.162.112.133 (talk) 00:45, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Grayscale mode affects the entire browser and all other pictures on the page, and it does not remove the color coding, it just changes the code to different shades of gray instead of colors. It is also an obscure feature and it is unreasonable to expect that readers will actually be leveraging that "choice". Pretending it is something people will turn on or off depending on whether they like it is simply an excuse to avoid the discussion about whether it actually improves the article or not. GlenwingKyros (talk) 01:26, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The colors do improve the articles because it is possible to understand the product lines without reading in detail.
The colors are not arbitrary. It is a heat map. You can understand how products compare even without looking at the legends. 217.162.112.133 (talk) 01:34, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

At what point do enough Wikipedians have to complain to solve this issue. It seems to me that only one user is advocating for these changes, while all others seem to disagree with them. I’m working on a decluttered version in my sandbox at the present, which I believe can solve most of the colour coding issues and reduce confusion. 1832 Heritage (talk) 07:08, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, i'm working on for resolve those problem too. You can see my current progress here, here and here; The current version of header (and links for all current templates) is here. It's a ~60% completed work, but some of current templates is completely usable (but documentation is extremely poor, ごめんなさい). 176.59.108.38 (talk) 07:58, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, wow, all of those look excellent. You have made a whole lot more progress than I have. I wish you the best of luck, and I hope that I may be able to assist you in the future. 1832 Heritage (talk) 08:07, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. This is not a one-day work, for example, the "LaptopCPU" part is a half-year-old project. I had to create a userprofile, and backup of my current version is here; current draft version is partially rebuilded by 217.162.112.133-san. ThisIsNotABetter (talk) 02:45, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Only 2 users have been complaining on the Thinkpad T page. Nobody on the other laptop pages.
2 people have been working on enhancing the page.
I don't see the masses complaining. They are the most likely to welcome color.
If you have pastel alternatives to the bright colors, I would be glad to hear about it. Those are the templates I found. Changing that is easy. Anything major should wait until the specialized templates are ready so that the pages only need to be changed once. The quantity of colors is not a problem as long as they can be discerned because it is a heat map. It is not confusing as long as the colors are properly chosen.
Similarly if you have additional templates that can be discerned so that the RAM palette can be extended to properly cover Latitude, as requested.
The Latitude page is very big. I'm not planning to add it until the RAM template is implemented with a discernible palette.
Maybe instead of blue being reserved for the future, "UV" can be used for that. 217.162.112.133 (talk) 14:48, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The specific original soldered CPU legend can be removed if a marker is implemented (the right way to present this information). 217.162.112.133 (talk) 14:54, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Out of 3 people responding here, 2 are negative. That would be concerning feedback for most editors. Granted it's not a large sample of editors, but the proper response in this situation would be that we need feedback from more editors, instead of trying to brush it off. GlenwingKyros (talk) 16:15, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have not been brushing it off. I already made modifications based on your feedback. 217.162.112.133 (talk) 16:34, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

T400 switchable graphics[edit]

The official lenovo PDF pages contains following information about T400 discrete graphics: "GM45 chipset; switchable, but Vista only". Chipset PM45 is not listed as all, models with integrated video have a same GM45 chipset. Anyone have ideas about this? 176.59.110.177 (talk) 13:16, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unofficial memory limits[edit]

Someone undid my upgrade of the memory limits of 6th and 7th Gen Intel U processors. I found the supposed real limits at a RAM vendor (speicher.de). I find that Crucial usually sticks to the official limit even when extended compatibility is proven. 217.162.112.133 (talk) 21:16, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's i'm. Sorry for this rollback, but without external approving link this information is can't be a encyclopedic fact. I know about unofficial upgradeability of some ThinkPad laptops, but sometimes they works with only special selected modules. 176.59.100.112 (talk) 06:45, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The site also shows that the T420 and T420s support 16GiB RAM, as confirmed by users. As an additional check, it shows the T410 supporting only 8GiB RAM. 217.162.112.133 (talk) 22:47, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

T470s reddit user confirmed that 32GiB Samsung module works. 217.162.112.133 (talk) 01:51, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's great, but where the link for this case? Also, if unofficial RAM limits can be listed, maybe, unofficial display replacements can be noticed to? :3 176.59.112.33 (talk) 17:54, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It is not the same to hack a screen replacement as just buying RAM from a reputable vendor who offers a guarantee.
If people want to know the memory supported when the computer was launched, they can just look at psref.
Here's the reddit link: [1] 217.162.112.133 (talk) 21:35, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for link! This is not a official document, Mass Media publication or a something alike, but, for first time... Maybe, someone else can prove information about supported modules. 176.59.96.175 (talk) 11:23, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
PHS makes modules, tests them, and guarantees them so you can trust their speicher.de site or amazon storefront. 217.162.112.133 (talk) 17:59, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The same memory as in speicher.de is being sold at amazon in Europe: ASIN B07NBPKWP8. 217.162.112.133 (talk) 22:02, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
speicher.de is the online shop from phs.de 217.162.112.133 (talk) 22:12, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.reddit.com/r/thinkpad/comments/bibx3p/t470s_supports_single_32gb_module_samsung/

USB 3.0 Basic Dock[edit]

I think the compatibility table is not accurate. 217.162.74.13 (talk) 14:29, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:ThinkPad_T_series&oldid=1201475803"