Quote:
Originally Posted by darrakk
This doesn't make a whole lot of sense. I mean personal preference you are certainly entitled to... Movies and TV are mostly 16:9 or 16:10. Looking at it from the standpoint of a reader, your standard paperback novel has an aspect ratio of about 10:16 (portrait). The last product I have owned that had a 4:3 aspect ratio was almost 7 or more years ago when I owned my last analogue TV set.
I understand that you prefer a 4:3 device and again, you are certainly entitled to your opinion. However virtually every type of media these days is based on a 16:10 or 16:9 display.
|
Your difference with me is I do not want or need any device designed to deliver media content. I in my entire career in IT I have only tried a few computer games, I find game consoles uninteresting. I would rather go play golf, go fishing, take a hike, shoot some photos basically something physical rather than use the device I spend most of my day on as a source of recreation.
So that might be why I know my preference. my current laptops are all 17" displays measuring about 14-1/2" by 9" give or take to fit a diagonal of 17". This is thus a 16:10 device. And it's FINE because I have that good 9" of height at a resolution of 1680x1050. But when you begin decreasing to a ~10" diagonal then you run the numbers and all those devices are good for is video then if you encounter content not specifically setup for wide screen it's small, squashed and/or stretched.
I want a general use device not a media consumption device because, quite honestly I am not obsessed with the idea of entertainment needing to be with me 27/7/365. And to me whatever I get on a standard use device is just fine in terms of how any sort of media appears. One thing I KNOW is on a 4:3 device my books will look just fine and the fact these new devices are far taller than we are used to for portrait reading it's distracting for a lot of people.
Also, business users are the target of companies such as HP as well as Asus for the large format devices. And those folks will need to be able to run existing and legacy apps with them looking close to "normal" for productivity.
Maybe in 20yrs, long after I croak, things will be different and people will have all ocular implants or whatever and giggle over today's primitive "screens, how quaint"
In general that is my rational for a more standard screen. Basically a widescreen device has less screen real estate than a screen closer to 4:3 unless the screen gets to 17" or larger. I can't even use a 15.4" 16:10 laptop because it is vastly less useful than my old Dell Inspiron 5000's 15.4" 4:3 screen.