How important was the 16:10 screen aspect ratio in your decision to purchase?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by iFanboy, Feb 12, 2012.

  1. iFanboy Guest

    #1
    I'm a lawyer and vertical screen real estate is important to me because I spend most of my time on Word or other scrolling A4 documents.

    I have previously tried a 16:9 laptop, which sadly most laptop's now use, and it was incredibly annoying to use.

    I wouldn't purchase a 16:9 laptop and as long as Apple continue producing 16:10 screens they'll have my business.

    Does anyone else feel this way?
     
  2. 88 King macrumors 6502

    88 King

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Location:
    London, UK
    #2
    I prefer 16:10 as well, and this was a factor when I was looking at either a 13" MBP or Lenovo 14" ThinkPad to replace my old 13" MBA. However, since the Lenovo 14" have screen resolution of 1600X900, the 16:9 is not too bad if you move the taskbar to the side.

    If the next 13" MBP have 16:10 ratio and 1600X1050 resolution or higher, I'll move back to Apple laptop.

    P.S. I mainly work on PDF, Word docs and Excel sheets on the go with my ThinkPad, so the 15" MBP is a bit too heavy and powerful for my needs.
     
  3. SuperCachetes macrumors 6502a

    SuperCachetes

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2010
    Location:
    Away from you
    #3
    No. Didn't matter to me either way... I couldn't have told you what the aspect ratio was until you said it. YMMV.
     
  4. iFanboy thread starter Guest

    #4
    It's visibly different as it affects screen SHAPE.

    Think of 16:9 as a letterbox. Think of 16:10 as two letterboxes, one on top of the other. This is why 16:10 with a good screen resolution is excellent for document work. You get to see more of the document and have to scroll less.
     
  5. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #5
    Doesn't matter to me. In fact aspect ratio does not even come into my decision matrix.
     
  6. bruinsrme macrumors 603

    bruinsrme

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2008
    #6
    I have a dell 16:9, think pad 16:9 and a 13MBP. my considerations were were similar. Heck I still play around on some older 4:3 laptops
    4:3 for docs
    16:9 for spreadsheets

    Although one of my most significant decision to go with a think pad was the docking station. One button the dual screen desktop becomes my 7.5 hours notebook. I would think apple users, with just a mini as a desktop, would benefit from this.
     
  7. kolax macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2007
    #7
    Thing is, if Apple added width then you wouldn't lose any height. 13" 16:10 to 14" 16:9.

    Would you buy a 13" 16:10 laptop instead of a 14" 16:9?
     
  8. 88 King macrumors 6502

    88 King

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Location:
    London, UK
    #8
    If everything else are similar than yes, I'd buy a 13.3" MBP with 1600X1050 screen over a laptop with 14" 1600X900 screen. The extra 150 pixels are very useful for me.

    The reduction of 0.7 inch in screen size is not a big deal when offset with smaller footprint and slight battery gain over the 14".
     
  9. kolax macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2007
    #9
    You missed what I was saying, the vertical resolution stays the same while the width gets extra pixels.

    I'm for a 16:9 screen, as long as we gain width pixels and not lose height pixels, like in your example 88 King.

    1440x900 becomes 1600x900 for example.
     
  10. 88 King macrumors 6502

    88 King

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Location:
    London, UK
    #10
    I'd still prefer gain both width and hight in 16:10 ratio.

    For example 1600X1050 (16:10) over 1600X900 (16:9) and 1920X1200 (16:10) over 1920X1080 (16:9).

    16:9 is great for watch videos, but 16:10 is much better for office work no matter the size of the screen iMO.
     
  11. whiteonline macrumors 6502

    whiteonline

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2011
    Location:
    California, USA
    #11
    Exactly. Trying to be productive on a 16:9 screen feels cramped vertically.
     
  12. Krazy Bill macrumors 68030

    Krazy Bill

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    #12
    What's funny is since the adoption of 16:9 screen layouts the movie industry has since gone to 2.2:1.

    After using a mac for so long, 16:9 designs just seem odd to me. "Wide" and stubby.
     
  13. robgendreau macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2008
    #13
    Funny…I'm a lawyer too and at 27" the iMac at 16:9 is just about ideal for side by side documents.

    Aspect matters little to me though; I almost always use two monitors anyway. 16:10 would be rather insignificant on most of the machines I use vs. 16:9.

    Rob
     
  14. bniu macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2010
    #14
    I like the 16:10 on my MBP 17. I have enough horizontal space to view 1080p movies as well as have a ton of vertical space to do what I want.

    I don't mind the thunderbolt display being 16:9, once you go beyond HD, it's more pixels than you could ever want! I see it as 640 more horizontal pixels and 240 more vertical pixels over my MBP!
     
  15. SuperCachetes macrumors 6502a

    SuperCachetes

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2010
    Location:
    Away from you
    #15
    I understand the concept. You asked whether it was important with respect to purchasing, and for me, it wasn't.

    I have had laptops with both aspect ratios and didn't necessarily feel constrained or benefited by either, so seeking out a certain screen shape didn't matter to me - I chose the MBP for a slew of other reasons.
     
  16. thundersteele macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2011
    Location:
    Switzerland
    #16
    It didn't play a role in my decision. However I think that 16:9 is stupid on laptop screens.

    On desktop screens it's different - at some point there is enough vertical screen space (once you can edit an A4/letter page comfortably without scrolling), and then adding horizontal space is better in my opinion. Most multi-screen setups put the screens to the side, not on top of each other.
     
  17. Zwhaler macrumors 603

    Zwhaler

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2006
    #17
    16:10 on a laptop is nice, but I like 16:9 on the LED Cinema Display, mostly because video editing and playback is my primary use of the machine.
     
  18. dusk007 macrumors 68040

    dusk007

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2009
    #18
    I think 16:9 works okay on big screens >20" but it sucks on mobile devices.
    If you compare notebooks with similarly big looking screens
    a 12.1" 16:10 looks almost on par with a 13,3" 16:9 though the latter it is much more clunky as a whole. It is doesn't matter all that much with the small notebooks but with 15" sizes it makes quite a difference.
    16:9 makes for a bigger notebook or a smaller screen it sucks.
    But all are doing it and if we see any redsign there will definitely be a 16:9 screen. 16:10 or 3:2 is much better for stuffing it in bags while still getting big enough display.

    Given the choice I would always go for 16:10 but I doubt the next time I will buy a new notebook there will be any kind of choice left.
     

Share This Page