Most (13"-16") Asus laptops have 1366x768 screen :(

I found many Asus laptops having the same screen resolution of 1366x768 inspite of their screen size from 13"-16"

This is the most dissapointing thing I found on these models with better matching other components

Seems like they have stock of this particular resolution screen and making use of it till they clear their stock

 

It's mostly a matter of them being cheaper, especially with the smaller ones.

1366x768 at 16" is definitely disappointing, though.

 

My eyes even can't stand on my mother's 1366x768 resolution on 12". It's a pity they don't continue further their old A series. Such a perfect combination between performance/mobility/elegance.

 

The G51Jx has a 15.6" screen with Full HD! Although that's quite rare.

 

Not really - the 1366x768 screen res is not a unique offering by Asus, but is being used ubiquitously across the industry. These are high volume production screens, and thus cheapest for the OEMs to use. As the general public insists on the least expensive price possible, and in general also does not like the higher res screens with their smaller text and icons (which they can't bother with altering) the field is set, and everyone will use these in their model offerings going forward. Enthusiasts always want the highest res possible, but Asus/HP/Acer etc are businesses that need to sell lots of product and there just isn't a big enough market to justify the higher manufacturing costs across more than a limited subset of product. You just don't build something in volume that you know will only be puchased in limited quantities.

Same thing happened with the shift from 4x3 to widescreen lcd 4 years ago, the public liked them more and once the production price point got good enough everybody moved to them. Also what's currently going on with the shift from 16x10 to 16x9 screen sizes.

 

I had a 15.4in laptop that was 1680x1050 res..i loved it. Hard to find now adays though.

 

MSI are doing the same so the retardedness appears to be spreading *loud sigh* Ruins a perfectly good spec'd notebook.

 

I think 1366x768 is perfectly reasonable resolution for 13,3" screen.

 

I still think it's a perfectly reasonable resolution for a 16inch...

 

I also have a vague feeling that this kind of things (16x10, 16x9, low-res) are being pushed down our throats also due to beancounter decisions at the manufacturer's side, not just public opinion. It definitely has to do with the public going for the cheapest thing out there, but that's not necessarily the full story. Marketing has a lot to do with it, and the manufacturers can sway the public opinion in the direction they want. I'm not entirely sure all the cost savings they make are transferred to the end user, rather than to their profit margins.

Or maybe it's just my paranoia. But hey, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you! (joking, of course)

 

General public definitely prefers blocky resolutions. They don't know how to change text size, and all they look at is internet and documents etc.

It's a good thing there's still high end systems out there for us techies =D

 

42" 1080p tv is 1920 x 1080 . Most say you don't even need 1080p on anything below 50" it's hardly noticable. I agree I have a 55 and 42. The small 42 you can barely tell the diff bettween 1080p and 720p. a 16" I would think 1300 would be good. But I've never compared.

 

It all depends on your distance from the screen.

 

+1

i have two 32'' tvs, one 720p and the other 1080p...can easily tell the difference between the two at 6' away

 

1366x768 for a 13" can be justifiable, but not for 15-16"

 

Yeah like I said I haven't compared screens but I'm really into Home Theater. Seen many crop comparisons with same brand tv's. Sure some ppl may tell the difference @ 6ft away. But a small 16" vs 32" @ 6ft vs what 2ft I find it hard to believe you can tell much difference on equal quality monitors? But I guess I need to go look more carefully in person before I get my new laptop.
I just feel ppl get to hung up on resolution on such a tiny screen. I've seen them battles are large screens. Byt guess laptops may differ?

 

to me the 14-15 should have 1440x900 res options and the 15-16 should be 1680x1050 options

 

Yes for me the actual definition doesn't matter as much as having more screen real estate and not having cinder block sized icons.

I was fine with the G1s having 1680 x 1050 resolution, but 1366 x 768 is just too cramped.

 

It's a huge difference.

I've had a 17.3" laptop with 1920x1200. My desktop is the same resolution. My previous 13.3" inch notebooks were 1280x800. I had an Dell 8600 with a 15.4" with a 160x1050 resolution. I'm currently using a Sony CW with one of the few 1600x900 screens found in a 14.1" laptop (perfect resolution/portability imo).

When it comes to text, the smallest difference in screen resolution makes a big difference.

1600x900 and up you're able to use two documents (web page, excel, outlook, word) side by side. The user experience in my opinion is apples and oranges.

I will never own a laptop with less than that resolution going forward except for the Alienware M11X. That little beast is just too damn cool. I might consider a 14.1" laptop with a 1440x900 resolution if it's just packing some serious heat under the hood.

 

Seriously? And both TV's are the same manufacturer and model family (other than the LCD panel being different)? Too many variables to do a fair A:B comparison. Zenith vs. Samsung, etc.

 

I didn't thought it would care, but now owning a Samsung Q320, I must say that having poor viewing Angles and a screen that is glossy and average bright, is not something I want to go through again.

Macbook Pro has a really nice screen though, from what I have seen. Really good viewing angles!

 

Considering the most interactive unit of laptop, the display should have better quality and should have some configurable option for customers, so that eachone can choose of their own as per their taste

For me this screen resolution is the deal breaker for the best equipped Asus N61JQ-A1 in that price range and I'm forced to look for other models

 

Absolutely agree on this point. I've been browsing through tons of laptops looking for a replacement for a 3 1/2 yr old dell e1505, and I just don't find many screens out there that can display the high resolution I want without either compromising a key feature or breaking the bank to get a handful of hardware I don't really want. The 15.4" screen on that display maxes out at 1680x1050, and anything less just won't do anymore. I'm tired of seeing all these 16:9/16:10displays that have a maximum of 786/900 vertical resolution. 1366x786 may be perfectly fine for some people, for anyone actually trying to use the full extent of the screen's real estate, the actual pixels do matter alot.

The best example of this problem would be a netbook, where the bottom or top 20-50 pixels are covered by the taskbar regardless of OS, and the application's own toolbars often take up an additional 100. The netbook display probably exaggerates the problem because it affects a greater percentage of the viewing area, but the problem is essentially the same in larger displays.

 

i disagree...the lcd will be different in each model from the same manufacturer, so why does it matter if the manufacturers are different? as long as the source is the same (besides being outputted at 720p vs 1080p), a comparison can be made...and at 6', i can easily tell the difference

 

What's odd is that for most people, having a cpu that benchmarks for 2% faster (and is of absolutely ZERO discernible difference in real world use) or a gpu that is 5% faster is more important than having a top end panel. Bad viewing angles and the color saturation of steaming garbage be damned, 200 more points in 3dmark06 is more important!

 

Asus has ONLY 1 laptop with Full HD screen (1920x1080) ( ASUS G51JX-A1) within 13"-16" screen size with a price tag of $1449 usd

Means if someone wants a FHD Asus laptop within 13"-16" screen size he/she has to spend atleat $1449 usd
The concept of Full HD starts from 17" screen or above at Asus(with above 1 exception).

 

correct...adding to it also there is an application title bar, menu bar and status bar, which further reduces the actual relevant display area. I just wonder when someone will work on applications like Visual Studio with multiple toolbars of its own how he/she can work comfortably

 

Don't be trapped by low screen res!

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=465074

 

Not every laptop with low res-screen can get the high-res screen counterpart all the time. I actually had planned to get N61J with screen replaced to 1920x1080, but there is no such panel available in market AFAIK.

 

Not to mention voiding your warranty. No thanks.

 

I don't really see whats up with al those high resolution needs. I have 1280*800, but i'm forced to use 800*600 when playing cod4. The only difference I see is that the 'written things' are sharper, all the rest looks quite the same.
High resolution pushes your gpu to much anyway. And if its just for all around use, I see no use in high resolution when browsing the web, I can't read anything if the 'written things' are too small.

 

1366x768 on a 13" screen is good.

 

Higher resolution screens give you more real estate to work with on the desktop. If the res is too high for you then you can increase the font size but you can't 'make' more space on the desktop.

 

1920x1080 is fine on a 15.6" screen as long as you adjust your clear type settings and your DPI settings

only problem so far that I've seen is that clear type doesn't seem to work with x-chat

 

You will only void your warranty if you are exceptionally clumsy and really have no business tooling around inside a computer in the first place.

If you've ever built a computer, have a delicate touch, a clean workspace, and patience to do modifications correctly, this is as easy as swapping your ram or a processor.

Otherwise, there are no warranty stickers or other alerts for Asus to check in the event it ever needs to be sent back. IF it does need to be sent back for some other reason, its best to keep your old screen to swap it back out in the event they will entirely replace your computer. You don't want to lose a $150-200 screen.

 

Oh !

I think this is the biggest difference between us. I need a good/reliable laptop for work NOT for gaming (I never game in my computer), but you need a laptop for gaming. May be for gaming lower resolution is good (which I do not know) but when you will work applications like visual studio you will have very less visible coding window

BTW, Found another optional full HD 15.6" laptop from Asus N63JN.
i5/i3, optional FHD 15.6", optional usb 3.0, nVidia GT 335M 1GB,

Dear, first of all I can not do the transplant jobs of my own. even though you do it you will void the warranty.

 

This ^

While I do enjoy gaming everywhere I go, in the end, I'll go back to some programming where more screen resolution = less headache clicking/switching windows in visual studio/more area to read the long code on

Got link?
Nvm... Saw it now on Mar/Apr ASUS world magazine thread

 

Yes...Now computers/laptops are not mainly designed for programming/coding/work rather they are designed for wide screen HD movie watching More wide screen does not give much benefit while you are on work (I use 80 character code line length), rather there should be more vertical height to see more code/work area.

Yes..I was referring to that magazine only