The 4:3/Matte Revolution begins tonight

I didn't know where else to post this, so "Hardware Components" seemed as good as anywhere:

This glossy/widescreen display nonsense has got to stop. We just bought my wife a new Dell (see sig), which thank God was available without a glossy screen, but it's incredibly hard to find a 4:3-aspect notebook anymore. When all the T61s currently available are wide, you know it has gone too far.

The math is simple... a 14-inch, 4:3-aspect screen gives you about 94 sq.in. of area. A 14-inch, 16:9-aspect gives you less than 84. You're giving up 10 sq.in. with the widescreen! What a ripoff!

The glossy thing, I'm not even going to make the argument. You want it, fine. All I'm saying is, this has gone too far, and consumers need to vote with their wallets.

Join the revolution! Educate your friends! Comb your hair in a mirror, not in your laptop screen!

Chris

 

All I have to see is I agree with your screen real estate argument. But humans naturally view objects on a horizontal plane so it is just a natural step to correct what probably should have been the original design years ago. I love the widescreen aspect for games, movies...etc

Sure you lose 10 sq/in, but your eyes will thank you for it!

 

I think they already have voted with their wallets... LOL... They're taking the standard 4:3 off the market because everyone wants the widescreens now. It's just the market giving the consumers what they want.. and right now a majority of consumers want the widescreen notebooks.

 

What you say is correct. But my 16:9 15.4 is the same hieght as your 4:3 14 with extra on the side so I like. They should offer more choice of both matte and glossy as they both have strengths and weaknesses.

You did not mention resolution which matters more for realestate than the physical size.

 

Blame the screen manufacturers for forcing widescreen down consumers' throats.

 

Very interesting ergonomical point, EB, never thought about that. On another note, I wonder what offering MORE screens would have done to the Dell delay fiasco going on... I think I'm ok with only a couple of options.

 

I don't so much care if it's wide or standard, I just don't want a manufacturer to sacrifice resolution in favor of wide screen, and then try to tell me how much better it is. I completely agree with you on gloss coatings, though.

 

Ummm, ever think of just getting a larger screen?

 

I think once you start going under 13 inch is where it starts making more sense to have a 4:3 screen. Screens that small are way to flat to be comfortable in widescreen.

As for bigger notebooks with widescreen thats fine, they are big enough and the extra horizontal room does make things feel more natural. Standard screens do require less scrolling when looking at web pages but the extra screen space on the sides can be more useful then the vertical space. I do agree that its lame that they give you less screen overall compared to 4:3 though, they should do something about that.

Another draw back sometimes is fitting a flush 6 cell battery into a notebook with a 14.1 widescreen. It seems like its tough to do on some brands, more notably the 14.1 T61 when you compare 4:3 to 16:9 versions. A 6 cell has to be expanded on the 14" T61 where the 4:3 has one thats flush, making the widescreen version look pretty chunky. Other brands with 14.1" screens and 6 cell batteries aren't to exactly slim either.

 

On your first point the resolution is the only thing that affects scrolling. My 1280X800 is comparable to a 1024X768 4:3, I actually have a little more verticle, less scrolling. Now with a resolution it does not matter if a 2” screen or 20' screen it will show the same stuff on screen just so much difference in size.

On your second point “do something about it” do what? You can't, it is what it is, a 16:9 ratio. The truth is people need to learn and understand that a 15.4 wide screen is not a 15 4:3 but wider it is the same as 14 4:3 but wider. A 17 wide screen is closer to a 15 4:3 but wider, than a 17 4:3 and so on and so on.

 

Both my laptops are 4:3 right now. Given the choice I'd prefer the Toshiba (conducting general tasks) to be widescreen, probably WXGA because you get higher resolution and more desktop space, and browsing especially seems to work better scale wise with WXGA than my current XGA.

As for gaming, I've recently had the pleasure of using a Zepto 6625WD which has a 15.4" glossy widescreen. Honestly the brightness, colours and clarity absoluely destroy even the best matte screens I have seen. Even on SXGA+ the words on a browser/desktop on my Mitac can be hard to read, but not so on the Zepto at WSXGA+, namely higher res on a slightly smaller screen.

If matte screens had the colour quality, contrast and clarity of today's best glossy screens I'd agree, but they just don't, or very few do. Widescreen fits much better with our peripheral vision and I have found it to be much more absorbing in games. My only issue is flight simulator, the aircraft instrument panels for which wouldn't work properly on widescreen (stretched).

I think the next pcs I get will be widescreen. Glossy, we'll see, but probably.

 

I did a little test a while back, tilting my head 90 degrees and closing one eye, and came to the conclusion that you do have more peripheral vision to the left and right (horizontal). Widescreens just make sense, lcd makers save some dough by using less pixels and we get a more comfortable screen.

I'll admit that my gloss screen is impossible to use outside in full sunlight, even at full brightness. But for technologically challenged lcds, TN panels, gloss screens seem to bring out the colors making images more vivid especially while using lower brightness to save battery power. Another way for lcd makers to save money I assume.

In the end, I think the average computer user prefers the most cost effective method. It seems that glossy widescreens are cheaper for the manufacturers to produce and have a wide appeal. So in a way, we already decided a long time ago. =)

 

I love widescreen and I think standard is terrible.

GO WIDESCREEN!

 

This comment “we have more peripheral vision” is kinda of a no brainer as our eyes are next to each other not on top. The comment about less pixels is incorrect except that maybe they are trying to trick us into buying lower resolution screens but that is a whole different story.

 

I would consider a desktop widescreen in a 21-24-inch size, because then I could fit two pages of text side by side. But looking at a 14-inch widescreen, I feel like I'm looking out the slit of an armored vehicle or something.

As for getting a larger screen on a laptop, to me that defeats the purpose of a laptop. I'm not real excited about carrying around a 7-pounder.

If things stay the way they are, my next laptop is likely to be an X60.

Chris

 

What's the use of "colour quality, contrast and clarity" when all you can see is your own reflection?

Chris

 

I will just say I love my Toshiba 14" glossy widescreen. I really don't care for my HP 15" standard matte at all anymore. I'm just keeping it for a backup in case something goes wrong with the Toshiba someday.

 

My last 4 laptops were glossy screen. However, my newest one is a 17" Macbook Pro which has a matt screen. I have come to the conclusion that both as stated before have their +/-. I do prefer glossy screens as most of my usage is under Metal Halide lighting and it doesn't affect glossy screens like sunlight. Glossy screens do seem to produce brighter and crisper images. I do however love my new MBP and the screen is great!!!

On the note of 4:3 vs 16:9, I think viewing widescreen is much more natural. My office LCD is 4:3 and both my home PC and laptops are widescreen. I feel that I actually can work faster and more efficiently on widescreens. Mostly because I use multiple windows and use higher resolutions for what I do. Widescreens also benefit those who use programs like PS, Aperature, etc where the extra space on the sides provide room for the tools. Widescreen computer displays might have originally been a gimmick to mimmick the trend towards 16:9 tv's. However, in the end everyone decided to go the widescreen route anyways. Do you think that in a few years time you will be able to find a 4:3 tv in the store?

 

If you view the web a lot, you'll know why horizontal resolution is more important than vertical resolution. Of course, you'll probably want more vertical resolution at the same time. And don't forget the movies...
I agree that a glossy finish is more annoying than useful. (Well, I like how it reminds me how pretty I am when I type commands into the mostly-black Konsole...) While it's still common to find a laptop with an antiglare finish, all the recent handhelds and cell phones I have seen have glossy screens.

You'll see a much clearer picture of yourself. Of course, that only gets in the way when you're trying to do anything other than look at how pretty you are.

You're having a hard time lifting 7 pounds? Sounds like time to lift some weights.

 

Glossy is criticized way too much. Personally I love it, all you have to do is fix the angle of the screen and its gone. Even when it is there if you use it for a while you get used to it.

 

Oh, I can't let that one go. I played football in college :yes: :tongue: -- that doesn't mean I want to sweat carrying extra weight across campus. Also, I can barely get my 14-inch T60 open in an airplane seat. Any bigger, forget about it.

Chris

 

I don't know how you cant get a 14 inch T60 open on your laptop easily on an airplane. That sounds like total crap to me.

If you would not be able to open up your laptop easily you would have a hard time fitting into your seat.

 

7 pounds shouldn't make a lot of difference. I routinely carried about 20-30 pounds of books every day in high school (lots of classes every day, they meet every day, and only about 5 minute breaks between classes). Took a while to get used to but not even noticeable once I got used to it. In college, the classes generally do not meet every day and there are often long breaks between classes. Then I would not have to carry as many books, although I am carrying my laptop. And I can greatly thin out my binder by digitally archiving it at home. In the end, I'll probably carry no more weight in college than in high school, maybe less.

And if you want to stay cool, use a fan and a shade.

 

So, you're what, 18? Don't take this the wrong way, but trust me: You're going to feel different about this later. Hauling around overweight/oversize toys gets old fast.

Sure, I'll get myself a parasol and a fan. That'll be a cute picture. Just call me M. Butterfly.

Chris

 

No one has forced anything upon me. I wanted a glossy widescreen, I got one. The vast majority of consumers think like me, 4:3 matte-loving people are the considerable minority.

 

Um, glossy widescreens have been the norm for, what, a year? Two? This fad will pass. Dell has already stepped back from the all-glossy approach in its consumer line. Other makers will follow suit.

Chris

 

Simple answer: Get what type of screen you want, there is no right answer.

 

Screw both 16:9 and 4:3 I want 9:16 portrait mode!

All this talk about peripheral vision is fine for some tasks, but since the majority of my time on the computer is spent simply reading I think a tall and narrow screen is definitely more useful. There is a reason why books come this way.

 

Brother!
Sadly, the market is lead by the majority of people.
And it seems that the majority of people won't use ther laptops for work (that is writing documents to be printed in letter sized or A4 format - how may of you write letters in 'landscape mode'? -, or programming, the most scrollful job of all times ). They seem to love to watch movies, play games, listen to music.

Paradoxically, the people that is having fun is causing trouble to the people who has to work with a laptop.
By making the glossy widescreen the new 'standard' they are forcing the others either to spend a lot more to get a matte 4:3 screen, or to keep their fingers onto the scroll bar to compensate for the lack of vertical depth.
Not to mention the eyestrain due to the reflections in a usually well lit office environment.
And I am not bringin up the DRM craze that had to be forced on the office people by the new "multimedial experience".

But if all you have to do is: surfing the web for leisure, playing music, watching a movie or showing your friend how vivid the colors of your photographs are, well a glossy 16:9 screen is the way to go.

It would be nice if the mainstream laptops were offered in two separate lines: for work, and for fun.

(I managed to get a matte screen, but not a 4:3 one, as I would have liked)

 

I'm using a glossy screen right now. There's a light source above the laptop and behind me and I can't see the effects of either on the screen. It's not even placed at a funny angle! In areas with lots of bright light, like outside, an office maybe yeah there is a case for glossy being annoying, but using them at home I've not found them to be so yet.

 

For people in Europe who want 4:3 aspect ratio, non-glossy, look no further than the Samsung P55. 15.4" and 1400 x 1050.

John

 

Preach it!

You're making me nostalgic for... two years ago!?! I have no idea what Lenovo, Dell and HP are thinking with their widescreen business models...

Ditto.

 

Well, I'm reading your post on a 4:3 desktop monitor running at 1280x1024 (less than my T60's SXGA+ resolution). And not only can I fit this site (and any other site) fine, I also am running bookmarks in my Firefox sidebar. And the image quality is great. I need a glossy widescreen why?

Any defenders of glossy ever seen a ThinkPad FlexView display?

Chris

 

You don't need one, obviously don't want one which is fine. As I say, both my laptops are 4:3 and Matte and serve me well.

As for the thinkpad thing well no, I haven't, I don't know many people with Thinkpads, new ones at least. Still, while Lenovo might be able to make a matte screen with he contrast, colours and brightness of most glossies, others don't seem to be up to it.

I think there are ideal screens for every use. Outside, matte might be better, also for publsihing 4:3 might be too, but for gaming and watching films etc. widescreen and glossy makes more sense to me.

 

I am a definite supporter of the 4:3 just because I am used to it.

But I got a Dell 1520 matte screen and the widescreen, though I do admit seems more of a marketing ploy for DVD movies than anything else, does not bother me. I'm not using Vista, but I can imagine it would help with the sidebar taking up screen space--that's a BS piece of software too, another marketing ploy.

 

Both my handheld PC and my cell phone have glossy screens. I have not actually had any problems viewing the screens, indoors or outdoors. My Inspiron E1405 has a glossy screen and I find it a little annoying at times. I got my Vostro 1700 with an antiglare screen and I prefer it to a glossy screen.
I think they should make a glossy screen that includes an optional antiglare cover.
And yes, DRM is some of the worst junk ever made. That is one of the big reasons why I removed Vista from my Vostro 1700 (and installed Gentoo) as soon as I got it. We should petition Microsoft to have them offer an update that removes DRM from Vista.

That's because it's a desktop monitor. It's horizontal resolution and horizontal size that really counts for web viewing. I have two 1280x1024 19" monitors side-by-side for my desktop and it works excellent even though Firefox only fills up one monitor. My 17" laptop has a 1440x900 screen. It has more horizontal resolution. However, the horizontal size is only slightly smaller than that of the desktop monitor so for the same size text, I don't miss much. Some graphic-heavy sites (mostly threads with pictures) will horizontally scroll even on my desktop which is annoying because most mouses can only scroll vertically. On my laptop, however, the higher horizontal resolution means that it might not horizontally scroll.
Basically, for smaller screens, you'll want widescreen over standard for the same diagonal size since the horizontal size and resolution would be higher thereby helping avoid the horizontal scrolling. With bigger screens, it doesn't matter much since there is plenty of horizontal size and resolution either way.

 

Small handheld devices are easily tilted to make the offending reflection go away.

I thought Dell's truebrite (or whatever they are called) were antiglare, too.

Did you know that by refusing to accept the Eula, at first boot, you could have asked (and obtained) a refund for Vista?

IMO, DRM is the raison d'être of Vista.

 

FYI

Most widescreen monitors today are NOT 16:9. They are actually 16:10. Go on, do the math. 1280x800 is 16:10. 1440x900 is 16:10. 1680x1050 is 16:10. The only 16:9 resolution you'll usually see is 1280x720.

What does this mean? Well, rather than a 14 inch widescreen monitor having only 84 sq inches, instead it really has about 88 sq inches. So if a 14 inch full screen is 94 sq inches, you're really only losing 6 sq inches instead of 10. On top of that, widescreen laptops are 14.1 inch, rather than just 14. So that adds another sq inch back on. So, a 14.1 inch monitor is 89 sq inches, leaving you with only 5 sq inches of missing real estate.

You're getting ripped off on a 4:3 screen, too. You know why? There's 5:4 out there, also (think 1280x1024). If my 19" 5:4 monitor was really 14", it would have over 95 sq inches of area, ever so slightly more than 4:3 has

I'm not really a big fan of widescreen, either, but it's the way of the future. I also thank you for the excuse to practice middle school math before I start class in a few days. The only part of this post that really matters is the fact that I think people should know that widescreen in the world of computers is usually 16:10. Since a lot of people said 16:9 in this thread, I'm not sure everyone realizes that.

Oh, yea, and just to rock your world even more, many "widescreen" movies are really 2.39:1 (today's "scope", although some still say that it is 2.35:1) instead of 16:9 That's why you sometimes have black bars on the top and bottom of your 16:9 TV when watching certain movies I'm sure many of you knew that, though.

By the way, matte is still way better than glossy.

 

Paranoia
Good info but time to go to bed you posted the same twice I will do the math later but does sound good

 

Fixed. It wasn't quite the lack of sleep that caused that. Don't ask

 

Well, Widescreen is an advantage sometimes, for example when gaming FPS, you can see players using a widescreen monitor that you won't see in a 4:3 Aspect Ratio screen. And when watching films, you'd want to see more of the environment. If the Image was "taller", faces would look elongated and un-natural. Human eyes have quite a wide viewing angle, so it makes sense to have a wide(r) screen.

That being said, all professional machines should come with a 4:3 Ratio screen. Documents and Spreadsheets benefit from a 4:3 Ratio Screen.

 

Well, the idea behind 16:10 widescreen is that you can view two full pages of text side by side. Not that many people really seem to do that, though.

 

Windows's window system doesn't really allow for that easily. You'd have to scale them manually and only the mxaimize button snaps the borders to the edges of the screen.

Long live the 4:3/Matte revolution!

 

There is a "Reading Layout" mode in word that will give you two pages side-by-side, scaled to fit the screen. However, even my present 19-inch desktop monitor cannot fit two full-size pages, and so Word changes the formatting to accomplish this. Since I prefer WYSIWYG, I never use the feature.

I also use Acrobat a lot. I don't know if Acrobat will scale multiple pages...

I have been looking at 24-inch monitors, but the good ones are still a bit steep.

Long live the 4:3/Matte revolution!

Chris

 

Eagle Devil. I totally agree with you. OEMs MUST and HAVE to stop cramming glossy widescreens down the throat of consumers.

I'm not saying do away with them, just give me a freaking choice. I have no gruff with gloss but i don't like the widescreen aspect. I work on a laptop I don't watch movies or game all the time. I really like my T60p's SXGA+ (1400x1050) in a 14 inch foot print. In fact not being able to get a T61p in SXGA+ (lenovo said they wouldn't make it back then). I used to have a 15.4inch Asus and it was too heavy(with AC adapter) to go from class to class in an 8 hour day with books).

You also mentioned that it's hard to get a T60 on an airplane. You're right on those commuter flights it's freaking cramped and unless you're on business class you're cramped as hell. It's so cramped they removed the foot rests that used to be in the chair in front.

 

No, it isn't just a fad. Matte might make a return, but 4:3 never will. All media displays, from notebooks to computer monitors to TVs are going widescreen.

 

I use a widescreen notebook and the main reason I chose that ratio was that it was a better profile for fitting into a bag alongside A4 folders and textbooks. I feel that 4:3 screens make the notebook too square and as a result a bulkier bag is needed for transport of the laptop.

I like glossy displays aside from when direct sunlight cannot be avoided. They're a pain then!