6 ms·
(Disclaimer, I submitted the linked HN post and wrote the linked blog post.) I talk about this explicitly here [0]. I think it's important that this be called
by basilgohar 7y ago
(Disclaimer, I submitted the linked HN post and wrote the linked blog post.)
I talk about this explicitly here [0]. I think it's important that this be called-out widely and given attention. As I said in the first comment there, it's hard to vote with your wallet when the option you want doesn't exist.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21975877 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21975877
- mixmastamyk 7y agoReminds me of the lack of non-wide hi-dpi monitors. Nothing at 4:3, 3:2, or 16:10 exists anymore—even if you were willing to pay $10,000+.
- basilgohar 7y ago15 years ago I had a Dell laptop with a 15.4 1920x1200 (16:10) screen. Nowadays you can't find something like that except on esoteric "Toughbooks" by Panasonic...
- chao- 7y agoCoincidentally enough, Dell's recent upgrade to the XPS 13 includes a 16:10 monitor. Announced only a few days ago, available today. https://www.arstechnica.com/gadgets/2020/01/dell-updates-xps-13-laptop-with-1610-aspect-ratio-screen-ir-camera https://www.arstechnica.com/gadgets/2020/01/dell-updates-xps...
- core-questions 7y agoI have a similar Dell Pentium 3, still works, from 2002. 1600x1200 15" 4:3 screen. I still occasionally use the thing for nostalgia's sake.
- mixmastamyk 7y agoI remember it! Awesome.
- fierarul 7y agoI had that laptop. Amazing screen (and a tank of a laptop). Back then other other cool thing was the 17" MacBook Pro. It was glorious.
- thedaemon 7y ago16:10 was the perfect aspect ratio. I held onto my 24" 1920x1200 Dell Monitor until just last year. I recently tried to upgrade to a new 16:10 and it was impossible. Disappointing.
- kilburn 7y agoCheck the new dell XPS 13 to be released today [1]: > Screen resolution on the XPS 13 has jumped accordingly, now up to 1,920 x 1,200 on the FHD model, and 3,840 x 2,400 on the 4K model. Dell calls this FHD+ and 4K+ for the added aspect ratio, but it should be noted that touch is still an optional feature and isn’t standard. [1] https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/dell-xps-13-2020-everything-new/ https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/dell-xps-13-2020-eve...
- mixmastamyk 7y agoI saw that and am happy about it. But, until they come out with a 15" supporting Linux it is still a no-go. Maybe next year.
- winter_blue 7y ago> supporting Linux Wait, the Dell XPS 15 doesn't work well with Linux? Could you share a bit on why? (I was actually thinking of getting a XPS 15 myself, and putting Linux on it.)
- nougatbyte 7y agoI had the newest Xps 15 at my last job two month ago. With a new enough kernel (5.1 or 5.2) got everything but the fingerprint reader working
- quantummkv 7y agoMost probably due to that Nvidia gpu in there.
- mixmastamyk 7y agoProbably, but they usually come out with a Precision dev edition with Linux installed, no MS tax. That’s what I usually buy.
- alias_neo 7y agoI, and every developer in my company have been running Linux in various flavours in XPS 15s for several years now; it works just as well as on any other device I've used it on. I use an XPS 13 at home also running Linux (Ubuntu/Manjaro) and have no unusual issues there that I haven't also seen in my desktop. Saying it doesn't work well in Linux is either bad luck with a particular model or just plain misrepresentation.
- soperj 7y agoIsn't the windows surface book's screen 3:2? edit: Apparently it's called the windows surface laptop and yes it has a 3:2 aspect ratio https://www.microsoft.com/en-ca/p/surface-laptop-3/8VFGGH1R94TM?activetab=techspecs#primaryRegionPivot https://www.microsoft.com/en-ca/p/surface-laptop-3/8VFGGH1R9...
- mixmastamyk 7y agoI need a Linux laptop or standalone monitor.
- loeg 7y ago16:9 is quite common and not too far from 16:10. It also happens to match up with popular consumers HD video standards (1080p, "4k" 2160p), which is probably a good portion of why it has enduring popularity.
- llampx 7y agoPopularity has nothing to do with why its more popular. The industry decided as a whole to go with 16:9 screens due to them costing less, and consumers had no choice. Similar to how most flagship smartphones have lost their headphone jacks even though no customer is running to buy a phone just because it doesn't have a headphone jack.
- mschuster91 7y agoBut consumers do run for ever thinner devices, and a 3.5mm jack will always make the device at least 4mm high (probably more to account for front display and backside assembly).
- mixmastamyk 7y agoAnd when they got too thin and started bending in pockets folks complained until they got sturdier and thicker again.
- vetinari 7y agoThe wider the panel the, the smaller area it has, while still preserving the diagonal (i.e. 14" 16:9 has smaller area than 14" 16:10), allowing more panels to be cut from the same material and increasing the yields in case of material defects. I.e. making of wider panels is cheaper, and because in advertisement there's diagonal and not area, it still allows advertising in a way that doesn't put the manufacturer or oem to disadvantage.
- bjoli 7y agoGod yes. Why can't screen manufacturers make 3:2 desktop screens. We can't all be gamers or movie watchers.
- disiplus 7y agoi have a huawei with a 3:2 13" display it so much smaller compared to the same 13" zenbook with "no bezels" and the keyboard is the old "2015 macbook" keyboard. https://imgur.com/xGES3Wz https://imgur.com/xGES3Wz
- Avamander 7y agoTry finding 5:4 monitors
- 0-_-0 7y agoI want a 1:√2 ratio, like an A4 sheet. But irrational pixel sizes aren't invented yet.