Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Why wide-screen monitors?

Last response: in Components
Share
May 18, 2010 7:43:47 PM

(there wasn't a "display" sub-category under graphics and display. So, I posted here. Please advise if there is another place...

I just wanted to put this out there to see if anyone knew.

It appears that we are being pushed into buying "wide-screen" monitors.
Does anyone know why?

I hope this trend gets reversed. I really dislike the wide-screen view.
I much prefer the squarish monitors we have had. (4:3 aspect)

The people I service (our managers and users) do not like the wide screen either.
But, it is becoming difficult to find standard aspect monitors.

More about : wide screen monitors

Best solution

a b C Monitor
May 18, 2010 7:48:01 PM

Mostly, that push is multimedia driven and the widescreen view suits movies better than 4:3. Though, speaking as a spreadsheet jockey I do prefer widescreen at work as well.
Share
a b C Monitor
May 18, 2010 8:12:19 PM

anton48 said:
I hope this trend gets reversed. I really dislike the wide-screen view.
I much prefer the squarish monitors we have had. (4:3 aspect)
It's actually cheaper to make the widescreen models. Not likely to get reversed.

You can still find 4:3 aspect monitors. Just expect to pay a bit more for them.
Look under the Business sections instead of the Consumer listings. example: UltraSharp 2007FP 20-inch 1600x1200
m
0
l
Related resources
May 19, 2010 2:18:44 AM

I get more screen real estate with a widescreen display. We use Autodesk Revit 3D architectural software at my office, which has a ribbon interface similar to MS Office. Widescreen is MUCH better as it gives more room for all the tools on the ribbon. I was running it on a 19" 4:3 display at 1280x1024. Now I run it on a 24" widescreen at 1920x1200. Much more screen real estate, even more than the largest 4:3 resolution I've seen of 1600x1200.
m
0
l
May 19, 2010 7:28:26 AM

Widescreen is the future. It has almost become the standard for viewing movies, gaming, etc. And 4:3 screens will be extinct within the next couple of years, deal with that.
m
0
l
a b C Monitor
May 19, 2010 4:21:51 PM

PatrickGSR94 said:
Now I run it on a 24" widescreen at 1920x1200.

1920x1200 is not widescreen.

1920x1080 is.

For serious work, I also would prefer the larger monitor.
m
0
l
May 19, 2010 4:35:11 PM

jsc said:
1920x1200 is not widescreen.

1920x1080 is.




:lol: 
Where did you get that??

FYI, any display having width-to-height ratio more than 1.37:1 can be called as widescreen.
In other words, anything which is not 4:3, is widescreen nowadays.
m
0
l
a b C Monitor
May 19, 2010 5:55:29 PM

patrickGSR94 is incorrect for a given diagonal, the 4::3 yields a larger square inch display.

Initially it was a cost factor, 4::3 was more expensive than a 16::9 as a 4::3 is approx 12% larger panel for a given diagonal as pointed out by WR2. At that time widescreen dvds were still in the minority. As wide screen movies increased in popularity, the 16:9 format, became more popular it dried up the "home user" desire for 4:3
Added
for 20" dia 16:9 = 17.44 x 9.81 = 171 Sq in - 4:3 = 16 x 12 = 192 Sq in
16:10 = 16.96 x 10.6 = 179.8 sq in.
End added

jsc/ksampanna
Both are correct
1920 x 1080 (1050) is the 16:9 (widescreen)
1920 x 1600 maybe 16:10 which is also widescreen (my samsung HD240) or 4:3, Referenced Dell UltraSharp 2007FP (as quoted by WR2), normal

anton48
(1) use WR2's recommendation
(2) find a 16:10 that allows the screen panel to be rotated 90 degrees and then rotate the display 90 degrees in windows properties. Kind of the best of both worlds.
m
0
l
June 1, 2010 1:48:38 PM

Best answer selected by anton48.
m
0
l
!