The Notebook Review forums were hosted by TechTarget, who shut down them down on January 31, 2022. This static read-only archive was pulled by NBR forum users between January 20 and January 31, 2022, in an effort to make sure that the valuable technical information that had been posted on the forums is preserved. For current discussions, many NBR forum users moved over to NotebookTalk.net after the shutdown.
Problems? See this thread at archive.org.

    16:9 Whining

    Discussion in 'Hardware Components and Aftermarket Upgrades' started by Jayayess1190, Mar 14, 2011.

  1. Jayayess1190

    Jayayess1190 Waiting on Intel Cannonlake

    Reputations:
    4,009
    Messages:
    6,712
    Likes Received:
    54
    Trophy Points:
    216
    Please stop! Not everyone hates 16:9 and it is getting a little annoying seeing so much whining about the move to it.
     
    Jayayess1190, Mar 14, 2011
    #1
  2. Ayle

    Ayle Trailblazer

    Reputations:
    877
    Messages:
    3,707
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    106
    There is one thread about it. You creating another thread to voice your discontent kinda defeats the purpose of your rant don't you think?
     
    Ayle, Mar 14, 2011
    #2
  3. Agent 9

    Agent 9 Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    565
    Messages:
    205
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    Just curious, what do you like about 16:9 screens? we've all heard the cons to a 16:9 screen, but what are the pros, in your opinion?
     
    Agent 9, Mar 14, 2011
    #3
  4. Achusaysblessyou

    Achusaysblessyou eecs geek ftw :D

    Reputations:
    334
    Messages:
    1,809
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    56
    I'd rather 1600x900 than 1440x900 :p. (although some manufacturers should give us 1600x1000 as opposed to 1440x900)
     
    Achusaysblessyou, Mar 14, 2011
    #4
  5. HTWingNut

    HTWingNut Potato

    Reputations:
    21,580
    Messages:
    35,370
    Likes Received:
    9,877
    Trophy Points:
    931
    I'd rather have 1680x1050 than 1600x900.

    They basically went from four common sizes to three:

    1280x800 --> 1366x768
    1440x900 --> 1600x900
    1680x1050 --> 1600x900
    1920x1200 --> 1920x1080

    For me, 1600x900 isn't so bad, my biggest gripe is the quality of the LCD's have gone downhill and rarely have the option for larger pixel size screens. Most come with 1366x768.
     
    HTWingNut, Mar 14, 2011
    #5
  6. Jayayess1190

    Jayayess1190 Waiting on Intel Cannonlake

    Reputations:
    4,009
    Messages:
    6,712
    Likes Received:
    54
    Trophy Points:
    216
    There is whining in multiple threads on this forum besides the big thread in this section. Whenever a new laptop is announced, for example the recent announcements of Sandy Bridge business machines like Latitudes and Thinkpads people have issues with the change to 16:9 and go on and on about it in threads.

    I don't really care whether it's 16:10 or 16:9, but the pro for me of 16:9 is the slightly smaller machine (Sony Vaio Z at 13.1" vs the SZ at 13.3"). I mean, I like 14.1" machines with 1440x900 screens, a great resolution, and if the new Lenovo X220 had a 16:10 screen still with 1280x800 I would still want it.
     
    Jayayess1190, Mar 14, 2011
    #6
  7. Tsunade_Hime

    Tsunade_Hime such bacon. wow

    Reputations:
    5,413
    Messages:
    10,711
    Likes Received:
    1,204
    Trophy Points:
    581
    Because cheaper isn't always better. There's no doubt the reason why 16:9 is exploding is because people want cheaper laptops and faster. Sure we got it, but the downside is that the quality went down a toilet. Of course the average person doesn't care about the amount of pixels. 1368x768 on 16" is absolutely disgusting and unacceptable.

    Now 1368x768 is okay on sub 14" laptops. My L13 has 1368x768 but it's 13.3" laptop. Also my L13 is a multimedia notebook, not a serious notebook. I absolutely refuse to buy 1368x768 on a 14" and larger, I would pay for at least 1600x900 or stick with an older laptop.
     
    Tsunade_Hime, Mar 14, 2011
    #7
  8. Charles P. Jefferies

    Charles P. Jefferies Lead Moderator Super Moderator

    Reputations:
    22,339
    Messages:
    36,639
    Likes Received:
    5,076
    Trophy Points:
    931
    This has turned into another 16:9 vs. other aspect ratios debate.

    Based on that alone, I'm ready to close the thread. You must have expected this to happen . . . ?
     
    Charles P. Jefferies, Mar 14, 2011
    #8
  9. Jayayess1190

    Jayayess1190 Waiting on Intel Cannonlake

    Reputations:
    4,009
    Messages:
    6,712
    Likes Received:
    54
    Trophy Points:
    216
    No, I just wanted people to know I was tired of seeing people saying "boo 16:9" everytime a new laptop is announced. How am I supposed to know people would start arguing about 16:10 vs 16:9, that is not what I created this thread for.
     
    Jayayess1190, Mar 14, 2011
    #9
  10. Thaenatos

    Thaenatos Zero Cool

    Reputations:
    1,581
    Messages:
    5,346
    Likes Received:
    126
    Trophy Points:
    231
    1440x900 is NOT the equivalent to 1600x900. 16:10 is greater in size and resolution then 16:9. 1600x900 is the new 1680x1050.

    The only thing that 16:9 has over 16:10 is you can get higher resolutions in smaller platforms (e.g. sony vaio z). Other then that its a loss of 10% or more pixels.
     
    Thaenatos, Mar 14, 2011
    #10
  11. Charles P. Jefferies

    Charles P. Jefferies Lead Moderator Super Moderator

    Reputations:
    22,339
    Messages:
    36,639
    Likes Received:
    5,076
    Trophy Points:
    931
    Noted. Use the report post function anytime you see it derail a thread.

    That said, you're the only one staying on the original topic here . . . I am respectfully closing this thread. Any other issues, PM me.
     
    Charles P. Jefferies, Mar 15, 2011
    #11