3 ms·

The whole reason we switched to 16:9 is for more real estate for side-by-side apps. Perhaps with the age of insane ads embedded with everything, that extra vert

The whole reason we switched to 16:9 is for more real estate for side-by-side apps. Perhaps with the age of insane ads embedded with everything, that extra vertical space is more important. Not sure I agree with that.

layer8 5y ago
> The whole reason we switched to 16:9 is for more real estate for side-by-side apps. The whole reason of switching to 16:9 is because TVs did and it’s cheaper for the manufacturers, AND they can advertise the same (or larger) diagonal for less square inches.
- cpuguy83 5y ago
  When monitors went from 4:3 to 16:9, tv's were going to 16:10.
  - tedunangst 5y ago
    So when did TVs go to 16:9?
    - theandrewbailey 5y ago
      When HDTV became a thing. Mid-late 90s?
      - layer8 5y ago
        It took a long time to really become mainstream, TV broadcast was firmly 4:3 until roughly the mid-2000s, and 16:9 TVs were expensive until LCD TVs became cheap. There was a long interim period were 16:9 was mainly a DVD aspect ratio you watched on 4:3 TVs with black bars.
  - wtallis 5y ago
    What TVs were ever 16:10?
    - cpuguy83 5y ago
      I got these flipped, monitors went 16:10, then changed to 16:9 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/16:10_aspect_ratio https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/16:10_aspect_ratio
  - layer8 5y ago
    That’s not really correct. TV went straight from 4:3 SDTV (NTSC/PAL) to 16:9 HDTV. There is no 16:10 TV (signal) aspect ratio. It’s true that there were a few "HD ready" LCD TVs with 16:10 aspect ratio (1680x1050 resolution), but those were never dominant and didn’t precede 16:9 TVs (which were already there in CRT/Plasma/RPTV times). Computer monitors on the other hand went from 4:3 and 5:4 to 16:10 in the mid-2000s, and then to 16:9 from ~2010 on, after 16:9 had already been well-established on TVs. See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Display_aspect_ratio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Display_aspect_ratio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/16:10_aspect_ratio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/16:10_aspect_ratio
    - cpuguy83 5y ago
      Indeed I flipped which was 16:9 and which was 16:10 in my head.

layer8 5y ago

> The whole reason we switched to 16:9 is for more real estate for side-by-side apps. The whole reason of switching to 16:9 is because TVs did and it’s cheaper for the manufacturers, AND they can advertise the same (or larger) diagonal for less square inches.

cpuguy83 5y ago
When monitors went from 4:3 to 16:9, tv's were going to 16:10.
- tedunangst 5y ago
  So when did TVs go to 16:9?
  - theandrewbailey 5y ago
    When HDTV became a thing. Mid-late 90s?
    - layer8 5y ago
      It took a long time to really become mainstream, TV broadcast was firmly 4:3 until roughly the mid-2000s, and 16:9 TVs were expensive until LCD TVs became cheap. There was a long interim period were 16:9 was mainly a DVD aspect ratio you watched on 4:3 TVs with black bars.
- wtallis 5y ago
  What TVs were ever 16:10?
  - cpuguy83 5y ago
    I got these flipped, monitors went 16:10, then changed to 16:9 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/16:10_aspect_ratio https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/16:10_aspect_ratio
- layer8 5y ago
  That’s not really correct. TV went straight from 4:3 SDTV (NTSC/PAL) to 16:9 HDTV. There is no 16:10 TV (signal) aspect ratio. It’s true that there were a few "HD ready" LCD TVs with 16:10 aspect ratio (1680x1050 resolution), but those were never dominant and didn’t precede 16:9 TVs (which were already there in CRT/Plasma/RPTV times). Computer monitors on the other hand went from 4:3 and 5:4 to 16:10 in the mid-2000s, and then to 16:9 from ~2010 on, after 16:9 had already been well-established on TVs. See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Display_aspect_ratio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Display_aspect_ratio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/16:10_aspect_ratio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/16:10_aspect_ratio
  - cpuguy83 5y ago
    Indeed I flipped which was 16:9 and which was 16:10 in my head.