WHY?
I mean what are the two activities you do most on computers? Internet and word processing. Both of which need a portrait screen.
I've been using the funny "tall" screens in the basement today which appear to be deigned for 1280x1024 and they're so much better for the net than my laptop which is on 1280x800.
TV's are different than computers. Computers shouldn't be widescreen.
Widescreen laptops
16:10 according to powerpoint.
but that's stupid. how often are DVDs watched on laptops compared to other activities? Unless you put all the controls down the side of programs it doesn't work very well with this shape of viewport.
but that's stupid. how often are DVDs watched on laptops compared to other activities? Unless you put all the controls down the side of programs it doesn't work very well with this shape of viewport.
"He has to be larger than bacon"
Nodnirg is quite right, you'll find most Media Center laptops are widescreen.
What irritates me is bad web sites that are designed to a fixed resolution (usually 800 x 600), when they quite easily could be "stretchable" to fill the screen of bigger resolutions. The BBC site is a notorious example of this, and it means you have to scroll down just as much when on a higher resolution. The reason sites do it is just laziness, it's marginally harder to design dynamically resizing templates (using %ages rather than fixed values).
What irritates me is bad web sites that are designed to a fixed resolution (usually 800 x 600), when they quite easily could be "stretchable" to fill the screen of bigger resolutions. The BBC site is a notorious example of this, and it means you have to scroll down just as much when on a higher resolution. The reason sites do it is just laziness, it's marginally harder to design dynamically resizing templates (using %ages rather than fixed values).
yes but you're rubbish. nobody would design a laptop for you.bee bee see wrote:Well quite often here, seeing as I don't have a TV and I do have plenty of DVDs. There's not really much point in getting one right now. I'm waiting until next year.
"He has to be larger than bacon"
Well, the one I'm using right now is perfect for me. I just don't need a TV, because I can get news online now (I've given up The Daily Mail) and clips on YouTube, plus DVDs of course.
Sorry if I've missed the point, I've had some pretty bad news today and it's on my mind.
Sorry if I've missed the point, I've had some pretty bad news today and it's on my mind.
Indeed, one of the most useful features of some 4:3 LCD screens is the facility to rotate them through 90 degrees to provide a 'tallscreen' display which allows you to view a whole A4 page in real size. Early dedicated computer displays were usually portrait-oriented. It was only the home computers using domestic TVs for display that cemented the landscape style screen; it might be what we're used to but for most everyday applications (unless you're into graphic design anyway) a portrait screen actually makes more sense.mean what are the two activities you do most on computers? Internet and word processing. Both of which need a portrait screen.
Interesting isn't it? Early plugs for widescreen TVs stated that you could watch movies 'the way they were meant to be seen' - so we then standardised on a widescreen format which no maintstream films are produced in. Then we move to widescreen computer displays so that you can 'enjoy' the benefits of widescreen TV on a computer - yet we produce them in a different aspect ratio to TVs.The idea, as I understand it, is for them to be good for widescreen DVD and TV viewing on the move. In which event it would make sense for them to be 16:9 rather than 15:9/16:10 or whatever the exact ratio is that all widescreen laptops seem to be!
There will always be someone who does genuinely benefit from a wider display, but in general, I'd agree with you. But then I'd argue that TVs shouldn't be widescreen either, although that's a whole other rant.TV's are different than computers. Computers shouldn't be widescreen.