Sony screen sealed the deal....

Good selection Pertinax
I believe Sony and Fuj. are definatley a clear way to go.
I had put much faith in the N5 and it was *very* well worth it

The Toshiba CASV screens are also in this class of LCD's as well and are right up there with the XBrite and a tade below hte N5010. These are beautiful screens indeed. This is the reason why I didn't buy a Gateway 505X. After seeing one of these I can't settle for anything less.

It's a true bummer isn't it? The Gateway LCD is not only sub-par compared to the CASV of Toshiba, but it's also sub-par to even my non-CASV previous 5105-S701....

That to me was what made me not go Gateway as much as I liked the idea of having the Radeon 9600 inside... that, and the 1280x800 which after being used to 1600x1200, it's going down too much.

- Raist

What resolution is it? Resolution and pixel refresh rate are by far the two most important things to me about a screen.

Fujitsu 16" Crystal View SXGA+, I’ve seen one at Fry's, and yes, this is the best LCD screen ever! extreme wide angles, superb colors

Check out the N series from Fujitsu with those screens:
http://webshop.fujitsupc.com/fpc/Eco...n.do?series=N5
An 8890 Sager with this screen would be my perfect laptop!

You have to see it with your own eyes to belive
Anyone knows why this screen looks so good compared to the others?

Yes the Sony screeen is great! I had one for about 10 days and then I did return the laptop. While the screen was great, I had problems with the drivers. The computer came with xp home. I did repartition the hard drive and put xp professional. I was never ever able to get all the drivers to work ok... Too bad because I liked the screen so much!! I got a Dell 8600 with WUXGA and I can tell that the screen is not bad at all! Is is not xbrite but it is acceptable. I installed xp prof and all is ok. No driver problem.

Good luck, Ghe8895

The market for a great screen isn't that big. Most power users care about processing speed and video performance. I notice this even with desktop users who have a kick ass system yet use a 17" or crappy ass 19" in screen that's barely passable. To each his own I suppose but I would think something that you constantly stare at for HOURS a day and is not a place where you'd tolerate "acceptable". What's mind-boggling is the fact that quite a few of these users would nitpick and pay a premium for 3.2 ghz vs a 3.0 ghz processor. I defy someone to take a blind test with most apps and be able to tell the difference. I'll even spot a few hundred mhz. But anyways I digress...yeah the Sony screen rocks .

Pertinax - I agree with you about how laptop manufacturers skimp on the screen. I was " close to getting a Gateway 505X. I hate to say it but the lcd looked like sh1t. I'ts unacceptable I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the Emachines is going ot use the same screen. It's a crying shame to as these two laptops have everything else in spades except the most important part: the screen. I'm used to using a 21" flat screen Sony CRT and a dell 1800fp lcd so there's no way I can take that big of a step down. I'm currently using a Toshiba CASV laptop and it's using the same tech as the MVA/X-Brite and side by side, this goes toe to toe with the dell 1800fp (it's actually brighter and has a better viewing angle) on my desk.

it looks like none of sony's laptops have 128mb. graphic cards. are there any other 16.1 notebooks with the XBrite screen and a Radeon 128mb?

I've seen the Sony at Best Buy and agree the picture quality is superb. However, you're gonna pay Sony quite a bit extra for the technology. The one at Best Buy was $400 more than an identically configured sony minus the Xbrite. Sony has always been an innovator with display graphics. Their trinitron technology in the TV industry was way ahead of its time.

Guess what you've got to ask yourself is it worth $400 to have a slightly brighter screen with a bit better pixelation dispersment. Here is my theory. If you don't have an Xbright sitting right next to your Sager or AW as a point of reference, you will never notice the difference.

The Toshiba S119 implements the same screen and video card for 1349. That's a great price for it's feature set.

Pertinax, thanks for the review. If possible could you post some benchmarks and an idea of battery life?

Sony GRT260-290 vs Fujitsu N5010

I just stumbled onto this forum a couple of days ago. Here is my long and rambling story.

I was in desperate need of a laptop last week, because a current programming project requires a fast processor for compiling code quickly. I love my old Thinkpad A21p, but the 850 Mhz Pentium was not cutting it. I set out to buy a desktop, but I have been working on laptops for so long I just couldn’t do it. Long story longer, I really just wished I could upgrade the motherboard in my Thinkpad as I loved the UXGA screen and already upgraded to a 7200 rpm hard drive. So out I went to the local stores (I used to live on the west coast, and boy do I miss Fry’s) and I stumbled upon a Sony GRT260G. It’s a p4 2.8 Ghz CPU, 512 Meg Ram machine. Size wise, it’s a beast compared to my Thinkpad, but nothing comes close to the Sony’s screen. I spend all day staring at my screen; I work from home and I often work outside to enjoy the sunshine and fresh air on nice days. The thinkpad screen is predictably hard to read outside. The Sony Xbrite blows it away, and seems to produce even less glare in direct sunlight. I will say it again, there is no comparison to a traditional laptop screen.

But the story doesn’t end there. I bought the Sony knowing full well that I may return it as I didn’t have time to do proper research. Focusing on the screen and a fast processor, my research came down to three models, the one I have (GRT260G), the Sony GRT290Z (3 Ghz CPU) and the Fujitsu N5010 (3 GHz Hyperthreading CPU). Of the three, only the GRT290Z can run UGXA (1600x1200), the others are all sxga+ (1400 x 1050). This, I thought, would have sealed the deal for the GRT290Z. But after working at the slightly lower resolution with a bigger screen for a couple of days, I have really begun to enjoy the enhanced readability. Additionally, I don’t lose that much screen real estate when editing lines of code. So maybe SXGA+ is as good or better than UXGA for me, especially given my love of working outside with the laptop. Hmmm.

The Sony’s case is all plastic. I really don’t think it will hold up to my abuse. Given the fact that I hold on to a laptop for 2 or 3 years, I doubt the Sony would go the distance. The Fujitsu’s case is magnesium alloy, has a 3 Ghz hyperthreading CPU (GRT260G has a 2.8 non hyperthreading CPU) and has all of the features that the Sony has excluding the TV tuner (don’t need it) and the DVD +RW capability (The Fujitsu only supports DVD –RW - I don’t know if I need this or not or even what DVD +RW is). The Sony’s memory maxes out at 1 Gig, while the Fujitsu 2 (and I ordered it with a single 512 Meg module so I can expand easily, the Sony has 2 256Megs filling the slots). The sony has a FSB speed of 533 Mhz, while the Fuji 800 Mhz. From what I can glean from this forum, the Fujitsu has a slightly better screen (hard to believe). The Fujitsu runs a ATI 9600 while to sony an Go5600 video card. Plus, the real cincher, the Fujitsu ends up costing me around $800 less! The higher up model, the Sony GRT290Z matches the Fujitsu CPU specs, with a UXGA Xbrite screen, but it would cost over $1000 more and still have the questionable plastic case.

So I ordered a Fujitsu N5010 from Global Laptops inc, being assured that I could return it within 30 days if I don’t like it. I only have 10 days to return the Sony. I should have the Fujitsu before the Sony needs to go back so I can sit them side-by-side and make a final decision, but it looks like the Fujitsu is going to be the clear winner.

Those units do have nice screens for sure, but aren't they all desktop processors? So the trade off is portability and battery life. That's always the problem. Great screen as long as you are going anywhere to far from an outlet which kinda is the point of a laptop IMO. I was under the impression those screens are battery drainers as well?

I gave long and hard thought to both of those units as well but my problems were the truly scary stories of Sony customer service and (proprietery hardware) which makes Dell's look good, and after I had custom configured my machine on Fujitsu's site directly I saw they had a NO return policy so that was that. At the time the 5010 wasn't out yet from retailers.

It all really depends on how you use your machine. I almost never run on the battery. I work from home and have a house up north and in Florida. I often move around the house and work from different places just for variety. I always work from the deck when it’s nice out. If I need the laptop in the car, I have a small inverter that the laptop plugs into. Last year I sailed a small boat from South Florida to Nantucket, using my laptop to decode weatherfax SSB signals and help with navigation. Of course, the laptop plugged directly into the boat’s battery bank, charged by occasionally running the motor. The only purpose the laptop battery serves for me is to prevent data loss in the event of a power outage and let me turn on the laptop anywhere to quickly retrieve a phone number or email message.

I guess my point here is that, in today’s society, we are almost never far from an outlet. That is unless you plan to hike out into the woods and put in an 8 hour day of coding.

I’ve read that the new bright screens don’t use much more juice than normal ones, but who knows if this is true. For the work I do, I need the fastest processor available. I HATE being tied to a desk day in and day out. It’s terribly depressing.

Anyway, the battery issue will become a mute point within the next 2 years or less due to the advent of small fuel-cell batteries.