Sure you gain horizontal space, but you lose vertical space except for 1600x900 from 1400x900. And listen, a lot of people do real work on their computers that requires hight. I have a 13" MBP, with a hight of 800 pixels. That's barely enough, I wish I had a 15" screen. Reducing that to 768 would not be a good thing, let me assure you.
Look, this argument just doesn't hold water at all. I work with text, coding, etc. all the time. And the argument for a few extra vertical lines of resolution just doesn't work when a WIDER display allows you to have more open at a time.
The more windows I can have displayed side by side is a lot better than being able to pull a window down a little bit more. 16x10 is just an inefficient waste of space.
Because most people use their computers for things more useful than watching movies
Yeah. And the funny thing is that since screens went 16x9, computer sales are UP. People want proper widescreen.
And besides, a lot of movies have an ever wider ratio. Even with 16x9 you'll see black bars.
Thats true. However, on a 16x10 screen, like the MacBook screen, the image of a 2/35:1 film is as small as it is on a 4x3 TV. Not the case with a proper 16x9 screen.
Look at the iMacs. The 24" iMac had a 1920x1200 resolution, now the 21.5 has a 1920x1080 resolution. You just lost pixels. The 27" iMac has a 2560x1440 resolution, and the 30" Cinema display has a 2560x1600 display.
And guess what? The iMacs are selling better than ever now. Apparently Apple made the right move.
I hate that the new iMacs are 16x9, and hope that their notebooks don't go that route
Well, you're in a very very small minority. The rest of the industry has moved to 16x9. They did it virtually overnight. Sales are up. Apple did it on the iMac and sales are up. The only two places you really can't find 16x9 now are on Apple notebooks and Apple "Cinema" displays. But its only a matter of time with them.
I'm sure Apple already has working prototypes.
But notebooks have lower resolutions, I don't want to lose vertical space for horizontal space, even if it does give you more pixels in some case. And I'm sure most people who actually work on their computers instead of d**cking around agree with me.
Again, your argument just doesn't work. I've lost NOTHING in "work" (if working on a computer can even be called "work") by going 16x9 and gained everything when it comes to entertainment. You don't know how many times I've had to explain to people why their widescreen movies look so small on 16x10 displays and how those very same people jump at the opportunity to replace their system with a 16x9 display. And yes these are people who "work" on their computers.
Just like me. 16x10 should have never been introduced to begin with.
As part of a speaking tour at universities across the United States, Microsoft chairman Bill Gates sat down with Princeton's newspaper to discuss the road ahead. When asked why Microsoft chose to support HD DVD over Sony's Blu-ray format, Gates replied that Blu-ray's copyright protection scheme is "anti-consumer."
Which is ironic because HD DVD used the same copy protection as blu-ray disc. HDCP, AACS. BD+ wasn't even around at that time and its something that doesn't affect anyone.
Or... Welcome to Windows 7 Forums:
"The HDCP system is easy to understand and it is annoying." . . . <<snip>> . . . the player, and every other device in the signal transmission train (videocard, monitor, etc) must be HDCP compliant."
Which is exactly the same for iTunes HD downloads. So its okay for Apple to enforce the same type of HDCP requirements for HD video but its not okay for blu-ray to do it?
Frankly, a little less troll-speak and a little more candor would be helpful here.
You need to take your own advice and not cherry pick replies.
It's funny how you call me a troll and ignore the fact that Apple enforces the same HDCP requirements for their "high definition" content.
http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/17/apple-itunes-multimedia-throwing-hdcp-flags-on-new-macbook-mac/ http://gizmodo.com/5177075/itunes-hd-movies-wont-play-on-older-non+hdcp-monitors
You know what you need for HDCP compliance? A modern videocard with a chipset manufacturered provided driver (also known as a driver directly from nvidia or AMD), a non-Apple manufactured display from within the last 4 years, and an HDMI or DVI cable. Thats it. Scary stuff, huh?
Is it a huge difference? I have not seen the Dells. I know that Dell's lcds gets lots of positive responses, even from people here.
Well, Dell's RGBLED displays are some of the few that can claim true 100% color reproduction.
With Apple's edge-lit LED LCD displays, they're just giving you a thinner display that uses less power. RGBLED actually has hundreds of LEDs behind the LCD panel that can change color along with the picture being displayed on the LCD. Obviously that enhances the color quality dramatically. But none of Apple's displays use this technology. They're all edge-lit.
He is waiting for you to buy it. The "helpful link" that mosx posted to Newegg was a Commission Junction affiliate link so he gets a % of every purchase made at Newegg that someone makes from this site, for probably up to a month.
rofl I did no such thing. All of the links I have posted are DIRECT to newegg. I don't get squat out of anything.
