Talk:Toughbook

message: Maybe this should be merged with the Rugged Computer article so that other manufacturers would be written about on the same page.  Would help to take care of neutrality.
Robinandraenelle (talk) 21:40, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Should be a rugged laptop article 

message: I noticed that most of the links are to the usatcorp.com website. Is there some particular reason why they are not linked directly to the Panasonic website? iamthebob(talk|contribs) 03:08, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Links - why not to the Panasonic webiste?

message: * "Notebooks made by major manufacturers have a return rate averaging 25%, while..."  Twenty-five percent?  Yeah, I'd say a citation is needed!
* I agree, we need a source for that statement. However, I find that a mean time between failures (MTBF) for portable/laptop/notebook computers of 1-2 years is about right. --Johnlogic (talk) 17:06, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source? 

message: === Despammed article ===
Removed vast amounts of spam from reseller "http://www.buytough.com".  All links relating to that site have been removed, except for their google group. Supposed info pages bring you to purchase.  Please watch for attempts to re-insert them.  
=== Despammed article ===
Removed vast amounts of spam from reseller "http://www.usatcorp.com".  All links relating to that site have been removed. Please watch for attempts to re-insert them.  Thanks.  --John Nagle 20:22, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But the article still feels like an advertisement. --Proficient 12:11, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

text: If the Toughbook is the only type in it's class that can do is that still favoritism? Are there citeable sources that contradict the praise which has been offered in the tablet PC article and even the Toughbook pages? --Tangerineduel 01:48, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Promotion, Advertising, Spam 

message: Removed vast amounts of spam from reseller "http://www.usatcorp.com".  All links relating to that site have been removed. Please watch for attempts to re-insert them.  Thanks.  --John Nagle 20:22, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But the article still feels like an advertisement. --Proficient 12:11, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Despammed article 

message: I've been reading articles about Tablet PCs and such lately, and they all appear to be full of praise for the Toughbook line. The Tablet PC article itself mentions them glowingly three times! What's the deal with that? --68.147.167.6 01:15, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If the Toughbook is the only type in it's class that can do is that still favoritism? Are there citeable sources that contradict the praise which has been offered in the tablet PC article and even the Toughbook pages? --Tangerineduel 01:48, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Wikipedia a subsidiary of Panasonic now? 

message: * Patent spam, and poorly executed at that. Should be deleted immediately.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhvrm (talk • contribs) 21:01, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Patent Spam 

message: * Does anyone else recognize the problem with shipping MIL spec hardware with software that is fundamentally-unsound (Microsoft Windows)? Other PC makers are starting to wise up; Apple offers Mac OS X UNIX and Dell offers Ubuntu Linux. (Boutique PC maker Tadpole Computer, also in Cupertino, California, offers MIL spec hardware running Solaris.) I think it's worthy of mention, but would like to keep the text appropriate. Thanks --Johnlogic (talk) 17:06, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Software issues? 

message: * Why is there a special section for wireless capable models? Aren't all the models wireless capable? This article needs some class, it reads like an ad O_o 199.212.8.26 (talk) 09:10, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Wireless capable models

message: I suggest removing all sections of this article except for the opening section, references and external links. Rather than extensive revisions to attempt to change this tiger's stripes, let's just get rid of the tiger. Dhvrm (talk) 15:59, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think some of the info contained in "the tiger's stripes" are important. I have already begun to remove advertising and will continue to do so for a couple days. Airplaneman talk 22:50, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Pretty much done now :). Airplaneman talk 23:13, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality 

message: Why is it -29C minimum operating temperature? Did someone do a literal convert from farenheit? If someone looks at the metric stats, would it say -29 or -30? 70.55.86.142 (talk) 11:37, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  temperatures 

message: Hey, this notebook has BEEN IN THE NEWS. Why isn't that in this article? It was shot and stopped a bullet in Iraq. 70.55.86.142 (talk) 11:37, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Source?Airplaneman talk 22:30, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

text: That's a terrible source.  A website entirely devoted to praising Panasonic Toughbooks is does not exactly follow WP:RS.  I'm going to go ahead and stick a citation needed up.  Aeonoris (talk) 06:47, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: news

message: Since the CF-54 is out, shouldn't it be updated as the 53 isn't the most recent one now?--84.105.83.223 (talk) 02:15, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-rugged models need a update 

message: Does anyone know the offical size of the 19's screen? Some sources say 10.1, but others say 10.4..
My 19 Mk5 has a very slightly smaller screen (black borders on the edges of the screen) so I guess 10.4 is for the pre-Mk4 ones.
--84.105.83.223 (talk) 18:42, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  CF-19 screen size weirdness? 

message: As the only pic of a CF-19 is the Mk1 in this article, is there a need for a pic of the newest spec 19?
--84.105.83.223 (talk) 21:37, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pic of 19 Mk6 yes/no? 

message: COI/Paid Editor: I am an employee of the Amber Group and a paid contractor for Panasonic Toughbook
I have a number of suggested updates for this page for editors to consider:
Introduction
The Toughpad brand name was retired in 2018 with all Panasonic rugged notebooks, tablets and handheld devices reverting to the Toughbook brand name.
Retired Models
The following models have been retired:
Toughbook CF-30,
Toughbook CF-29,
Toughbook CF-28,
Toughbook CF-27,
Toughbook CF-25,
Toughbook CF-19,
Toughbook CF-C2,
Toughbook CF-41,
Toughbook CF-45,
Toughbook CF-53,
Toughbook CF-52,
Toughbook CF-SX2,
Toughbook CF-AX3,
Toughbook CF-LX3,
Toughbook CF-MX4,
Toughbook CF-H2,
Toughbook CF-U1
Current range of models:
Toughbook 2-in-1 models:
Toughbook 20 Detachable,
Toughbook 33 Detachable,
Toughbook XZ6
Toughbook notebook models:
Toughbook CF-31,
Toughbook 54,
Toughbook 55
Toughbook tablet models:
Toughbook CF-D1,
Toughbook L1,
Toughbook M1,
Toughbook G1,
Toughbook handheld models:
Toughbook T1,
Toughbook N1
Additional details on model specs can be provided if required.
Many thanks
Amber828525 (talk) 11:45, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested updates to this page