Why I regret getting the 1600x900 screen.

1400x1050 in a 14" was pretty much a sweet spot, IMO.
1440x900 in 14.1" isn't too bad either.

Running 2560x1600 (simulated) on a 1440x900 14.1" panel is... interesting to say the least. It's workable if you have perfect vision, but window elements are too tiny to be easily hit. Text is next to unreadable, but that's probably the supersampling.

 

how do you do this?
i have a T410 with NVIDIA graphics. how can i simulate higher resolutions? i am missing my old wuxga....

 

Did it in VMWare. Not sure how one would do it on a host system. Sorry.

 

This is why you should always avoid screen recommendations in forums. That goes for keyboards, too. It is not an objective matter.

I love 1680x1050 on a 15.4". But I also like the FHD 1920x1080 res on a 15.6" screen, too. And contrary to other opinions, I use 125% or 150% DPI all day and night depending on the screen I am using. Works well for me.

 

You're preaching to the choir on that one.

 

Only regarding screen and keyboard?

Some of the "how do I do this" or "how do I fix this" kind of suggestions are good. The rest is mostly for entertainment.

BTW, this is a rather old thread.

 

I am about to order a W520 and was going to get the FHD display but got a little concerned after reading this thread. I am sure print would be too small for me without going to at least 125% DPI. Do changes in DPI work system wide including all apps/browsers?

My previous Thinkpads have been of the 1366X768 variety and while usable they are certainly not great displays. I was hoping for something more hi-res and better contrast this time around but I don't want to regret the decision because of readability issues.

 

The main point I was trying to make earlier today is that nobody can answer that for you. You really need to see this for yourself.

For example, many people of this world are perfectly fine with 1366x768. I'm not.

I'm perfectly fine using IE9, FF7 or Chrome on the W520 FHD screen at 125%. But you may hate it. How would you ever know unless you've seen it?

 

I understand...the problem is there is nowhere in the Chicago area, that I am aware of, where I can see a Lenovo HD+ or FHD display. I have seen a Sony FHD display and found it a bit annoying at 150% DPI. That, of course, doesn't mean I would find the Lenovo display the same.

 

CDW's main office is in Vernon Hills has a Lenovo showroom with all the models.

 

I only use 150% DPI on a 27" or larger external LCD panel. But those panels are 2560x1440 or higher.

 

I used to run 1920x1200 WUXGA on a 14.1" Dell Latitude... until Dell stopped making those screens.

I had no problems with it.

 

as to your Sig

have you seen THIS Samsung at Bestbuy ??

I looked at it and it is quite the machine

Thin, strong, light, powerful, hi-res, and a 8cell

 

I am extremely happy with the 1600x900 on my W520

Very nice screen, bright and beautiful.

Not too small text and dpi wise. But the 1900 would be for me.

I also love the screen real estate I have now.

 

Update: After several months with this screen, I am digging it more than I used to. I have set the icon sizing back to 100%. Maybe my eyes are getting better. Who knows.

 

I was interested in it... but the BB version is actually a bit neutered. I ended up getting the Sony VAIO SE, 15.5" running 1920x1080 and has a BluRay player. Its only problem is the battery life.

 

I have been looking at the series 7 laptop from Samsung also. What is not clear is the screen quality on these baby. One of the member noted that the screen's contrast ratio are sub 500:1 on the BB model. I wait till notebookcheck review the machine before I give it a verdict.

 

^ Sony Vaio Z (13.1" 1920x1080 for less than 1.5kg with long battery life & excellent screen) or Panasonic Let's Note B10 (15.6" 1920x1080 for less than 2kg - battery life not so good)

 

I hear ya

I am a 'local' at my neighborhood BB

and they wish they could hire me LOL

yes, it IS dumbed down and I told them that !

they were like, OMG, this dude knows ways too much

call security !

haha

 

I think i looked at that Sony unit and hated the touchpad area

and I mean HATED it

 

The 1080P on a 13.1 is just to much for me. I would like a slimmer 15" business grade laptop from Lenovo. I like the fact that with Thinkpad it is not a pain to service. HD+ on a 14 and 15 inch laptop is prefect resolution for me. I am just hoping that Lenovo would upgrade their X2 with a decent high resolution screen next year. I might just get the x220 when it is discounted next year.

 

The SE isn't at Best Buy I don't think.

You probably looked at the E-series which is way different.

 

Before, I rarely used my notebooks touchpad, always had a portable mouse.

Then I got an MBA... say what you want about Apple, but that glass touchpad made my mouse very lonely.

But that caused me to have issues, when I go to use my other notebooks (I have 4 others), I'm find myself fighting their trackpads (esp the ones that don't have multi-touch and I have to use the right vertical side to scroll).

 

Yeap the touchpad on macbooks are very compelling. But people whom uses the ThinkPad are more likely a trackpoint user.

 

I think your right....

 

Well that's good to hear.

 

With a 16:9 display, you lose 25% of the real estate vs. a 4:3 display, because the "wings" are often not usable. I came from a T41 to a T420. The T41 had a 101-sq-inch display. The T420 has only an 85-square inch display. Now clip the 85-square inch display by 25%, and you get a 63-square inch display. I have lost 37% of my screen real estate with this laptop, what a disaster !!!

Although I am getting better at looking at the screen at 100% resolution, my 50-year old eyes aren't going to support this tiny print for very much longer !!!

HD 16x9 displays are, quite simply, stupid, if you want to get work done ...

 

So, wait, you went into it knowing the screen was a different proportion and now you're blaming it?

Me, I'm glad to have the reduced vertical size when I'm using it on planes and carrying it in my bag. That and I prefer having some side-by-side windows when I'm working. Now, if you're set in your ways and can't get out of using the screen with just one window, maximized to full screen, then, well, maybe it was the wrong choice you made.

My eyes are 49 years old and it's plenty readable (without the reading glasses either).

 

Screen size is certainly smaller with the same diagonal for 4:3 vs 16:9, but it may be a reason to go one size higher With 16:9 15.6" laptop like T530 has the same width when closed as older T4x series, and only half-a-pound heavier, making it about as portable in a backpack etc.

As to the ratio, it really depends on the tools where the work is done. Many modern apps from Photoshop and CaptureOne to Visual Studio/Esclipse/etc. use the extra horizontal space wisely for vertical panels, and I'd take 16:10 and 16:9 over 4:3 or 5:4 any day. With 16:9 and FHD screen it's an option to put two windows side-by-side without major sacrifices, and it's very fast & convenient to do so with Windows-Left/Windows+Right keys. That, and the extra resolution, for me often means the difference between doing something on a laptop, and desperately looking where to connect to an external monitor or, better, two.

Also, there is an option to put Windows Taskbar on the screen side (one of the reasons it was placed at the bottom in Windows 95 by default is compatibility with incorrectly written Windows 3.1 applications). Added bonus - can restore the good old Windows Quick launch bar too. Can read names and quickly switch through the loaded documents, using Windows+number keys, quickly. Really handy, and difficult w/o the wide screen.

 

Hey guys,

i have a question. I have a Notebook with 13,3" and a screen resulotion with 1600x900.
The icons and fonts are very small and it is very hard to read.(if i change the resolution to 1366x786, the picture is very blurred but the icons are good to read )

Do you recommend me to change the DPI to 120%(windows)?
Do i have any disadventage with this?

 

I wear glasses so the 1600x900 resolution on my T420s is perfect for me.

At this point, I would never go low res again.

 

I'd rather increase the Windows magnification factor while respecting the native resolution than to hard-set the resolution to 1366x768.

(I set 125% magnification for my ThinkPad 15.6" FHD screens. Fonts and icons are a bit larger but remain very sharp thanks to the 1920x1080 pixel resolution. For my ThinkPad 14" HD+ screen, 1600x900 resolution is perfect.)

 

Rocking 1600x900 on a 14 incher here

Though my old Dell had 1280x800. R.I.P 16:10 you will be missed.

 

The important thing is for you to read without too much effort. I have an FHD 15.6" screen and Windows is automatically set at 125% DPI. For the browsers, I set it to 125% as well. Most websites and applications work very well with this setup. This way, I can read fine and also the picture quality looks good. So try to use 125% and see how you like it.

 

So there are problems with some applications when i change the dpi?

 

Yes, but not too many with Windows Vista-7-8. An application can report to system whether it works fine with high DPI settings and supports non-default sizes of system fonts. Many new apps, especially blockbusters from established vendors, support this.

For older apps, that do not indicate their preference, the OS fakes the real resolution, called "DPI virtualization". OS is telling the app that it's working at 96dpi, and then resizes the application output. The result is a bit washed out, like http://i.msdn.microsoft.com/dynimg/IC534211.png . Some apps, e.g. Google Chrome, while working fine with non-default fonts, don't tell the OS, and look fuzzy unless user checks "Display display scaling on high DPI settings" in the Properties/Compatibility of that app.

All and all, it's not perfect, but there are no major issues with non-100% fonts. One of the nastiest issues is that Windows before 8.1 does not support different scaling on different monitors. So if you use external monitors often, and want 100% scaling on them w/o changing the DPI and logout/login every time, pick resolution of the laptop screen where you'll be comfortable with 100% scaling.

 

1920x1200 on 15 inch over here an I'm loving it. No glasses, eyes aren't perfect but good enough to not have to wear glasses. I'd go higher if I could, I think 2880x1800 would be perfect on 15 inch. Unscaled of course. I also loved 1920x1080 on 14 inch. (unscaled)

 

Hardly, its 225ppi. People with normal vision just can't see individual pixels on a 15" screen assuming normal sitting position (average height, straight spine, elbows bent at right angle => ~70cm).

In fact, full HD resolution for 15" is close to "retina" at this distance (and for horizontal black text on white background, when font smoothing activates and subpixels matter, it's well beyond that).

 

I have WUXGA on 15" (more than Full HD), and of course you don't seen any pixels from a normal distance. But I don' really care about pixels, you don't see them on a normal 120 dpi screen either if you view it from a normal distance. But personally I'd still prefer a bit more. OK, perhaps 225dpi is a bit much. I guess something around 160-180 would be perfect for me.