7 ms·

I'm so damn happy people are starting to realize how awesome resolution is. I've been buying 1920x1200 15" Dell laptops for 10 years now, and never bought a Mac

by staunch 14y ago

I'm so damn happy people are starting to realize how awesome resolution is. I've been buying 1920x1200 15" Dell laptops for 10 years now, and never bought a Mac because they've always had terrible resolution. I run Linux anyway, but I'm going buy Mac hardware next, unless a PC maker creates a competitive display (which I assume they will). Next up: IPS LCDs everywhere.

Osmium 14y ago
1680 by 1050, which is the best you could get on a 15" Mac previously, isn't exactly "terrible resolution" (by historical standards anyway). But otherwise agreed. My main machine is a 15" Retina, and I don't think I could ever go back to a lower-PPI laptop.
- evoxed 14y ago
  I bought the first generation MacBook Pro, a 17", for that reason. Other resolutions were just too small for what I was doing, and 1680 seemed like just enough. Eventually when they started offering the resolution upgrades on 15" models I upgraded to my current machine. The way I see it, there's no way I can be disappointed by the resolution of my next machine. No more pains over spending $100-300 for just a small bump to make things usable. Of course, the downside is that I can't let myself even try out the retina MacBook in store for fear that I won't look back– I'll wait until I can afford it.
  - peteri 14y ago
    Last time I went shopping for a machine 1680x1050 was my target resolution for a 17" screen with dual hard drives, I'm still using it four years later (it has had HD upgrade to 2x500gb 7200RPM drives) It happens to have a couple of GeForce 8600M GPUs in there so its just about usable for gaming too. After I dropped it (laptop bag strap broke) and smashed the corner I looked around for a replacement (The mac book pro was tempting but oh the $$$) and couldn't find one for sensible money. So I bought some new plastics, redid the thermal paste on the CPU (it had started thermal throttling during long compiles) bought a second hand screen (and a new 4 port USB pcb that got damaged during the fall) off ebay to replace the broken clips that hold it together when its closed. So I also have a spare screen now. I'm dreading replacing it but I reckon I'm probably still good for a year or two yet.
- moheeb 14y ago
  I would consider the fact that they have only been able to increase the vertical resolution by ~300 pixels in 20 years to be pretty terrible. Meanwhile the images we view on those same screens have increased in size by nearly 20 times!
  - brigade 14y ago
    20 years ago notebooks had 640x400 or 640x480 screens... If you include the 15" retina MBP then that's 17x more pixels in 20 years. And that includes greyscale to 8bit color to 16 bit color to 24/32 bit color, passive-matrix to active-matrix, and dozens of other panel technology improvements not directly related to resolution.
    - moheeb 14y ago
      The XGA (1024x768) was intro'd in the early 90s. Maybe you missed the earlier discussion but we've all been lamenting the crappy default resolutions since then. We were not discussing bit depth or black and white vs. color.
      - brigade 14y ago
        Not in laptops. Which is what everyone is talking about, if you missed it.
5h 14y ago
can i have a link to your 10 year old 1920x1200 15" laptop? i'd buy one just for the screen to use in one of the many hacky projects!
- rplnt 14y ago
  Older thinkpads had these as an option http://support.lenovo.com/en_US/product-and-parts/detail.page?&LegacyDocID=MIGR-70202 http://support.lenovo.com/en_US/product-and-parts/detail.pag... It's not 10 years but they are pretty cheap now anyways (although getting your hands on the WUXGA or even WSXGA+ isn't the easiest task)
- dexen 14y ago
  Good old 1600x1200, here it goes: http://www.laptopmax.com/HP/reviews/34/HP_Compaq_NC8000_reviews.html http://www.laptopmax.com/HP/reviews/34/HP_Compaq_NC8000_revi...
  - jve 14y ago
    Ohh, I have exactly this one unusable because of a dead motherboard at home.
- masklinn 14y ago
  Dell has had a number of them over the years, one I remember was the Latitude D820 (15.4", with a 1920x1200 option) back in 2006 but I know they had such offers before as a colleague had one in 2005. I'm not sure they offer WXUGA screens anymore though, it seems everyone has nerfed back to "full HD" (which offers 120 vertical pixels less) these days, which is bullshit. Since 2010 (when this trend started), the interwebs have been full of people trying to find out manufacturers who still provided WXUGA screens.
  - jebblue 14y ago
    >> Since 2010 (when this trend started), the interwebs have been full of people trying to find out manufacturers who still provided WXUGA screens. Exactly, it's like laptop vertical resolution in particular has gone in the wrong direction the past couple of years. What happened? Trying to view web sites on one of these resolution challenged laptops means a lot of scrolling up and down, feels like the 90s all over again. Glad I'm not the only one and glad Linux raised the issue.
davidw 14y ago
For years, the things I have cared about in terms of computing have been, roughly: 1) Internet connectivity. Without it I'm mostly dead in the water. 2) Screen resolution. I want as much code/information on the screen as possible. I currently have a 1920x1200 Dell myself, and am I bit scared/saddened that I won't be able to replace it. 3) Memory. Always good. After that come processor speed and storage space. I suspect my next machine will have SSD, because I've heard that it's such a dramatic improvement. I completely agree with Linus though - I very much want a high resolution laptop screen.
- Nursie 14y ago
  Once you've gone SSD you'll be amazed you got by without it. It's the biggest single-part speed upgrade I've seen since the 90s. Even just a small on for a system partition, and data kept on a traditional HDD, you'll see great gains. (And yes, also agree, it's a shame that monitor and laptop resolution seemed to stall at 'HD' for ages)
  - diminish 14y ago
    Any laptop I buy for any one, I always replace it with SSD. Higher dpi doesnot matter much for a programer but higher screen estate or resolution matters more.
- dagw 14y ago
  After having bought an SSD a couple of years ago I can honestly say it is at the top of my requirement list (after internet connectivity, but it's basically impossible to buy a computer that can't connect to the internet) for all my computers, easily above memory and screen resolution.
- ghshephard 14y ago
  SSD on my MacBook Air is the one thing that has made more of a difference than anything else. I can live with only running four or five major apps at a time in the 4 Gigabytes that came with my 2010 MacBook Air - but the SSD changed my life. I'd put that on your list above memory.
- 14y ago
mmcnickle 14y ago
I was recently asked for laptop buying advice. I told them that if they're going to be using it more than casually, then prioritise the screen over everything else; Minimum 1080p IPS screen. I was shocked that here were less than a 5 models (that you can buy new) out there that fit the bill. Such a sad state, I expected that to be the starting off point.
prof_hobart 14y ago
One of the reasons that I finally jumped over to the Mac was the fact that it was one of the few laptops that provided 1680x1050 at around 15". My previous 2 Windows laptops had been that resolution, but when I came to upgrade about 2 or 3 years ago, that resolution seemed to have been abandoned for 15" laptops by pretty much everyone apart from Apple. Most of them had gone to 1440 or even less. A handful of pretty expensive, at least Apple price, and usually quite bulky, ones offered 1920x1200 but given that the scaling didn't look too great on them at the time I though that this might be just a bit too small for me, and if I was going to be paying about the same price for a Windows PC as I was paying for a Mac one - and not get the resolution I wanted anyway on Windows, I thought I'd bite the bullet and see what all of the Mac fuss was about.
- FireBeyond 14y ago
  I am a little surprised by this - both Sony and Dell have had credible 1920x1080 options at 15" for several years (admittedly I prefer x1200, which has also been available) - both have also had 1920 13" options for at least a year.
  - bitcartel 14y ago
    Are these matte? Put one next to a glossy display and the difference is glaringly obvious (pun intended!).
    - FireBeyond 14y ago
      Yes, matte! (well, at least on the ones I know about - my Sony is matte - Glossy is better for little more than the store)
  - prof_hobart 14y ago
    Like I say, the 1920 seemed too small to me, given the not particularly great scaling in Windows at the time if I did want to use other resolutions, and the ones that I did find were usually around Apple prices anyway.
emixam 14y ago
Check out the Asus Zenbook Prime series. They are 11" or 13" laptops with 1920x1080 IPS displays. I have one and it works well with Ubuntu. http://www.asus.com/Notebooks/Superior_Mobility/ASUS_ZENBOOK_UX31A/ http://www.asus.com/Notebooks/Superior_Mobility/ASUS_ZENBOOK...
adestefan 14y ago
The problem is there are just as many bad IPS LCDs systems out there as there are bad TN LCDs. The main problem seems to be either uneven backlighthing (especially on LED based LCDs) and really bad anti-glare coatings that make grey colors sparkle. I just returned an Asus IPS LCD because of the later case.
- flurpitude 14y ago
  There's also the problematic panel used in the Sony S15 and others, which is 15" 1900x1080 IPS but has poor colour accuracy that makes reds look orange.
bduerst 14y ago
One of the deciding factors for purchasing my Elitebook 8560w was the 1920x1080 RGB LED screen. I can never go back.

by staunch 14y ago

Osmium 14y ago

1680 by 1050, which is the best you could get on a 15" Mac previously, isn't exactly "terrible resolution" (by historical standards anyway). But otherwise agreed. My main machine is a 15" Retina, and I don't think I could ever go back to a lower-PPI laptop.

evoxed 14y ago
I bought the first generation MacBook Pro, a 17", for that reason. Other resolutions were just too small for what I was doing, and 1680 seemed like just enough. Eventually when they started offering the resolution upgrades on 15" models I upgraded to my current machine. The way I see it, there's no way I can be disappointed by the resolution of my next machine. No more pains over spending $100-300 for just a small bump to make things usable. Of course, the downside is that I can't let myself even try out the retina MacBook in store for fear that I won't look back– I'll wait until I can afford it.
- peteri 14y ago
  Last time I went shopping for a machine 1680x1050 was my target resolution for a 17" screen with dual hard drives, I'm still using it four years later (it has had HD upgrade to 2x500gb 7200RPM drives) It happens to have a couple of GeForce 8600M GPUs in there so its just about usable for gaming too. After I dropped it (laptop bag strap broke) and smashed the corner I looked around for a replacement (The mac book pro was tempting but oh the $$$) and couldn't find one for sensible money. So I bought some new plastics, redid the thermal paste on the CPU (it had started thermal throttling during long compiles) bought a second hand screen (and a new 4 port USB pcb that got damaged during the fall) off ebay to replace the broken clips that hold it together when its closed. So I also have a spare screen now. I'm dreading replacing it but I reckon I'm probably still good for a year or two yet.
moheeb 14y ago
I would consider the fact that they have only been able to increase the vertical resolution by ~300 pixels in 20 years to be pretty terrible. Meanwhile the images we view on those same screens have increased in size by nearly 20 times!
- brigade 14y ago
  20 years ago notebooks had 640x400 or 640x480 screens... If you include the 15" retina MBP then that's 17x more pixels in 20 years. And that includes greyscale to 8bit color to 16 bit color to 24/32 bit color, passive-matrix to active-matrix, and dozens of other panel technology improvements not directly related to resolution.
  - moheeb 14y ago
    The XGA (1024x768) was intro'd in the early 90s. Maybe you missed the earlier discussion but we've all been lamenting the crappy default resolutions since then. We were not discussing bit depth or black and white vs. color.
    - brigade 14y ago
      Not in laptops. Which is what everyone is talking about, if you missed it.

5h 14y ago

can i have a link to your 10 year old 1920x1200 15" laptop? i'd buy one just for the screen to use in one of the many hacky projects!

rplnt 14y ago
Older thinkpads had these as an option http://support.lenovo.com/en_US/product-and-parts/detail.page?&LegacyDocID=MIGR-70202 http://support.lenovo.com/en_US/product-and-parts/detail.pag... It's not 10 years but they are pretty cheap now anyways (although getting your hands on the WUXGA or even WSXGA+ isn't the easiest task)
dexen 14y ago
Good old 1600x1200, here it goes: http://www.laptopmax.com/HP/reviews/34/HP_Compaq_NC8000_reviews.html http://www.laptopmax.com/HP/reviews/34/HP_Compaq_NC8000_revi...
- jve 14y ago
  Ohh, I have exactly this one unusable because of a dead motherboard at home.
masklinn 14y ago
Dell has had a number of them over the years, one I remember was the Latitude D820 (15.4", with a 1920x1200 option) back in 2006 but I know they had such offers before as a colleague had one in 2005. I'm not sure they offer WXUGA screens anymore though, it seems everyone has nerfed back to "full HD" (which offers 120 vertical pixels less) these days, which is bullshit. Since 2010 (when this trend started), the interwebs have been full of people trying to find out manufacturers who still provided WXUGA screens.
- jebblue 14y ago
  >> Since 2010 (when this trend started), the interwebs have been full of people trying to find out manufacturers who still provided WXUGA screens. Exactly, it's like laptop vertical resolution in particular has gone in the wrong direction the past couple of years. What happened? Trying to view web sites on one of these resolution challenged laptops means a lot of scrolling up and down, feels like the 90s all over again. Glad I'm not the only one and glad Linux raised the issue.

davidw 14y ago

For years, the things I have cared about in terms of computing have been, roughly: 1) Internet connectivity. Without it I'm mostly dead in the water. 2) Screen resolution. I want as much code/information on the screen as possible. I currently have a 1920x1200 Dell myself, and am I bit scared/saddened that I won't be able to replace it. 3) Memory. Always good. After that come processor speed and storage space. I suspect my next machine will have SSD, because I've heard that it's such a dramatic improvement. I completely agree with Linus though - I very much want a high resolution laptop screen.

Nursie 14y ago
Once you've gone SSD you'll be amazed you got by without it. It's the biggest single-part speed upgrade I've seen since the 90s. Even just a small on for a system partition, and data kept on a traditional HDD, you'll see great gains. (And yes, also agree, it's a shame that monitor and laptop resolution seemed to stall at 'HD' for ages)
- diminish 14y ago
  Any laptop I buy for any one, I always replace it with SSD. Higher dpi doesnot matter much for a programer but higher screen estate or resolution matters more.
dagw 14y ago
After having bought an SSD a couple of years ago I can honestly say it is at the top of my requirement list (after internet connectivity, but it's basically impossible to buy a computer that can't connect to the internet) for all my computers, easily above memory and screen resolution.
ghshephard 14y ago
SSD on my MacBook Air is the one thing that has made more of a difference than anything else. I can live with only running four or five major apps at a time in the 4 Gigabytes that came with my 2010 MacBook Air - but the SSD changed my life. I'd put that on your list above memory.
14y ago

mmcnickle 14y ago

I was recently asked for laptop buying advice. I told them that if they're going to be using it more than casually, then prioritise the screen over everything else; Minimum 1080p IPS screen. I was shocked that here were less than a 5 models (that you can buy new) out there that fit the bill. Such a sad state, I expected that to be the starting off point.

prof_hobart 14y ago

One of the reasons that I finally jumped over to the Mac was the fact that it was one of the few laptops that provided 1680x1050 at around 15". My previous 2 Windows laptops had been that resolution, but when I came to upgrade about 2 or 3 years ago, that resolution seemed to have been abandoned for 15" laptops by pretty much everyone apart from Apple. Most of them had gone to 1440 or even less. A handful of pretty expensive, at least Apple price, and usually quite bulky, ones offered 1920x1200 but given that the scaling didn't look too great on them at the time I though that this might be just a bit too small for me, and if I was going to be paying about the same price for a Windows PC as I was paying for a Mac one - and not get the resolution I wanted anyway on Windows, I thought I'd bite the bullet and see what all of the Mac fuss was about.

FireBeyond 14y ago
I am a little surprised by this - both Sony and Dell have had credible 1920x1080 options at 15" for several years (admittedly I prefer x1200, which has also been available) - both have also had 1920 13" options for at least a year.
- bitcartel 14y ago
  Are these matte? Put one next to a glossy display and the difference is glaringly obvious (pun intended!).
  - FireBeyond 14y ago
    Yes, matte! (well, at least on the ones I know about - my Sony is matte - Glossy is better for little more than the store)
- prof_hobart 14y ago
  Like I say, the 1920 seemed too small to me, given the not particularly great scaling in Windows at the time if I did want to use other resolutions, and the ones that I did find were usually around Apple prices anyway.

emixam 14y ago

Check out the Asus Zenbook Prime series. They are 11" or 13" laptops with 1920x1080 IPS displays. I have one and it works well with Ubuntu. http://www.asus.com/Notebooks/Superior_Mobility/ASUS_ZENBOOK_UX31A/ http://www.asus.com/Notebooks/Superior_Mobility/ASUS_ZENBOOK...

adestefan 14y ago

The problem is there are just as many bad IPS LCDs systems out there as there are bad TN LCDs. The main problem seems to be either uneven backlighthing (especially on LED based LCDs) and really bad anti-glare coatings that make grey colors sparkle. I just returned an Asus IPS LCD because of the later case.

flurpitude 14y ago
There's also the problematic panel used in the Sony S15 and others, which is 15" 1900x1080 IPS but has poor colour accuracy that makes reds look orange.

bduerst 14y ago

One of the deciding factors for purchasing my Elitebook 8560w was the 1920x1080 RGB LED screen. I can never go back.