Irritation ? Asus, Newegg and 1366x768 native resolution

Just a quick one... I cannot for the life of me work out why Asus and many other manufactures have gone to screen with 1366x768 resolutions. Apart form the 720p standard…why why why… I live on my Asus M50sa with 1680x1050…

Someone enlighten me?

 

$ $ $ $ $ $

 

Echoing that. There are 11" netbooks out there with 1366x768. Who the hell is going to pay $$$ for a 15" or 16" notebook that only has 1366x768? When you pay for a bigger screen, you expect to get more space to work with. This totally sucks.

 

A lower native resolution is sometimes more desirable than a higher native resolution screen; this is often the case for gamers. Playing games in native resolution will always "look" better.

However, the primary reason why Asus and other laptop manufactures are opting for a lower 16:9 resolution is due to the cost.

 

And I thought my first response of "$ $ $ $ $ $ $" was sufficient to get the point across

 

I guess it's to keep costs down. i can't really think of any other reason.

 

Yes, it was sufficient. I was simply reinforcing your statement

 

I'm still not enlightened... (Or like the argument of price)

I cannot find a good sweet spot! Resolution, performance, design! At Newegg I either have an M60J with crap resolution and bluray or G51J with good resolution and crap design with only 50 in it!

The price argument I can see however... Come-on! I'll pay for higher res, I'm sure many would! Or at least I model without the bluray and high res on the M60J.

 

I don't understand what you're trying to say... if you're willing to pay for the high resolution screen etc, Alienware and others will gladly take your money.

 

I'd rather not spend my time squinting at a 15" screen running a high resolution that also hobbles game performance.

 

I have to say, im not complaining, I got my ASUS G50VT-X5 with a 1366x768 Res and it looked tons better then the WD 24" 1920x1200 Res Screen i was using for my Desktop.

Also for laptops, i mean Why have such a Huge resolution?

1) Your making the laptop bigger, therefore heavier
2) Like all the others said, Cost. Lower Res keeps money down therefor cheaper laptops
3) To power such high-resolutions properly, you're going to need higher end Mobile graphics cards, Which means
A) Even more cost
B) more heat, less battery life.
4) Keeping it lower resolution as one pointed out keeps it from a "Stretching" also allows me, who owns a 9800m GS basic GFX, to plays Company of Heroes, BF 2, WiC all in high/medium details at good frames, without having to "re-size" and lose some quality.


In the end would i like a better screen? Yeah i would love it, but the benefit doesn't justify the means for a laptop. i don't think it truly belongs there the point of a laptop is to be.. a Laptop!? meaning, Mobile, all-in-one, easy to pick-up and go and last for a hours... Not a 15 pound weight, with a huge resolutions that i can play all my games on High details with its powerful Mobile GFX card and get 30mins of battery life.

 

WoW, you all assume that everyone is a gamer! Maybe I'm showing my age but we all aren't. I am sure there are some here too who either just use their game consoles or dedicated gaming machines. I have a U81a with 14" 1366x768 but would have loved a higher quality 1600x900. This would have kept icon and text the size the same as an 11.6" netbook which I am totally comfortable with.

Would I have shelled out an additional $100 for it, without a doubt. Am I the common customer though, probably not. It would have been nice though for a special edition limited release...........

 

running higher desktop res hardly takes a noticeable toll on battery life or graphic card performance. I had a 15.4 inch asus g1 with a 1680x1050 screen which is very close to full hd, and I will tell you, it looks MUCH better than my 1440x900 17 inch g71 screen. Things may be small, but that helps a lot when using the notebook for more than just gaming.

tldr: higher screen resolution is better regardless if its on a laptop screen or not, outside of wanting better frames in a game at native res.

 

Probably because most of the reasonably priced laptops running 1366x768 in the Asus lines found at BB and NE are all gaming laptops?

Similar priced and specced laptops that aren't from the gaming lines usually have craptacular GPUs and higher res screens.

 

The reason I purchased from BB is the cheaper non-GPU version other than refurb at the time was only available from them. NewEgg is not BB and is the OP here. Same from Asus though all over thier lines, unless you know of different Asus U or UL or K or N or even G series out there I am not familiar with?

I am fine with just a "Craptacular GPU" if you hadn't already noticed...........

Edit; the 15.6 1920x1080 they do have may be the exception. On that note I'd bet there would be a market for the UL50VT with that screen........

 

Resolution is like the "Ghz" or "Megapixels" to the uninformed consumer. Higher does not uniformly mean "better". The 15.6 1080p you are referring is the truly "craptacular" screen. There dozens of screens with lower resolution that are far superior.

 

Guess you haven't seen the poor quality of the 14" in the U80 and UL80 series as I have. just about anything is an improvement. The viewing angles suck to say the lease but at least there is a sweet spot, abeit narrow. That sweet spot makes this usable but definately nothing to write home about.

I think it funny their ad for the UL has three people sitting in the back seat of a car vieing the UL (the couple and the guard) inferring a great viewing angle, what a crock of SH**............

 

I have no doubt... I had a 14" Asus A8jp a few years ago... it had either a CMO or AUO (Chi-mei or AU Optronics) and it was a pure spectacle of steaming shat (there was no sweet spot at all).

 

Mine is the AUO203C. Not suer if it is the same with the UL80vt's..........

 

I agree with all the other points listed, but this one makes no sense to me. How does increasing the resolution make the laptop bigger? A 15.6" 1920x1080 vs. 15.6" 1366 x 768 (Or whatever it is at that size) is still 15.6". It's not any bigger, and I doubt those extra pixels weigh enough to make it that much heavier.

 

Buy a 42"+ 1080p tv and you will be satisfied.
Shell out the extra cash, playa!

 

Im just saying the Pro's to having a smaller screen, if you want a bigger screen because you watch movies etc.. well then you got to pay more to have it.

No, but a 16" or a 17" screen as seen with most higher resolution monitors usually does.

The only point i really agree with on this, is what gateway did to there 7800FX line-up where some people were getting the 1080P Screen and others reported getting the 1440x900 screen.. Both people bought the laptop for the same amount of money, i though that was quite messed up.

 

That is what I'm saying, I'll pay the extra to have it. Thing is I can't pay the extra to have it if they don't offer it, meaning a small high res screen and not a big screen...............

 

For starters I'm sorry for the little contribution on my part, I've been traveling to England!

Secondly my story goes a little deeper; I have an m50sa-ak023c. It went back for repair and it came back with a 1440x900, and should have been 1680x1050. Yes that's right it was repaired just before I left for England, so I'm a little screwed and upset for many reasons, but that's a different story.

I disagree... disagree so much I'm going to say "sort-of"! Like I mentioned Asus royally messed up and replaced my screen with a much lower res... This has made no noticeable difference to my battery-life (maybe 5 min) running only Windows (Vista). The screen has made no difference to the weight of my hefty M50! And last but no means least, the graphics chips and cooling don't usually differ on laptops if you want power (model specific). Therefore you usually have a lower res screen with the same powerhouse that drives the higher res screen. I’d go to the point it really depends what you want as a consumer! For me its desktop real-estate that is more productive, with power!

I do understand the cost that most people have mentioned. The gaming is a good point, I still disagree, but a good point… I gladly reduce my resolution on games to get more FPS and see little difference in quality. But I don’t game much these days and this can spark the age old argument, you want games, buy a desktop! I’m sure that’s where you were going and do partially agree, but my requirements are power with mobility… not excellent mobility and trust me, my back muscles are nicely exercised, but think kind of desktop replacement.

I’m sure you’re happy with your G50 and don’t let me take anything away from you but the low res isn’t for me! Let me try and explain why. High powered laptop as yours is should have desktop real-estate and something to use with that power… A low-res screen doesn’t give the productivity, enjoyment and pure spectacle that a powerful laptop deserves. That's IMO... I don't quite understand the low-res argument for this reason, cost isn't one of them for powerful expensive laptops.

 

I completely agree…

 

maybe go to ebay and hunt for some screens the DIY ? ...