Physical Specs The product physically is very sturdy, thanks to the unibody construction. Normally the chassis would normally consist of various small parts. So instead of taking a small piece of aluminum and adding more aluminum, Apple has taking a big piece of aluminum and subtracted from it. Thus creating a sturdy, yet light laptop. I have heard that the aluminum interferes with internet connectivity issues. I do have to say, unfortunately, it is true. I put the Macbook and my old PC laptop side by side, and the PC was able to pick up better frequency and more networks. Now for the multi-touch trackpad. It is made from glass, but it feels like there is a covering on it that doesn't nearly have the friction of glass. Clicking and moving the cursor is very easy and enjoyable, with the very large surface. Right-clicking can be done with by clicking with two fingers or by clicking one of the bottom corners after being manually set. It should also be noted that only the bottom 3/4 of the trackpad is clickable. The multi-touch gestures are fun to use, but are truly unneeded gimmicks that could be done easier with a click. I'll just go through the gestures now. There are 2 finger gestures: The first is scrolling with using two fingers by swiping your fingers vertically or horizontally depending on the page. Secondly you can rotate a picture using two fingers apart and rotating. The third gesture is holding the control button and scrolling vertically to zoom in on a page. And there is one 3-finger gesture: Swipe with three fingers to navigate. You can do this to go forward or back on a page, or changing a picture. Lastly there are 4-finger gestures: Swiping vertically upwards allows you to clear everything off your desktop. Swiping vertically down launches Expose. Swiping horizontally in any direction lets you change and view your running applications, which can also be done with command+tab. On the bottom of the MacBook there is a panel that allows for easy access to your battery and hard drive. This will be handy to many people. The keyboard is just like the Air, with the spaces between the keys. This creates a very nice typing experience, and are backlit if you purchase the 2.4GHz model. A major letdown by Apple is the omission of a FireWire port. This is very disappointing to many people, but doesn't affect me at all. Nowadays the average users don't use FireWire too much. Although I do see this as a major problem for professional applications. There is also a battery life indicator on the side of the base that glows green to show the rounded percentage of your battery. Software and Performance Of course the MacBook has the great Mac OS X Leopard software. It is very fast, and has good security. The battery life is advertised to have 5 hours of battery life, but Apple obviously means not being connected to the Internet, and having no applications running. You'll probably get about 4 and a half hours with Safari and other apps running. Unless you have a lot of apps on like me, then you'll maybe have 3 and a half to 4 hours. With the NVidia graphics card, the screen looks pretty good, as do games. I do have to admit, though, the new MacBook Pro screen looks better, especially with blacks. Still, games really pop on the gorgeous glossy screen, unless you are in a bright area. The glossy screen of course attracts bad glares and many noticeable fingerprints. Still, if you are indoors or someplace with low light, the glossy screen is perfect. I mostly use it inside, so I wouldn't trade the beautiful glossy screen. Although for those coffee-shop typing folks, this could be a deal-breaker. Other than these things, Mac OS X is the same, really. Conclusion If you have purchased a MacBook anytime soon, then I would not suggest you purchase this one. Most of the differences are the physical attributes, and the software is pretty much the same. If you are new to Macs like me, then I would DEFINITELY suggest this phenomenal notebook computer. Of course it does have it's faults, truly I have never used such a simple, enjoyable computer.
If you really want one of THE best, if not the absolute best super lightweights, this 2.68 duo core ThinkPad x60s is simply a great machine with great IBM support. This is my first laptop. I agonized over my decision, drove my tech friends nuts. But I wanted and needed a super lightweight, because of the weight of other equipment I carry around with me. I did not want 7 pounds, or even 4.5 pounds. In the super lightweights I had it narrowed down to the Toshiba Protege R200 (also listed sometimes as R205). But is was single core and they just would NOT discount it anywhere, other than rehab'd or from vendors I just could not count on for support. I knew I would need some support and IBM has been great. I spoke with a friend of mine who lives in Israel, and his firm supports Verizon's Wireless network around the world. He told me, without me even suggesting names and models, that the two units his staff uses where the Toshiba and this ThinkPad x60s. It comes in at 2.68 pounds, with the optical drive being in the docking station. It is great, rugged, light machine and IBM support has been very strong. US support. It works well, supports dual monitors well. I went with the 1.83Mhz, 1GB ram, and faster 7200 rpm drive. I may go to 2GB of RAM, but for most this would be a waste.
IBM will only replace a dud machine if you buy it DIRECTLY from them. If you buy it from an authorized reseller, you are out of luck.	My brand new machine wouldn't recognize my fingerprints. I called tech support and they said the reader was faulty & I sent it back for repair (long story, not for here). Got it back and it wouldn't recognize the reader - said it wasn't there. Spoke to a manager who said they'd replace it if I bought it through them - but since I didn't buy it from Lenovo I should contact the authorized reseller. Brought it back to the reseller who called IBM who said call your distributer - we only replace it if it was bought from us. He called his distributer (PC Wholesale)who said he has to call IBM. (Phone on speaker - I heard the conversations). He tried both again, same results. IBM sent him a part, he replaced it, the thing worked. It rode home on the floor of the car in its box and then didn't work. There was something loose internally. After days of "we'll call you back"(see other review here), they said it may be beyond the time period for replacement! After THEY caused all the delays! Each one at IBM told me the same garbage about they would have replaced it if I bought it from them. PC Wholesale said their contract with IBM said the customer has to deal directly with IBM. And I was nowhere with a useless machine. I wrote and faxed IBM with no response at all. After more than a month and dozens of calls from me, from PC Wholesale, and from my reseller, they finally authorized PC Wholesale to take it back and the reseller got the refund and sent it to me. He's sold lots of Lenovos and loves the X60 and after this ordeal won't sell anything from Lenovo. I guess if it works, it's a great machine. I wish mine had worked. I bought a Sharp at BJ's. I love it, and most of all, it works!
Overall, I like this camera. I got this one when I exchanged the HP612 I bought last week. Great camera for the price, and the picture quality is great. I got 59 pictures at the lower resolution (900x600) ... I was impressed. Some came out a little blurry, but most came out looking very good. Getting 59 pictures in to 8MB at that resolution says a lot for Kodak's storage algorithm. The HP got a significantly less pictures into the same space. The time to take the picture seemed very quick as well ... like most point and shoot cameras. The Kodak takes the cake over the HP as the HP would take up to 2 seconds to snap a picture. Needless to say, many pictures of my 2 year old nephew and pets were missed due to the slow response time. And for ease of use, you can't go wrong. My wife started using this camera and had a ball with it. She isn't very tech savvy, but she found it very easy to use and was taking great pictures within a few minutes of picking it up. I would have liked the option of having an AC adapter so I didn't have to burn batteries while I have it attached to my computer. It still only took a few seconds to pull the images from my camera though. An optical zoom would have been nice as an option for a little more money. Perhaps a 3550 Zoom could be a model Kodak wouldn't mind creating. I think it would get rid of some of the blurriness when using the digital zoom. It's a lightweight camera, which is both good and bad. It's good that your arms don't get tired when taking tons of pictures, but it could probably be a little more well-made. Overall, if you're on a budget, I'd get this camera. For around $210, this is probably one of the best cameras out there for the money.
This camera is a worthy portable and compact successor to my Canon EOS 20D. I have used and owned 8 digital cameras, and have had this camera for about 3 months now. I thought I'd give it some good use before I posted here. Some of the A700s strong points: - little lens distortion in macro, normal, and telephoto - excellent battery life (high above average) - layout and ease of use (as for most Axxx series) - fast start-up time - excellent macro mode (much better than expected) A700 shortfalls: - flash recycle time longer than average because of the 2 batteries (not 4, as in other models) - specific areas have weaker construction: camera mount, case, battery cover. Not a problem if you take care. - noisy pictures when taken at ISO 800 (expected, and can be remedied with noise-distortion removal software) Don't get me wrong, I knew this camera's weak points well before I purchased. The benefits to this camera (such as 6x optical, battery life, size [for the number as options available], and speed) outweigh any shortfalls. When using the 6x optical zoom the camera isn't quite as portable as one would think. Even on bright days and with a steady hand a tripod will be needed to eliminate blurring due to camera shake. A nice surprise: generally, when comparing pictures taken with other compact 7 or 8 MP cameras (not only Canon) the photos tend to have less noise, fringing, and distortion; most likely inherited from better lens quality and setup; a major selling point in my books. I was looking for a compact camera with good macro and telephoto abilities, above average battery life, large screen, and good reliability; all which I found in the Canon A700. Thank you all for your posts and for the reviews in helping me make my decision.
I had a Kodak DX4900 with 4mp and a 3x lens. It was my first digital camera but it was four years old I wanted a longer lens and more pixels. I did some research (C-Net was a big, big help) and settled on the Canon PowerShot A700. I've had mine for three weeks and the first week it got a real workout at a social function. The A700 has a nice, solid feel abut it but doesn't feel heavy. It's compact but not slim and while it may not fit in your shirt pocket, you can, if need be, put it in your pants or jacket pocket. One hand operation was relatively easy. The zoom was not as smooth as some other camersa I tested but that was not a deterrent. I was aware of the slow flash recycling time from the reviews I had read but in the real world, it really became a drag not being able to capture certain moments in rapid succession as I would have liked. However, the pictures I was able to capture were sharp, well saturated and chrystal clear. The 6x lens was a real step up from the 3x and the pictures weren't plagued with a lot of 'noise'. Overall, picture quality was excellent but there are three down sides of the camera: slow flash recycle, no viewfinder information and no image stabilization. A camera with a zoom lens beyond 3x needs image stabilization. Trying to take pictures at the long end of the lens constantly set off the camera shake alarm/ icon. Interestingly enough, some of the shots taken at the 6x max with strong light were remarkably sharp but far too many were just on the edge of being sharp and many were just downright unusable. I wrote to Canon about this oversight and their response was to direct me to their higher end cameras. I think any camera in the $300 dollar range with a zoom lens over 3x should have IS. I was also disappointed that there was no camera information in the viewfinder; the viewfinder is pretty small but clear although limited in its scope. Everything is displayed on the 2" LCD which is bright and clear but tends to wash out in bright light. In spite of these draw backs, I really like the camera, especially its handling and the beautiful pictures it takes. It shoots in aperture and shutter priority, manual and host of other shooting modes. If you're planning to move over to digital photography but not quite ready for a D-SLR, this camera, in my opinion, is a good introduction and if you can live with the 'flaws' I've outlined, give the A700 some serious consideration.
y mum recently got this phone after her 8850 was stolen out of her pocket. I really enjoy using it, it has internet, great  games looks great, and its such a beautiful shape! Anyway, let’s take a look at what the  Nokia 6210 has to offer:  Availability:  Europe ,  Africa , and  Asia Pacific  Operating frequency: EGSM 900 / GSM 1800  dual band Weight: 114 grams with standard BLS-2N battery  Dimensions: 129.5 x 47.3 x 18.8mm, 95 cc  Talk time: 2 hours 30 minutes – 4 hours 30 minutes  Standby time: 55 – 260 h  Key features: slim, light, very useful calendar, long talk and standby time.  Display: high resolution, illuminated graphical dynamic display, 96  x 60 pixels  Colours: available in 3 chameleon colours – black night, grey dusk and red sunset.  Games: Snake 2, Opposite and Pairs 2  Well, you can tell by those specifications that this really is a very high quality  mobile phone , and without a doubt one of the best out on the market currently. The 6210 is classed as a  business phone . I would recommend this phone to anyone who doesn’t currently own one. I would also like to point some minor disadvantages. The games on the phone are rather boring. Snake 2 is OK but the others are just not worth playing, but who cares, and the phone is only available in 3 different colours, which are black, red and grey. The phone has some great advantages, like dual band compatibility, an HSCSD modem, which can allow you to switch data on your phone, at the speed of a landline  Modem , it is WAP compatible. It also has predictive text input on the text messaging service. This allows you to type your words onto the phone much quicker and easier, with its T9 dictionary. All you have to do is memorize how you spell the word and just press each number once. For example, if you wanted to spell the word “climb”, all you would do is press 2,5,4,5,2 and the dictionary will automatically recoginse the word, clever, isn’t it. Another advantage is the  Infra Red port, allowing you to play 2 player snake and send messages to other Infra Red devices.  You can also use voice dialling on the phone. When you have stored a name in your phone book, scroll down to the name and press options, Voice tag and select. You will then see a face. When you are  ready to say the name just press start and talk into the phone. I would recommend doing this in a very quiet room. Now, when it is stored come back to the standby mode and press and hold Names. You will then here a couple of bleeps and see that ugly face again. Just sat the appropriate and it will automatically start dialling the number of that name. This phone comes equipped with a wopping 35 ring tones, and the option to download an extra 5 from the internet. What do you think about that!  The WAP browser on the phone is very useful, depending on which operator you register to. Something else you will be pleased with is that it doesn't have an  external antenna , like it's predecessor, the 6110. It is also much slimmer and lighter. The phone allows you to dowload only 5 ring tones from the internet. It has no composer, which is a bit of a disappointment. The battery life on this phone is excellent. The reading on the side of the screen is also more accurate than some other phones. It displays 5 segment instead of 4. This is also the same for the signal strength reading.  In conclusion, this phone is definately not for people who dont need to make the most of its functions. Only buy this phone for buisness perposes, its too expensive just to  show off to your mates, but if you dont need to make full use of all the functions then you would probably be better off getting a 3330 or 3310 as they are a lot cheaper, and less desirable to theives
I LOVE IT the truth is I like my  phones bigger and more tactile, I don't like fancy colours and neon lights. The 6210e is the phone for me.  It is a reasonable size and weight, the  battery life is good and has lasted me most of four days with light use before. The Style is very nice but not too funky and I like changing my Logos and ringtones so these are nice faetures.  I hate T9 it is very annoying but not as bad as some I have used. The other nice thing about the  sms is the pictures, though few of my mates can see them it is good fun trying. The reall steal of the show though is connecting the phone to the Orange network. Data connectionds suddenly become a reality. I have hosted a  web server through the phone. 28.8kbps data connection and that at only 25p/pm is very nice, nokia support the ipaq and the palm and drivers are available from their site. The Nokia support staff are brilliant and helpful and through to the data centre and they fall over themselves to provide information and assistance. I appreciate all there help especially when I was setting up the ipaq.  Lastly, my wife and I both have  Orange phones and she keeps nicking mine and giving me the triband, nice though it is. GIVE ME BACK MY 6210e.
It's another toy from Nokia. Not reliable. Too bad, because it has great features. Unless, you change your mobile every 6 months... It's my 3rd Nokia phone and I realized that nokia is becoming a toy manufacturer. The 3rd one, the Nokia 6210, had so many problems, i had to left it for months at the repair shop. First it was the screen (missing line), then nobody could hear me talking, then it would just switch off by itself, then the keyboard was not responding well. I only have it for 8 months.  Features are great. It's user-friendly and have a great look, but when you spend $300+ you don't expect to have so many problems. I would rather spend more and have something reliable. One of my friend has the same model and had the same problems. Another friend had no problem.  I think Nokia made a mistake in making their toys look like mobiles, i mean their mobiles look like toys. My 4th mobile won't be a Nokia.
I picked up a Zune as a Christmas present to myself in early January. I've wanted an MP3 player for a while and had been scoping the options. What sold me on the Zune was the large screen, the easy-to-operate buttons, and the Zune Marketplace subsciption option.  There's a lot to like about the Zune. It has great sound and it's easy to navigate the library (I've always found the iPod interface confusing). The body of the Zune is really not that much larger than other players and it still fits easily into my pockets, whether in my jeans or my jacket. The buttons are simple enough and large enough that I can change tracks and adjust the volume without pulling it out of my back pocket. So far, my only complaints are minor. The Zune Marketplace software is a resource hog and runs very slowly. Downloads are easy though and syncing media from the Marketplace is pretty easy. The MicroSoft produced car adapter is a bit chancy. You have to hook it up in just the right way or you risk resetting the Zune, shutting it down for about two minutes and losing your place in whatever media you were playing. Annoying, but not deal-breaking. Overall, I've been very pleased. I'd definitely buy a Zune again, if anything happened to this one.
ew program, which is what I hated about Ipods. I have Windows Media playlists with thousands of songs on them but none of those playlists are compatible with Zune. I looked all over and there are some fairly complicated hacks to convert the playlists, but absolutely no official support. I actually called the Tech Support and the lady who talked to me said that I either have to redo all of my playlists (click...scroll...click...repeat 1000's of times AGAIN!) using Zune software or buy new music from the Zune community. I wasn't too happy so she put me on hold and then came back on and told me that her supervisor said to go to MSNBC and search for a solution. ***?  If anyone wants to buy these SOB'n machines off of me, be my guest. I bought 3 to give out as presents this Christmas but if I have that much trouble with them, my mom and girl friend will be in over their heads.
I have read many of the reviews for the IPod, Creative Vision M, and the Zune, and of course everyone has their favorite, but I have to say that the Zune beats the others hands down in sound quality. I have compared the three using quality headphones, Grado SR60's and Shure E2c's, and have come to the following conclusions: The Zune has a much more open and full sound while the Ipod and Vision M sound one-dimensional in comparison. The highs are also cleaner and smoother on the Zune, the highs on the Ipod and The Vision M sounding strident and distorted next to the Zune. Listen to the background singers on Mariah Carey's "Any Time You Need a Friend" and you will see what I mean. On the Zune the definition in the highs is definitely superior.  I am not a Microsoft fan by any means, and there were many reasons I wanted to like the Vision M and Ipod more such as the size, the fun factor, and the overall design of each player, but sound quality is a priority for me and no matter how I tried to convince myself to go with the other two I kept coming back to the more musical and satisfying sound of the Zune. If you are contemplating purchasing one of these players I would recommend you compare them side by side. If sound quality is not a priority then you may very well opt for an Ipod or Vision M, but if you want the music to move you then get a Zune. One more note...if you use average sounding headphones or earphones you may not be able to hear the difference. Invest in a pair of quality phones and you will hear the difference and enjoy your music like you never have. I did not give the Zune a rating of ten because there are reasons to prefer the other mentioned players, but, again, sound quality is the best available.
I found the process of researching and buying an HDTV to be overwhelming, but I am thrilled with the end result. The picture quality has been nothing short of stunning. I'm sure that the black levels could be better on a high-end Sony, but for me they are excellent. NBC's coverage of the Olympics has been luxurious to watch. The colors are fantastic. There are a few times when I notice artifacts, such as with water polo and with the Olympic logo that flashes through between replays, but I can live with it. I actually think that the reason is NBC's 1080i signal, because Fox's 720p signal for football and baseball has been flawlessly smooth. I am typing this on the TV screen, using it as my computer monitor, which has worked great through both the VGA port and the (DVI-to-)HDMI port. Movies on an upconverting DVD player have looked great, and the big screen is lots of fun with the 480p component signal from our Nintendo Wii. Sound could be better, with the speakers being in the back as well as the sides, but it's as good as any other TV I've owned. I would get a separate sound system if it really mattered to me. I found the setup to be easy, and it was a pleasant surprise to see that the TV could pick up the HD local channels through the cable, even though I just have basic standard-definition service. The standard channels are much less attractive than the HD ones, but I'm willing to accept that in order to enjoy the HD. Knowing that 120hz technology and other features will be coming down in price, I think that this was an excellent purchase in terms of getting a good deal on features that are mature enough to enjoy right now.
We recently purchased this TV, and I have to say it is GREAT. We got it primarily for our photography business - basically, to use it as a giant monitor for editing and to show photographs to clients. It is the exact look and feel we were going for. So far, everything has worked out perfectly. Particularly, it looks wonderful with our iMac putting video out to it at 1920x1080 @ 60 hertz via HDMI (mini-dvi to DVI to HDMI). It looks great as well with our Compaq PC laptop hooked up through VGA - again at 1920x1080 @ 60 hertz. I honestly don't see a difference on this model through VGA vs. HDMI, but I haven't run any comparison tests yet. The sound is really decent on this TV. We can set it at a volume to comfortably here it at 30 feet away without maxing out the volume. Though, we can also hook it up to our sound system to put out more sound / bass. It does have optical sound out which works just fine for this (or you could use the standard RCA red & white audio out). The display itself is absolutely crisp. We haven't tried customizing it yet, but there are a good bit of options for that as well. To give you an idea, a photograph on our 20" iMac looks just as good (if not better) on the 530 Samsung. There's no loss of color, blacks, or details. Originally, the images on the TV seemed to have a sharpening affect applied - we took down the sharpness on the Samsung and it is now spot on. I'd easily recommend this TV to anyone. It has all the inputs and outputs you'd need. The display is absolutely great (on par with an Apple screen - which is saying a lot). It has a nice, sleek feel to it (even the buttons are recessed and don't poke out). It is easy to use. Oh, one note: it is a 60 htz tv, not 120 htz. For us, we didn't want or need the 120 htz as we're primarly working with photographs. Really, movies and TV are still at 24 fps and 29.97 fps ... it'll be quite a while before they go higher than that (to 60 htz or 120 htz) ... at the moment I believe 120 htz movies are actually at 24 fps and then the 120 htz tv displays 5 frames per actual frame to make the movie appear smoother. Just some tech talk there.
This is my second Flat Screen TV and I did and extensive review before I bought it. This TV is incredible, the colors, the functionalities, the inputs and outputs. Everything was perfect since the TV arrive, I just connect the cables and the TV did all the rest. So far, I have connected a computer, Tivo, a DVD, a VCR, Cable, and Satellite, and off course my 6 year old son X-Box which I'm starting to enjoy inmesily with him. By the way still have input for more. I cant get over how good it looks in every aspect and input, and by the way the TV itself is beautiful, with a frame where the picture images seams to be floating. The remote control is great too and very easy to use and program, and controlling all my extras with the exception of Tivo and the X-box.. My recommendation if you get to purchase this item, have all your cables ready and label when the TV arrive, that way you want lose any time to see this beauty in all it splendor. Viva HDTV, Viva Pioneer. I have not rate support, but and hope that if some day I have a problem with the TV, they will have a service as good as this TV