Why does hp use 1200x800 rather than more conventional 1366x768??

dell, lenovo all use 1366x768 resolution screens which are perfect 16:9 widescreen. I personally find them much more visually appealing than a 16:10 screen. Why does hp stick with 1280x800 which is 16:10??

 

Well, they do. The dv3ty, dv6t, dv7t and the HDX's all have 16:9 aspect ratio screens. Going forward most of the other laptops will probably switch to this ratio as well.

 

I dont know about dv6t or dv7t, but according to hp site dv3t is still coming with 1280x800 screen. Is dv3ty a new model???

 

The dv3t has the 1366x768 resolution. HP apparently hasn't updated this yet on their site.

 

Sorry meant dv3t and users have been reporting that the screen is 16:9 not 16:10 as indicated on HP's website. Check the dv3t owners lounge...
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=374714&page=23

 

1366x768 resolution is going down in history as the WORST thing to happen to laptops in the past 10 year. This is a horrid resolution. Most people dont care about watching movies on their laptop. The awful 768 vertical resolution kills productivity and web surfing. 16:10 is by FAR the limits you can go with windscreen for laptops.

These are laptops not portable movie players. I dont know anyone who purchases a laptop to watch movies. Like you cant watch movies on 1280x800 or something....

For some reason its cheaper to make these awful 1366x768 panels and now us consumers have to suffer because of it.

There is ZERO usefulness of these "ultra" widescreen laptop panels other than to watch movies with no black bar on the top or bottom. Other than that these 1366x768 panels HINDER the use of any OS and Apps out there.

You will NEVER find these awful panels on a real laptop because companies know they're awful to work with. Most of these panels come only on junk budget laptops to cut costs.

 

16:9 has had quite an impact on netbooks as well. They used to be 10.2" 1024x600, now they're 10.1" 1024x576. Vertical resolution was already cramped, now even more so.

 

Truth.

IMHO 16:10 is the perfect mix of productivity and entertainment. 16:9 movies look great, I really wanted a dv3t until I read about the screen change. I wonder how they did it though. Did they just keep the outside dimensions and put in the smaller screen with a bigger bezel?

I imagine I'd adjust if I did get a lappy with 16:9 but 16:10 is where it's at.

 

Past 16:10 the sides of the screen really become useless. There's nothing built for them anyway. For most applications it's equivalent to a 1024X768 screen, with pretty black bars on either side , which is crap. At least with 1280X800 you get a bit more vertical room, and less side wasted pixels.

I was never bothered by tiny bars at the top and bottom of the screen in the minuscule amounts of time I watched videos on my laptop as opposed to my television. It makes much more sense to cater for the majority of other tasks done by a notebook, which usually benefit much more from vertical room, rather than ideal wide screen.

The thing is that we'll probably have to accept it, or pay premium and sacrifice other parts.