Bye bye W7xx series?

Did Lenovo kill off the 17" ThinkPad?

 

I hope not. I do see that the only way to get one is from a retailer. Is that bad news bears? I do not not for sure. But I can say I sure hope its just lenovo gearing up for a new 17in workstation.

 

Hopefully they keep 17" vs the new Precision M6600 which went 17.3" and 16:9..

 

Perhaps it was too expensive, heavy and thus didnt sell so well? No idea, but 17" ThinkPad would seem like nice choice as either semi-mobile working station beast or desktop replacement.

 

oh ... is anybody still buying laptops that are bigger than 15" ?

me for instance can not buy anything bigger than 13.3 these days, even though that is also kinda big.

 

the roadmap posted before has no 17 in laptop listed (except for the W701ds being phased out by next month). so it's quite possible Lenovo decided to cancel the W7xx series. With the W520 you are getting almost everything you could get on the W7xx anyways so Lenovo was probably thinking they didn't want to spend the resources on developing the W7xx upgrade.

Performance-wise, the W520 offers a quad core processor, 32 GB of RAM, full HD screen, and mid range graphics (for a workstation). The W7xx's had the same level specs, but with high-end workstation graphics. What differentiates the W7xx's from the W5xx's was the graphics tablet (which was small and awkward to use for some people, like me being left handed), the color calibrator (also a W510 feature, hopefully also available for the W520), dual hard drives, the numpad, and the second screen in the DS. I think Lenovo has decided that these features were too much of a niche to bother with so they've decided to cancel the W7xx series.

 

C'est moi!
I use X200s (unrivaled workhorse) and W701 (undisputed workstation)... (too much NBA All-Star recently...)
Voilà!
:wink:

 

Yes, you are right, but compared of DELL and HP, Lenovo should have 17 inch workstation, only Fujitsu got 15 ich model for workstation. Actually, bigger size workstation is very popular for professional users.

 

I second that. 15.6" is kinda...half baked. The GPU offered are nowhere near as powerful in most cases, and the cooling isn't as good. 17"+ offer higher end GPU cause they can be cooled properly. I think notebooks should go 13.3" or 17" in all honesty.

 

But again, who wants/needs to lug around 17 inches while needing that power, while at the same time, not being better served with having a desktop (price, display, performance)?

 

I mean then 17" notebooks wouldn't exist...but here we are, they do! True, my i7 desktop spanks most 17" notebooks by a long mile. But nowhere is it portable, and I would have to lug around my monitor, speakers, keyboard, and mouse.

I would say 17" notebooks a niche market. People who want a desktop replacement, a mobile workstation, a monster uber gaming laptop.

 

I think it is wise for Lenovo to have a full portfolio of laptops but I guess they've run into the law of diminishing returns. The more high-end the GPU, the higher the price and the less customers, so they probably ended up getting low margins on their product.

To be honest I didn't like the W7xx because it was just so huge. I guess I'll make people mad by saying this (again ) but the W7xx was too big compared with the 17 inch Macbook Pro. I don't like the excess bezel on it, it just looked off to me. It really should have been the same body but with an 18.4 inch screen. (It'd be much more compelling if they could get 2560*1440 resolution into an 18.4 inch laptop, W820 and W820ds anyone? I'd like that a lot

 

I agree, I've always felt the same way. 17 inches works when you put it in that mac chassis. The W700 is just monstrously, almost comically, big for seemingly no reason (other than perhaps fit the wacom on the palm rest). Even compared to a 17 inch HP or Dell workstation, it was huge. The design was nonsensical--awesome to see a supersized thinkpad--but not something i'd personally want to own.

 

17in notebooks arent that bad to lug around. But then again they are meant to be desktop replacements that rarely move. Ideally the perfect setup would be a 17in at home and a 11-14in for travel. You could bring the 17in with you if need be, but for the most part you wont need to. A happy medium is the 15.6in platform as most systems that size have the same power as the new 17.3 systems with the added bonus of being lighter, smaller and better on power consumption. With the advent of 1080p screens in smaller packages being ALOT more common then WUXGA was in sub 17in platforms, there is very little advantages to 17in laptops over the 15.6in platform.

The only way I see 17in staying worthwhile is keeping them 16:10. Otherwise it will be a dying segment for sure, really only for those extreme gamers and people who like 1080p but need a larger screen to make things more visible.

 

I've been chasing a W7xx for sometime, a quest that was initiated not entirely by practical considerations, but by a crazy price drop on Amazon last December that was cancelled before they shipped. In terms of practicality, it would have served my purposes insofar as 1. my home is small; and 2. I could leverage the mobility between office and home wherein lugging it would be a matter of carrying it to and from the vehicle. In any case, it's become somewhat of a hobby for me to check Amazon's stock and I did just place an order on a "used" (sold by Amazon Warehouse -- which sounds very much like "Amy Winehouse" now that I think of it) and I'm assuming open-box W701. The listing on it was so confusing and seemed to meld various models into one Frankenstein monster that I mainly ordered it because I'm curious to see what the actual configuration is. It promises a Wacom + i7-920XM (2.0GHz) processor and was priced at $1k. (This is not the new W701 price error I referred to in another post.) To which I say: Show me. I'll report back on what is actually inside the box. By the way, Amazon customer service could offer me no additional information about the item or answer the apparent discrepancies in the listing. Go. Figure.

 

BTW -- if you want to see a crazy listing relating to the W701, click here.

 

The W7xx-series, just like the X-series, follows a staggered refresh cycle that is timed after the mainstream T-series. I'd imagine a release for a refreshed (if not entirely redesigned) "W720" will happen in the next few weeks.

 

RMP-1 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

No replacement is indicated in this roadmap.

 

Hmm, interesting. That roadmap is from quite a while back, though, so I wouldn't be surprised if a refresh does happen. That said, although I generally prefer Thinkpads over both Elitebooks and Latitudes, I think the 17" equivalents from HP (particularly with the DreamColor 2 display) and Dell are more compelling offerings. The W701 is such a niche product, I also wouldn't see it as that crazy of a business decision to entirely ax the line.

 

Usually, Lenovo plans everything 18 months to 24 months ahead (pretty much a standard practice for laptop companies). SO the next refresh if that does happen, will be after March 2011. Maybe we would see 17 inch 16:9 LCD version of the W7xx coming.

While, W7xx was a beast of a machine, it was more of a product that lenovo released to gauge the public response, and see how consumers react to these products. If there sufficient revenue from such machines, then they could continue it, and Lenovo could kill it if the sales are underwhelming.

I still haven't pulled a trigger on a W701 machines, since i am not sure whether i really want a machine of this size.

 

The market for a 9lb notebook has got to be extremely small regardless of how powerful it is (for a notebook).

 

Come on, its only 12 pounds with the power adapter. The concrete model that i carry around the studio is about 50 pounds. 17" laptop workstation is a must for design school and design studio. We need that extra screen space and extra built quality for occasional beating up another designer.

 

If they would build the thing thin and light enough, people would buy it. There is a market. I think the Dell Precision M6500 has done pretty well. The Apple 17" MBP is nice. The HP is nice, too.

Pretty expensive though.

You can buy a W520 and a Dell Ultrasharp 24" LCD panel for less.

 

Look at the market right now, how many graphic cards does Nvidia and ATI provide for 17 inch laptop and Nvidia just released 3 high end mobility professional cards for workstation which means they are popular. To me, a desktop like for public use only but a laptop is private and moveable, yes, even its heavy, will you take it walk for 10 miles? BTW, now lots of cellphone like iphone can do lots of thing instead of turn on a computer.

 

But how big is the market for large 17 inch "professional" systems that need to be "private and movable"?

 

Well if the prelim specs on the Apple 2011 13" MBP are to be believed, then their 17" is still heavy.

 

The market is not big, surely. That's why the steep price tag. W70x always were for people who wanted this desktop power in relatively small and quiet package, while willing to pay the costs. That's the difference between mainstream and niche markets, you can profit from both even when niche doesn't sell millions.
17" may be a bit on heavy side, but you don't notice that when you carry in the backpack. You can not carry equivalent PC workstation in a backpack (or it will be huge backpack, definitely not carry-on luggage, heh).

I wouldn't say Lenovo killing W7xx yet. They always were latest to refresh, it took about additional year to refresh from W700 to W701 if you compare with other laptops.

 

With the advent of 16:9 screens the advantage of screen space went away with 17in laptops. When we were on 16:10 wuxga screens were common on 17in but rare anywhere else giving them the advantage of more space for work. But now with 1080p as the largest resolution you can get the same screen space on a 13in laptop as you can with a 17in. Not to mention a lot of 15in laptops now pack the same or very close to the same power. So now there is no advantage to 17in laptops.

Now if they were to keep 16:10 standards there would be an advantage...

 

Ok Lenovo market the W7xx as desktop replacement. I am wondering how many external monitors the W7xx series can run with the lid closed?

 

You sound like physical screen size does not matter at all and only resolution does.
Physical screen size still does matter for comfortable work, especially if you do graphics-oriented work.
Also AFAIK W70x are still 16:10. When (if) they will become 16:9, we could talk about it.

 

The business 17in models are going to be 16:9 when they are released. So from here on out they will be 16:9 so lets talk While I agree for graphics type stuff a larger screen would be comfortable for most, but still the only advantage of 17in workstations is a bit more power (gpu) and easier to read for some. Honestly I think 15.6 and 16in laptops are the new 17in as they are relatively close in size and pack the same resolution and most times about the same power.

As for the screen size vs resolution debate, yes I think resolution matters ALOT more then physical size. More pixels means more stuff on my screen. For instance my brother has a new dell xps 15 and I have an old SXPS 16. Both are the same exact size but mine has a 1080p screen while his is only a regular HD screen. Even though both are the same size mine has alot more functionality for doing multiple things then his does as I can fit more on my screen. Even my t400 wxga+ screen is more usable then his 15.6in due to resolution. Granted his screen quality is much better then my t400's CCFL 14in.

Now if OEMs kept their business class 17in laptops 16:10 I would admit 100% they are the best size for long term use. WUXGA is 10% bigger pixel wise then 1080p, but after using my dell vostro screen then switching to my SXPS screen there is a HUGE difference in usability. So I am mad they are growing the 17in workstations by 2% yet limiting their effective resolutions by 10%.

 

It does make a difference.

17 => 17.3
15.4 => 15.6
14.1 => 14

The numbers on the left used to be the older 16:10, 4:3 aspect ratio screen sizes. Most turned wider and are 16:9.

 

Where did you get the information that W7xx refresh will use 16:9?

As for "nobody needs 17" laptop". As person who had some involvement with businesses ordering workstation laptops (and enterprise market is what W series aim for) I could assure you that for some kinds of work (eg CAD, graphics design, etc), 17" a lot more preferrable than 15", even if its the same resolutions. Designers don't like to work hours on FullHD squished to 15" display, it a lot worse for eyestrain on the long run. That's the whole point there are separate W series with 17" and 15" display. Not to mention 17" case allows to squish more power inside with easier cooling, and since case already this big, no sense of smaller screen.
Maybe general market doesn't need 17" laptops that much. But W7xx ain't made for general market.

Yeah. Funny that while diagonal went up for 16:9 in most cases, the actual area went down (which is not as widely advertised )

 

Well unfortunately people screamed for cheaper, faster notebooks so quality is down the toilet. That meant the death of 4:3 in a heartbeat, and the slow death of 16:10. Why didn't they keep those higher end screens for customers who were willing to pay..

 

Im the IT guy for an engineering firm so I know about CAD and screen size. Honestly the idea of working on anything smaller then the 24in screens they have would make them furious. But when on the go they usually use a 15.6.

While Ill agree some people would prefer the larger screen, the 15.6in or 16in screens arent that much smaller then the traditional 17in. My SXPS is about as wide as my 17in vostro. As for the better power yes there is a little more and better cooling. All Im saying is the difference is very slight now. when 16:10 was the screen ratio I was a HUGE 17in fan (still sorta am) but now with the 15in being as powerful or only slightly less powerful and more portable they make more sense. But if the laptop is going to sit on the desk all the time and rarely travel then it balances out.

I really was upset to find that even the highend business laptops were going to 16:9 route. There are so many of us that WILL and have paid extra for those screens yet they fail to offer them.

Yeah funny but in reality sad. Bigger size and significantly less screen. When coding on my vostro 17in it is beautiful and the view is amazing. I can see alot more lines then my SXPS. While I love my SXPS, there is a huge difference between WUXGA and 1080p.

As for advertised, why would companies advertise that they were charging the same or more for smaller cheaper screens? Instead they lied to the public and said that these screens were better for watching movies on. Wrong. 16:10 works just as well for watching movies, yet doubles as a much better work or play machine.

Shame isnt it? I dont really see much difference in notebook prices since the switchover from 16:10, but my multitasking has suffered alot.

 

I wouldn't bury 16:10 yet, at least for 17"
I haven't heard anything about Lenovo switching to 16:9 in their 17" workstations, nether about HP or Dell.

 

Precision M6600 is confirmed to be 17.3" and 16:9. Also rumored the Elitebook is going 16:9 and 17.3" also.

 

I would like to see the next W7xx series workstation equipped with a 3D glasses-free 4k display.
Really.

 

Dell is pretty much confirmed 16:9 and hp and lenovo will most definitely follow suit. If they don't ill be surprised and gladly admit I was wrong. Id also risk the wrath of my wife to buy one.

 

The model number given on Amazon is 25003AU. According to Lenovo, the machine has i7-720QM(1.6GHz), 2GB RAM, 320GB HD, 17in 1440x900, 1GB nVIDIA Quadro FX 2800M, CDRW/DVDRW, Intel 802.11agn, Bluetooth, Modem, 1Gb Ethernet, UltraNav, Secure chip, Fingerprint rdr, Camera, 9c, Win7 Pro 64

 

hmm there seem to be many people that think that 17" is not used..
Weird, in our company all our developers and even most of the other staff are all on 17"

And no a desktop is not the same, i work on 2 to 3 different places throughout the week (as do many of my coworkers) then a desktop is out of the question. But so is a laptop smaller then 17" i am now on my 3th 17" laptop in 9 to 10 years that i don't have had any desktop besides my media center. In my eye's i don't get that desktops are still made, no body around me is using a desktop any more, everything is replaced by laptops and most of them are 16" and bigger.

But in all those 9-10 years i always had the 1920x1200 resolution, but it seems that i now for the first time in all my years of buying laptops/components i go BACK feature wise, so really the wrong direction. I never had that before in my whole live of buying any thing electronic...

A first for everything i guess.

 

Of course 17" should always be 1920x1200 or have an option but 16:10 is really on it's last limb with the latest models out from Dell/Lenovo/HP. Everything is going freaking widescreen and thus 16:9.

I agree that certain people need 17" notebook, it is a niche market. Of course the teenager who wants a light and portable laptop won't consider it, some want a gaming laptop for college. They function as desktop replacement.

 

I wish it wasnt a dying segment or lessening in popularity. I love my vostro 1700 the wuxga screen was amazing to work on. Whether it be developing, system admin work, gaming or just surfing the web it was king. Sure battery life stunk and it was much heavier then an average laptop, but the joy of using it outweighed the minor issues. Will the segment die out? We wont know until it does, but for now in my eyes its dead as FHD+ on a 17.3in notebook = no thanks. Ill get a 15.6 or smaller for that resolution.

Yeah all but apple should be completely rid of 16:10 within this year I would think. Shame but theres nothing we can do. I remember seeing petitions and tons of info all over the web begging and pleading with OEMs to keep the standard alive and then just as an option for those who would certainly pay for it and now nothing much more then cricket noise. Sad.

17in were great desktop replacements. Gobs of power with a large high resolution screen and cool running hardware. I loved that segment when it was 16:10, but now with 16:9 the segment is dead to me.

 

lol not all 17" notebooks are gobs of power.

The only reason why I respected such large laptops was the WUXGA resolution and the better cooling systems 17" notebooks offered, but then 15" notebooks started to have 1920x1200 options. Though now my Vostro 1500 is a portable gaming laptop that primarily remains planted on a desk..

Why would Apple kill 16:10? They are the only consumer notebooks with half decent screens these days. Apple people already pay a premium for their notebook, they kept 16:10 to keep those people happy.

 

I hope they dont kill the 16:10 screens. If only they came to their senses and got rid of the chicklet keyboards Id start considering them as an option. As far as gobs of power, well 17in notebooks typically offer more potent processor and gpu options. But sure this isnt always the case. The vostro 1500/1700 laptops are a prim example. They were able to be spec'd the same, but the 1500's were more prone to GPU failure.

 

And for that reason my next 15" machine may be a MacBook Pro. The 15.4" 16:10 1680x1050 screen is still the best resolution for my needs. But as far as I can tell, only Apple offers it now.

 

lol it's +100 for WSXGA+ and 150 for the anti-glare. I mean you shouldn't just buy a laptop for 1680x1050 resolution...

Buy what you need with what you have.

 

Maybe you didn't see the word " may". I'm a long way off from buying another 15" machine right now. I have a W510 with 2.5 more years of warranty.

 

Apple, you "may" pay half of its price for its brand name.

Look into HP Elitebook, you might find something suits your needs, they are sturdy.

 

It'll be a really cold day in you know where before I buy HP.