Prev: ASUS G1 CPU replacment
Next: How to install XP in ThinkPad X61
From: - Bobb - on 6 Apr 2008 12:46

"John Doue" <notwobe(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:R7S5j.83$Nb7.16(a)read4.inet.fi...
> Barry Watzman wrote:
>> Wide screen is smaller. That is, in fact, WHY widescreen has become so
>> popular ... the monitor & laptop makers are "pushing" it because for
>> any given "inch size", it costs a lot less to make due to the smaller
>> surface area (a 1:1 aspect ratio screen (square) would have the
>> greatest area per "inch size").
>>
>>
>> Mahlon Wagner wrote:
>>> Which screen has the greater surface area:
>>> for example the 14.1 inch regular vs 14.1 wide screen?
>>>
>>> The same question re the 15.4 inch screen.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Mahl
>
> When you say, > That is, in fact, WHY widescreen has become so
>>> popular
>
> you obviously mean, with manufacturers. But why is that, according to
> various salespeople I talked to, people seem to like and request that
> format "because that is the movies'format". Are actually buyers buying
> computers to what movies?
>
> To make things worth now, it has become almost impossible in the last
> six months to buy a monitor that is not glossy (glary!).
>
> I remember a thread where someone wrote that manufacturers do not
> manufacture products people do not want.
>
> So can someone explain to me why those changes are being pushed down our
> throats? People who work on their computers - and I thought that lots of
> them do - do not want glary screens and often do not have the place on
> their desks to put the huge monitor they now need to display a full Word
> page. The "extra" horizontal space ends up often being black useless
> space, or is used to display an often distorted picture.
>
> I do watch occasionally movies on my machine but never regret that I
> have the 4:3 format.
>
> So, at the end of the day, is there really a "popular demand" for those
> products? My suspicion is, most computer buyers just use their machines
> to surf and read emails, have not the slightest idea if they run Vista
> or XP (what is the difference anyway for those users) and see in their
> computers a second or third TV. Which leaves us with the kind of choices
> we see today ... A sorry situation!
> John Doue

While searching to buy a laptop, I was looking for a 14" 'non
wide-screen', but they were all big bucks. Seems a SMALLER screen size is
a premium now. These bigger/wider screens (which USED to be a premium)
are useless on an airplane unless you want to lie on the floor with the
screen in front of you. In Nov 2006 I bought an HP WMC laptop with a
glossy wide-screen ONLY because it was a Black Friday deal and went from
$900 to $499 for that one day. Friends that have seen it say " VERY NICE!"
They like the color ( " BrightView" HP calls the glossy screen) and the
wide-screen 17" format. In both instances they are thinking of movie
watching. 99.5% of the time I am not watching a movie and would NOT prefer
neither the glare nor the wide screen size. I would prefer the old
screen-size ratio. Even on my TV I would prefer to see movies " the way
they used to be". I have no need to see 2" bars of black above and the
image while viewing on an old TV. I felt stupid the first time I brought
it on a plane and couldn't open it more than 45 degrees ( with guy's chair
in front of my reclined).

The few times I DID watch a movie, it was nice and I think that more and
more folks want to use a portable pc to view movies ( maybe for the kids
in the car ?). The PC makers are trying to make PC's mainstream and any
reason to maybe get someone to pick theirs over the other guy's is a good
reason for them to do so.
Personally I'd prefer old ratio screens - with old ratio movies on DVD !
Like you I'm thinking that " people must like them since they make more
and more of them". Unless it's just that they decided - "We can't make
both: and who wouldn't want a bigger screen?"



 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: ASUS G1 CPU replacment
Next: How to install XP in ThinkPad X61