Who must have 1920x1080?

I am just curious. What kind of work that REQUIRES 1920x1080 resolution with default 96 DPI?

EDIT: second question: what kind of work that requires at least 18.4" laptop?

 

I feast upon pixels with my programming and math work.

 

Well, the DPI at eactly 96 - possibly people who print.

With large screens you also gain by having more "space" on the screen.

On little laptops like the Z its lunacy - 16:10 at 1280*800 would have been better.

 

for 18.4 " laptop: Grid generation, numerical simulation, visualization, LATex, PLotting, Photoshop, video edition, etc, etc.
But it is also fine with the 16,4" and full HD.

 

Probably people who edit 1080p video or people that work with spreadsheets all day.

Or just people that like having lots of things open at one and like multitasking; nothing wrong with that.

I actually got my laptop for video though.

 

With the work I do in Excel -its great.

 

I'm using 1920x1200 at standard DPI because it's great for developing software and using Photoshop. Also, I like how it feels "airy" compared to lower resolutions because you can have so much content on the screen at once without anything ever getting in the way.

 

So freakin' stupid that my 16'' HP comes with a max 1366x768 resolution...
Why the hell would they do that

Every time I connect to external 1650x1050 I cant believe how much bigger it is.

 

all of my laptops i've bought in the last 6-7+ years have come equipped with WUXGA screens. i couldn't even think of goin back to a lower resolution screen, unless it was something tiny like a netbook. all of my 14"-15"+ laptops that i own now, and all of my future laptops will come equippied with WUXGA or higher screens.

 

Doing physics lab report using Excel spreadsheet it really is usefull. I'm now used to my 22'' 1080p screen so I do not think I could go a lot lower. 1680x1050 on my 15.4'' still feels good but 1280x800 is a no go.

 

Real Estate. Photoshop open with several toolbars. CAD work. Need that real estate.

 

Yeah. Plus, if you have a vector-based desktop graphics system, you can scale things ( everything) up to a comfortable size, and enjoy the benefits of a crisp, high-resolution representation of your content, all of your content. Oh wait, Windows still comes with the same quarter-century old bitmap-based display subsystem that it started out from. Nevermind...

 

I have 1920x1080 at regular DPI (not the oversized Dell one) and I'd say it comes in use when multitasking. I watch movies when I do almost anything, so 1/2 the screen width is that. Also, when doing homework, 1/2 the screen is for the questions PDF and the other 1/2 is for my answers doc/ppt/xls. Other than that, it's also good for comparing different windows (browsers, etc.) also it lets you see more at once (although it's all smaller). Finally, bragging rights Not everyone can say that have a 1920x1080 RGBLED.

Where this does NOT come in use is gaming. The GPU must work a lot harder to render at 1920x1080 than say if my screen was 1366x768 or 1600x900, whereas I wouldn't notice the difference in quality and clarity on a 16".

 

1920x1080 is only good on smaller screen if you're doing Photo-editing/Video-editing as well as Animation. If not, on small screen, it's not worth or not needed to have 1920x1080 because lower than that(1920x1080) more than enough fir small screen size.

However, if you're using External LCD Panel(21.5" or more), then, you need to have at least 1920x1080. If not, the graphics/images will not be good.

 

I sure as hell don't, but i find its assential on my TV, .

 

I must, but that's because of the photo and video work I do in the field.

For now (and due to cost), I 'make do' with a 1600x900 screen and an HDMI connection that support 19x10 output. I can usually find a 19x10 screen at most hotels or if I'm really desperate, rent one for a hundred a week.

 

For me, it's all about fitting your windows on your screen. M$ IE taking up the whole screen just feels cramped.

getting a 17.3" 1080 soon

 

1280x800 ftw <3

Smaller make my eyes hurt D:

 

I've got 1280*800 on 13,3" - it originally looked very small coming from my old laptop two years ago - but I don't think I could used a higher DPI...

 

1920x1080 on 16.4" isn't bad, and it helps a lot when I have to type up a document and get data from Excel at the same time. It is great for watching movies (I don't have room for a TV in my dorm). Best of all, I can write really long lines of code and annoy everyone else who reads my code.

"This line doesn't fit on the screen, why didn't he finish it on a newline?!"

 

It's all personal preference - nothing more, nothing less.

I regularly type papers and spreadsheets and long Java programs on my desktop with a 22" 1920x1200 display. However, when the need arises I do the exact same on my netbook with a 12" 1366x768 display, and that's just as good for me. I prefer my higher resolution desktop display simply because that's my preference, but I am not harmed in any way by a lower resolution display.

 

Do you really write a code, 1920 pixels wide, in one line? I am sorry but I wouldn't even do that for 1600 pixels. My eyes would get tired when keeping focus.

Imagine if everybody in this forum has 1920 screen and NBR allow them to write their messages 1920 pixels wide at 96 DPI. That would be unreadable. That would be like reading your newspaper with each article span from left edge to the right edge.

 

It's not like the sourcecode was 1920 pixels wide. Often, the development environment in use will be filled with much information, so 1920x1200 will give you a decently sized area for the sourcecode even if you set the IDE to show all information you'd like to see at once. With lower resolutions, you're usually limited to a subset of that information at a time, with having little space for the sourcecode left at the same time.

I know what you mean. Well, the difference is that if you have a 1200 screen, you CAN make use of the high resolution, but you don't HAVE to. You can still increase the DPI (which is not optimal and therefore may not be acceptable if you need to do this permanently) or simply resize the windows containing text to a smaller size.

 

How about pasting a screenshots showing what your displays look like when working, chatting, interneting or doing whatever you like to do? but only laptop screens indication the resolution and info about the windows you have opened.
It´s just an idea

 

Windows 7 fonts actually scales with dpi very well. And it's very easy to split screen in win7 too.
You don't need full screen of windows to enjoy 1080p.

 

I work with charts and therefore, the more resolution the better. The bigger the screen the better as well. This is why I am using my Qosmio Q850 more often than my Alienware M15x.

One thing I realized, 1920x1080 resolution is too high, such that, letters/numbers even on 18.4" display is too small to read!

I am in a dilemna:
* I need high resolution because i need the "pixel" space for my charts
* but the high resolution makes the fonts on many applications too small to read. These applications do no come with ways to change the fonts and if there are any, it would defeat the purpose of having high res....

I should have gotten the iMac 27" ...

 

Wow, even with 18.4"? Which applications do you use that is too small to read?

 

No, but Windows does... try changing the DPI setting in Windows... in Display Properties.

Well, for some uses... you can still do 1080p movie viewing.

 

Don't quite need that high but I seriously miss my 1680x1050 screen resolution. I'm at 1366x768 now and it just ain't cutting it for me. Moving to 1600x900 soon!