Quote:
Originally Posted by kjk
... Well sure, everything is subjective in the end. But do you doubt for a minute that Motorola and Samsung optimized for HD video by going with 16x9, while the Kindle and Nook optimized for reading by going with 4:3 (or 3:4)? Whereas the color Nook purposely went to 16x9 to differentiate it from being a pure reading device? And Apple focused more on the portrait aspect of browsing/reading as well for the iPad, hence its 4:3 ratio?...
|
For the love of Christ, can people quit arguing about the stupids things. 16:9 vs 4:3, LCD vs eInk, ePUB vs MOBI, Jean-Luc Pickard vs James T. Kirk.
What kills me is people site their personal experience as a good source for fact. Or reference some obscure post. Really who cares?
And as for anybody claiming that 4:3 is better than 16:9 they need to get their head/eyes examined. How does 4:3 enahcne the readig of re-flowable text... Really? Unless somebody is reading/viewing fixed formats like PDF and movies screen ratio makes no difference.
The only reason why I prefer a 7" 16:9 screen is because it fits in my back pocket, and a 4:3 would not. Else there is no difference, I've enjoyed my 4:3 ratio kindle and SONY just as much as my 16:9 nookCOLOR.
<Rant off>
@kjk, this rant is not directed at you but rather all of the 4:3 vs 16:9 arguments, I just chose your post since it's the most recent.
=X=