The future of 4:3 displays

It seems Lenovo has dropped the 4:3 option from the T61/T61p, and I'm sure the explanation will be similar to the one I got from HP/Compaq when I asked why they went widescreen: the widesreen panels are cheaper to make so its hard to find a supply of 4:3 panels, and everyone is going widescreen.

However, major LCD manufacturers are still making 14.1" SXGA+ screens (Samsung and others), so I have a hard time believing that PC makers couldn't get a supply of them. And being more expensive shouldn't be an issue; those who value the 4:3 screen (like myself) would be willing to pay a premium for it. The 4:3 display is much more useful for those who primarly use their notebooks for productivity purposes and not entertainment. Lenovo had/has a market niche by being the only maker of a solid business notebook with an SXGA+ screen. There was clearly demand for it as well, since the T61 was not originally intended to have a 4:3 screen option from what I understand.

I hope the T400 will offer a 4:3 display, but I'm not hopeful. Just because everybody is going widescreen doesn't make it a good idea. Are we likely to see another good SXGA+ screen on a notebook or are we stuck with widescreen?

 

Everyone is moving towards widescreen which is good, as long as everyone sticks with a single standard. The annoying thing is when everyone's off doing their own little thing, and confusing the customer.

I never got the "more productivity" aspect of a monitor. A screen has a certain amount of pixels. You get "more productivity" from more pixels since you can see more at a single time. The aspect ratio takes a back seat, unless you're using completely vertical programs, in which case, you can run two at the same time on a widescreen monitor.

The big advantage of a widescreen monitor is that 16:10 is very close to the golden ratio, and thus aesthetically pleasing to most people.

But really, who knows.

 

A 14 inch widescreen display is typically offered in WXGA or WXGA+ resolutions, both of which offer fewer pixels than SXGA+. An example of a productivity application that is better on a 4:3 screen is a word processor. It's a pain to look at two pages at once, and 16:10 isn't the best setup for looking at a single page.

I also don't see how it would confuse consumers. Widescreen displays are probably a good thing for consumer oriented notebooks, which typically focus more on watching movies and entertainment than productivity. The 4:3 screen isn't as desirable for watching movies. People who buy business notebooks aren't likely to be confused by the choice between 4:3 and 16:10 aspects.

 

Golden Ratio FTW. It should be readily apparent that widescreen laptops are more pleasing to look at.

As far as the productivity thing goes, it's all about the pixels. I have a widescreen laptop, but the resolution (1280x800) is such that I can only effectively view one program at a time. However, if I had a higher resolution, I could place two programs side-by-side.

Of course, if I had a 4:3 screen with a high enough resolution, I could do the same with the windows tiled top-to-bottom, so either way...

 

I can't say that the Thinkpad Z61t (14" widescreen) is particularly more pleasing to look at than a T60 with the 4:3 screen.

And the number of pixels is one of my major objections to widescreens. There's a balance between portability and screen size, and 14" widescreens generally aren't offered at greater than WXGA+ resolution, which offers fewer pixels than SXGA+. Going to a 15.4" screen leads to a larger notebook than those with an 14.1" 4:3 display.

 

Lol quote above...golden ratio...PHI for the win...

 

Blame whoever invented the fact that a rectangle with certain proportions is subconsciously aesthetically pleasing to most people.

 

I'm actually glad that they don't offer higher than WXGA+ on 14.1" screens. Have you guys actually looked at a WSXGA+ on a 14.1"? I haven't but I'm sure the pixel pitch is disgustingly small and highly straining on the eyes. I think the biggest benefit to widescreens is that the manufacturers can place a full size keyboard without adding more screen bezel and weight. Regarding productivity, widescreen is far more productive for me than the corresponding 4:3. Being able to display two pages simultaneously is fantastic: Excel sheets with lots of columns, webpage and Word, etc.

The OP mentioned that they still produce standard aspect screens. While that may be true, they definitely don't produce the same level they used to, so following supply and demand, it makes sense that it costs manufacturers more money and the general public (read >90%) doesn't want to pay more money if they don't perceive more benefits.

That being said, 1280x800 is only useful for entertainment purposes and 1280x800 is what usually ships with laptops these days. For those people, I think 1280x1024 would have been better, back when they still made 1280x1024 panels.

 

I will echo the observation that I am more productive with widescreen display, with the caveat the resolution must be WSXGA+ or higher. Being able to see two pages at the same time is a boon. In an IDE like Eclipse or VS, I can leave the left and right panes visible without encroaching on the center text area.

Widescreen is great for travelers who are stuck in the coach section. The lower overall height makes it possible to work in cramped quarters. When the person in front suddenly reclines, a widescreen is less likely to become damaged because the shorter height is harder to become wedged between the seat back and tray table. A typical 14.1" 4:3 ratio panel has 228mm height, which is 6mm taller than a 15.4" 16:10 panel and 23mm taller than a 14.1" 16:10 panel. (Dimensions from CMO and Hydis.)

The shorter overall height also makes it easier to make brighter displays. A typical LCD panel for laptop is lit by one CCFL along the bottom edge. The light does not need to travel as far upward on to illuminate the screen. A display with larger height will either be dimmer when all else being equal, or require a brighter CCFL or a second CCFL along the top edge and draw more power to achieve the same brightness.

 

Well, MattB85, what can I say? Obviously you are a Cretin and a Philistine, and have no taste or aesthetic judgment.

 

I guess so. I suppose I'll just have to buy one refurbished.

 

LOL