Why is the Ipad screen not 16:9?

[Beta Particle]

How can more screen space (as the iPhone5 is getting) with more pixels cause a reduction in the iPad's usability?

More pixels could only allow more options. If you reduced the size of the screen of reduced the resolution then you could say that.

16:9 tablets are unwieldy when used in the portrait orientation. They are landscape-only devices. That is a massive reduction in usability.

Changing the aspect ratio changes how content is rendered. As shown above, you would actually see less of a web page, even if the tablet has the same height and is physically wider with a higher resolution display.

 

[darngooddesign]

How can more screen space (as the iPhone5 is getting) with more pixels cause a reduction in the iPad's usability?

The current iPad is 10" tall. Lets say the iPad 4 gets a 16:9 screen the width will decrease, because Apple would have to increase the height by a lot to maintain the same width. Now magazines pages are basically 4:3 in format. On this 16:9 screen they would be displayed smaller because of the decreased width. This is a reduction in usability.

 

[Oppressed]

Because I watch videos maybe 5% of the time on my iPad? And maybe because I read books, feeds, game, and a number of other things the other 95% of the time. Many others are in the same boat. I mean if you honestly watch videos a good 80%+ of the time then buy a 16:9 tablet.

Also call me crazy but I mainly use my iPad in portrait mode.

 

[fertilized-egg]

As the title says?

If the new Iphone will be 16:9 why was this never? Could they make it 16:9 in it's current size for Ipad 4?

I have a 16:9 tablet that's small (RIM Playbook) and it feels awkward in portrait. 16:9 to me is only good for watching movies and little else. Unlike phones that are usually designed to be held in a hand, tablets are supposed to be more like a notebook. At least I feel that way.

 

[voronoi]

You'd doing it again.

You are removing the top and bottom parts of the current screen to turn it from 4:3 into 16:9 or 16:10 rather than adding extra screen onto the side.

As I've pointed out, (and as Microsoft and Samsung have shown) You could have the same 4:3 web browser view on screen, but then perhaps an extra sidebar area for a second program to run, say a email app or a video app, or something else to can drag/drop onto or from.

I can't help but feel as time goes on, two apps on screen, in some way is going to become a no brainer way of making tablet usage more practical. And that's going to call for a wider screen at 4:3 really is just no suitable for splitting.

I don't expect the Microsoft Surface tablets will get the split screen idea right on their 1st attempt, but really it's such an obvious thing to wish to do. Not having to copy data, close the app, open another full screen app, paste the data in, do back to the 1st app, copy some more data, reopen the 2nd app, paste more in.

Come on, even you can accept this is no sensible way to do computing.

How's this then? Two websites with the same vertical length, but one is wider than the other. Notice how the text on the wider site expands and becomes uncomfortable to read. The images might look strange in the thumbnail, but expand them and see for yourself. You could say that websites should use a fixed width so that doesn't happen, but then what would this width be? Who determines the standard (if there could be a standard) for all the possible aspect ratios and resolutions out there?

As for having two apps on one screen, I still don't see why it's such an obvious thing to do on a tablet. If we had two apps displayed side by side, we'd only really be focusing on one of them at a time. Even on a laptop, most people choose to overlap windows or use tabs rather than display them side by side because for that to be useable, you'd need a rather large screen.

At any rate, none of this matters if you use a tablet in portrait mode, for which again, there are plenty of uses.

 

[TheWheelMan]

How can more screen space (as the iPhone5 is getting) with more pixels cause a reduction in the iPad's usability?

More pixels could only allow more options. If you reduced the size of the screen of reduced the resolution then you could say that.

A narrower screen (not a "screen with more pixels, as you're trying to classify it) is very much a problem if you need to read or write documents that are 8.5 x 11. A narrower screen means less width for a webpage in portrait and a shorter page of text in landscape. If all you want to do is view video or occasional web surfing, that's fine. For those of us with much greater requirements for the iPad, it very much would reduce usability. And I think a whole lot of people will feel the same.

 

[Piggie]

A narrower screen (not a "screen with more pixels, as you're trying to classify it) is very much a problem if you need to read or write documents that are 8.5 x 11. A narrower screen means less width for a webpage in portrait and a shorter page of text in landscape. If all you want to do is view video or occasional web surfing, that's fine. For those of us with much greater requirements for the iPad, it very much would reduce usability. And I think a whole lot of people will feel the same.

I never have ever said a narrower screen. Those who don't want a change to the old 4:3 ratio keep using the term narrower screen to try and push their point across from a negative point of view.

I'm beginning to think a Photoshop is needed to make these people grasp that a wider screen format is actually better in portrait mode also as it will allow you to see more at once, and most importantly (as you point out) lose less space when using the on-screen keyboard in portrait mode.

Again, and in bold capitols if it helps: I'M NOT ASKING FOR A NARROWER SCREEN. I'm asking for a larger screen to give more space to benefit games, to benefit movies and to benefit web browsing in Portrait and document creating in portrait

 

[darngooddesign]

Assuming that Apple keeps the height of the screen the same:

Please provide a photoshop showing how a 16:9 screen is not narrower than the 4:3 screen in protrait. Also demonstrate how 4:3 formatted documents (PDFs, Zinion Magazines, etc.) would not be smaller when displayed fullscreen on the narrower 16:9 screen.

In Portrait mode you would see more when web browsing, but what you see will be smaller than on a 4:3 iPad.

Also, please address the issues I, and others, brought up in regards to landscape browsing.

 

[TheWheelMan]

I never have ever said a narrower screen. Those who don't want a change to the old 4:3 ratio keep using the term narrower screen to try and push their point across from a negative point of view.

I'm beginning to think a Photoshop is needed to make these people grasp that a wider screen format is actually better in portrait mode also as it will allow you to see more at once, and most importantly (as you point out) lose less space when using the on-screen keyboard in portrait mode.

Again, and in bold capitols if it helps: I'M NOT ASKING FOR A NARROWER SCREEN. I'm asking for a larger screen to give more space to benefit games, to benefit movies and to benefit web browsing in Portrait and document creating in portrait

Were you or were you not talking about the 16:9 aspect ratio? Because if you were, it doesn't matter how big the damn screen is, that would be a NARROWER screen aspect ration, which is our point. If you were not talking about a 16:9 aspect ration, then that's different.

 

[v0lume4]

Like many others have said, the iPad is meant to be the perfect size to cover everything it handles, from movies (16:9) to magazines, games, and web browsing. 4:3 is the perfect middle ground. Like a jack of all trades.

 

[gusmahler]

If the iPad were 16:9, it would make it great for viewing movies and video, but horrible for reading books and magazines and for web browsing. A 16:9 aspect ratio just doesn't work for those types of activities.

I surf the web on my 16:9 monitor every single day.

 

[v0lume4]

I surf the web on my 16:9 monitor every single day.

But your monitor isn't only 10 inches diagonally I'm sure. If you ask me, it doesn't matter what the aspect ratio is if the screen is big enough. With tablet-sized 16:9 screens, however, I feel the vertical space when in landscape is too scarce.

 

[TheWheelMan]

But your monitor isn't only 10 inches diagonally I'm sure. If you ask me, it doesn't matter what the aspect ratio is if the screen is big enough. With tablet-sized 16:9 screens, however, I feel the vertical space when in landscape is too scarce.

Exactly. You can up the pixels to "Retina" resolution, but then on a smaller iPad the text on webpages would have to be microscopic in order to fit much webpage real estate on the screen.

 

[Redjericho]

I will answer your question in the simplest way possible.

Apple intended the iPad to be a portrait device, and it is. 16:9 looks worse (maybe not bad, but worse) in portrait orientation than 4:3.