iPad Vote For or Against an iPad with a 16:9 Display

[LightOnAHill]

The point is, there have been polls, and they always include discussions. Here's another one, from three years ago, so this is not a new topic.

:

I wasn't participating three years ago...

I'd like to participate, and I'm sure new members would too.

A new poll is fun, and that's accomplishing something sufficient to make it worth the few clicks to make the thread.

I'm sure the OP is really really sorry he used up some of your bandwidth for the text in the forum with the new thread.

If you don't like it, don't open the thread. No reason to come in here and antagonize the OP, especially if your best basis for doing so is a 3-year-old poll.....

Seriously.

 

[shortcrust]

If only you could spoil online ballots.

 

[Oracle1729]

The poll is incomplete.

The right aspect ratio for a tablet is 1:√2

Where do you get that ratio from?

Are you thinking (1+√5)/2 : 1?


As for the original poll, 16:9 should not be in any device except a dedicated TV. It's worse for web surfing, photo editing, coding, and just about anything else I can think of doing on a computer or tablet.

 

[Shanghaichica]

Strongly against. 16:9 is only good for watching videos IMO. I have a 10 inch samsubg tab with a 16:9 screen and it's no fun at all. It's basically unusable in portrait mode and is still difficult to hold in landscape mode. When web browsing I have to constantly scroll and pan because you get so little on the screen.

 

[cube]

where do you get that ratio from?

iso 216

 

[Piggie]

Strongly against. 16:9 is only good for watching videos IMO. I have a 10 inch samsubg tab with a 16:9 screen and it's no fun at all. It's basically unusable in portrait mode and is still difficult to hold in landscape mode. When web browsing I have to constantly scroll and pan because you get so little on the screen.

Why do people keep coming up with this?

So, what you are saying is take an iMac, lop 2 inches off either side of the screen, taking it back to 4:3 and it will suddenly become better?

As you say 16:9 is only for video and nothing else.

 

[cube]

So, what you are saying is take an iMac, lop 2 inches off either side of the screen, taking it back to 4:3 and it will suddenly become better?

No. Grow it to 4:3 and it will become better.

 

[Night Spring]

Why do people keep coming up with this?

So, what you are saying is take an iMac, lop 2 inches off either side of the screen, taking it back to 4:3 and it will suddenly become better?

Why do you keep on bringing up the iMac? Desktop monitor and tablets are different beasts, mainly because you don't hold a desktop monitor in your hand, plus the application windows on an iMac can be resized to fit the content.

That said, there is usually a lot of space being wasted on an iMac when working with things like Word documents or reading web pages and ebooks. But it doesn't bother me because I just ignore the wasted space, and I don't have to hold the monitor in my hand. And it looks great when I watch high def video, so on a desktop monitor, I don't mind 16:9.

 

[oneMadRssn]

16:10 with iOS9 ? Being modified to allow to utilize the new format screen and also allow some form of side by side multitasking so you could drag items from one app to the other.

I would live to have two portrait apps side by side on a landscape tablet. However, there is no need for 16:9 or 16:10 for this. Two portrait apps in 4:3 will fit just fine in a landscape 3:4 tablet.

Also, iOS9? What happened to 7? or 8?

 

[Piggie]

Why do you keep on bringing up the iMac?

Because it was posted and I quote:

"Strongly against. 16:9 is only good for watching videos IMO."

----------

Also, iOS9? What happened to 7? or 8?

I plucked iOS9 out the air, and like with a Plastic iPhone and Large screen Mobile, I think it will be a while before Apple offer the custom a choice of 4:3 and 16:10 screen models of tablets. Perhaps also in a variety of sizes.

It's not going to happen tomorrow, but may well do in time, esp if Samsung continues to grow and grow in market share on their mobile computing devices.

 

[Night Spring]

Because it was posted and I quote:

"Strongly against. 16:9 is only good for watching videos IMO."

But that post didn't specifically mention a desktop monitor. Considering the subforum this thread is in and the thread title, I think we can assume that everyone is talking about tablets -- so we should assume that the poster meant "16:9 [on a tablet] is only good for watching videos." If we have to specify "on a tablet" each time, our posts would get unnecessarily long and cumbersome.

 

[Rodster]

If Apple ever uses a 16:9 screen I will never buy another iPad.

 

[Lancer]

The problem is that all PCs have gone 16:9 and it is truly terrible.

How so?

I've have several 16:9 LCDs and now the 27" iMac and I have no issues with the format. I say bring on 22:9!

 

[Piggie]

If Apple ever uses a 16:9 screen I will never buy another iPad.

So your entire life without owning another tablet, that would be a shame.

What brand would you select instead?

 

[MartiNZ]

So your entire life without owning another tablet, that would be a shame.

What brand would you select instead?

MS Surface or something else Windows 8 like I would hope . Maybe one of the new Samsung haswell ones except ... Samsung ><.

 

[Piggie]

MS Surface or something else Windows 8 like I would hope . Maybe one of the new Samsung haswell ones except ... Samsung ><.

It's going to be interesting to see what Msoft do here. Many seem to be writing them off, but it's just really Mk1, and they don't generally give up just like that.

RT was only really around for cost/battery/performance reasons. As time goes on, years pass and low power chips get faster and faster then perhaps RT will just fade.

I'd love a 10 year crystal ball right now to see all the unexpected things that are going to happen and what company is on the crest of the wave now and will of crashed down by then.

 

[MartiNZ]

Indeed. But kind of contrary to that, I think they should run with RT for tablets but take it all the way, as they should have done up front - once Office is in metro they can pretty much ditch the desktop altogether in RT, and that would make it a proper tablet OS.

While there are a lot of desktop games and such that I would like to have on my Surface RT, I would like to see them run with full metro.

 

[Shanghaichica]

But that post didn't specifically mention a desktop monitor. Considering the subforum this thread is in and the thread title, I think we can assume that everyone is talking about tablets -- so we should assume that the poster meant "16:9 [on a tablet] is only good for watching videos." If we have to specify "on a tablet" each time, our posts would get unnecessarily long and cumbersome.

Thanks. I did mean on a tablet as the title of the thread asks about 16:9 on the iPad.

 

[theluggage]

I've have several 16:9 LCDs and now the 27" iMac and I have no issues with the format. I say bring on 22:9!

Aspect ratio becomes less of an issue as the screen gets larger.

At 27", 16:9 is fine. You can, for instance, view a 2-up A4/Letter spread at actual size with tons of room left over for toolbars, palettes etc.

Once you start getting to 15" and smaller screens, and "screen real estate" becomes more scarce, 16:9 rapidly gets horrible - like trying to work while locked inside a mail box. Add touchscreen - which restricts how small you can make controls and icons - and you rapidly run out of space.

I happily use a 27", 16:9 Apple Cinema Display. I've recently been using a 10.1 Android tablet and by far my biggest criticism is the 16:9 screen.

Bigest joke - try to use the on-screen keyboard in landscape mode on a 16:9 tablet. Ridiculous.

 

[Piggie]

Bigest joke - try to use the on-screen keyboard in landscape mode on a 16:9 tablet. Ridiculous.

So, you are saying, cut, say 1" of either side of your 16:9 tablet, so it becomes 4:3 and it will be usable for you?

4:3 is smaller than 16:9 (if you wish to look at 16:9 or 16:10 in a positive way as opposed to a negative way)

There is no law or rule of god which states that if you have a 4:3 screen making it wider has to mean it gets shorter, I see it as ADDING to the width not taking away from the height.

 

[darngooddesign]

Because it was posted and I quote:
"Strongly against. 16:9 is only good for watching videos IMO."

This is the iPad section, logically people mean on the iPad. Computers and TVs and Movie screens are different animals and widescreen works well on those.

So, you are saying, cut, say 1" of either side of your 16:9 tablet, so it becomes 4:3 and it will be usable for you?

It does for me based on the things I use my iPad for.

4:3 is smaller than 16:9 (if you wish to look at 16:9 or 16:10 in a positive way as opposed to a negative way)

There is no way to say if it is smaller or larger if you don't mention the physical screen dimensions. For example, The 4:3 iPad 4 is nosmaller than the Nexus 7.

There is no law or rule of god which states that if you have a 4:3 screen making it wider has to mean it gets shorter, I see it as ADDING to the width not taking away from the height.

While you would think that is true, making an iPad wider means you see less vertically in landscape when web browsing, so in practice you are making if shorter.

 

[MrWillie]

The point is, there have been polls, and they always include discussions. Here's another one, from three years ago, so this is not a new topic.

Poll: 16:9 on the iPad

From the forum FAQ:

So...

Bigest joke - try to use the on-screen keyboard in landscape mode on a 16:9 tablet. Ridiculous.

Try it on a 7 inch tablet. Try editing an Excel document on an RT tablet with the onscreen keyboard.

So, you are saying, cut, say 1" of either side of your 16:9 tablet, so it becomes 4:3 and it will be usable for you?

4:3 is smaller than 16:9 (if you wish to look at 16:9 or 16:10 in a positive way as opposed to a negative way)

There is no law or rule of god which states that if you have a 4:3 screen making it wider has to mean it gets shorter, I see it as ADDING to the width not taking away from the height.

Yes a larger sized screen is a larger sized screen. A 9.7" 4:3 screen has more area than a 9.7" 16:9 screen. Adding width to 9.7" 4:3 screen no longer makes it a 9.7" screen.

I could also make a 16:9 screen taller.

 

[charlituna]

Hi everyone, please vote for your preference of 4:3 or 16:9. Let's put this one to bed with a massive showing.

Why? It's not like this is going to change anything. Apple will do what they want no matter how many polls etc are posted on boards

 

[johnseattle]

16:9 ftw

 

[theluggage]

So, you are saying, cut, say 1" of either side of your 16:9 tablet, so it becomes 4:3 and it will be usable for you?

Cut 1" off either side of a 16:9 tablet and it is 2" narrower and proportionately lighter - a useful reduction in size. Sure, you now have a smaller screen, but because 4:3 is a more useful shape, the impact of the loss of space is reduced.

A 16:9 non-mini iPad would either be the same width and, therefore, have a substantially smaller screen, or be an inch or two wider & therefore substantially bigger.