Click here to see how the TR3AP3 rates:

Do u agree with PCWORLD, or do u think the editors sleep with IBM Execs?  (I know I did when I worked there )

It’s pretty fair.

A. The TR is by far the most expensive.
B. Was the second slowest in the benchmark
C. Was the second worst for battery life.

I’m not sure why these mags get such poor battery life out of their TRs, but from the data they have I would have put the TR where it is as well.

Erik

Why do these magazines keep using the tr3ap3!!!! when they rate them to $2,000 laptops and whine about the cost. for god’s name, why don’t they use the TR3AP or TR3AP2 instead? another magazine i looked at rated 10 ultralights (anything less than 5 pounds), and they did the same thing. (it was mobilepc). sigh, i guess they can’t be perfect…

umm… yea…

last time i heard manufactures charge about 300 for 1gb of ram… (sony wants 400) 

the review would have been better if they stats were a lot closer.  oh well.  i’m happy with my computer

I agree that they should have used a TR3AP.  The TR could have scored better if they did.  It may have gotten a 76-77 and gotten third place.  However, I was thinking to myself:

The TR doesn’t even belong in this comparison!!!!  Every other laptop was a 12” model.  The V505 would have been a more appropriate comparison.  It is less expensive, and it performs a little better than the TR.  Was I the only one that noticed that?

I’ve always considered PC World to be PC Magazine lite anyway.

The TR did make it in the top 5 out of 15. Still, of the top five:

It’s the only one with a DVD RW drive
It’s one of only two with 802.11/g and has /a to boot.
One of three with a real honest to God internal optical drive.
Two to three times system RAM.
Two lack firewire, two lack PC Card slots.
Typical weight with power and optical drive 6.4 5.3 6.0 3.7 to the TR’s 4.0

The street price given is Sony’s MSRP.

I’m happy as hell with my new TR!

Like I said, the TR didn’t really belong in that comparison.

I continue to maintain that most of these reviewers don’t get it. They don’t really understand about ultraportable computing and just apply their generic views on any products that come their way. I would argue that we’re a unique bunch of mobile computing users and those reviews simply don’t do those products justice. They really don’t address our needs and don’t actually try out the notebooks in practical settings where they would really find out about the strengths of lesser known notebooks.

oh but they DO get IT.  I’m tellin ya, they are in BED with DELL and IBM marketing execs.  Come on,  speak up out there and deny it!  I know, too busy boffing….well, I can’t blame ya, I did it.

oh but they DO get IT.  I’m tellin ya, they are in BED with DELL and IBM marketing execs.  Come on,  speak up out there and deny it!  I know, too busy boffing….well, I can’t blame ya, I did it.

Our digital pimp….hard at work. :D