swie@cs.umn.edu (S. T. Tan) (05/12/91)
I plan to purchase either an IBM L40SX or Compaq LTE 386SX (60 M HD). Before I made my final decision, I need advice from those who have used/tried any of those systems. Both of them provide international warranty and their prices are comparable now ($3800++ for Compaq LTE 386SX with 60 M HD and $3500++ for IBM L40SX). I realize that Compaq LTE 386SX has better performance than IBM L40SX (from benchmark tests in one of computer magazines), but how significant do these benchmark tests affect our daily use? I have tried IBM L40SX and I like its keyboard (?? degree angle, like a full size regular keyboard) and its screen (large 10 inches). I have NOT tried Compaq LTE 386SX. Could you please share your experience? Which system is more reliable? Thanks in advance. swie
borsom@imokay.cmw.ltn.dec.com (Doug Borsom) (05/13/91)
Is the L40SX IBM's new notebook? If so, read on. If not, please graciously ignore the following well-meant but inapproproiate information. From what I've _read_ (haven't had a chance to try one yet), IBM's notebook has a _much_ nicer keyboard, both in terms of touch and layout, than does the Compaq. But these things can be subjective. Personally, I don't much like the layout of the Compaq keyboard (cursor keys). The IBM notebook is bigger (by about an inch in both width and length, as I recall) and heavier (by about a pound) than the Compaq, so if you're going to be carrying your notebook around a lot, the Compaq might be a better bet. The IBM's battery life is on the short side, something under 3 hours with power-conservation features running, but IBM provides two batteries with their notebook, and you can swap batteries without losing the work you're doing. Of course hauling around two batteries means even more weight. The recharge time on IBM's battery is _long_, something like 6 or 8 hours. IBM does offer (an option, I believe) a quick recharger that cuts the time down to a couple hours. The Compaq display is good, but not great, and it's smaller than the IBM's. IBM's display is reported to be very good. The IBM notebook can accommodate 16 megs of RAM. Compaq tops out at 10. If previous machines are any indication, both the Compaq and the IBM are well designed, well built systems that won't disappoint. I plan to purchase a notebook PC in the next month, and what I've read about the IBM (great keyboard, very good display, good performance, 60 meg hard drive) makes it a front runner. By the way, where have you seen the IBM notebook offered at that price?
tohaver@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Timothy J O'Haver) (05/15/91)
I've spent some time with the IBM and the Compaq. Here are my impressions.
The IBM is a solid machine, with good speed, a fair display and an excellent
keyboard. The standard carrying case is a joke, and I would wait for third
party memory and modems to make the IBM more affordable. The size of the
For a large organization with lotsr travel. It was tolerable elsewhere.
IBM's service record will also sell lots of laptops to large organizations.
After muffing the 286 machine repeatedly, Compaq is finally producing laptops
sans cracking cases and exploding hard drives. Even though I'm accustomed to
the keyboard, I wouldn't want to do any serious work with it. The size and
the (accessory) carrying case make it an excellent choice for frequent
travelers. To my eye, the display is substantially better than the IBM.
Compaq laptop service, in my opinion, is an oxymoron.
Personally (and from a user's perspective) I like the Compaq better because I
use my laptop most when I travel.
If I had to code on the thing or support a thousand of them, I'd get the IBM.
--
Tim O'Haver
tohaver@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu