Slimy Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 I hate widescreen, it's smaller than a normal screen ( a 20 inch 4:3 is bigger than a 20 inch 16:10 ). Widescreen is a horrible idea, you basically pay the same price for less! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TruckWEB Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 With Vista and the sidebar, suddently that widescreen will be nice to use. Widescreen usualy have more pixels than 4:3 screen. You can see more (very good in Excel, or watching DVD). Wider is better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaffra Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 You mean they still make laptops with 4:3 screens? :p sure theres plenty around. widescreens are mostly sold for the consumer market while the standard 4:3 are more for busineses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tech_Dude_5000 Posted August 24, 2006 Author Share Posted August 24, 2006 most base models have a standerd 4:3 screen. some mid- range have standered.but the ones with all the fancy stuff. ( sliver, glossy, finishes, lights, etc ) have the wide screen... look at that new Dell M2110 Hybird. 20.1" screen thats just crazy.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slimy Posted August 24, 2006 Share Posted August 24, 2006 With Vista and the sidebar, suddently that widescreen will be nice to use. Widescreen usualy have more pixels than 4:3 screen. You can see more (very good in Excel, or watching DVD). Wider is better. Afaik they have less. 1600x1200 = 1 920 000 pixels (normal) 1680x1050 = 1 764 000 pixels (wide) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noroom Posted September 7, 2006 Share Posted September 7, 2006 Ever used the DPI setting? It's not too bad, but a lot of programs look out of proportion. Don't believe me? Jack up the DPI to 150% and open media player. The only thing that's resized is the text. And it's like this on a number of programs, not just WMP. But hey, it's not as bad as OSX. OSX resizes everything in proportion, but only quartz apps look decent (safari looks pretty good). Quickdraw apps look like complete crap (everything is pixelated). But I digress. That's the applications' fault. Not Windows'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Neo Posted September 7, 2006 Share Posted September 7, 2006 But hey, it's not as bad as OSX. OSX resizes everything in proportion, but only quartz apps look decent (safari looks pretty good). Quickdraw apps look like complete crap (everything is pixelated). But I digress. That's why developers shouldn't use the Mac OS 9-erra QuickDraw engine to render an application's interface. Luckily most Mac OS X applications use Quartz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts