Probably ridiculous, but.....
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| Ridcully Mar 06, 2013 6:25 AM EDT |
As soon as I saw the Chromebook Pixel, I realised why I keep my present HP laptop instead of migrating to a very much better Toshiba Satellite which just sits on a desk nearby......It's the screen. My HP has a conventional 3:2 (1270 x 800 pixels) screen and I love it...The Chromebook has the same overall dimensions, if much superior resolution...The Toshiba has the wide screen format, and it just is NOT (in my humble opinion) as good as the 3:2 screen. I wonder if any other LXer's feel the same ? Oh sure, the Chromebook Pixel has far, far superior resolution, but the 3:2 format just "feels" right in my opinion even though my old HP is so outranked. I think I will stay where I am. |
| CFWhitman Mar 06, 2013 1:52 PM EDT |
I do rather like the 16:10 ratio of my current laptop (1920x1200). It's rather strange really that I certainly find the wider screen ratios better than the old 4:3 ratio, but I also very definitely prefer 16:10 to 16:9, when that would not seem to be a great difference, and is closer to the old ratio that I don't like. I guess that there is a definite sweet spot for the ratio that shouldn't be departed from very much in either direction (and perhaps not everyone agrees on what it is). (Incidentally, I suspect that your screen is 1280x800, which is a perfect 16:10 ratio, rather than 1270x800, but perhaps that was just a typo.) |
| BernardSwiss Mar 06, 2013 2:06 PM EDT |
@CFWhitman: Beat me to it. It's kind of odd, but somehow 16:10 works very well, and yet 16:9 is pretty awful. An example of "too much of a good thing, I guess... |
| Ridcully Mar 06, 2013 4:11 PM EDT |
@CFWhitman.....sigh......You are absolutely correct; a typo and mine is 1280 x 800 (ruddy fingers - never do what you want). I realise of course, that it isn't exactly 3 : 2, but it's near enough to give the comfortable dimensions I like. Interesting to see that at least two other people have the same sort of preference for working in a particular screen dimension. "Eye of the user" I guess. |
| caitlyn Mar 06, 2013 5:41 PM EDT |
I like wide screen for certain applications (i.e.: HD video) but the old conventional dimensions for a lot of non-multimedia apps. I agree that it's in the "eye of the user". |
| tracyanne Mar 06, 2013 5:43 PM EDT |
@tony, yes I feel pretty much the same, my main laptop has the 3:2 format (it's 1920x1200), although I do have a an external monitor situated above it which has a resolution of 1920x1080 (1.7:1), but yes I prefer the 3:2 format. However if I really had my choice, I'd go for a large 1.7:1 or even the current 1.8:1 and turn it on it's side so that the screen high rather than wide, and save on scrolling when reading or coding. |
| Ridcully Mar 06, 2013 6:16 PM EDT |
@tracyanne and caitlyn, indeed....and you have both just reminded me of something I saw late last year in a recycling government computer store in East Brisbane. (I add the quality of the machines is excellent.) They were a specially designed laptop with a screen size that equalled a 16 or 17 inch monitor and I just about drooled over them.......I understand that the idea was precisely that: to give a normal monitor size on a laptop and they were supplied almost only to government offices....or at least that is the information I was given. I'd still like one....... |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!