[sl956]

I used to think so... and I was (like you) thinking that my (6.77 pounds) T61 was "lightweight". I finaly replaced it by a Portégé R500 (my first non-Thinkpad laptop in years). Less screen real estate (12"1), obviously not as rugged and sturdy, but I could pack no less than four of those R500 in my bag, and it would still be lighter than my old Thinkpad! Get used to it: Thinkpads (most of them anyway) are really heavy by today standards.

[CaptainMorgan]

Your requirements are obviously different than mine. And I'm not sure where you got yours, but my Thinkpad runs at about 5-5.5 lbs... far from close to seven. By your response, it appears you misread my requirements. I agree it's not the lightest, but maybe I should have said it is a dream compared to my previous T43 which feels more like a weighted brick. But emphasis in my post was on ruggedness... which I'll take any day over weight. In that bag of four Portege's or one Protege and whatever else, I'm more concerned with picking up that laptop where I left off - in top condition, which is tough to say when you got a bag stuffed and who knows what could happen to it in transit. Thinkpads have good investment and therefore resale value and I'm not looking for laptops that are fancy on the shell, not coming close to the levels in durability that a Thinkpad does.

[sl956]

My main point was that the ruggedness and superior build quality of Thinkpads used to have limited drawbacks: they were at worst 10 to 20% heavier than alternatives (and sometimes even lighter, like the 560 around 1995). Not so anymore, especially in the smaller and lighter models: the X200 (and X300) are 120% (and 70%) heavier than a R500. That's why I finally reassessed my longstanding commitments to Thinkpads. But you are right to point that it may be less of an issue for the T series than for the X series: I would probably have stuck to Thinkpads had I been looking for a 15+ inches screen.