3 ms·

> I'm sure like usual when this comes up, some people will come reply with "you can't make out the difference anyway", which is just not true. It is true for t

> I'm sure like usual when this comes up, some people will come reply with "you can't make out the difference anyway", which is just not true. It is true for those people. No doubt that's not true for you, but you're not everyone. With fairly small screens (14" is small compared to a 24" desktop monitor) I genuinely don't notice the difference. I'm sure if you would put two screens next to each other I'd be able to spot differences, but in daily use? Not really. I used to have a employer-provided 15" Dell XPS with some >1080p resolution (I forgot which exactly) and I really didn't notice. There are downsides, too: the computer has to work harder to render all those pixels and the battery life is shorter; my battery life was noticeably shorter than my previous almost identical XPS with a "normal" 1080p screen, so it's a trade-off. Having an option would be nice for those who care about it of course, but I suspect a large section of people just don't care, and especially as a fairly small shop you can't do everything.

IE6 5y ago
> It is true for those people. No doubt that's not true for you, but you're not everyone. While what you say is probably true I just wish it was not the constant narrative around laptops that have nice screens. I bought a Samsung Galaxy Chromebook and absolutely loved the 4K OLED screen it had up until the day its WiFi suddenly died. Everything looked amazing on it - even just the boring ChromeOS UI elements looked amazing. However every reviewer had the same feedback - that you can't tell the difference and you should shoot for 1080.
josephcsible 5y ago
For me personally, I definitely do notice the difference; I just don't care about it enough for it to be worth the downsides you mentioned (plus the downside of worse FPS when gaming).
3np 5y ago
Of course it's true for them and they should go with that. It's a tired myth that "the human eye can't perceive the difference and you don't either". We're all different, with different needs and preferences.
- Beltalowda 5y ago
  > We're all different, with different needs and preferences. Yeah sure; actually, it just so happens I more or less said the same thing in a different comment a few days ago (very different topic, but similar sentiment): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30984309 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30984309 I mostly just wanted to hook in on why these kind of systems still frequently come with a 1080p screen.
colordrops 5y ago
I notice the difference so much that I have a visceral reaction to low res displays, almost claustrophobic as if a screen door is covering my eyes. Can't stand them.
tromp 5y ago
I can live with the lower resolution, as my eyesight is getting worse, but not with the 16x9 aspect ratio. 16x10 (1920x1200) feels so much more productive.
- IE6 5y ago
  FWIW you can also try scaling the display - ChromeOS does this well out of the box, Linux is OK, Windows has it too. Best of both worlds IMHO.
- Beltalowda 5y ago
  My main monitor is actually 16×10 1920×1200, and at 24" I find it's kind of too low of a resolution: I wish it was more. But it was fairly cheap (second-hand/refurbished from a reseller) and the intersection of "16×10", "not too large" (I don't want a 32" behemoth), and ">1080p" is basically zero, so I had to compromise somewhere, and given the low price point and that I couldn't be arsed to figure out all the display tech and whatnot for the new screens it was an easy choice. But 16×10 seems to be making a bit of a come-back, at least for laptops.
bzzzt 5y ago
> There are downsides, too: the computer has to work harder to render all those pixels and the battery life is shorter; my battery life was noticeably shorter than my previous almost identical XPS with a "normal" 1080p screen, so it's a trade-off. Makes me wonder why Apple is capable of building laptops that run for hours and have a high DPI screen then? Don't confuse Dell dropping the ball on hardware and software integration with trade-offs. There are upsides to high DPI too: you can turn off anti-aliasing since you won't notice it when the pixels are too small to see.

IE6 5y ago

> It is true for those people. No doubt that's not true for you, but you're not everyone. While what you say is probably true I just wish it was not the constant narrative around laptops that have nice screens. I bought a Samsung Galaxy Chromebook and absolutely loved the 4K OLED screen it had up until the day its WiFi suddenly died. Everything looked amazing on it - even just the boring ChromeOS UI elements looked amazing. However every reviewer had the same feedback - that you can't tell the difference and you should shoot for 1080.

josephcsible 5y ago

For me personally, I definitely do notice the difference; I just don't care about it enough for it to be worth the downsides you mentioned (plus the downside of worse FPS when gaming).

3np 5y ago

Of course it's true for them and they should go with that. It's a tired myth that "the human eye can't perceive the difference and you don't either". We're all different, with different needs and preferences.

Beltalowda 5y ago
> We're all different, with different needs and preferences. Yeah sure; actually, it just so happens I more or less said the same thing in a different comment a few days ago (very different topic, but similar sentiment): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30984309 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30984309 I mostly just wanted to hook in on why these kind of systems still frequently come with a 1080p screen.

colordrops 5y ago

I notice the difference so much that I have a visceral reaction to low res displays, almost claustrophobic as if a screen door is covering my eyes. Can't stand them.

tromp 5y ago

I can live with the lower resolution, as my eyesight is getting worse, but not with the 16x9 aspect ratio. 16x10 (1920x1200) feels so much more productive.

IE6 5y ago
FWIW you can also try scaling the display - ChromeOS does this well out of the box, Linux is OK, Windows has it too. Best of both worlds IMHO.
Beltalowda 5y ago
My main monitor is actually 16×10 1920×1200, and at 24" I find it's kind of too low of a resolution: I wish it was more. But it was fairly cheap (second-hand/refurbished from a reseller) and the intersection of "16×10", "not too large" (I don't want a 32" behemoth), and ">1080p" is basically zero, so I had to compromise somewhere, and given the low price point and that I couldn't be arsed to figure out all the display tech and whatnot for the new screens it was an easy choice. But 16×10 seems to be making a bit of a come-back, at least for laptops.

bzzzt 5y ago

> There are downsides, too: the computer has to work harder to render all those pixels and the battery life is shorter; my battery life was noticeably shorter than my previous almost identical XPS with a "normal" 1080p screen, so it's a trade-off. Makes me wonder why Apple is capable of building laptops that run for hours and have a high DPI screen then? Don't confuse Dell dropping the ball on hardware and software integration with trade-offs. There are upsides to high DPI too: you can turn off anti-aliasing since you won't notice it when the pixels are too small to see.