3 ms·

>however worth noting that the average usage of tablets dramatically favors watching movies and videos over reading Word documents and PDFs. The average use al

>however worth noting that the average usage of tablets dramatically favors watching movies and videos over reading Word documents and PDFs. The average use also favors using the web over watching movies and videos, which works better in the 4:3 format.

corresation 13y ago
which works better in the 4:3 format The entire computer and laptop market has overwhelmingly endorsed 16:10 and 16:9, and most content correspondingly adapted. This notion that the web was built for 4:3, or is somehow superior on it, seemed to rise out of nowhere the moment Apple happened to announce the iPad as 4:3.
- sp332 13y ago
  The web is still mainly vertical with limited horizontal space used. This is for readability, since it's hard to keep track of very long lines. Shorter screens were chosen because they are a lot cheaper to make than squarer ones. But when Google made their aspirational $1,300 web browsing computer, the Chrome Pixel, it had a 3:2 aspect ratio because that's a much better experience.
  - corresation 13y ago
    That "cheaper to make" thing is based upon absolutely nothing whatsoever, likely as a repurposing of the somewhat factually based reason why 16:9 panels overtook 16:10 (though that's completely irrelevant in this context, given that the Nexus is 16:10). Regarding the Pixel -- a device with shockingly little deployment (and whose form was driven by a lot more than the idea screen size) -- 3:2 is 1.5:1. The iPad is 1.33:1. 16:10 is 1.6:1. Meaning the Pixel is significantly closer to the ratio of the Nexus 7 than the iPad. So what now? What does that prove? Now as to the web being "mainly vertical", the single and only place where that is true are a few spartan text blogs. Content sites are a rich cacaphony of horizontally distributed content -- Wikipedia is informational sidebars of all sorts, as an example. I find those experiences dramatically better on wider screens.
    - rayiner 13y ago
      The punchline here is, of course, that the iPad is the one with the wider screen.
    - sp332 13y ago
      A15" diagonal screen has much less area at 16:9 than at 4:3. That's why it's cheaper. Anyway, how can you say websites are more horizontal than vertical? On any kind if site, you are much more likely to have to scroll vertically to get what you want. That means increasing visible vertical space improves your experience more than adding horizontal space will. Edit: I run my web browser in the left half of my 1920x1200 screens because when I maximize them I feel like the window is much too empty. So there's room for preferences, of course. But I think most content on the web is taller than it is wide.
- baddox 13y ago
  I won't make baseless claims about "the average user," but I personally very rarely maximize a browser window on a desktop or laptop monitor. The aspect ratio of a PC monitor is, to me, much less relevant than for a tablet, because tablet displays are much smaller and most tablet platforms focus on fullscreen apps.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
- Tyrannosaurs 13y ago
  Laptops and desktops are (almost) always in landscape mode, don't have to deal with virtual keyboards occasionally taking up large parts of the screen and have subtly (and not so subtly) different use cases. I agree with the point that content providers adapt but it's not a case of what's right for one type of content, it's what's good for one type of content on a specific device type, possibly in a specific situation. (Worth noting that Apple certainly don't believe 4:3 is some universal "right" ratio - the iPhone 5 is 16:9 as are Macs, 4:3 is only the aspect ratio for the iPad)

corresation 13y ago

which works better in the 4:3 format The entire computer and laptop market has overwhelmingly endorsed 16:10 and 16:9, and most content correspondingly adapted. This notion that the web was built for 4:3, or is somehow superior on it, seemed to rise out of nowhere the moment Apple happened to announce the iPad as 4:3.

sp332 13y ago
The web is still mainly vertical with limited horizontal space used. This is for readability, since it's hard to keep track of very long lines. Shorter screens were chosen because they are a lot cheaper to make than squarer ones. But when Google made their aspirational $1,300 web browsing computer, the Chrome Pixel, it had a 3:2 aspect ratio because that's a much better experience.
- corresation 13y ago
  That "cheaper to make" thing is based upon absolutely nothing whatsoever, likely as a repurposing of the somewhat factually based reason why 16:9 panels overtook 16:10 (though that's completely irrelevant in this context, given that the Nexus is 16:10). Regarding the Pixel -- a device with shockingly little deployment (and whose form was driven by a lot more than the idea screen size) -- 3:2 is 1.5:1. The iPad is 1.33:1. 16:10 is 1.6:1. Meaning the Pixel is significantly closer to the ratio of the Nexus 7 than the iPad. So what now? What does that prove? Now as to the web being "mainly vertical", the single and only place where that is true are a few spartan text blogs. Content sites are a rich cacaphony of horizontally distributed content -- Wikipedia is informational sidebars of all sorts, as an example. I find those experiences dramatically better on wider screens.
  - rayiner 13y ago
    The punchline here is, of course, that the iPad is the one with the wider screen.
  - sp332 13y ago
    A15" diagonal screen has much less area at 16:9 than at 4:3. That's why it's cheaper. Anyway, how can you say websites are more horizontal than vertical? On any kind if site, you are much more likely to have to scroll vertically to get what you want. That means increasing visible vertical space improves your experience more than adding horizontal space will. Edit: I run my web browser in the left half of my 1920x1200 screens because when I maximize them I feel like the window is much too empty. So there's room for preferences, of course. But I think most content on the web is taller than it is wide.
baddox 13y ago
I won't make baseless claims about "the average user," but I personally very rarely maximize a browser window on a desktop or laptop monitor. The aspect ratio of a PC monitor is, to me, much less relevant than for a tablet, because tablet displays are much smaller and most tablet platforms focus on fullscreen apps.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
Tyrannosaurs 13y ago
Laptops and desktops are (almost) always in landscape mode, don't have to deal with virtual keyboards occasionally taking up large parts of the screen and have subtly (and not so subtly) different use cases. I agree with the point that content providers adapt but it's not a case of what's right for one type of content, it's what's good for one type of content on a specific device type, possibly in a specific situation. (Worth noting that Apple certainly don't believe 4:3 is some universal "right" ratio - the iPhone 5 is 16:9 as are Macs, 4:3 is only the aspect ratio for the iPad)