MobileRead Forums - View Single Post - 4:3 vs 16:9 aspect ratio

astra · 02-14-2011, 10:17 AM

Voted for "other".

For ebook readers 4:3 only. I feel comfortable to read on a screen with this aspect ration only. Probably 30 years of reading printed books left a long lasting vestige.

For watching TV - wide screen, whatever ratio it is.

For desktop PC monitor at home - wide screen 1920x1200 pixels. Anything with hight below 1200 won't suit. I want to see pictures in portrait mode in decent size. Thus, if it is not 1920x1200, then 4:3 (1600x1200)
Any other PC/laptop/netbook screens - wide screen whatever ratio it is.

I have noticed that I will never buy another netbook or a laptop with 10" screen (my netbook). Very uncomfortable. I don't need glasses to read on it, it is just flippingly small - unpleasant.
12" is probably the bare minimum. Most likely 13-14.

02-14-2011, 10:17 AM	#48
astra The Introvert Posts: 8,307 Karma: 1000077497 Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: United Kingdom Device: Sony Reader PRS-650 & 505 & 500	Voted for "other". For ebook readers 4:3 only. I feel comfortable to read on a screen with this aspect ration only. Probably 30 years of reading printed books left a long lasting vestige. For watching TV - wide screen, whatever ratio it is. For desktop PC monitor at home - wide screen 1920x1200 pixels. Anything with hight below 1200 won't suit. I want to see pictures in portrait mode in decent size. Thus, if it is not 1920x1200, then 4:3 (1600x1200) Any other PC/laptop/netbook screens - wide screen whatever ratio it is. I have noticed that I will never buy another netbook or a laptop with 10" screen (my netbook). Very uncomfortable. I don't need glasses to read on it, it is just flippingly small - unpleasant. 12" is probably the bare minimum. Most likely 13-14.