3 ms·

I'd rather have 4:3 or even 5:4, but I'll take any steps in the direction of square as positive.

by Zak 14y ago

nigma 14y ago
I couldn't agree more. I'm currently on an upgraded Thinkpad T61p with 1680x1050 and I'm reluctant to change it to a newer machine because of the 16:9 screens padded with tall plastic border that are available in most notebooks nowadays. I really hope that hardware makers will finally realize that the primary reason for buying a notebook is not for watching movies on a 15" screen.
- Zak 14y ago
  Did you know you can put a 14" standard-aspect T61 motherboard in a 15" T60p chassis with a 1600x1200 IPS panel? Did you know that if you want to spend $400 or so, or you're really good at shopping on ebay, you can upgrade that to 2048x1536?
Shish2k 14y ago
If tall thin windows are better, why not have a widescreen with two windows side by side?
- Zak 14y ago
  I don't especially want a single tall, thin window for code. 5:4 is still wider than it is tall. My usual development environment is Emacs with two panes (Emacs calls them windows for historical reasons) side by side on 4:3. My thinking is that a screen that's close to square works better for a wider range of tasks than one that's very oblong. A rotating oblong screen that could be tall or wide might work nicely for a lot of situations too, but it would be hard to implement well on a laptop.
- lmm 14y ago
  What I want is as many vertical pixels as possible; this is the first new screen I've seen that's got more than my 10-year-old CRT (1536). (At this point some wag is going to suggest portrait mode, but I've never seen a laptop with a portrait screen that can be used at the same time as the keyboard).
  - Zak 14y ago
    Apple's 13 and 15 inch retina Macbook Pro models have 1600 and 1800, respectively.
- rplnt 14y ago
  Because there's no space / it would be too small. We're talking about sub-15" display here. So while wide display is great in 22"+, it sucks for everything (except movies maybe) on smaller devices.

I'd rather have 4:3 or even 5:4, but I'll take any steps in the direction of square as positive.

by Zak 14y ago

I'd rather have 4:3 or even 5:4, but I'll take any steps in the direction of square as positive.

nigma 14y ago

I couldn't agree more. I'm currently on an upgraded Thinkpad T61p with 1680x1050 and I'm reluctant to change it to a newer machine because of the 16:9 screens padded with tall plastic border that are available in most notebooks nowadays. I really hope that hardware makers will finally realize that the primary reason for buying a notebook is not for watching movies on a 15" screen.

Zak 14y ago
Did you know you can put a 14" standard-aspect T61 motherboard in a 15" T60p chassis with a 1600x1200 IPS panel? Did you know that if you want to spend $400 or so, or you're really good at shopping on ebay, you can upgrade that to 2048x1536?

Shish2k 14y ago

If tall thin windows are better, why not have a widescreen with two windows side by side?

Zak 14y ago
I don't especially want a single tall, thin window for code. 5:4 is still wider than it is tall. My usual development environment is Emacs with two panes (Emacs calls them windows for historical reasons) side by side on 4:3. My thinking is that a screen that's close to square works better for a wider range of tasks than one that's very oblong. A rotating oblong screen that could be tall or wide might work nicely for a lot of situations too, but it would be hard to implement well on a laptop.
lmm 14y ago
What I want is as many vertical pixels as possible; this is the first new screen I've seen that's got more than my 10-year-old CRT (1536). (At this point some wag is going to suggest portrait mode, but I've never seen a laptop with a portrait screen that can be used at the same time as the keyboard).
- Zak 14y ago
  Apple's 13 and 15 inch retina Macbook Pro models have 1600 and 1800, respectively.
rplnt 14y ago
Because there's no space / it would be too small. We're talking about sub-15" display here. So while wide display is great in 22"+, it sucks for everything (except movies maybe) on smaller devices.