Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

EnzoAmata

macrumors regular
Original poster
Dec 5, 2010
143
1
I bought the new 2011 MBP 13" - 4:3 aspect ratio! Why?

The Air does 16:9 and it's 11"

Why didn't I check the specs before buying just assumed it would be 16:9 - I know I'm an ass but why doesn't Apple have 16:9 on it's 13" models?
 
It's 16:10, not 4:3. Besides, it's a lot better than 16:9, which would give you around 10% less pixels.
 
What?
facepalm.gif
 
I meant to write 16:10, my bad.

I mean though no wide screen the Airs screen is better for space than the MBP.
 
I mean though no wide screen the Airs screen is better for space than the MBP.

How did you come up to that conclusion? If 13" MBP had 16:9 screen, it would most likely be 1280x720 or 1366x768 which is worse than 1280x800. 16:9 screens are cheaper to manufacture but that does not imply that they are better.

The MacBook Air has the same aspect ratio. It is widescreen. You are confused.

11.6" MBA has 1366x768, which is approximately 16:9.
 
The MacBook Air has the same aspect ratio. It is widescreen. You are confused.

Air : 1366x768 (native)

Pro : 1280x800 (native)

The Air has widescreen the MBP doesn't the screen seems far more box like than the Air.

On the Air your windows have far more space on screen on the MBP with the same windows it's boxed in and the same things don't fit.
 
Air : 1366x768 (native)

Pro : 1280x800 (native)

The Air has widescreen the MBP doesn't the screen seems far more box like than the Air.

1366/768 = 1.77
1280/800 = 1.6
4/3 = 1.33

Both 1.6 and 1.77 would be considered wide screen in this context. Anything significantly larger than 1.33 would. Your basic premise does not make any sense.
 
Air : 1366x768 (native)

Pro : 1280x800 (native)

The Air has widescreen the MBP doesn't the screen seems far more box like than the Air.

On the Air your windows have far more space on screen on the MBP with the same windows it's boxed in and the same things don't fit.

Smaller resolution does not mean it isn't widescreen. And 16:10 will have more height than 16:9, making it slightly more "box like".
 
1366/768 = 1.77
1280/800 = 1.6
4/3 = 1.33

Both 1.6 and 1.77 would be considered wide screen in this context. Anything significantly larger than 1.33 would. Your basic premise does not make any sense.

The Air has the wider native screen resolution and with that you can fit more apps on screen and they also look less box like. I can load the twitter client on both and it looks thiner and better on the air if I load it on the MBP, if I try to re size it to be as thin as on the Air the content is squashed.
 
Air : 1366x768 (native)

Pro : 1280x800 (native)

The Air has widescreen the MBP doesn't the screen seems far more box like than the Air.

On the Air your windows have far more space on screen on the MBP with the same windows it's boxed in and the same things don't fit.

I was comparing the 13" version of both laptops. Didn't notice the 11.6" in your original post. 16:10 is still considered widescreen.
 
Smaller resolution does not mean it isn't widescreen. And 16:10 will have more height than 16:9, making it slightly more "box like".
Yes that doesn't look good next to the Air.

I was comparing the 13" version of both laptops. Didn't notice the 11.6" in your original post. 16:10 is still considered widescreen.
I admit making an initial error on the term widescreen and typing 4:3 when I meant 16:10 but the issue I was trying to bring up is apps look better on that 16:9 aspect ration next to the MBP, the content is box like and squashed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Air has the wider native screen resolution and with that you can fit more apps on screen and they also look less box like. I can load the twitter client on both and it looks thiner and better on the air if I load it on the MBP, if I try to re size it to be as thin as on the Air the content is squashed.

You should get a 25:1

2000 x 80 is the new craze.
 
I admit making an initial error on the term widescreen and typing 4:3 when I meant 16:10 but the issue I was trying to bring up is apps look better on that 16:9 aspect ration next to the MBP, the content is box like and squashed.

That doesn't make any sense. What does the aspect ratio of the display have to do with the shape and content in your apps?
 
Most programs, websites, and documents are vertical oriented. Now if you want two programs side by side, a wider screen will help with that, but you're talking about a 13" screen anyway.
 
Most programs, websites, and documents are vertical oriented. Now if you want two programs side by side, a wider screen will help with that, but you're talking about a 13" screen anyway.
I'm just going to have to start to use spaces...a feature I've never gotten into the habit of using...

I do want things side by side.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.