Originally posted by Shadowfax
dude, 1280*1024 is only standard because the distortion is not very perceptible. i like the look it gives, myself, and used it on my trinitron monitor. however, do the math. here, i'll do it for you.
1280/960=1024/768=4/3=1.3333
1280/1024=5/4=1.25=not the standard 4:3 ratio. i don't want to be mean, but it is really basic to understand that there will be a distortion when you use 1280*1024 on a screen that is 4:3 it squashes the pixels so that they are shaped like rectangles instead of squares, thus making images on the screen of squares look like they are horizontally elongated rectangles, and circles look like horizontally elongated ovals.
moving on to the Tibook that i have in my lap right now, 16:10 vs. 15:10 (3:2) is not splitting hairs. you are talking about the difference between 1280*800 (16:10) and 1280*854 (3:2, 15:10, on the current 15.2" Tibook). that is a net difference of 54*1280 (69,120 pixels total) that you are losing. there is nothing hairline about that. that's my workspace! there are 1,093,120 pixels on my 1280*854 screen. there are 1,024,000 on the 1280*800. that's 93.7% of the screen space, and thus 6.3% you are losing. sure, the number is cleaner, but that's not hairline. hairline would be, in my mind, like the difference between 1280*854 and 1280*850.