Rant: display resolutions available

Laptop manufacturers do realize there is such a thing as WSXGA+, right? Why do so many offer WXGA+ and WUXGA but nothing in between?? WUXGA is just a little too high for my tastes, and WXGA+ feels too cramped. I think 1680x1050 really is the most functional resolution for the larger notebook displays. It's funny how I can get it on a 15" ThinkPad, but the only thing Lenovo offers below WUXGA on a 17" is WXGA+. I'm just as surprised I don't see it on many other notebooks with 17" displays. It's a great resolution for that size screen.

/grumble

 

HP 8730w or 8710p might float your boat.

 

I am not talking about the Samsung vs LG debate (for ThinkPads), I think it may have something to do with supplies. Not a lot of "consumer" grade laptop buyers seem to demand it. The higher res stuff, in OEMs' theory of their buyers, is used by professionals in many capacities, gamers, and other power users. So their use of the parts is less than it could be, so they order less, so LCD manufacturers make less. I know when I looked for a laptop summer 2005, there were not a lot of laptops with WSXGA+.

 

Yeah, I checked out the Elite Books. Not bad, but dude, I want a Dell! (or Lenovo, for that matter)

 

If the HP has what want, why look elsewhere?

 

Dell's got a bunch of WSXGA+ displays. I don't get the complaint...

 

its simple, those displays cost more!

 

One of the flaws of LCDs... Remember back when we had CRTs and could actually change the display resolution without suffering any loss of quality?

 

Granted, just not on the models I'm interested in, particularly the M6400. I need a workstation-class machine, so I'll admit my options are a bit limited. It just seems like no machine I find that comes close to being "perfect" for me offers WSXGA+. It's just frustrating, and yes, just a matter of personal preference.

 

1680x1050 costs more to make than 1920x1200?

 

I feel you. When I looked for a standard 15.4" with a 1680x1050 screen I found very few offers (compared to the market as a whole). I picked the Asus L50Vn, but had to return it due to some high-pitched noise issues. other than that a good notebook.

 

Back when I was looking at the 15.4" Asus G series laptops, the only resolution I was considering was 1680x1050, and that's what I ended up getting with the ThinkPad T500. I bought a used ThinkPad T43 last month and had it for all of two days before returning it due to a dead pixel and a permanent pressure mark on the screen, but it was the widely renowned 15" IPS SXGA+ that I thought was perfect for the laptop's dimensions. In the 15" size range, 1050 lines should be the standard if you ask me. The reason why it isn't is the same reason that we probably all know at least three older relatives who run their 1280x1024 LCD at 1024x768 because it looks "bigger" that way.

 

Buy the 1920x1200 and just change the resolution to 1680x1050. You won't notice the difference unless you game.

 

rapion125: I agree...

 

Sorry, but that's incorrect. There is no current Dell laptop/notebook, consumer or business, that offers a WSXGA+ display. They phased out WSXGA+ in favor of WUXGA.

 

Gaming is where I would notice it least, actually (poor man's AA ). Fuzzy fonts and window borders are the worst, IMO.

 

WSXGA+ is headed for extinction, I'm afraid. You make a very valid point- the jump from 1440x900 to 1920x1200 on a 15.4" or 17" leaves a rather large gap in between.

HP offers more models with WSXGA+ than anyone else, to my knowledge. The Pavilion dv5t, dv5z, dv7t and dv7z all have it as an option.
HP Businiess- WSXGA+ is available on all EliteBook models, available on several 15.4" and 17" HP Compaq models

Other notebooks with WSXGA+ are-

Lenovo ThinkPad SL500, R500, T500 and W500 (all 15.4" ThinkPads)
ASUS G50VT-A1, A2 and X6 (15.4")
ASUS N50Vn-C2S (15.4")
Toshiba Tecra A10-S3501, also available on A10-configurable (15.4")
Toshiba Qosmio X305-Q706- (17")
MSI GT725-074 and GT735-024US (17")
Sager NP5797 and NP9262 (17")
Sager NP2096, NP7680 and NP8660 (15.4")

 

I'd rather use a native WXGA than a non-native WSXGA+... and I am 100% pro high DPI. Too bad there are no WQXGA notebook displays, would fit 18.4" definately

 

Clevo includes WSXGA+ on all of it's current mid to high range models, but few manufacturers do.

Imagine if 16:9 takes over; then we'll be choosing between 1366x768 and 1920x1080. Dell has already gone there with the XPS 16, and I fear more will follow. No 1600x900? Why the hell not?

 

it costs more because they are low volume. the price difference between 1920x1200 and that res is too little.

makes more sense to segment the market into 1440x900 and 1920x1200

 

Sony offers 1600x900 screens

 

Which is great, unless you don't like glossy displays. Funny thing is they offer WUXGA in matte, but not WSXGA+.

I think it's a shame that display size is being standardized around movie display formats.

 

That's the problem. It only makes more sense from the manufacturers' point of view. All the customer gets out of the deal are fewer options.

 

Agreed! Give me 16:10 or a "wide-enough" 4:3...

 

Well, I always preferred higher resolutions, so I have no regrets over the matter. If the fonts or icons look too small you can always make them larger, so I don't see what the problem is.

 

I'd prefer my GUI elements to not look jacked up. Screen DPI and icon scaling don't work as predictably as you think they do, and modifying them tends to have a side effect on other elements that you didn't want changed.

None of this should be surprising though. The 1050 height was never that popular or certified by some organization that approves screen standards, but 1680x1050 became more prevalent when there was no proper widescreen version of the illogical but popular 5:4 1280x1024. It was easier to breed a widescreen resolution from 1400x1050 than to figure out what to do with 1280x1024.