My point was that you could think of the ipad as giving you more height rather than less width in landscape mode.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Why does iPad not have a wide screen ratio?
- Thread starter Jackintosh
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
My point was that you could think of the ipad as giving you more height rather than less width in landscape mode.
Well, that;s 16:9 (or 16:10) then.
As what you are taking is a 4:3 display and adding (NOT TAKING) extra screen on either side of the current screen.
As with a TV
Your old 4:3 TV is say 18" tall by 24" wide
You buy a new widescreen set 18" tall by say 30" wide
You have lost nothing, you have simply added more screen to either side so it's win win all the way.
The new screen can display 4:3 with the exact same size as your old set, by, if you wish adding plain black borders where the extra is, or new programs can take advantage of the extra space and give you more content on screen.
It's funny how people seem to be negative and think 16:9 (or 16:10) cuts off the top and bottom of the old 4:3 display, rather than taking the more positive viewpoint that it's adding extra width they can use.
I guess it's the difference between a positive or a negative viewpoint on things in general
My point exactly. They don't get it. They haven't really thought about it because if they did, it would be clear as day.
Actually, this isnt correct at all. If you compare screens of the same size (diagonal measurement) a 4:3 display is about 12.5% larger than a 16:9 display.
This is why 16:9 tablets have larger screens, with 10.1″ being standard compared to the 9.7″ iPad display. Even then, these screens are about 5% smaller.
Thats why Microsoft is using a 10.6″ display with their Surface tablet, and why it is only made to be used in the landscape orientation.
It looks ridiculous to use a 16:9 display of that size in portrait:
(iPad in blue, Surface in green)
no one said this isnt considered. i was just was trying to understand your point as i wasnt seeing it clearly lol discuss it. this is a forum.
these are for sure considered.. i just dont feel the ergonomic changes are that significant as to why they wont do a widescreen display.
the other point you made in your original reply is more valid.
Last edited:
And for no good reason other than possibly it is cheaper to build a common shaped LCD (all TV's are 16:9 now). For actual productive use give me 16:10 or 4:3 any day.
When you say you feel that the ergonomic difference is not that significant, is that based on actual experience? Have you actually used a 4:3 tablet, and a 16:9 tablet, for a significant amount of time?
yes i own a 7" tablet, kindle fire and a new ipad.
i was saying, i felt that any more "strain" caused from a wide screen ratio would be minimal.
not saying i think the ipad should have a widescreen ratio, just saying i dont think,Apple is staying away from a widescreen ratio due to ergonomic difficulties
Last edited:
This is incorrect for landscape browsing on the iPad.
Using your tv analogy. Lets say you have a tv picture which is formatted for a regular screen, 4:3 format. Now if you switch to a widescreen tv, the only way you don't loose some if the picture is if it scales up vertically, leaving black bars on either side. The iPad scales up to fit the width of the screen so you will loose from the top and bottom, which means less content fits vertically.
This is readily apparent on a computer. Take a 4:3 formatted desktop picture, now scale it to fit the width of a widescreen. The top and bottom of the image are cropped.
You can simulate it on your iPad right now. Two finger zoom out of this window until you see enough background texture to approximate the additional width of a 16:9 screen. Now let go so Safari scales up to fit the width and you can see how much image is lost.
The only way what you said would be correct is if the iPad didn't scale up to fit the width of the screen, but it does.
Actually, this isn’t correct at all. If you compare screens of the same “size” (diagonal measurement) a 4:3 display is about 12.5% larger than a 16:9 display.
This is why 16:9 tablets have “larger” screens, with 10.1″ being standard compared to the 9.7″ iPad display. Even then, these screens are about 5% smaller.
That’s why Microsoft is using a 10.6″ display with their Surface tablet, and why it is only made to be used in the landscape orientation.
It looks ridiculous to use a 16:9 display of that size in portrait:
(iPad in blue, Surface in green)
Again you missed the point entirely. This is about ratio, not size. If apple were to release a larger screen iPad, it might do so with the same aspect ratio, thus giving us more height than a 16:9 tablet and thus black bars and people commenting why it's not in 16:9 yet provides the same size movie image as the surface tablet. The reason that the current iPad isn't 16:9 can be explained as:
A) to get that ratio you would lose height in landscape mode
OR
B) to get that ratio would have to have a wider screen in landscape mode.
So you could perceive the situation in two ways, the ipad is either too tall or not wide enough. A positive characteristic or a negative one. Thus the saying "is the glass half empty or half full?".
Last edited:
But size does matter, doesn't it? In order to get a tablet with a 16:9 ratio without losing any space from the current iPad size, you would have to make it bigger than the iPad -- by how much, I don't feel like calculating at the moment, but once you make the tablet bigger, then that would surely add more weight. So tablet makers tend to make tablets shaped like the Surface, which as was shown has less surface area than the iPad, in order to achieve a 16:9 ratio.
Yes. You could either lose height to get a 16:9 iPad or gain width. That's my point. The op sees that the current iPad should be 16:9 but misses the fact that it actually provides more height if you kept the dimensions the same. I'm not arguing for or against a bigger iPad, but I am arguing that it's not the aspect ration that is so important, but the overall size.
Does no one understand the glass half full being half empty metaphor? Doesn't anyone do critical thinking anymore?
Apart from all this 4:3 and 16:9 discussion, there has been a rumor about the mini ipad and I expect that there may be a solution for all this discussion in the mini ipad, its resolution has not been finalized and is expected to be released somewhere at the end of this year, so we can expect a bit from that... I mean may be...
