Question on 16:9 display

Please educate me. Why do people not care for a 16:9 display? What is the display ratio of the current T400 & T500 notebooks? Thank you.

 

16:10 is the current ratio. The reason people don't want 16:9 is because vertical resolution is worth more than horizontal resolution. Having a wider screen than 16:10 is just a waste of space with most applications. Fortunately I'm ok with 16:9 but I'd prefer 16:10.

 

16:9 favours HD media, but I prefer 16:10 per the previous poster as the vertical resolution is far more important for working.

I rarely, if ever, play media on my T61p, but I do a ton of work on it!

 

If you do anything related to documents and/or coding then vertical is far more valuable than horizontal. 16:10, 4:3 (or even better 3:4 or 10:16) is thus a much better option for this type of work than 16:9.

I happen to like the 16:10 on my tablet as it gives me a full keyboard, and general flexibility. However, it can be fairly short for reading documents. Luckily I can switch to portrait mode and have a very tall display when I want to read something.

16:9 just makes the situation even worse. A lot of ThinkPad diehards still want 4:3 displays to come back.

 

i personally actually like 16:10, but 16:9, not too sure about that...

 

Actually when 4:3 got ditched and 16:10 became the new standard, I hated 'widescreen', now that 16:10 it actually does not look bad (If I got WSXGA+ or WXUGA), but now 16:9 is unbearable
I imagine a monster 16" 16:9, those things will be hideous, it will feel as if I'm handling a LCD HDTV.

I just hope the W500 is on production at least until 2011, or buy a unit from the Outlet, it would be nice to get a high res unit.

 

I don't know if it's being a ThinkPad diehard that drives that - for me, it's having to scroll and scroll and scroll to view a complete document or use a lot of web applications.

 

Many people do not like the alleged move from 16:10 to 16:9 because current 16:10 displays are pretty wide already. In terms of resolution, moving from 1280x800 to 1366x768 (for example) means you gain horizontal resolution (which you already have plenty) but lose vertical resolution (which is in short supply).

Trading something in short supply for something you already have plenty is typically a bad deal. Not to mention that in some cases you can lose both horizontal and vertical resolution (such as from 1680x1050 to 1600x900).

Luckily W701, at least, seems to retain the 16:10 aspect ratio.

 

TV Shows I think do not use the 16:9 format, so I don't see why only movies or HD content is the only benefiaries of that aforementioned format.

 

all widescreen tv shows are 16:9, but some might want more of a movie feel, and go even wider (movies are typically 2.35:1, but it varies a bit)

 

For me 16:10 is almost perfect, 16:9 is cheaper to make.

TN Panels + 16:9 aspect ratio = EPIC FAIL!

 

I find the 1200 vertical resolution to be more useful for things like Office and Internet, which are more common tasks than movies on notebooks, but give me a decent panel and I'll be happy.

 

IPS Panel?

Anyone?

 

Think of 16:9 as the same width screen but 10% less height and a slightly bigger chassis.

I dont know why people insist on saying that 16:9 is better optimized for HD when 16:10 does HD the exact same way.

 

You're right that 16:10 does HD just as well as 16:9, but 16:9 is the HD aspect ratio and the aspect ratio for pretty much all TVs sold these days.

I play HD content very nicely on my 16:10 24" Dell display using my desktop. 16:9 just does the HD display without the black bars top and bottom.

 

Marketing? Those multi-million dollar marketing budgets must count for something.

Note how the screen resolutions are now marketed with the "p" suffix. This is to hitch a ride on the multi billion dollar HDTV marketing bandwagon. That marketing engine has built up a large consumer perception halo around the "p" numbers - 720p, 1080p "Full HD".

 

I can live with small black bars if it means I have a better resolution . But I think mtneer hit the nail on the head. I talked to a buddy I have known for 4 years playing WoW and he said that they use HD and 1080p and so on to sell laptops. I asked him why they didnt do that before and he said he didnt know, but thats the trend and the masses of sheep are lining up for it. Darn heard mentality people seem to have...

 

The tablets are it.

 

I will not buy the T410 in the hopes that the T420, or such future model, will bring some more vertical real estate back. I’ll force myself to use my existing T400 for another year—and vote with my dollars by not supporting a video-optimized 14” notebook screen on my work machine.

Granted, this same hysteria occurred with the new wide screen on the T400, but I’ll try to hold out for as long as I can.

 

And what if the T420 loses even more vertical real estate... then what.

 

We petition Lenovo not to be idiots.

 

In all fairness, Lenovo doesn't really have any say about what the LCD manufacturers make. Unfortunately, it seems like the LCD manufacturing business is an oligopoly, and they're wanting to make the switch to 16:9 for their own reasons. That's what they did when everything went to 16:10 from 4:3. To be honest, voting with our dollars isn't really going to work unless someone else who isn't going to play by the rules enters the LCD manufacturing business and starts making purely 16:10 or 4:3 aspect ratio screens.

I'd love to see the return of 4:3 IPS ThinkPads as much as most of us, although I'd take a 16:10 if I had to. For now, I'm sticking with my current 4:3 and 16:10 systems and remaining happy... I don't feel the need to constantly upgrade my hardware when the machines I have are perfectly capable of doing everything I want/need them to do.

I'm just of the mindset now that hardware capabilities are greatly outpacing the software needs of most users... unless you're a major gaming enthusiast that needs the highest quality gaming rig available(then I'd be suggesting a desktop where you could more easily find a 4:3 or 16:10 display) or someone who needs to go through some seriously CPU-intensive tasks(heavy coding, video editing, maybe virtual machines?) a "6-series" Thinkpad like the ones I run are still able to do most any task you would need a notebook to do. I use my Frankensteined X61s for about 90% of my computing needs and don't feel like it's underpowered one bit.

 

It would make sense that the screen manufacturers offer the best prices on 16:9 screens. For Lenovo to buck the trend to offer 4:3 or 16:10 screens, they'd have to raise prices. In today's market, where buyers are more cost conscious than anything else, it would cost them sales since all the other major players are going 16:9. That's the bottom line.