Linus Torvalds: 2560x1600 Needs To Be Next Standard


Recommended Posts

Linus Torvalds believes that it is time to leave antiquated screen resolutions behind.

Most of the buzz surrounding Google?s upcoming Nexus 10 tablet is on account of its WQXGA (2560?1600) display, the highest-resolution screen of any tablet out there. This isn?t the first time this year that a tablet has managed to grab headlines due to its display?s pixel count, though, with the now discontinued 3rd generation iPad also hogging a plenty of limelight for its 2048?1152 screen earlier this year. But even as manufacturers continue to up the display resolution ante in the highly competitive media tablet market, laptop vendors still seem content with 1366x768 displays for the most part. A certain Linus Torvalds has a major problem with that.

Known for speaking his mind, Linux creator Linus Torvalds recently took to Google Plus to do just that on the topic of laptop display resolutions: "So with even a $399 tablet [Nexus 10] doing 2560x1600 pixel displays, can we please just make that the new standard laptop resolution? Even at 11"? Please. Stop with the 'retina' crap, just call it 'reasonable resolution'. The fact that laptops stagnated ten years ago (and even regressed, in many cases) at around half that in both directions is just sad.?

?I still don't want big luggable laptops, but that 1366x768 is so last century. Christ, soon even the cellphones will start laughing at the ridiculously bad laptop displays.?

But he didn?t stop at criticizing WXGA-doting laptop makers, proceeding instead to blast tech journos: ?And the next technology journalist that asks you whether you want fonts that small, I'll just hunt down and give an atomic wedgie. I want pixels for high-quality fonts, and yes, I want my fonts small, but ?high resolution? really doesn't equate ?small fonts? like some less-than-gifted tech pundits seem to constantly think.?

We think he has a point. Do you?

http://www.maximumpc...lution_displays

  • Like 2

Well, yes and no.

Yes to higher resolutions and escaping this 1080p curse we've been stuck with due to the economics of scale.

No in terms of specifics. That resolution is only one aspect ratio (16:10). While I'm a big fan of 16:10, letterboxing is just annoying when watching movies. For people who care, and want a 16:9 display, the resolution you should be asking for is 2560x1440.

16x10 is an obsolete aspect ratio.

This is an example of the effects of scale. While I think work is more comfortable with the extra vertical resolution, 16:9 completely destroyed 16:10 because it was cheaper to manufacture (monitor panels could be lumped in with TV panels). High-resolution displays are helping us escape the TV technology trap, though, and we might see a rise in != 16:9 displays over the next few years.

On the other hand, if 4K really takes off, large displays might just jump on that bandwagon, and you might start seeing a lot of 27-30" 4K 16:9 monitors on the cheap.

  • Like 1

16:10 is obsolete!? It is by far my res of choice. For desktop monitors it is best by far - Letterboxed movies are fine, and the extra height is great for working.

16:10 on a phone/tablet? That I can understand if you say its not ideal, but I still like it...the Nexus10 looks functional to me.

I'm not a pixel junkie myself...I'm very happy with 1920x1200 on a 24" display.

I saw this the other day, It is definitely way past time to move on where it comes to laptop screens and desktop monitors. We've been stuck with 1080p for what seems like an eternity and pretty much every monitor released right now is still 1080p when we all know they can very easily move on to 2560x1600 and even beyond that without raising the cost too much. This res seems to be exclusively kept for top end 30" IPS displays from the likes of dell. It all comes down to the display manufacturers milking 1080p"indefinitely" I have no idea what would push them to finally move on.

16:10 is obsolete!? It is by far my res of choice. For desktop monitors it is best by far - Letterboxed movies are fine, and the extra height is great for working.

I tend to agree, my primary usage is work and occasionally gaming.. just a bit more screen real estate to work with.. games just "feel" a little weird at 16:9 too, but just what I'm used to I guess. I can totally understand some wanting 16:9 instead though.. for me, I got a ginormous TV upstairs for watching movies so the aspect ratio never bothered me. Guess it depends on your primary motivation.

I was looking to replace my old 24' MVA LCD (1920x1200) from 2007ish with something higher res when the power supply died. I saw 27' consumer LCDs (not a TV) and they are lower resolution than my old 24'...even 24' LCDs are lower res (1920x1080). Also, the current MVA panels look worse than my 24'...ended up paying someone to fix it as there was nothing with a reasonable price tag to replace it.

Why stop there? I want 4K resolution on my laptop and at least 1080p on my thermostat.

right now this cannot happen because of battery life. Wait a few years.

25x16 sounds like great for tablets if they can keep battery life at 10 hours. That should be the standard.

I'm really not sure I understand this trend of squeezing more pixels into the same physical space. Have we suddenly evolved to have mega awesome eyes that can see individual pixels at 5 feet away? :wacko: Using my computer, netbook or phone I can't see the individual pixels unless my eyes are too close to the screen. Maybe I'm not understanding something but it seems like pointless number increases to me, much like camera megapixels.

I changed my laptop's screen from 720p to 1080p.... never going back, who ever tought 1366x768 screens are good... is plain wrong, even I prefer 1280x800.

I'm really not sure I understand this trend of squeezing more pixels into the same physical space. Have we suddenly evolved to have mega awesome eyes that can see individual pixels at 5 feet away? :wacko: Using my computer, netbook or phone I can't see the individual pixels unless my eyes are too close to the screen. Maybe I'm not understanding something but it seems like pointless number increases to me, much like camera megapixels.

Try disabling font anti-aliasing and you'll quickly start seeing individual pixels.

  • Like 1

I am not sure that he is saying 2560x1600 needs to be the next standard but that 300ppi+ should be the minimum requirement.

And I agree with him.

Unless anything has changed things just break when you try and scale things up in a desktop environment, I'm personally happy with 1440x900 on my 13" ultrabook... i dont think i would gain anything by having a stupidly high resolution, things might look a bit sharper and thats it.

I'm really not sure I understand this trend of squeezing more pixels into the same physical space. Have we suddenly evolved to have mega awesome eyes that can see individual pixels at 5 feet away? :wacko: Using my computer, netbook or phone I can't see the individual pixels unless my eyes are too close to the screen. Maybe I'm not understanding something but it seems like pointless number increases to me, much like camera megapixels.

Look at the ipad2 and new ipad, there is a real difference in view photos. I am sure looking at say a transformer to a N10 and there again will be a huge difference in how a photo looks.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • You've tried DuckDuckGo and Brave Search, now get serious with SearXNG by Paul Hill Over the last decade, it has become quite trendy to dump Google Search in favor of privacy-preserving alternatives such as DuckDuckGo, Startpage, and Brave Search. These search engines have done a very good job at highlighting dodgy practices by Google, such as adjusting search results based on what it thinks you’ll like (filter bubble) and stalking you around the web to advertise to you. While these search engines are good starting points when compared to non-private services like Google, there are still quite a few issues with them. For example, both DuckDuckGo and Brave Search require running non-free JavaScript in your web browser, which is comparable to running proprietary software on your computer, meaning you can be sure about what it’s actually doing in the background. Another issue is that these search engines are hosted on the respective companies’ servers, and you are using a service that you don’t control. Finally, DuckDuckGo, while offering privacy features, relies heavily on Microsoft’s infrastructure for its results and, in the past, has permitted Microsoft tracking scripts. If you are looking for a more private search solution than DuckDuckGo, Brave Search, and Startpage, then I recommend taking a look at SearXNG. It is a privacy-respecting metasearch engine that can be used via different public instances, which is useful for mobile users, or you can install it on your computer or server and run it locally with maximum control. Unlike Google, Bing, or Brave Search, which crawl the web and have their own search indexes, SearXNG is a metasearch engine, meaning it taps other search engines, stripping your identifying data, such as IP address, user agent, and cookies, in the process. Your search query is sent to the other search engines you enable before aggregating the results. SearXNG has deployment flexibility. If you are a casual user or a mobile user and don’t want to run SearXNG locally, you can use a public instance that is hosted by someone else. The main problem with this is that you are putting trust in the maintainer of the instance regarding stuff like logs that they may keep; good hosts should have a privacy policy explaining their policies. If you are trying to use SearXNG, you can also install the software on your device and then head to 127.0.0.1:8080 in your browser and search from there. While you don’t have to worry about a third-party admin like the public instances, search engines could ultimately block your IP address if they frown on you pulling in their search results locally. If you want to run it locally, it’s a good idea to use proxies or VPNs to hide your actual IP. You don’t have to worry about this with a public instance, as search engines never see your IP address. The main privacy benefit of using SearXNG is that it isolates your identity from the underlying engines that it’s capable of searching, such as Google and Bing. These search engines will only see requests coming from a generic server, so they can’t profile you and create a bubble filter that influences what results you see. This also ensures that your search engine doesn’t turn into an echo chamber that prevents you from reading alternative points of view. As a free software project, you are allowed to inspect SearXNG to make sure there are no negative features bundled inside. This sets it apart from the privacy search engines mentioned earlier because you can’t check their source code. As a meta search engine, you are not restricted to getting results from one source. Due to the fact that it scrapes content from other websites, your SearXNG instance will periodically get blocked from different providers, so it’s good to select a range of sources as a backup. While enabling all of the services will give you great results, this can make searching slower. I am personally happy with slower searches for the best results, but you can always check which providers are slowing down your search from the search results page and disable them to speed things up. If you want decent results quickly, enable the main search providers such as Google, Brave, DuckDuckGo, Qwant, Bing, and Yahoo. This way, you get wide coverage without the latency. On the Engines tab in Preferences, do note that there are different tabs, such as General, Images, and Videos, with their own providers that can be toggled and are not covered by "Enable all" while on the General tab, so be sure to dig into each. Just a note, if you want to enable everything, press "Enable all" in one tab, then hit save at the bottom of the page, then do the next tab, and so on. If you press "Enable all", then do that in each tab, and then save, nothing will stick. When I had just some of the search engines enabled, I searched “define nefarious” and results came back with the definition of “define” - obviously that was a sucky result. However, when I had everything enabled, it found dictionary pages for the word “nefarious” and even had an inline definition on the sidebar, which is quite nice too - that was delivered by WolframAlpha for anyone wondering! Probably the worst thing about this meta search engine is that the engines you select are saved with a cookie, so you must enable them on every new device you use SearXNG on, including if you decide to go into incognito mode with your web browser. Honestly, I would say this is the most annoying aspect, and perhaps if your browser lets you choose a separate private browsing search engine, then it would be best to use DuckDuckGo for this portion of your browsing. Another weakness of SearXNG is the random blocking of it by search providers. When you are on the results page, expand the “Response time” box, and it will show things like “Suspended: too many requests” or “access denied”. This is why it is good to enable several providers so that there is always a fallback to get results from. I won’t pretend SearXNG will be for everyone, however, if you enable all of the providers and put up with the slower response time, the results can be really amazing. Even if you don’t want to use it as your daily driver, keeping a bookmark handy that links to it is a good idea if you ever feel like doing a deep dive into a niche topic where other search engines are just failing to bring up any good result, due to the amount of sources it looks on. If you’re interested in radical user control over the software you use, installing SearXNG locally can also be a good idea, but be prepared to be temporarily blocked from sites if you trigger bot sensors without a VPN. Personally, I’ve opted to use a public instance, rather than install it myself. If you want to use it via a public instance, head over to searx.space to find a provider. Let us know in the comments if you have used SearXNG or its predecessor, Searx. What do you think about the quality of the results?
    • Dear Neowin, If it is not too much trouble, can you start using the new-ish designations for Insider Preview? "Experimental" is different than "former Dev" as it can apply to different models, eg 26H1 or 26H2 etc, right? No need to seed confusion IMHO. And, please "finally" update your graphics. OK?
    • Did you see their FAQ, its quite good. Have a look in the Advanced section. https://delta.chat/en/help
    • Just install Linux Mint that is a real blessing and many times cheaper because you can continue using your old Windows computer/laptop with the latest Linux updates.
    • Interesting share -- however it does not make sense: Email messages get stored somewhere, so how is Delta Chat "based on email" and decentralized without actually storing anything? By Web3 standard practices, the various Relays would require dedicated storage to make messages available to the recipients (like a large series of message queue channels, akin to racks of traditional post office boxes)... and Contacts must be two-way confirmed in order for encryption keys to be exchanged (ostensibly every key-pair is uniquely bound between sender and recipient) and the Relays would preserve the public keys in order to facilitate message carriage... or every device stores all sorts of keys and contact info. All of this to say, decentralized messaging is like running Bluesky nodes except instead of discovering/browsing public feeds by various posters (at the given node) these Delta Chats would be relaying encrypted messages (via Relays) that only trusted recipients would have the appropriate decryption key (their own private key) to read it. But this doesn't solve the "it's like email" sales pitch. The only way it's like email is that there's encrypted binary stuff being transported from your app into the federated ether of Delta Chat Relays for others to decrypt (hopefully only the intended recipient)... but outside of this federated relays framework, it is absolutely nothing like email.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Woland13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Year In
      bernmeister earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      tuben earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      504
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      226
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      160
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!