Talk:Dell Latitude

Gigabit11

What is "Gigabit11"? Searching the web for it reveals very few hits, most of which are at the Dell website and tip off that the bulk of this article was copied from the product spec page (typos and all) at, e.g., 69 2004&l=en&s=hied .

probably in reference to Gigabit Ethernet

Discrete graphics cards?

An unregistered user (calling from IP address 66.188.93.152) has added comments:

They will also feature a move to nVidia based discrete graphics cards from the new Quadro NVS series GPUs. These GPUs will be based off of the consumer line geForce 7300/7400 Go serise.

The first sentence mentions "discrete graphics cards". This implies a separate PCB for the graphics card, which sounds a bit incredible for a laptop. I'd like to see a reference. The second sentence is not very well formed, and has a spelling mistake.

So I'm to take these two sentences out. I would discuss with the user who made the edits in the first place, but they didn't make it from a registered account, so it's a bit difficult to communicate.

Duckbill 14:58, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

I am no expert on laptop internals, but I know that they are commonly modularized in various ways. The hard drive and main memory are modules (though sometimes there used to be some built-in). I think the modem used to be a module sometimes. There is a new mini-PCI standard, that I think is used these days for wireless modules, that one would call a card. The same might well apply to the graphics function in some cases. On the other hand, I think in most cases the cpu chip is soldered in, and not something easy to replace even if you can figure out how to take everything apart without breaking it (and then get it all back together). 69.87.203.221 13:09, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

It's a perfectly common thing for a laptop that will have more than one GPU option to have a modular graphics card, but the cards are designed for and peculiar to each family of laptop chassis. They're not interchangeable between chassis, and rarely interchangeable between motherboards that use the same chassis. The C6xx series have modular graphics cards, located just underneath the power button (indeed, the power button and 'i button' switches are actually part of the GPU). It's possible to swap them over, although for most models exactly one type of card was ever produced. The c640, I think, had two different types, with the same GPU but different amounts of RAM. The C8xx series is the same, I think, and it is possible to simply drop the Quadro cards from the Precision C8xx into the Latitude C8xx. 80.168.239.204 (talk) 14:04, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

The Latitude series utilizes the Mini-PCI architecture for the wireless card and also has a modular video card. I own several (C- and D-series), and while disassembling for repair found the video adapter to be removable (simple press connector and 2 scres). This seems to be a common practice in modern laptops- I also have 2 IBM's with similar features.

Deleted Section

I deleted this below section because it seemed outdated in irrelevant. If anyone disagrees, please respons:

Improvements of the "Dx10" series over the "Dx00" series

{{Prose|date=September 2007}} In early 2005, Dell refreshed the Latitude Dx00 series into the Dx10 series. The refresh included:

• Two extra USB ports on the side, next to the module bay.
• Stronger, more durable tri-metal chassis
• D-dock is actually a USB device, and only has drivers for Windows beginning with Windows 2000 and currently XP.

Alexbrewer 23:09, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

The key difference is that Dx00 series uses DDR RAM while Dx10 series uses DDR2 RAM. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.42.166.120 (talk) 16:42, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Unreferenced

This article remains substantially unreferenced, and more unreferenced material has been recently added. Will references be forthcoming for this new material, or should it just be removed in order to not make the articles' problems any worse? -- Mikeblas 12:21, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Latitude D600

The information on the D600 comes from the sources noted as well as looking at my D600. I apologize if I didn't list everything in the correct place or the correct column.

• The CNET specs lists the video as 1024x768x24, but the review says it is also available in a 1400x1050 version (which mine is).
• I didn't know what was meant by the "video type" column so I left it blank.
• The CNET spec says it weighs 4.4 lbs but the review says 5.5. Is the difference the battery? Which one should be listed?
• The CNET review says it comes with the Intel 2100 but mine has the Intel 2200 -- I'll guess they upgraded when the 2200 became available.
• I mentioned the bluetooth support (because that's what I came looking for -- trying to figure out if I have bluetooth) but it's not mentioned in the other models so I don't know if I should have.
• It also has a modem which I didn't mention because none of the other models did.

--Ishi Gustaedr 15:04, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Image

I've noticed that the laptop pictured in the article is rather an old model and really isn't a proper representation of the Latitude series any longer. So I was wondering whether anyone minded if I replaced it with a picture of either a D610 or a D420?--Hazel77 13:04, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Dell Latitude XT Tablet PC?

Rumors of a new tablet Pc by Dell have been confirmed at the Oracle OpenWorld. this should make a nice addition to the Latitude article, however, how and where to put it is still a question.

Should it be added under Specs for X model? user:mnw2000 14:34, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Per [the D-Family page], the XT is an D-Family product, not an X model. Would edit myself but I don't trust my skills with tables so far. MLauba (talk) 14:55, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Dell Latitude XT Tablet PC Problems

I added the section on the Latitude XT problems with the N-Trig Digitizer. I referenced it as well as I could, but many statements are based on a general reading of all the cited webspots (most of which are Dell Community postings) and are not easy to reference - for instance, the statement "These problems occur both with XP and Vista, 32 and 64 bit" can't be referenced - the posters in the cited websites each give their system configuration and each of these operating systems is cited several times. If the cited websites are considered general references, everything in the addition is confirmed by the posters. Tbonge (talk) 20:14, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

None of the cited websites are appropriate under WP:SPS. I'm decidedly dubious as to the inclusion of this section at all, given that it is a small problem on one model, and this page is about the entire model range - and the fact that Wikipedia is not a manual. Stannered (talk) 20:34, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

This is not a small problem, it is a DECIDEDLY MAJOR problem to the extent that the computer, as it now stands may be totally unusable as a tablet. As I own 3 of these computers, I have been following the problem closely; Dell, N-Trig, and Microsoft are frantically trying to solve this problem; Dell is trying to avoid recalling all Latitude XT's, but the problem is since they don't know what is causing it, they have nothing to replace it with. Dell sells a MediaBase, and it CAN'T BE USED AT ALL under ANY circumstances. People use this particular page, as I do frequently, to make buying decisions. If "we" (whoever "we" are) are aware of a major problem which may well affect a purchasing decision, we would be derilict if "we" deliberately excluded the information. I am aware that including the links where they are is not usual practice, but I think that it is important to direct the possible customer to the actual information rather than my condensation of it, so that they may decide for themselves whether this is a "minor" or "major" problem in relation to their intended use. I know that the links could be moved to the bottom, to "external links" but i believed that the source information was important enough to "bend" what is normal procedure. If this is an issue, possibly they could be moved and a strong sentence directing the reader to the external links would serve.

I ask you this - if you were in the market for a tablet, but you had to unplug all periphials before booting, sometimes the touch functions didn't work even if you disconnect the periphals, and there was a constant threat of damage requiring manual registry editng, would you buy it? Oddly enough, my answer is "YES" which is my point. But I would NEVER purchase it to deploy to salesmen in the field. I think that the informaton and the links are not only necessary for this article, including them is our moral obligation.

As far as the references are concerned, "hands on user experience" has always been an exception to the rules you cite. As a matter of fact, the only other references in this entire article not Dell itself are "hands on user reports" - references 2 and 9. What is more, most of the citations are from an official Dell website - dellcommunity.com, which is under Dell's editorial control. if user experience is not recognized as worthy of citation here, we are then left, as in this article, with nothing but the manufacturers bloated claims

The page on verifiability states, "This page documents an official English Wikipedia policy, a widely accepted standard that should normally be followed by all editors." The word "normally" is highlighted. The popup states, "Use common sense." Common sense tells us that there is no way to get hands on user experience on a new product except from a hands-on user. A reader with common sense knows to take this information in context - the experiences of one user. However, when ALL users agree, then the information gains some authority.

These are my ideas on this section. However, in view of the comment stated, I will revise the section to state, "Reported user experience has been..." In that way the references, stating user experience, will be exactly on point.Tbonge (talk) 13:36, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

UPDATE: I have found two generally accepted authorities, Endgaget and maximumpc.com, which report as news articles the information psted here. Interestingly, they reference their information - with exactly the same user reports cited here!Tbonge (talk) 06:33, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Dell Latitude C610

The video resolution of the C610 is wrong. The one i'm posting this on will only go up to 1024x768 on it's panel.

88.105.143.57 (talk) 16:01, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

What does "specially selected RAM" mean?

The phrase is used in the tech specs listed for the C500. What does it mean? 217.33.74.203 (talk) 11:29, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Dell Latitude E series released

The E series has now been released and the article needs to be altered to reflect this. I've update the "System Configuration" section (which, BTW, needs a rewrite as it focuses mostly on the obsolete C-series) and will go through the specification tables and start updating them but some help would be much appreciated.--Hazel77 ^talk 19:40, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I threw in the 6400 and 6500 spec tables using the official press releases, needs expanding obviously. vlad§inger ^tlk 21:37, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Image of C500

I own a free image of a Latitude C500. What would be the opinion of the community on inserting this in the appropriate section? Oldlaptop321 (talk) 01:06, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Follow-up

No one has replied in approx. 30 days, so I am going ahead and uploading the picture. Feel free to challenge it if you wish. Oldlaptop321 (talk) 14:39, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

D620 Memory Limitation

"Although the D620 is capable of accepting 4gb of physical memory, because of Intel 945 chipset limitations, it makes at most 3.5gb of memory available to the installed operating system. Neither Intel site describe this Intel chipset limitation (it states 4GB supported), nor Dell warns customers before buying or explains why system see only 3.3GB of memory when 4GB is installed.(most likely because the system needs to use the memory also.)" is Incorrect.

This issue ocurrs when running a 32-bit Operating system, something that you will see with any system. Installing a 64-bit Operating System will allow all 4GB of memory to be addressed, which i have done on a couple of D620s personally. Don't just take my word for it though:

From Microsoft96 2005 From ZDNet [1] From Vistaclues [2]

Nuttyrat (talk) 17:51, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

That is absolutely accurate and this statement should be removed or altered as even if true, it looks like a bitter user's complaint —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.172.224.120 (talk) 18:01, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

I have Dell latitude D620 and i tried to use MULTIPLE of different types of operating systems, they are ALL fully 64-bit and neither one can see full 4GB of RAM, like stated in this article. Please prove that your 64-bit OS can see full 4GB of RAM on D620, because mine D620 and everyone else's that is complaining on DELL locking available memory in BIOS, can NOT use it. it is not the question wither it is 32 or 64bit OS. Dell locked it in BIOS, because it is uncertain if Intel have such limitation in chipset (like some people are talking and Intel is saying nothing). Anyway, statement that 64-bit OS on D620 can see all 4GB of RAM is False. Minikola (talk) 06:32, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Latitude Z (Z600)

Recently introduced in 2009, as the thinest 16" inch laptop in the world.

It offers a slimmer design, in comparison to E series, besides the application of Magnetic Induction Technology for charging the battery, through a charging station (similar to a Docking Station, but slimmer as well), wich results in lower electric shock risk, and motherboard problems because of voltage fluctuations coming from the AC adapter, although it can be used the regular AC adapter and Power Cord of a regular notebook.

Broken link

Link http://www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2007/2007_06_28_rr_001 is (effectively) broken. Other similar links may be (effectively) broken as well. --Mortense (talk) 22:10, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Usefulness of "System configuration" Secion

Is this section really needed? Firstly, it starts off like an advertisement. Next, there isn't really anything useful here. Perhaps it should be deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kasm279 (talk • contribs) 08:11, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Latitude D620

I'm typing this in a Latitude D620 with Nvidia graphics, that I've also installed Windows 7 Professional on. Nearly a decade old and still going strong :). I know the GPU will die eventually, but at this point I'm thinking my hard drive or cooling fan will die and fry the thing before the GPU does. I think the best thing about this laptop is its removable components and modularity. Like, literally, the thing goes together like lego bricks, anything that's not sautered to the motherboard can be replaced easily, even the RAM. --70.106.139.226 (talk) 16:33, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

BIG DELL (MALAYSIA) BATTERY FIASCO

Off-topic gripes about computers and foreigners

I'll write on Talk not main page. I get a old lattitude, figure it's not worth buying top dollar parts for, buy a charger and battery: it's an old top i'll infrequently use. A sain plan. I'm on fire: I'VE BEEN BURNED BY MALAYSIA. The asian parts DO NOT CONTAIN A BATTERY CHARGER but do check the serial number. All over the web these dell brats have flooded stories about how it's the user's fault, window's fault, or impossible. All lies. The result is: If your new battery is charged it still will not work, depsite being told upon purchase it is the right type. If your new AC/charger runs the laptop, IT WILL NOT charge the battery. I've seen tons of complaints from Linux and the lesser microsoft user's alike. WORSE: i spent good money to get a battery AND charger (battery was 0, i had no charger). had i know i could have spent the same money on A DELL CHARGER THAT WORKED. the sales people on google, amazon, dell, and microcenter (a store) happily sold me parts they KNEW would not work, depsite the same money would have had "saved me". no warning. all kinds of ads on boxes assuring me i was doing the right thing. SUMMARY: Use your damn head. Do you have to buy the right brand of battery charger to charge batteries? Of course not. These people, dell/malaysia, are total fraud. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.219.202.186 (talk) 21:35, 13 October 2014 (UTC) ______________________ Let me add to the frey: in linux the multimedia is still mediocre: really only early 1990's quality. if you had good made-in-usa (or canada/ireland) parts in the 1990's you got full dvd multimedia and a fluid high refresh bright screen (horrific to get installed in linux: way worse than linux's early days before hack invasions from mal-contents and industry virus planters) Today's computers are going backwards in compatibility, quality of multimedia, cost, and security: and are heavily hacked by malcontents at manufacturing. One is continually forced to upgrade from above (ie, to get a working web browser: it's damn planted by industry and foreigners, it's called forced upgrade). You then find out any progress you've made is destroyed: nothing works the same. If you upgrade computer none of the drivers work but the chips do the same thing (as I said: worse multimedia not better). There is more memory and faster intel speed: but these are separate from the rest and mostly wasted: %90 of your power is wasted by malcontent ware, bloat, complexity by industry "experts" (malcontents who steal code). The price with inflation is skyrocketing: in my area of the USA only gov workers who are illegals from foreign countries can afford these peices of asian malcontently engineered junk. Today's computers are a total flunk. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.219.202.186 (talk) 21:32, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Multiple issues (November 2014)

This article is biased and outdated. The section "previous models", contains (and is a potential magnet for) original research and anecdotal criticism of the Latitude series, especially a few specific models like the D6x0. Although an owner may find this information helpful, given the popularity of this model, it doesn't seem appropriate for a general article on Dell Latitude. This may be better on its own article, e.g. "List of issues with Dell personal computers", along with supporting sources. Otherwise, I believe this article should resemble more objective examples, such as the one for Dell OptiPlex. The section "Current models" is outdated: the article is missing current and recent Latitude series. ChrstphrChvz (talk • contribs) 05:25, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Needs a really good table of model descriptions and options

Here we are in Q3 2015, and discount electronic stores are selling off-lease computers and laptops of every make, model and description. Which in this case includes the Dell E6410 (supposedly first available in November 2010).

What would be perfect is to come here to wikipedia and see a table containing:

- how much ram each sub-model had for a given line (like the E6410) - when did the E6410 first become available for retail sale - video options (screen resolution for each sub-model) - wireless options (which sub-model had bluetooth, for example) - what CPU options were available (and how they were paired with other options) - original retail MSRP price at introduction - Original Operating system (what version of Windoze) it first came with

Yes I'm thinking of purchasing a "refurbished" Dell E6410, and the store flyer gives very little info about what's under the hood of what they're selling beyond the CPU type and speed. Knowing if certain CPU's were paired with certain options (screen resolution, bluetooth, etc) would be great information.

Yea, maybe wikipedia is not supposed to be a resource for product information for the basis of making retail purchase decisions, but it could be. And maybe pages like this, that are about retail products (past and present) could also sell advertising and act as a revenue generator for Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.67.111.108 (talk) 13:16, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Not sure if your request makes sense as Dell homepage has a very detailed info about every Exxxx Latitude model. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.42.166.120 (talk) 16:35, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Dell Latitude. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nvidiasettlement.com/pdfs/NVF_NOT.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130104092010/http://content.dell.com/us/en/corp/d/press-releases/2011-2-8-Business-Client-Launch to http://content.dell.com/us/en/corp/d/press-releases/2011-2-8-Business-Client-Launch

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:39, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Dell Latitude. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070905234726/http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=32550 to http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=32550
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061024171340/https://support.apple.com/ibook_powerbook/batteryexchange/ to https://support.apple.com/ibook_powerbook/batteryexchange/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070706032056/http://www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2007/2007_06_28_rr_001 to http://www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2007/2007_06_28_rr_001
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070702130051/http://www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2007/2007_05_09_rr_000 to http://www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2007/2007_05_09_rr_000
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070707193000/http://www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2007/2007_01_16_rr_000 to http://www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2007/2007_01_16_rr_000
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071022193339/http://www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2001/2001_11_12_aus_000 to http://www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2001/2001_11_12_aus_000
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071113172823/http://www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2006/2006_11_06_rr_000 to http://www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2006/2006_11_06_rr_000

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:02, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 19 external links on Dell Latitude. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added https://www.cnet.com/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040426012740/http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2003/2003_03_12_rr_002 to http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2003/2003_03_12_rr_002
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100821190844/http://content.dell.com/us/en/corp/d/press-releases/2010-4-8-latitude-efamily.aspx to http://content.dell.com/us/en/corp/d/press-releases/2010-4-8-latitude-efamily.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060623093707/http://www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2006/2006_06_20_rr_000 to http://www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2006/2006_06_20_rr_000
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070610041636/http://www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2006/2006_05_02_rr_000 to http://www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2006/2006_05_02_rr_000
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060411074837/http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2006/2006_03_29_rr_000 to http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2006/2006_03_29_rr_000
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051125192915/http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2005/2005_04_26_rr_001 to http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2005/2005_04_26_rr_001
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080907135442/http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2005/2005_02_01_nyc_003 to http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2005/2005_02_01_nyc_003
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060205023216/http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2004/2004_01_12_rr_000 to http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2004/2004_01_12_rr_000
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2003/2003_05_19_rr_000
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051215071201/http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2003/2003_04_10_rr_000 to http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2003/2003_04_10_rr_000
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040426012740/http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2003/2003_03_12_rr_002 to http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2003/2003_03_12_rr_002
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040504190651/http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2000/2000_09_25_rr_000 to http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2000/2000_09_25_rr_000
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/1999/1999_08_23_rr_000
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20031018003106/http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/1999/1999_06_14_rr_001 to http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/1999/1999_06_14_rr_001
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/1999/1999_01_25_rr_000
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070706032056/http://www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2007/2007_06_28_rr_001 to http://www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2007/2007_06_28_rr_001
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051208120748/http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2005/2005_03_30_rr_000 to http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2005/2005_03_30_rr_000
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040221183155/http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2003/2003_07_29_rr_000 to http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2003/2003_07_29_rr_000
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040504184028/http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2002/2002_05_06_aus_000 to http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2002/2002_05_06_aus_000
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051211070138/http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2000/2000_10_04_rr_000 to http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2000/2000_10_04_rr_000
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051220104326/http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2005/2005_03_08_rr_000 to http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2005/2005_03_08_rr_000
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080907135545/http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2004/2004_04_13_rr_000 to http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/corp/pressoffice/en/2004/2004_04_13_rr_000

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:27, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

New Models

Is there any specific process to add new models to this page? Dell's website now lists a Latitude 5591 which is reviewed for example at https://www.notebookcheck.net/Dell-Latitude-5491-5591-coming-with-Coffee-Lake-H-and-GeForce-MX130-options.29 97 2064.0.html

If there is nothing formal, I will go ahead and add it. Phersh (talk) 23:38, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

I do not think there is a formal procedure for adding new models; I have added some myself without discussion. --Danheretic (talk) 16:41, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Reference 128 has linkrot

This is a very small issue, but I'm not familiar enough with Wikipedia's citation machinery to fix it myself.

Reference 128, to http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=6479&news=dell+announces+latitude+e630s+e6230+e6330+e6430+e6530, redirects to a message about a forum no longer being maintained. The post is available on the archive, though: https://web.archive.org/web/20120603021926/http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=6479&news=dell+announces+latitude+e630s+e6230+e6330+e6430+e6530, and so the reference should be updated. I've linked to the oldest version; I suppose ideally it should be to the oldest archive taken after the reference was added, but I'm not sure how to find that in the history. PiNerd3 (talk) 21:57, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Article classified as needing more information in suggested edits

Hello! New wiki editor here, My suggested edits have recommended me this article to edit, and add more information to. However, this article has well over 120 references and a significant amount of information. I don't see how this article could use any new information as of now and would like to see it removed from the 'suggested edits' portion for other users. HyperNover (talk) 16:36, 25 November 2024 (UTC)