Slashdot Mirror


Get Ready For The 20-inch Laptop

linumax writes "With so many DVDs featuring letterboxed or wide-screen versions of films, consumers' fascination with larger screen sizes is changing the size and shape of the laptop industry, stated an IDC report issued on Monday. The wide-screen format, found in only 39.2 percent of laptops expected to ship this year, will become dominant in mid- to late 2006. It will nearly eclipse standard screen dimensions by the end of 2009, the market research firm estimates. Samsung has already unleashed its upcoming 19-inch laptop. The product is expected to ship later this year. Dell, a major partner of Samsung, could easily adopt the large screen format for its high-end XPS laptops. And, LG Philips is also touting its 20-inch LCD displays for laptops."

373 comments

  1. Lap Top vs Table Top by OctoberSky · · Score: 5, Funny

    I don't want to sound too much like flamebait but how on earth is this a Laptop?
    I thought my brothers 17" Notbook was beyond portable, but this thing should come with a gift certificate to a chiropractor.

    1. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by TCaptain · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I have a 17inch laptop and while its certainly a bit more awkward than my old one
      (9.2 lbs vs 7), I'm a big boy and I can carry the weight.

      The upside is that its a much nicer screen and size-wise in a car, cafe, or bus its not MUCH larger than a regular laptop and once you're used to it its nice.

      --
      "I'm not a procrastinator, I'm temporally challenged"
    2. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by drdanny_orig · · Score: 1

      Amen. I just got a 17" wide Fujitsu "laptop" and wouldn't dream of subjecting my lap to it. It does look nice, tho. But 19"? 20?!? That's insane unless it has wheels.

      --
      .nosig
    3. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by Apreche · · Score: 0, Troll

      No it shouldn't, Chiropractic is bullshit. See a real back doctor who went to medical school, not a pretend doctor.

      --
      The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
    4. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by Bastian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Interesting, because I feel quite the opposite. I have a 15" laptop, and I would love to have a 12" one. I think the 15"er takes up too much space and is an awkward thing to put in a backpack and carry around all day. The screen isn't MUCH smaller than a regular laptop and once you're used to the size it's not so bad; and at home I can plug it into my 19" monitor.

      Different strokes, I guess. I have a feeling that we aren't going to see a massive shift in what laptops folks are selling, I'm more inclined to guess that the PC market will follow Apple's suit and have size be the primary selling point on their laptops.

    5. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it shouldn't, Chiropractic is bullshit. See a real back doctor who went to medical school, not a pretend doctor.

      There are also other reasons why chiropractors are not effective. Same thing with massage therapists. They are basically providing a placebo to their patients. Real doctors can provide a placebo as well, in the form of physical therapy, drugs, surgery, etc. So sometimes both traditional and alternative medicine fail.

    6. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by CastrTroy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I have a 19 inch monitor at home. At work, I was using a 17 inch for a while. I didn't really notice much difference. I've also used 15 inch monitors that are set to 800x600 at the university. In the end, I don't really feel like it makes that much of a difference. If I was going for a laptop, i'd get a 12 inch or 15 inch, since portability is really what you want in a laptop. The only time I found that having more screen space was an asset was with multiple monitors. I find its the only way to have more than 1 program at a usable size. 1 monitor, no matter the resolution, doesn't really work too well with multiple programs opened. Maybe its just the way the window managers are designed.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    7. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right on! Although I prefer an even smaller laptop - my JVC MP-XV841US. 9" widescreen LCD, built in DVD/CDRW, and STILL only 3 pounds.

      And it even works with Linux!

    8. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by moeffju · · Score: 0, Troll

      Friends don't let friends go to chiropractors.

      Because chiropractors are Bullshit!

      --
      follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/moeffju
    9. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by moro_666 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Dont know about you but i cant usually fit the code that i write on an 800x600 display. I like to see a few blocks back and forth, so i dont have to scroll around to see what my bozo coworkers added to cvs the last night and what might break my code. even 1024x768 is far too small for me :(

      My laptop is a widescreen 15.4", quite a perfect fit for me. It fits fine on my lap and is small enough to carry around. I'm around 184cm/6feet myself, so i dont concider myself neither a small nor a big boy. But a 20" laptop on my lap would look pretty redicilous ... (as a tabletop/desknote it would be pretty ok thou).

      On the other hand, what would you think about having the screen in your glasses (or sunglasses if you dont wear regular glasses) ? They could have pretty enormous resolutions and still be portable ... so your laptop can be as small as suits your fingers (I always have issues with these mega-mini laptops that require you to use a pencil for typing on its megamini qwerty keyboard, i use an attached normal keyboard everywhere i can and luckily my laptop keyboard is about as big as the normal one, without the numpad ofcourse). Or even more the future way, have some kind of screen beamed at your eye or a contact lens covering the eye ? Any more ideas anyone ? Beamable sound would be cool too, so i could hear stuff that i want to hear as loud as i need it without wearing funny earphones and without upsetting the coworkers.

      --

      I'd tell you the chances of this story being a dupe, but you wouldn't like it.
    10. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by jacksonj04 · · Score: 2, Informative

      With me it's not the screen size, it's the resolution. I have a 19" monitor set to 1600x1200, and find it comfortable to work at (As long as I set the DPI properly). If I drop that to 1042x768, I immediately find it cramped. At school I'm forced to work with 800x600 on a 15" monitor, which drives me insane when you can't even view an entire webpage horizontally without scrolling.

      --
      How many people can read hex if only you and dead people can read hex?
    11. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by swiftstream · · Score: 1

      I've always found 14'' to be my sweetspot in the past, but like you, I've increasingly found the 12'' size very attractive. Perhaps in a year or four when I replace the 14'' I just bought...

      --
      Be a PATRIOT--because the only thing we have to fear is the lack thereof.
    12. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i guess that product is intended to replace the iMac as Computer.
      it reminds me of amiga integrating a computer into the keyboard.

      as big as an iMac, the keyboards already included and the monitor can be plugged off. what else does joe user want?
      somebody who wants a portable device will go for a pda, a subnotebook or even a 12" notebook. plus he can still buy an extra monitor if he requires a bigger screen at the office or at home.

    13. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by It+doesn't+come+easy · · Score: 2, Informative

      I have a widescreen laptop, and while the screen is great, I've decided the weight is just too much. My next laptop (whenever that might be) will weight less, so the only way I'm going to get a 19 inch or better laptop is if they get the weight down at the same time.

      --
      The NSA: The only part of the US government that actually listens.
    14. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by LurkerXXX · · Score: 4, Insightful
      If I was going for a laptop, i'd get a 12 inch or 15 inch, since portability is really what you want in a laptop.

      You mean it's what YOU want in a laptop. I want a large screen. I don't carry mine around with me constantly. It goes to work, and it goes home. I don't take it to cafe's, on trains, or to random places much. I want a big screen and dont' really care if it is 20" wide or weighs 10 lbs. Unlike you, I also have several apps open and onscreen at what I consider usable sizes. Different strokes for different folks.

      It's nice that we are getting a wider selection of models available so that each person can chose one that suits them and the way they like to work. I don't think 19" and 20" models will take over in what's used. I think we will see that sales in laptop sized will be broadly distibuted, jusst like their uses.

    15. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by Bastian · · Score: 1

      Screen size is what allows you to have higher resolution.

      Try working with 1600x1200 on that 15" monitor and see how sane you stay.

    16. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by Haeleth · · Score: 1

      Tell me - as a coder, what do you see in widescreen laptops? I can see the appeal of widescreen for movies, but for code, surely you want to maximise the number of lines visible? And surely your coding standards will still require you to keep lines short, for the benefit of users on non-widescreen monitors?

      I just don't see how a widescreen monitor can add up to anything other than fewer visible lines and acres of empty space, i.e. exactly what you don't want. Unless you have an editor that can display code in multiple columns. :/

    17. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by bleckywelcky · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's really just an easily moveable computer anymore. Pack it up at home, unpack it at the hotel room and sit it on the table. Or pack it up at your primary residence, unpack at your investment residence while you spend a week there taking care of business.

      I know a couple people who have picked up 19"ers. The things are absolute monstrosities and weigh half a ton. But you don't see them carrying the laptops around in their backpack every day. They carry it in a laptop bag from their permanent residence to their next temp residence then to the next temp residence after that. They aren't out in the field using their laptops for diagnostics on equipment. People just want a computer they can use wherever they happen to be for that week.

      Having said that, I was looking into getting a true "portable" laptop computer, and was thinking that even a 15.4"er might be kinda hefty. I am contimplating something in the 12" to 14" range because I simple want the laptop for collecting and manipulating data, and writing documents on the fly. I have no desire to watch a 2 hour movie on a screen in my laptop on a daily basis. Although, for convenience, I might watch a movie or play a game during a flight if I don't have any other work I can complete. But that's about it. I'll stick to a 110" diagonal projection screen for watching movies for real :)

    18. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by Johnso · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Last year, I traded in my 14.1" Inspiron 8200 for a 17" Inspiron 9200. I've regretted it ever since. I'm big so it's so the weight is no big deal. Unfortunately, it's too awkward for lap-top typing. The keyboard sits in the middle of it and takes only about 80% of the horizontal space and 50% of the vertical space. So you have this hard, flat surface which your palms, wrist, and a portion of your arm are resting on just to get access to the keyboard.

      In short, the keyboard is worst typing experience I've ever had. I'm sure some vendors place the keyboard better and make it more comfortable, but it's still going to be awkward with that much useless real estate.

      --
      I'm a signature virus. Please copy me to your signature so I can replicate.
    19. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
    20. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      Get Ready For The 20-inch Laptop

      Guess everyone's going to have to cut back on the Hallowe'en Trick-or-Treats to get fit that 20" laptop under their 50" belly flab fold. I can see it now: "Buy this laptop and get a free year's membership in Waist Watchers"

    21. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by tf23 · · Score: 1

      the wide screen is great for multiple windows. i generally fire up 4 term windows (apple-scripted up to open, connect to whatever, cd to src directory).

      however, your point about length - yes, sometimes i find i'll maximize one of those windows to full screen just to see more length-of-code.

      that'd be a nice button for OSX's terminal... not maximize to screen, but max the current window to screen-height-only.

      15" powerbook 1.25, fyi

    22. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by moro_666 · · Score: 2, Informative

      1) Not all my coworkers keep the lines short, and i dont like dynamic wrapping nor do i want to wrap the code for them. If some long lines would be wrapped for 80x25(just as an example) all the time, i would again see less lines of the code :(. I often read/recode code that isn't mine (all sorts of coworker creations and also a lot of open source software stuff) and i dont want to indent it all the time to read it humanly.

      2) Sometimes you have to read overbloated specification pdf files with annoying but useful graphs left-right from the text.

      3) Sometimes i like to have some applications overlapping, like editore on the right, chat window on the left, so i see right away when my chat mate types anything. Or just a debugger/output window running there to see right away when smth goes wrong.

      4) it's also relaxing to watch a movie from time to time :)

      ---

      in a perfect world ofcourse, nobody would require a wide screen for programming. but as most coders probably know, the word perfect is just an illusion.

      --

      I'd tell you the chances of this story being a dupe, but you wouldn't like it.
    23. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by Bastian · · Score: 1

      I like to have multiple source files visible side-by side, or to have an API's reference documentation up alongside the code. Or having an interface mock-up open alongside the code. Or having the design docs up alongside the code. Or having a file format spec open alongside the code. Heck, having Slashdot open alongside the code. whatever.

      I can't think of a single task I do that involves having as many open windows as software development.

    24. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by tomhudson · · Score: 1
      what do you see in widescreen laptops
      Probably the same advantages I have with dual monitors putting your wirk side-by-side with the output:

      1. Web development: code in one window, browser in another
      2. Binaries: code in one window, current build running in another
      3. Trolling slashdot: Article in one window, posts in another ...?
      Then again, if they're showing pictures of their families, they're gonna need a wide-screen after the pig-out from this year's Hallowe'en sugarfest.
    25. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      There are also other reasons [harvard.edu] why chiropractors are not effective. Same thing with massage therapists
      Depends on what you're getting massaged, I guess. But if you've had a 20" laptop sitting in your lap all day, my guess is you're gonna need a "massage" to "work the kinks" out of Mr. One-Eyed-Snake.

      I hope these monsters are properly shielded - you could end up siring mutants with one of these (hey - look at the bright side - your kids won't need a costume come Hallowe'en)

    26. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by roadrunnerro · · Score: 1

      Dunno about your IDE's, but mine use docked windows and usually there's a column of stuff on the right and another one on the left, so the actual code/design gets squashed in the middle. Widescreen helps with that..

    27. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by Kosmatos · · Score: 1

      How about resolution? With the bigger sizes, like 19" or 20", I expect at least 1920x1200 resolution. As it stands, my 17" laptop has a resolution of 1920x1200, and the DPI is fantastic. With 19" or 20", I'd like at least 1920x1200 as well. That Samsung model is only in the 1600x1050 range...

      --
      I'm your huckleberry
    28. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by graystar · · Score: 1

      Well, you know your average american is pretty big these days. Bigger Laps, Bigger Laptop......

      --
      -- Cheer, Cheer, The Red and the White.
    29. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by LurkerXXX · · Score: 1

      Yep. I definitely want good resolution. I've got 1920x1200 on my 15.4" laptop. Unfortunately I bought mine right before everyone rolled out 17" models. The text is so small sometimes it's a bit hard on my eyes. I'd definitely prefer it on a larger size screen.

    30. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by masoncooper · · Score: 1

      I originally had a 15" laptop but switched to a 12" ultralight (Dell 300m). Wherever I go, it goes. I even have a power cable under the couch! At work I have it hooked to my PC via firewire and have the 1394 connection bridged to the LAN. This allows me to open up an RDP session from my desktop to my laptop at the desktop's resolution. As a result I only have to connect 2 wires to get blistering-fast transfers and KVM-like abilities. I actually prefer this over using a KVM because I can keep the laptop display windowed and can switch between systems without taking my hands off the keyboard.
      I just wish Dell would offer another ultralight with a faster processor. The 1.2ghz works but can be a pretty slow when hitting SQL really hard (also installed on laptop). If they had a Pentium-M at 2+ghz I'd go for it.

    31. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by pmancini · · Score: 1

      I completely agree with that. My 17" Satellite is a bit too big for the typical cheap airplane seats I get and if the guy ahead of me reclines, forget it. As it is, I am already somewhat intruding on the other peoples space in my row. A 20" laptop... does it come with a minitower, full keyboard and what not?

      Back when I was a kid I got to use an IBM that was the size of a suitcase. it had a built in CRT and fold down keyboard. It had a HUGE handle on it to carry it around. I don't think I'd want to experience taking that on a plane!

    32. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by Bastian · · Score: 1

      Not only that, but keeping lines short for, say, an 80x25 display doesn't really make sense nowadays. Most computers can fit much, much more text on the screen - and people who are using older computers can use pretty printers. And now that we've largely left the era of 6-character identifiers behind us and have moved into the era of legible function and variable names, keeping your lines that short is making the code less readable, not more.

    33. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This all depends on preference and purpose. Size is an issue for all the various reasons mentioned; relative for many users. All users have different needs.

      I program using my laptop(s). And the one feature that is often overlooked in these discussion is the screen resolution. I personally find that the 1024x768 and 1280x800 (wide screens) are extremely awkward after using a laptop with a 1400x1050 res. So much more room to view code.

      So the amount of real estate is more important to me than size. A 12inch screen running at higher res is more useful than a 15" wide-screen.

    34. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by arose · · Score: 1

      Far too many people buy laptops to have a "stylish" computer on their desks, this thing seems to aimed at that demographic. Few think about ackward keyboards or monitors too close to your hands...

      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
    35. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by suitepotato · · Score: 1

      Obviously a lot of people don't remember the Osborne and Compaq "laptops" circa 1981. For those too lazy to Google, picture the average tower PC on your lap with a full sized keyboard and a five inch green phosphor composite monitor built in.

      --
      If my grammar and spelling are off, I am [distracted/tired/careless] (take your pick)
    36. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by Mac+Degger · · Score: 1

      What I have never got, since the first laptop came around, and especially now with the widescreen models, is this: why not just have a full keyboard in there? Especially now, with widescreens, why not just put a full qwerty+numpad layout? It'd even make carying easier; a rectangle is nicer to carry on a shoulderstrap than a square (it's a distribution of mass thing...a rectangle adjusts better due to it's longer base).

      Shit, I should patent that and make a killing from Appple for their next gen hyped up 'oh-so-cool-and-practial' line of ibooks.

      --
      -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
    37. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by Seumas · · Score: 1

      Not everybody has weak spindly schoolgirl arms. My 17" is only 6.5lbs (Powerbook) and it's barely noticible. You could probably double the weight and it would still be more than acceptable.

    38. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by Seumas · · Score: 1

      My main monitors at home are two 30" ACDs and a 23" ACD. It sucks to then sit down and work in the office or elsewhere at my 17" laptop. I can't imagine having to use anything smaller. It's like having a Suburban, but having to drive to work on a Moped.

    39. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by jonadab · · Score: 1

      > I don't want to sound too much like flamebait but how on earth is this a Laptop?

      Bear in mind, screen sizes are measured on the diagonal. One could easily fit a 20"-diagonal laptop on a 17"-across lap, which is not an unusually large lap, at least around here.

      It would certainly still be more readily portable than a typical desktop, and yet (especially if the keyboard takes advantage of that extra space) rather more usable, in day-to-day desktop-replacement terms, than a typical small notebook system. If you have a desktop system for regular use and want something small to carry to every meeting and class to take notes, this is probably not what you're looking for. Some people, however, do not want to deal with having two computers to maintain, and they'd like to be able to take the computer with them easily when they go someplace for the weekend or whatever; that is the niche these large laptops are designed to fill. Yes, "table-top" might be a more accurate term taken literally, but "laptop" is the industry standard term for folding all-in-one portable computers.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    40. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What I have never got, since the first laptop came around, and especially now with the widescreen models, is this: why not just have a full keyboard in there?

      Some 17" laptops do have a (sort of) full keyboard. Check out the Voodoo PC wide screen laptop models (note: I've heard they're not made well, but the site shows examples of those "full" keyboards).

    41. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 1

      Pages that cut off horizontally and require scrolling are poorly designed.

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
    42. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 1

      Can't you anti-health-choice atheists go play in traffic or something?

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
    43. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by kosmicki · · Score: 1

      Just have it come with a mail in rebate for a free vasectomy.

    44. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      I get really irritated when I can't cram a web page into a 400 pixel wide strip at the side of my screen so I can refer to it and work on something else in the rest of the screen. Or when I hit full screen on my 23" cinema display at work and still have to scroll down because the page is wasting all the space to either side. People should desgin web pages properly so they resize horizontally. Like they used to before somebody realized you can abuse CSS to make them fixed width.

    45. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      That's a good point... if the guy next to you in the cheap seats on the plane pulls out one of these things can you ask the flight attendant to make him put it away so you can use your own tray table (because he's hogging both with his 2000" laptop)? Do you have to book an extra seat for these "laptops"?

    46. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by Pyroteh · · Score: 1

      well... I have a 15 inch widescreen dell and I would much rather have a smaller size... say 12? its not that its too much to carry around... its that its just too much for what I need it for....

    47. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by rossifer · · Score: 2

      Try working with 1600x1200 on that 15" monitor and see how sane you stay.

      You seem to think that high resolution on a smaller screen would be a bad thing. My experience dramatically contradicts your statement. In my experience, the smaller the pixels, the better.

      My current and previous laptops (Thinkpad R51P and A21P) have had a 15.4" display with 1600x1200 resolution and I absolutely love that display. My fiance has also switched over to the same model of laptop after borrowing mine for a little while. Subpixel antialiasing on larger pixels just looks out of focus. Subpixel antialiasing on that screen looks nearly perfect. The math seems obvious to me: a 1/4" high letter on my screen has a lot more pixels than a 1/4" high letter on a lower resolution display. More pixels == smoother curves and fewer jaggies.

      These are the first screens that I can read documents (PDF's, web pages, etc.) without any eyestrain whatsoever. I used to print just about everything out that would take more than a few minutes to read. Now I only print out things that need to go places that the laptop can't.

      Technical manuals? Recipes? Research papers? All comfortable to read on that screen. For the first time ever. The only thing that worries me is whether or not I'll be able to find another laptop with the same incredible resolution in two years when I need to replace this one...

      Regards,
      Ross

    48. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by jacksonj04 · · Score: 1

      As a designer myself I am painfully aware of this (And yes I know some of my sites don't resize horizontally, they're on my to-fix list), but that doesn't excuse the fact that 800x600 is uncomfortable to work at. The taskbar takes up an appreciable fraction of my screen, combine this with the piss-poor toolbar layout in Office (Nicely locked so I can't make it something more useful), and the fact that Google toolbar is now installed on all machines (What?) leaves most applications with about 8" of vertical space to work in. At 800x600, so all the text is huge.

      --
      How many people can read hex if only you and dead people can read hex?
    49. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by Peganthyrus · · Score: 1

      Long, long lines impair readability - I find it a lot harder to read something that's stretched all the way across the screen. I have to work harder to figure out where the start of the next line is when I flick back across tens of inches. This is part of why newspapers are laid out with columns - easier, faster reading.

      I actually design most of my web stuff to float prettily on wide layouts, but to keep the text at a width designed for comfortable reading. Measured relative to the font size, so when you do apple+/- to resize the text, it doesn't get crammed into a suddenly-too-thin column...

      --
      egypt urnash minimal art.
    50. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Sure... but give me the choice! Like Slashdot... I'd never read it stretching across my whole screen, but I could if I wanted to -- it WILL stretch. Or I can cram it in 400 pixels. It's ugly, but I can then see it behind another window that I'm working in. Or figure out a way to add columns if you want to be fancy. But the pages that are all the rage these days that are 1024 wide, no matter what, are really annoying. Especially when half of that 1024 wide is a semi-useless navigation bar on both sides.

    51. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by moeffju · · Score: 1

      To whoever moderated that Troll, please post evidence that Chiropractics are anything but quacks.

      --
      follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/moeffju
    52. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by Fenster+Karton · · Score: 1

      A portable desk top is ideal for me. A screen large enough to display complete pages of a book is wonderful. Scrolling sucks. Just tap your mouse and the page turns. Fantastic! There are a lot more people using notebooks as portable readers every day and the large display will accelerate it. A bit more room for the components doesn't hurt either. Very dense is often a thermal problem.

    53. Re:Lap Top vs Table Top by carsamba · · Score: 1

      Since these monsters are really desktop replacements, I'm all for it. My line of work entails freelance 3D modeling/rendering and video compositing, I really need the extra resolution for the multitude of windows and views I use, and like them to be readable without pasting my nose onto the screen. I use dual 19" LCDs for my main deskside machine (which is pretty typical for the kind of work I do - 2 x 1280x1024), and a 15" laptop for field work - when I need to work on some other location, to make changes etc (1400x1050). The resolution on the laptop is quite usable because it's so crisp, but I sigh with relief when I come back to the main PC.

      My point here is this: It would be very useful to have a monster laptop, and a backpack (and backside) friendly one. Mobility is very attractive, and upgradability isn't what it used to be anyway.

  2. ugh.. by jkind · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Give me the portability of a Tablet PC like the Toshiba Tecra anyday.. These large display systems are akin to SUVs in their power consumption, are they not?

    --
    ~jennifer.k~
    1. Re:ugh.. by myspys · · Score: 1

      Since they use the same technology as normal desktop lcd screens, i'd assume that they (the laptop versions) use more or less exactly the same amount of electricity.

      ie around 40 watt. More on screens and energy usage here

    2. Re:ugh.. by somersault · · Score: 1

      These types of 'laptop's are designed as desktop replacement systems, that for example can be taken to and from work for telecommuters/any worker, and dont take up as much space as a conventional PC for home users (when they are in use they dont take up as much space as a normal PC with a desktop/tower case, and when they're not in use you can pack them away easily). It's not like you're meant to carry this around as a personal organiser...

      --
      which is totally what she said
    3. Re:ugh.. by bleckywelcky · · Score: 1

      I think the point the parent poster was trying to make was that a 19" LCD hogs a lot more than a 12" LCD, not that laptop LCDs hog more than desktop LCDs or CRTs. I didn't see anything in the link about comparing different sized LCDs, just LCDs and CRTs. It makes sense though because a larger screen requires a larger or more powerful backlight, which should consume more energy. Unless the backlight scaling for energy consumption is flat over those sizes ... I don't know.

    4. Re:ugh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the point the parent poster was trying to make was that a 19" LCD hogs a lot more than a 12" LCD, not that laptop LCDs hog more than desktop LCDs or CRTs. I didn't see anything in the link about comparing different sized LCDs, just LCDs and CRTs. It makes sense though because a larger screen requires a larger or more powerful backlight, which should consume more energy. Unless the backlight scaling for energy consumption is flat over those sizes ... I don't know.

      I agree, but if the screen is 20", then the base should have room for a larger battery or multiple batteries. Of course that means it would be heavier, but I doubt anyone interested in a 20" laptop would expect light weight.

    5. Re:ugh.. by strikethree · · Score: 1

      I have a 17 inch Powerbook made by Apple. The battery still lasts over 3.5 hours despite very heavy usage. I also have a Sharp Actius MM20. It weighs just under 2 pounds and has a 10(?) 12(?) inch screen. Very small. Regardless, it eats up the battery like there is no tomorrow. *shrug* Personally, I think it may be the quality of the batteries that make all of the difference. In the end, I would not worry overly much about the size of the screen in regards to battery usage. As long as your backlight is not bright enough to require you to wear sunglasses, your biggest power eaters will be the disk drives (cd/hard) and the cpu (under heavy usage).

      strike

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
  3. Bigger = Better? by hoshino · · Score: 1, Redundant
    Personally I won't want to carry a 20" screen around with me...

    I just don't see the point of going beyond 17" for laptops. Heck, my personal ideal screen size is 14.1" to 15.4".

    Personally I would rather see screens that continue to maintain their portable size but with increased resolutions than 20" behemoths.

    1. Re:Bigger = Better? by Hey+Pope+Felcher+.+. · · Score: 4, Insightful

      . . . personally, I don't see the point of having to carry a screen, when I can carry a pair of goggles to view my applications with, and a pair of gloves (or smaller attatchments to my hands) to type on my virtual keyboard, and manipulate the programs with.

      Simply put, I hope companies begin to innovate rather more than simply changing the dimensions of the screen I need to view with. I mean the things meant to be portable, not inexcusably large.

    2. Re:Bigger = Better? by AnonymousYellowBelly · · Score: 1

      Well... a friend had a portable DVD player with goggles, and after 45 minutes all I had left was a headache. As far as gloves go, unless they give me the 'feel' of typing on a keyboard I would guess they'll be uncomfortable to use.

      I do agree that companies should find ways to incorporate 'bigger' displays without the need to carry something big and heavy.

      --
      Disclosure: I'm stupid
    3. Re:Bigger = Better? by generic-man · · Score: 1

      Worker: HEY BOSS!
      Boss: What is it?
      Worker: Hoshino doesn't want one of our 20 inch laptops.
      Boss: SHIT!! SHUT DOWN PRODUCTION!

      (klaxons blare, equipment screeches to a halt)

      Worker: But he does want a 14" laptop.
      Boss: Oh. We still make those. RESTART PRODUCTION!

      --
      For more information, click here.
    4. Re:Bigger = Better? by jridley · · Score: 1

      I've got a 15", and honestly, I'd trade it even up for a 12" display. I bought it thinking "desktop replacement" but for what I do, you just can't replace a desktop with a laptop. If it's not going to be my main machine, I want it as portable as possible. I'd rather have a 800 MHz 4lb or less 12" screen unit that I could bring along anywhere than this 8.5lb 15" brick I have.

    5. Re:Bigger = Better? by bleckywelcky · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Lower power consumption. The screen is a huge sink on the battery. Decrease that by 50% or so and you can probably get a couple more hours out of your battery. Techies, admins, field engineers will buy those up in droves.

    6. Re:Bigger = Better? by guyjon · · Score: 1

      Some of us are forced to carry around 20" with us all the time...
      Yeah, once in a while it's handy...
      But all it really amounts to is lower back pain.

  4. You'll need on heck of a big lap by Redwin · · Score: 0, Redundant

    At what point does it stop being called a "lap"top? Surely the purpose of a laptop is that it is portable, not something that requires a large suitcase to move about.

    --
    Warning, comments may not have been passed by the sanity department of my brain.
  5. Little boy is growing up by Biking+Viking · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Although this news is a bit exciting, at which point is a laptop not a "lap" top anymore? Images of Baby Huey are starting to come to mind...

  6. Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by DoorFrame · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I like bigger screens. When I bought my laptop four years ago I got the biggest screen available at the time. The thing is a tall beast, but it's not widescreen. I don't want widescreen. Widescreen forces me to use more width, when in reality I never need more width, I only ever need more height. Never am I reading a webpage and think, "Damn, if only this computer were a little wider."

    The worst part is, all the good new laptops are being made with widescreen because little Jane going off to college wants to watch DVDs. I don't want to watch DVDs on my computer, I'll do that on the TV. I want to use it as a computer, and computer need height.

    I just wish some laptop companies would keep the big non-widescreen models around. It's sad.

    1. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Also a lot of websites are designed so poorly that they don`t expand to fit the available width.. so they just occupy a thin column down the middle of the screen on a widescreen display anyway.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    2. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by el_womble · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm not saying you're wrong, clearly this is a matter of personal preference, but there is a counter point to your objections.

      Since getting a 20" widescreen iMac I'd not go back. It gives you the same advantages as a dual head system but without the join: rather than reading more of the same webpage it means you can read the webpage AND see the document you're working on. Thats not so say I wouldn't want more height too!

      --
      Scared of flying, pointy things snce 1979!
    3. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by MaestroSartori · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Although you are in the majority in not needing extra screen-width, I (as someone who wants a laptop for audio production) would love a 20" widescreen laptop. More tracks on screen at once, less scrolling, easier visualisation of what I'm working on. Marvellous :)

    4. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by shic · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I've a 15" 1200x1600 display which is pretty damned great for my purposes - and until recently there's been nothing better I could find. If I were to buy again now I'd get the Sony 17" 1200x1920 as this would give me an extra strip down the left or right hand side... though I'd far rather have a 17" regular ratio display.

      I accept the argument that big displays aren't very portable - but to me that doesn't matter. I only want to use my laptop on a desk - in fact I'm not even bothered if it is able to run on batteries.

    5. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by ProppaT · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Oh, you're one of those who haven't had the good fortune of actually trying a widescreen. The great thing about widescreens is the fact that you can open more documents, web browser screens, etc. side by side. It's a godsend for multitaskers and people using their laptops for work. And, with the higher resolution widescreens, you don't even need to worry about vertical height...the resolution is high enough to display whatever you need.

      I too thought the wide screen laptops were stupid until I tried one out. Now I could never give up being able to have 3 documents open side by side at work. Think of it as dual screens on one screen...

      --
      Wise men say, "Forgiveness is divine, but never pay full price for late pizza."
    6. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by Twinbee · · Score: 1

      But with widescreen, we can have two or more programs easily open at once. I can have the browser on the left half, and one or two programs on the right (such as notepad and a calculator).

      I like a good degree of height too, but this can always be solved by bigger overall screens and resolutions.

      --
      Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
    7. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Perhaps you could turn the widescreen laptop on its side (and plug in a usb keyboard and mouse)?

      Of course, that doesn't exatly solve the problem, since you also need to rotate the image. I suspect there are some gfx cards that allow you to do this.

      Some widescreen monitors support 90 degree rotation. I remember a monitor by Iiyama that is rotateable, but I don't know if they still sell it. I wanted one to play Ikaruga on, but I thought it was perhaps a bit extravagant.

    8. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you have your laptop on edge or what?

    9. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by CrazyTalk · · Score: 1

      I disagree. Vertical scrolling is a lot easier than horizontal scrolling, and I like to be able to view different apps, etc. side by side. So for me, I would rather have more width than height. That said, on a laptop I prefer the smallest screen possible - thats why I have a 12 inch iBook - for maximum portability, not just for lugging around but for using in confined spaces like airplanes or the classroom.

    10. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by bogado · · Score: 1

      Very long lines of text are harder to read. The problem here is that CSS/HTML does not allow you to make text flow throw columns automaticly (I think this is being proposed in CSS3, but I am not shure). The main problem is that CSS, HTML and other web standards are talked by web developers and not web designers. Many of the hacks to make columned sites with CSS are frankly quite ugly and use stuff that was not designed for this end (floats for instance), much like the table in html were abused to do layout.

      CSS2 is just now being accepted, and even now IE have a lowsy suport for it. It is going to be ages to be able to use CSS3, with it dreamy column flow text. The only solution is to make your long text readable is to limit it to a single fixed sized column. The best solution for me is to not use maximized windows, so you can use the rest of the screen to show another sites in diferent windows or even anothe programs.

      --
      []'s Victor Bogado da Silva Lins

      ^[:wq

    11. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by shic · · Score: 1

      Do you have your laptop on edge or what?

      I'd like to... that would make widescreen LCDs genuinely useful to me.

      Anyway - what's wrong with stating the y-dimension first - it's good to be unconventional.

    12. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by pintomp3 · · Score: 1

      aside from watching dvds, widescreen is nice for having documents side by side. the lower hieght also lets you actually open the laptop in an airplane when the guy in front of you is fully reclined. these may not be factors for you, but they will obviously appeal to a larger market. you can always get something with a higher res. a wsxga+ screen should be fine for almost any website.

    13. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      Oh, you're one of those who haven't had the good fortune of actually trying a widescreen.

      Don't assume that much. I have used a widescreen display on an iMac G5. I don't think widescreen is worth the expense. As it is, for example, a 20" widescreen costs just as much or more than a 21" standard aspect ratio, but gives the user less vertical resolution, despite having the same horizontal resolution. Why pay more for fewer pixels?

      Now I could never give up being able to have 3 documents open side by side at work. Think of it as dual screens on one screen...

      That said, a widescreen display is only 12% wider in aspect ratio (1.5 vs. 1.333), I don't see how it can necessarily support 50% more documents. A standard high resolution screen might support four documents if tiled.

    14. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      Anyway - what's wrong with stating the y-dimension first - it's good to be unconventional.

      Not in communication. The only reason y dimension makes sense if you were stating scanlines, but then, you don't need to state the horizontal resolution, forexample, 1080i or 1080p is assumed widescreen unless otherwise stated: 1920.

    15. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      piano wire will also help if the guy in front of you is fully reclined

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    16. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      I'd worry about the laptop falling over. Conventional setup means the center of mass is near the bottom face, setting it on the edge means moving that up a lot.

      There are some drivers that allow rotation for Windows. Mac OS X has screen rotation built-in now.

    17. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by karnal · · Score: 1

      So...

      What you're trying to say here is....

      Once you go Mac, you never go back?

      I know it's corny. It feels like Monday.

      --
      Karnal
    18. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by BushCheney08 · · Score: 1

      Thats not so say I wouldn't want more height too!

      I'm in need of more width. And thanks to this email I just received, I may be on my way!

      --
      Be a real patriot: Question authority. Think for yourself. Formulate your own conclusions.
    19. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by DingerX · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, it's not quite as good as dual screens, but as a widescreen laptop user, yeah, I'm with you; also a 17" or even 20" screen carries with it an added bonus: the bigger the screen, the more keyboard space; the more keyboard space, the better the chances it'll be a keyboard you'd actually like to lose.

      There are a couple problems with them, though.

      A) First, I like my screen high resolution for exactly that purpose: it's supposed to replace a dual monitor setup. So I run a 15.4" widescreen in 1920x1200. It works great for all kinds of things, but the web can be problematic: it seems web designers like to make stuff in absolute pixel values, assuming a 72 dpi screen. Cheap streaming video players, like that crap that Microsoft pawns on me or Apple's crippleware player, also like to limit scalability to the medium. 320x200 at "200%" is still tiny. Apple's crippleware is useless (I know, I know, there are many fine Quicktime players out there that aren't made by Appple) for the same reason.

      B) Second, everything still has to be on the same screen. With a dual-monitor setup, you can stick your comms and entertainment on one screen (the "distraction" screen), and focus on the task at hand on the other.

      C) Most widescreens are not made for geeks who want to have 40 windows open. They are, in fact, made for the college kids who want to watch movies on them. So their resolutions are not near the "eyebleeding" level I demand.

      (oh yeah, and this is what that 1920x1200 screen looks like in operation -- I stuck this up on Flickr some time ago: Desktop shot

      Yes, I know, my life will be better when I get rid of that (X software in there) and run (Y software that's not) that's clearly superior, or use a free photographic host that allows more than 1024 pixels in their pictures.

    20. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by NickCatal · · Score: 1

      Or you could, you know... design it in HTML with Tables. I'm not going to loose sleep because my site can't be seen properly on Lynx or Konqueror. I worry about IE, Firefox, Opera, and Safari. All of which render plain-jane HTML just fine for my tastes.

      --
      -nick
    21. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just wish some laptop companies would keep the big non-widescreen models around

      I kinda agree here. I think widescreens are great in monitors that are already big enough and have a high enough resolution that you wouldn't want any more height. They function similarly to having dual screen. But for notebooks its awkward.

    22. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by Xenditil · · Score: 1

      One word: Spreadsheets

    23. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by nine-times · · Score: 3, Informative
      The worst part is, all the good new laptops are being made with widescreen because little Jane going off to college wants to watch DVDs.

      You're entitled to your own opinion, but that's not the only reason why screens have been moving to widescreen. First of all, vertical scrolling is generally considered easier than horizontal. But also, ask yourself, why are movies widescreen?

      Think about the position of your eyes. Your field of vision is wider than tall. Really, screens should have always been wide. I assume that the main reason they haven't been is that it's harder to engineer CRTs that don't have roughly a square screen, but even "normal" screens are a little wide (when you're talking about 4:3, 4 is the width).

      Now that we have LCDs and are free to make our screens whatever shape we want, it makes sense to me that we'd be looking for screens that more closely represent our natural field of vision.

    24. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I'm still waiting for an audio production software which will visualize such things vertically, not horizontally... The feel would be much more natural, especially the piano strip. And the mouse scroll button would make much more sense that way too.
      That's why I still use trackers, such as Renoise. :)

    25. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by Comboman · · Score: 1
      The worst part is, all the good new laptops are being made with widescreen because little Jane going off to college wants to watch DVDs.

      I don't think laptop customers are the real motivation for the change to wide screens. Laptop makers used to be the primary (or only) market for LCD panels. That is no longer the case. Television makers are buying a lot of LCD panels, and they want wide screens. Laptop makers are just riding along, since they can probably get a 20" widescreen panel for the same price or cheaper than a 17" 4:3 panel.

      --
      Support Right To Repair Legislation.
    26. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by mwilli · · Score: 1

      Have you ever tried using an IDE, such as Eclipse or Visual Studio, on a 15" laptop? I'm doing a lot of programming this semester in school and I do most of it on my laptop. I have a 15.4" widescreen display and wouldn't trade it for a thing. It's the perfect size and not too heavy. Eclipse is able to "spread out" across the widescreen display so I can actually see what I'm programming.

      --
      My sig beat up your sig.
    27. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by MacGod · · Score: 1

      As others have pointed out, it is nice to be able to view two screens side-by-side. At with a 1050-pixel vertical resolution, you still fit a fair amount on screen.

      However, I think as you point out, lots of people do watch DVDs on their computer. I'm a student who's fortunate enough to have a 20 Cinema Display (widescreen, obv.). However, I have no TV. I haven't seen the need to buy a TV. My Cinema Display is crystal clear, plenty big enough for watching movies, and I hook my G5 up to a decent sound system. For me to buy a TV that would be noticeably better than my monitor would cost far more money than I could even remotely justify.

      So why is this so bad? It may not be what you want it for, but obviously there's enough of a demand to justify this change. If the majority wanted 4x3 displays, the manufacturers wouldn't be making this change. I this may just be one of those cases where you happen to be in the minority opinion. Which is fine, but it's unreasonable to expect the manufacturers to cater to that opinion.

      --
      "Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one " -Albert Einstein
    28. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by bogado · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Tables don't overflow text from one column to the other. Table usualy have an unintuitive layout in the source that makes hard or even impossible for a screen reader to make out the order on witch the text must be read. Sure blind and hard to see people are a minority, but why not include them in your audience?

      I don't like tables layout more then I dislike CSS hacks to emulate coluns, but this is my opinion. I do use tables, to display tabled data, not much else.

      --
      []'s Victor Bogado da Silva Lins

      ^[:wq

    29. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by joss · · Score: 1

      > why are movies widescreen?

      Well, mainly so they don't play well on normal TVs. Early movies
      (citizen kane etc) often had a 4:3 aspect ratio.
      Studios moved to widescreen formats out of fear that TVs
      would destroy cinema.

      There might be an inate perceptual advantage
      too, but I'm not sure if this has been tested.

      --
      http://rareformnewmedia.com/
    30. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by ce25254 · · Score: 1

      Not that this disproves your point, but the 1680x1050 display on the Samsung computer in TFA is a 1.6 aspect ratio.
      The new PowerBook 17" is also 1680x1050 = 1.6.

      That's 20% wider than 4x3. Interesting that not all of the widescreens are the same aspect ratio. (And they're not 16x9, either.)

    31. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by MaestroSartori · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I dunno, horizontal piano roll with vertical = pitch, horiz = time, makes decent sense to me. Mixers and other stuff horizontal is just fallback to the old hardware days. Even then though, eq's and stuff are normally laid out hi-mid-low top->bottom, which again makes a kind of logical sense.

      I just love ableton, and want a huge laptop to run it on :D

    32. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by theJML · · Score: 1

      Actually, I prefer the widescreens. I work on linux command lnes and editors a lot. It's definately nice to be able to see a directory listing, a php command, etc... without having to have it wrapped. Which also, therefore, takes up less heigt. For Linux people, this is a great idea...

      Now I don't know if a 20" laptop is really a great idea... I already have trouble opening my 15.1" dell's screen on an airplanes.

      --
      -=JML=-
    33. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by shellbeach · · Score: 1

      The worst part is, all the good new laptops are being made with widescreen because little Jane going off to college wants to watch DVDs. I don't want to watch DVDs on my computer, I'll do that on the TV. I want to use it as a computer, and computer need height.

      Well, I use my laptop primarily for work (I'm writing a thesis, a couple of papers and a book chapter on it; I also do image processing on it), but when I got it I specifically bought a widescreen so I could watch movies on it as well. Why would I want to, when I've got a TV? Well, because the resolution's heaps better and the relative screen size (the 15.4" laptop on the coffee table compared to the 21" TV in the corner of the room) is larger too. I get the equivalent of a plasma/LCD HD set in a machine that I needed to get anyway.

      It's not just college kids that are buying widescreen displays, it's anyone who enjoys watching DVDs at their real resolution, rather than a crappy low-res interlaced display.

      (Mind you, even without the DVD bonus, I've found that I much prefer widescreen displays - I can now fit several windows side-by-side more easily, you get more taskbar space and I don't feel as though I've "lost" any vertical space ...)

    34. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think this is being proposed in CSS3, but I am not shure

      No, no you're not. I know Mr. Shure personally, and I'm sure that you are not him.

    35. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by WuphonsReach · · Score: 1

      First, I like my screen high resolution for exactly that purpose: it's supposed to replace a dual monitor setup. So I run a 15.4" widescreen in 1920x1200

      What screen is this? If it's on a laptop, who makes it?

      (I'm moderately happy with my Toshiba Tecra's 1400x1050 15", but that's only a 4:3 aspect at roughly 125ppi. The 1280x768 screens that are frequently seen would be a step down for me so I'm always on the lookout for high-res laptop screens.)

      --
      Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
    36. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If people have a look at the article, the screen is detachable.

      I see massive potential in this given that they seem to have already achieved that feat of engineering. Assumedly they still made it reasonably light even with that capacity. They list the motiviation for this is so that when you upgrade your laptop you just just upgrade the lower part and keep the screen, saving a massive chunk of the cost.

      The fact that the screen is detachable I see as offering another huge advantage that would deal with the debate currently going on about whether people like widescreen.. make the screen rotatable!

      Some screens that implement it very well have already been on the market, and its easy for drivers to do the rotation.

      I'm a coder and like my dual screen goodness, I can appreciate widescreen for coding and multiple windows.

      If I was knocking up a document though or reading websites, I'd like things to be portrait, and a laptop that can 'flip' the screen to do that would be extremely nifty. Especially if you can upgrade it later and keep the screen, saving on cost... and maybe use the lower part to make an older 'server' or router. laptops can fill that purpose well since they come with a built in UPS (the batteries might not be as good, but they'll outlast most power problems).

    37. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      Widescreen forces me to use more width, when in reality I never need more width, I only ever need more height. Never am I reading a webpage and think, "Damn, if only this computer were a little wider."

      Reading your comment makes me immediately think, "must be a Windows user" since Windows is the only OS I know of whose dominant use paradigm is one program at a time, which takes up the whole screen (even if it does not need to). I've had a widescreen laptop about a year now, and I don't think I've ever watched a DVD on it. It is usually plugged into an external monitor with windows from various programs laid out across all the available real-estate on both. Widescreen is great if you want to display multiple terminals, editors windows, web pages, etc. on the screen at the same time. I often work with at least one window viewing reference information, one or more editing something, and one displaying the results of what I'm working on. It is a lot easier to display multiple pages side-by-side when you have a wider screen, hence I'm appreciative of the widescreen. I guess if you only want to use it to display web pages and you never want to view multiple web pages at the same time, well maybe widescreen is not for you.

    38. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by nine-times · · Score: 1

      And why, do you think, that people believed making movies widescreen would be an advantage over 4:3? I mean, if they were made wider to be an advantage over TV, why would it be an advantage?

    39. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by badasscat · · Score: 3, Informative

      I don't think widescreen is worth the expense. As it is, for example, a 20" widescreen costs just as much or more than a 21" standard aspect ratio, but gives the user less vertical resolution, despite having the same horizontal resolution. Why pay more for fewer pixels?

      This is not really true. For example, currently on Dell's web site, there are a 20" 4:3 and a 20" 16:10 monitor that are exactly the same but for the aspect ratio and the inherent resolution difference that that implies. The 4:3 version is $749 and the 16:10 is currently on sale for $545, though it normally sells for $699.

      The resolution on the 4:3 model is 1600x1200, while it's 1680x1050 on the 16:10 version. That's a negligible difference in total pixels, and the price reflects that negligible difference (i.e. the widescreen version is actually slightly less expensive).

      Now, are those extra 80 horizontal pixels useful for anything? Well yes, because it's not just about pixels. It's also about actual horizontal size. When you're watching a DVD or HDTV, you're not going to be looking at actual pixels anyway. The same is true of today's high-resolution digital photos. In those cases, it's better to have an aspect ratio that more closely matches the source aspect ratio to give you the most actual screen area (in inches, or however you want to measure it... but not pixels). Viewing a 3:2 photo (standard 35mm/APS ratio) on a 4:3 20" monitor will appear much smaller than it would on a 16:10 20" monitor when opened in an app that puts various tools on the side (as almost all image browsers/editors do).

      It really depends on what you use your computer for whether a widescreen monitor is worth it or not. For most "home" users, who watch DVD's, play games, maybe edit their digital photos, I would think a widescreen monitor would be best. I really enjoy having one myself. Obviously for any video or photo pros, widescreen is also better. For someone who's writing code, though, maybe not so much.

      That said, a widescreen display is only 12% wider in aspect ratio (1.5 vs. 1.333)

      No, 16:10 is obviously 1.6:1, not 1.5:1. You can also get 16:9 screens which are 1.77:1, matching HDTV exactly. Most people go for 16:10, though, because it's a compromise that allows you greater width for movies and photos while still being reasonable for web browsing and word processing apps that can better use the extra height.

    40. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by WinterSolstice · · Score: 1
      "...hard to see people are a minority..."

      I'd say. There was quite a stir over one of those hard to see people... ;)

      -WS

      --
      An operating system should be like a light switch... simple, effective, easy to use, and designed for everyone.
    41. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by chrisnewbie · · Score: 0

      the only + of a widescreen latop is probably that it could come with a regular keyboard with the numeric keypad already there.

    42. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by Rhipf · · Score: 1

      This bring up the question, why do you need a laptop computer for then? If you aren't interested in portability or battery life why not just use a desktop computer. The point of using a notebook should be portability. As for a 20 inch monster notebook... I sure hope the guy next to me on the plane doesn't decide to pull one of these out.

    43. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by bogado · · Score: 1

      hahahaah, you got me there. hahahaha! :-D I guess that "the invible man" would be nearly impossible to see, a hard to see not-so-much-person would be the predator, pehaps. :-D :-D :-D

      Off course I was mening a people with vision problems, not necessarily blind.

      --
      []'s Victor Bogado da Silva Lins

      ^[:wq

    44. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by breadbot · · Score: 1
      Quicktime: I assume you're talking about the 2x magnification option in the View menu. There are two easy ways around it:
      1. Resize the window -- the movie will expand too.
      2. Ctrl-3 fills the screen
      You can't get seamless full-screen, which I assume you can if you pay for Pro, but you can do almost as well.
    45. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by kisielk · · Score: 1

      I have one of these 20" widescreens from Dell, and in my opinion one of the coolest features is that you can rotate the screen to get a 1050x1680 display. It's awesome for reading large documents for extended amounts of time as you can fit more lines on the screen at once. I love it.

    46. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by DingerX · · Score: 1

      HP/Compaq. Dell sells laptops with them in it too: just look for the WUXGA screen.

      Come to think of it, my laptop choice was determined by the availability of at least a 1600x1200 screen.

    47. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, all widescreen computer screens are the same aspect ratio, and none of them are 16x9. They are all 16x10, or 1.6:1.

      (This is also known as the "golden ratio," and refers to the most aesthetically pleasing shape. Nobody knows why it's the best shape, but it is.)

    48. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by KanSer · · Score: 1

      I know this sounds like a troll, but am I the only one who makes use of Alt+Tab? I can multi-task as well on a 15 inch as I can a 20-inch.

      Free your mind people, it's the user that's important, not the hardware.

      --
      • MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward Wednesday April 20, @4:20
    49. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by xtracto · · Score: 1

      B) Second, everything still has to be on the same screen. With a dual-monitor setup, you can stick your comms and entertainment on one screen (the "distraction" screen), and focus on the task at hand on the other.

      Maybe a kind of virtual desktops will work for you, if you are on Linux, chances are you already have them, if you are on windows try Virtual Dimension

      Now, one thing I would love to have is an extension to those multi-desktop programs which let me see all my desktops (or some of them) at the same time on my screen (a la Microsoft Virtual Desktop manager desktop previewer). I think it could be possible via VNC but the last time I tried and connected to the localhost with VNC (On Windows XP), the screen was not usable (because of inifinte image recursion).

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    50. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by ProppaT · · Score: 1

      Again, it depends on your uses. I'm a professional tech writer/editor, so the extra width is imperitive when I'm scrolling through multiple markups of a document and implementing them into the master. It's also great when scrolling between actual documents and specs looking for changes in diagrams, tables, etc.

      One of the greatest advantages for me is the ability to look at 11x17 engineering drawings using the full screen.

      --
      Wise men say, "Forgiveness is divine, but never pay full price for late pizza."
    51. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by mcb · · Score: 1

      I personally like my widescreen dell laptop more than a 4:3 monitor. In emacs I can divide the window into vertical frames with plenty of room to spare.

    52. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by arose · · Score: 1
      Very long lines of text are harder to read.
      I can resize the browser window myself, thank you very much.
      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
    53. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by mattbrundage · · Score: 1
      There might be an inate perceptual advantage too, but I'm not sure if this has been tested.

      It has to do with a human eye's visual field of view (FOV). The widescreen format caters more to an eye's FOV than does a 4:3 aspect ratio. While a 4:3 ratio provides less than 1/100th of an eye's FOV, a 16:9 format provides about 1/20th.

      source (PDF): The Limits of Human Vision (Michael Deering of Sun Microsystems)

      --
      Matthew Brundage
      Silver Spring, MD
    54. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use Alt+Tab a lot, but I do still often like seeing the other window while I'm still working in the first one. Sometimes I end up having to Alt+Tab back and forth many times because I need information from one window while working in another window and I can't remember what's in the other window long enough. Sigh.

      So I like wide screens with may pixels and as many of such screens as I can afford.

      ---
      Marnix

    55. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by minimunchkin · · Score: 1
      This might be what you're after:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_section

    56. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by willy_me · · Score: 1
      I assume that the main reason they haven't been is that it's harder to engineer CRTs that don't have roughly a square screen

      Actually, it's because of those old western movies. Back in the day it was decided that a 4:3 aspect ratio was optimal to display a person riding a horse. The standard stuck..

    57. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by generic-man · · Score: 1

      Technically, it's only "built in" at the driver level. The video card in my 12" PowerBook (GeForce something Go) doesn't have a driver which supports rotation, so even external displays can't be turned. The 15" and 17" PowerBooks use ATI cards with drivers which support rotation, though.

      --
      For more information, click here.
    58. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by bogado · · Score: 1

      But you would probably not resize your window. The text being harded to read would probably make you somewhat less interested in reading, since it get's you more tired while reading it. This could make you walk away, or maybe not.

      Readability is important, a site is there to be readed, and if people get away because of a feature, this is a problem (in my book). Even if it is a tiny percentage.

      --
      []'s Victor Bogado da Silva Lins

      ^[:wq

    59. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, widescreen would look small in a regular tv, the advantage would be making tvs suck, so people would go to the cinema.

    60. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by LtOcelot · · Score: 1

      ...and on "narrowscreens", you can open more documents, web browser screens, etc. vertically. Any advantage widescreens may seem to have in this respect comes from having more total area or higher resolution, not from their aspect ratio.

    61. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by arose · · Score: 1

      Yes I certaily would resize my window to improve readability. I would probably turn off CSS if it ment that I get full width layout, but an alternative full width stylesheet would be a good compromise. I'm in the other tiny(?) percentage: people who might go away because of non full with layout, links that open in new windows, flash and "pixel perfect" (and other non-markupish) layouts that break if your setup is outside the box the designer is thinking in.

      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
    62. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by bogado · · Score: 1

      Don't get me wrong, I also hate flash and pop-ups in general. But I am also understanding, for instance, flash sites that uses flash in a way that don't corrupt my browser's back button and are do require flash (see www.homestarrunner.com) are ok for me.

      I also tell people who design sites, when I'm in the job to code, to think that the fonts can get somewhat larger or smaller. It is not impossible to design a site that will withstand some size changes without breaking horribly (and even if it does break, it is not hide text beneath images or stuff like that).

      The truth is that the site will always break if you change it too much. Designers do want to make the site beautiful and that requires some "pixel-perfect" adjustments, and with CSS2 this is quite possible. CSS3 will probably be even better, but it will take a few years for people to begin using it efectly.

      --
      []'s Victor Bogado da Silva Lins

      ^[:wq

    63. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The resolution on the 4:3 model is 1600x1200, while it's 1680x1050 on the 16:10 version. That's a negligible difference in total pixels, and the price reflects that negligible difference (i.e. the widescreen version is actually slightly less expensive).

      Actually, I've got both of them in front of me here at work, and I'd disagree that the difference is negligible. As a coder, the extra 80 pixels of width is nice - but it's not worth the loss of 150 pixels worth of height. It's not a good tradeoff, as far as I'm concerned.

      Of course, Dell also allow you to avoid that decision by buying the 23" 1920x1200 version. More expensive, of course, but much wider than either of the 20" versions, and without any loss of vertical space. Personally, I think the higher price is worth it, which is why I have one on order.

    64. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by General+Melchett · · Score: 1

      To me widescreens seemed like an unworthy novelty, till i used one.... This way, i can have the primary window (browser, txt editor, what ever the fuck im using etc etc ) open full height, at standard 4:3 screen width, then in the remaining 200/300 pixels have 2/3 scondary apps on the right, Like a media player video window, rss feeds, new mail notifcation. trillian, xfire etc etc, stuff that isnt absolutely nescesary, but that is useful none the less. Plus it means that i can have a large quick launch toolbar on the right, an it doesnt obscure my main window. So, i changed my tune after using a widescreen laptop.

    65. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by arose · · Score: 1

      I certainly undertand that a site will break if display conditions are dramaticly changed, there are however ways to minimize that. Now this could mean that the designer has to do more then slice up his Photoshoped site template and piece it back together in HTML+CSS (or a damned table design). It could even mean that the design has to be simplified. But that is the thing about web design--it's not graphics design, it's not page design, it stand on its own and has requires a different approach.

      It's not that difficult to make a site usable when CSS is turned off. Try to arrange your HTML in a sensible way and do positioning in CSS as you envisioned it, put a 'skip to content' link as the very first thing in your page--you can hide it via CSS if it's not needed in the final version, test in Lynx.
      If your design is to wide for a PDA make an alternative stylesheet for small screens (this is where simplification comes in), same for when you just havo to restrict the width to 800 pixels (so the fellow with a resolution of 1600x1200 and bad eyesight can crank the font size up and have more then two words on one line).

      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
    66. Re:Bigger Screens good, Wider Screens bad by xouumalperxe · · Score: 1

      well, the ergonomics argument says that your field of vision is wider than it is tall. Hence, the screen proportions should accompany that tendency. the l33t argument says that a widescreen 19" LCD lets you put 2 terminals side by side without shrinking them. Possibly it has enough height for a full four xterms. What more could you possibly need?

  7. obligatory whine.. by TheHawke · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You got laptops with 20" screens now, why don't they put larger keyboards on those very same laptops? Those ittybitty chicklet keyboards kill hands for just about everyone I know that use them, save for the odd elf. They got alot of area on the laptop to place additional items like USB ports, relocating that %#$*()&! speaker jack, loads of other items can go in that blank space now.

    --
    First rule of holes; When in one, stop digging.
    1. Re:obligatory whine.. by tzanger · · Score: 1

      Oh I dunno... I've got large hands (I can easily palm a standard-size basketball) and I have no problem on laptop keyboards at all. The big hands, however, do make it difficult to find cheap work gloves, play regular electric guitars and reach in behind little areas to grab screws that fell off the table and found the smallest place to settle. :-)

    2. Re:obligatory whine.. by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 2, Informative

      A lot of laptops now have a layout that uses the same size keys as a standard desktop keyboard, save maybe a few of the function keys. The only difference is that they are short throw keys.

    3. Re:obligatory whine.. by Alioth · · Score: 1

      My old Amstrad portable PC (not really a laptop, but neither is a laptop with a 20in display) had a fullsize standard 102-key PC keyboard when you opened it. With a 20in screen, you've certainly got the width to do it.

    4. Re:obligatory whine.. by djbckr · · Score: 1
      I have the HP zd7000 - a wide-screen laptop.

      Yeah, it's big, and it's a bit of a pain to lug around, but I don't lug around all that much. What I *love* about it though, is the numeric keypad. It's big enough to have your normal keyboard, plus enough space to have your numeric keypad as well.

    5. Re:obligatory whine.. by nine-times · · Score: 1

      The samsung model in the article summary seems to have a full-sized keyboard. More importantly, it has a detachable monitor, which solves the real problem with using a laptop as your desktop replacement: needing to stay hunched over the keyboard in order to see the screen.

    6. Re:obligatory whine.. by Urusai · · Score: 1

      And while they're at it, how about having keys with some depth and travel. I'm typing this on a USB keyboard plugged into a laptop because I hate the awful keys. Also, the awful mouse-substitute pads are awfully awful. Is a trackball too much to ask for?

    7. Re:obligatory whine.. by heeeraldo · · Score: 1

      I dunno about that... I've tossed a few laptop keys and they've gone a fair distance.

    8. Re:obligatory whine.. by MindStalker · · Score: 1

      Yea I noticed that.. Is the monitor wireless? I didn't see any wires..

    9. Re:obligatory whine.. by Deviant+Q · · Score: 1

      Because then you have the awkward situation where you have the (main part of) the keyboard to the right of your screen's center. My XPS Gen 2 Dell could have its keyboard shifted to the right and add a numeric keypad, but then I'd be typing off-center. *Shrug*. It works for me.

      --
      "May the days be aimless. Let the seasons drift. Do not advance the action according to a plan."
    10. Re:obligatory whine.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not really, but at least mine can be used to reproduce...

  8. Pretty soon by strider44 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Pretty soon laptops screens will become so big that you won't even be able to carry them around, and you'll have to keep it permanantly on your desk. They'll have to come up with a new name though, I mean if you keep it on your desk, how about instead of "lap-top" call it something like "desk-top"?

    1. Re:Pretty soon by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      How about a "portable desktop"?

      At first the idea of a 19" LCD laptop sounded foolish to me too, but if they just stopped limiting it to the "laptop" concept, you could actually end up with a portable desktop machine.
      Add just a bit of desktop-quality hardware whilst keeping weight down and you've got a winner.
      Now let go of the classical book-shape; detachable keyboard/mouse, etc. and you've got a new type of computer.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    2. Re:Pretty soon by gstoddart · · Score: 1
      Pretty soon laptops screens will become so big that you won't even be able to carry them around, and you'll have to keep it permanantly on your desk. They'll have to come up with a new name though, I mean if you keep it on your desk, how about instead of "lap-top" call it something like "desk-top"?

      First, they will mutate through a phase of existence whereby they will become heavy, unwieldly, and large. We will call these luggables since they can be relocated but not with ease.

      Then someone will decide we should make them progressively smaller. We will have notebooks, subnotebooks, and even tablets.

      Oh, wait. That was 1988 ....
      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    3. Re:Pretty soon by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      Hmm... we did this in the eighties, and it's called a luggable.

    4. Re:Pretty soon by WolfZombie · · Score: 1

      I see use in these large "laptops" in the work environment for those who do not travel. Great for taking home on the weekend in an oversized SUV (Finally, a use for those things). They really should just change the name from "laptop" to something like "port-a-puter".

    5. Re:Pretty soon by WuphonsReach · · Score: 1

      And I somewhat miss the luggable lunchbox units that came out c1990.

      They had a miniature detachable keyboard (similar to today's laptop keyboard layouts). The ones that I remember (made by Compaq in the i386 days) were rather comfortable keyboards to use. They were smaller then the previous decades luggables (which were breadbox sized as opposed to lunchbox sized).

      The best part about them was that they typically came with (2) ISA expansion slots that used regular ISA cards. A useful thing to have in a semi-portable workstation, back when motherboard chipsets didn't include the kitchen sink.

      The downsides / characteristics of the units were:

      - The depth (thickness) of the unit would require special laptop bags today. Although you could probably use a carrying case for an overhead LCD projector. It's also more difficult to pack a thick, boxy shape then a thin wafer shape.

      - The old Compaq luggables had to be plugged in, no built-in battery at all. OTOH, they came with a monochrome plasma screen which was very easy on the eyes. (Or was it greyscale? I just remember the orange glow.)

      --
      Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
    6. Re:Pretty soon by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      Hey, I'm tossing around the idea of first, a breadbox luggable (complete with 5 to 9" color LCD), and then doing something like modding a Compaq Portable III into a widescreen (they DID have a wider than normal screen, right?) lunchbox luggable with modern components (IIRC, they used normal AT-class stuff). If push really comes to shove, there's always shoving a Mini-ITX mobo in there...

  9. desktop LCD? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is the Smasung laptop LCD in the article 19inch 1600x1080 for sale as a desktop LCD?

    1. Re:desktop LCD? by hattig · · Score: 1

      Indeed, I'd be interested in the new Powerbook's 17" 1650x1050 display as a stand-alone desktop display as well.

      I'm sick of 1280x1024 19" TFTs. Nice two years ago, but now I want more. Ah well, there's always Dell and their widescreen displays.

    2. Re:desktop LCD? by xouumalperxe · · Score: 1

      I'm under the impression that it's a "buy an expensive 19" screen, get a detachable laptopish computer free" deal

  10. I have to ask... by zegebbers · · Score: 1

    what about the weight of these things? Also, will it be cumbersome to carry? I honestly can't see a need for a 20 inch laptop.

    1. Re:I have to ask... by MichaelSmith · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I honestly can't see a need for a 20 inch laptop.

      In the office where my wife works all the computer systems (I assume except the servers) are laptops. They cost about the same amount of money and people tend to take them home on the weekend.

      So the laptops are being used as car-portable desktops.

    2. Re:I have to ask... by somersault · · Score: 1

      laptops definitely do not cost the same amount of money as desktops, in terms of the amount of processing power you get for your money. Especially since laptops cant really be upgraded, etc. If all you're doing is word processing, then sure you can get a little £300/$500 laptop, but if you want to do anything useful, such as play games (hehe), or 3D CAD work, then laptops are nowhere near the same value as a good old desktop.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    3. Re:I have to ask... by el_womble · · Score: 1

      When I bought my 12" PowerBook I knew that it was going to be my desktop computer so I bought a 17" LCD (I dual-head it) and a bluetooth keyboard and mouse for comfort. The reason that was better for me than a mini is because I can use it on the train and in the park and it has battery backup built in (so I can move it around whilst its sleeping). The reason its better than a 20" monster is because it weighs 3 pounds and has an 6 hour battery life, oh and it'll be a lot cheaper (everything is more expensive when its built into a laptop).

      I don't need my laptop to be the most powerfull machine in the building as long as it can connect to the most powerful machine in the building (thank God for 3G and WiFi). I don't really need to use it in the park, but on a cool, bright October day like today, it is a privaledge thats hard to resist. But size sells, so no doubt your wifes company will be buying these 20" screens by the dozen, her chiropractor will give herself a raise and you'll be buying an SUV to drop the laptop off at work ;)

      --
      Scared of flying, pointy things snce 1979!
    4. Re:I have to ask... by Professor_UNIX · · Score: 1

      The 19" Samsung model in the article blurb weighs 9.7 pounds! I imagine the battery life is around 60 minutes if you're lucky.

    5. Re:I have to ask... by izomiac · · Score: 1

      Ok, I'm a college student who likes to take my (rather large) laptop home for the weekends. Other than that, I essentially don't move my computer. Therefore, portability isn't that much of an issue (11 lbs, fits in a backpack), whereas having a large screen for movies, writing papers, etc. is a definate benefit. That's not even taking into account the improved hardware that comes with a heavier/bigger laptop.

    6. Re:I have to ask... by vasqzr · · Score: 1

      Apple really needs a widescreen 12" PB. 1024x768 is just too limiting.

  11. Manufacturers: Please don't forget this! by bradbeattie · · Score: 1

    Laptops are supposed to be portable.

    1. Re:Manufacturers: Please don't forget this! by mzwaterski · · Score: 1
      So buy a small laptop then...

      If someone wants a big laptop let them have a big laptop. Its not as if tiny laptops aren't avaiable. I wouldn't want my Dell 300M to be any smaller and its certainly not the smallest laptop available.

  12. Landscape vs. Portrait by VoidEngineer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's a Good Thing this is going to happen. Why? Well, for one thing, it will also push the Tablet's into getting a little bigger. Oddly enough, Laptops and Tablets still don't screens that are big enough to fit an 8.5x11" full-size 1:1 ratio image of a piece of paper! People ask me if I find my Tablet too bulky (same problem with Laptop, essentially), and I tell them... actually, no, I want a bigger screen so I can write papers in real ratio format. Expect with this increase in size for some manufacturers to also start playing around with swivel screens to allow putting the screen in either landscape or portrait mode.

    Of course, it's also great to have a portable movie playing machine. Nothing wrong with the entertainment side of the equation. I'm just saying that this is also going to push the adoption of swivel displays and increased tablet screens sizes.

    1. Re:Landscape vs. Portrait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude. Proofread your shit before you send it. You write like it went through translation.

    2. Re:Landscape vs. Portrait by jgc7 · · Score: 1
      Let's see...

      an 8.5x11" piece of paper printed with a 300 dpi resolution would have a resolution of 3000x2250 assuming the paper has a 0.5" border. Good luck finding a laptop with that resolution.

      --
      70% of statistics are made up.
    3. Re:Landscape vs. Portrait by MROD · · Score: 2, Funny

      But, of course, the manufacturers will need to make two versions: US-Letter sized for the USA and A4 for the rest of the world. :-)

      Actually, maybe a third version for the legal industry as well.

      --

      Agrajag: "Oh no, not again!"
    4. Re:Landscape vs. Portrait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An 8.5"x11" sheet of paper is equivalent in physical dimensions to a 14" (diagonal) viewable area, at a 1.30 aspect ratio. The LCD screen sitting on my desk right now has a 19" viewable area and a 1.25 aspect ratio. That translates to dimensions roughly 15"x12", which is more than big enough to fit an entire sheet of paper, almost two. If you've tried to work on a document recently, the zoom level that fills the screen is higher than 100%. Even a 14" screen is almost big enough, if you use it in portrait mode.

      There's two basic problems here. One is that a (Windows) computer expects a 96 dpi display, and monitors aren't all 96 dpi. In fact, at maximum resolution my monitor is closer to 86 dpi. This distorts the size of things on the computer screen so they appear slightly larger than normal. You can adjust this, but it's a bit of a pain because so much software is broken. It really only matters for certain kind of work, too. The other problem is that you don't have plain sheets of paper on your screen, you've also got all those tool bars and status bars and other GUI elements cluttering things up. Perhaps the interface of the future will eliminate all of these distractions, so working on a computer will be generally as simple (and limited) as putting pencil to paper.

    5. Re:Landscape vs. Portrait by pioneerX · · Score: 1

      So European users will see a message box pop up saying "PC Load Letter" whenever a US program is run.

    6. Re:Landscape vs. Portrait by SecretAsianMan · · Score: 1

      Of course, it's also great to have a portable movie playing machine.

      Heh. You're right. They will have room for a subwoofer in that thing.

      --

      Washington, DC: It's like Hollywood for ugly people.

    7. Re:Landscape vs. Portrait by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      My 15" Powerbook screen fits an 8.5"x11" piece of paper with space left over. Did you mean the screen isn't high enough? Because the area is certainly bigger.

  13. Laptop egronomics suck (sometimes) by rice0067 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I like the form factor of a laptop, no messy wires and all that.. but having the screen so low is what sucks most for long term use. Not good for the neck.
    The cool thing about this Samsung laptop is that the screen comes off and you can put a base on it. If its a quick change, and doesnt break after the 20th time you switch it, it should be a good concept. But I wonder what sort of wire goes btwn the screen and rest of the computer while the display is off. It would sort of suck to carry around a regular DVI cord. About as much as it would suck to cart around a 19 inch laptop.
    Thats why i like my combo of a 15 powerbook and 20 inch cinema display. Leave the 20 at home and travel with the 15.
    And wide aspect ratio is really the way to go. I just wish macs had a way to rotate the screeen output, like for reading big pdf files at 1080X 1650...

    1. Re:Laptop egronomics suck (sometimes) by AnonymousYellowBelly · · Score: 1

      Some video cards support rotation, and OSX 10.4 can use this feature:
      http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=302 291

      --
      Disclosure: I'm stupid
    2. Re:Laptop egronomics suck (sometimes) by zogger · · Score: 1

      Actually, that's sounds like a good niche machine idea with this twist. Perhaps a form factor that is sort of a laptop, but only comes with a very small integral screen, say 7 inches (or smaller, anything like a large PDA screen would be sufficient), and it's designed to be carried from big monitor to big monitor (and normal keyboard) and plugged in for regular use. You could use it away from work or home, but primarily it's designed to be a commuter special carry-all. The machine itself could still be relatively small then for ease of transport. Sized between todays high end PDAs and ultra small notebooks. Without the big screen to lug around, the machine could be pretty light and still have a decent sized battery in it, which would function as the UPS device as well. Perhaps even use the mini itx form factor board and an easy to open case so it could be upgradeable in the future.

  14. Desktop Replacement! by FatSean · · Score: 1

    I have a Thinkpad T40 for my work computer as I travel and work from home. It generally spends all its time on the table or the bag, rarely on my lap. It's nice to have a larg(er) screen when coding...1024x768 is rediculous. I would totally jump for one of these.

    --
    Blar.
    1. Re:Desktop Replacement! by Feyr · · Score: 1

      my laptop has a 15" 1600x1200 (native!) display, you don't need the large screen for better resolutions

    2. Re:Desktop Replacement! by Taladar · · Score: 0

      You don't need one, you just ruin your eyes without one...

    3. Re:Desktop Replacement! by CastrTroy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      resolution says nothing about how much you can fit on the screen. It really gets me mad, when people set their tiny monitors to some really small resolution. Either you can't see anything, or the fonts are so big, that you get no advantage of actually having a higher resolution. If you want you fonts to be x mm accross, then a bigger monitor will always be able to fit more letters on them.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    4. Re:Desktop Replacement! by DragonKai · · Score: 1

      I have a custom built laptop from R3 Technologies. I run Fedora Core 4 on it, and spend a lot of time at a command line instead of in the GUI. The display is a 12" display and I run a 1280x1024 resolution. The laptop weights less than 4 lbs, and that's with an 8 hour battery (less than 3 with the standard battery). This is a highly mobile laptop! I had a Toshiba with a 15" that would run at 1600x1200 resolution. That boat anchor of a laptop weighed in at between 5 to 7 lbs, and was large enough that I had a hard time using it on the plane ride from Southern Indiana to Austin, Texas. That is a problem for business people that need to travel for their jobs, and may spend hours in a plane or at an airport terminal.

      I wouldn't trade my laptop for one with a 19" or 20" display if someone was offering it to me for free. This thing is great, who wants to carry around a boat anchor?

    5. Re:Desktop Replacement! by Peter+La+Casse · · Score: 1
      resolution says nothing about how much you can fit on the screen.

      Of course it does. You can't fit more pixels on the screen than your resolution allows.

    6. Re:Desktop Replacement! by Feyr · · Score: 1

      of course you can fit more on the screen, that's the whole point. and yes it's a bit smaller, but on this laptop 1600x1200 is surprisingly comfortable, with the default font size

    7. Re:Desktop Replacement! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you think the resolution does not matter then try to use older any-size-TV for editing. I wish you good luck with that !

    8. Re:Desktop Replacement! by John+Nowak · · Score: 1

      This gets you ... mad? Perhaps you should seek help?

    9. Re:Desktop Replacement! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1024x768 is rediculous.

      It's not as rediculous as misspelling ridiculous is.

    10. Re:Desktop Replacement! by utexaspunk · · Score: 1

      of course resolution determines how much information you can fit on the screen. the same information is there whether you're running a 19" monitor at 1600x1200 or a 15" monitor at the same resolution. everything is, of course, a lot smaller when all those pixels are crammed into a smaller area, but it's all there. maybe some of us have better vision than you do. i've got my 17" monitor here at work set at 1280x1024, and all my older coworkers are always saying "how can you see anything with it that small!" but it looks totally normal to me. if i set it to 1024x768, everything looks absurdly huge.

    11. Re:Desktop Replacement! by Moofie · · Score: 1

      "It really gets me mad, when people set their tiny monitors to some really small resolution"

      You need to take a really deep breath, and worry less about what other people do. You'll live longer.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    12. Re:Desktop Replacement! by cloudmaster · · Score: 1

      Are you the same graphics designer who tried to tell me that dpi had nothing to do with digital image size and resolution?

    13. Re:Desktop Replacement! by FatSean · · Score: 1

      Nor as ridiculous as a Spelling/Grammar flame on Slashdot is.

      Nearly every non-trivial forum software produced in the last 5 years has a built-in spell check.

      Slashdot does not. A Nerd site? Bah...we should have grammar checking by now.

      --
      Blar.
    14. Re:Desktop Replacement! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A forum full of presumably smart people should be able to spell, or at least know which words they need to look up and check.

  15. American market? by Shano · · Score: 4, Funny

    I assume this is being marketed in America?

    The rest of us don't have laps that big.

    1. Re:American market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      Don't worry, if you're foreign your ego is probably plenty big.

    2. Re:American market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe there is co-marketing involved with McDonalds and Burger King.... I can see the advertisig campaign now, "Can't fit that new laptop on your lap?. The King has you covered, meet the new spam, egg, sausage and spam sandwich, now with 2 slices of cheese and secret dipping sauce!"

      You'll quickly fit under that new laptop!

    3. Re:American market? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually it is being marketted to non-americans, where the laps are actaully big enough. The lap is the not the same thing as stomach. It is the space from the front of the stomach to the knees when sitting down. So us Americans actually have smaller laps than the rest of the world.

      But on the other hand this is a big wasteful power-hungry machine, so the Americans love that. So it really is a good global market.

  16. A 20" laptop? by 8127972 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Well.... I guess some of us have to make up for our shortcomings somehow (not that *I* have that problem).

    --
    This is my opinion. To make sure you don't steal it, it's covered by the DMCA.
    1. Re:A 20" laptop? by Fross · · Score: 1

      if you leave that machine on your lap for a while, you will.

      on the flipside, i understand it'll smell like grilled pork.

      mmmm. pork.

  17. Why is everything 'unleashed' these days? by RandoX · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I mean really, it's just silly now.

    1. Re:Why is everything 'unleashed' these days? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, it was either that or spawned...

    2. Re:Why is everything 'unleashed' these days? by GMFTatsujin · · Score: 1

      It's silliness . . . UNLEASHED!

      It's the dominant paridigm, man. Grok it or don't, chummer.

    3. Re:Why is everything 'unleashed' these days? by danieljpost · · Score: 1

      Well, the marketing folks I work with were talking about using "unplugged" as their new buzzword, but I talked em out of it. :)

      --
      We must drive a sword through any hypothesis that is not strictly necessary.
  18. Don't confuse these with a laptop by JanneM · · Score: 4, Informative

    Don't see these as laptops; they aren't. If you click the link on the Samsung 19" machine, it's obvious that these are rather the heir to the all-in-one portable desktops that were available some years ago (they tended to look like a sewing machine, with a detachable keyboard and a screen behind a side panel).

    You don't lug these around every day, and you're not expected to. Instead, they are space-saving uncluttered desktops without the hassle of cables and multiple beige boxes to move around. You can take it out into the dining or living room to work or play for a few hours with the rest of your household instead of being relegated to some study or den. When it's time to clear the table you can just unplug it and move it away.

    The format just looks rather like a laptop since it's the all-in-one form people are used to by now, and lots of components are made to accomodate it. I would prefer the sewing machine model myself (and Sony has some VAIO's for the Japanse market that are pretty close).

    --
    Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    1. Re:Don't confuse these with a laptop by steevc · · Score: 0

      Weren't they called 'luggables' or 'transportables'?

      I used a couple. One was a TI suitcase-sized box with a tiny CRT, several ISA slots and enough metal shielding to build a small tank. I'm sure I saw Windows 1.0 on that box.

      The other was a Compaq 'lunchbox' with an orange plasma screen, 5.25" floppy and a couple of card slots. I seem to remember some similar IBMs that kept breaking down. I liked that form-factor as it let you have an expandable PC in an easily carryable form. I guess things like the Shuttle are almost as transportable, but still consist of too many separate parts.

      I can see that people will argue that laptops are just as expandable via USB or PC card. Relatively cheap these days too. 15 years ago things were different.

      Maybe some bright spark will just build a PC into the back of an LCD screen!

    2. Re:Don't confuse these with a laptop by hodet · · Score: 1

      Damn, you're right. I was thinking these things have become stupid but the way you put it, I could actually use one at the house. Who says /. comments are are the domain of Karma whores and Trolls. Once in a while someone actually says something useful.

    3. Re:Don't confuse these with a laptop by MacGod · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I agree. While in general, I wouldn't want to haul that 19" Samsung around all day, it seems like the perfect compromise for a business person. You bring the computer part to the office, where a full-sized monitor awaits you. If you need to make a presentation with a projector, your scren can be omitted (I know PowerPoint let's you have visual cues and extra text on a second screen, but for many presentations that's irrelevant). At the end of the day, you bring home the computer, and can use it at home for gaming/browsing/yet more work, by connecting it to your monitor there. Hell, if you're lucky enough to afford a Plasma screen, hook it up to watch a DVD in your living room! I agree with the parent post-if you don't think of this as a laptop, but rather a luggable computer that happens to come with a (detachable) matching monitor, it actually is a cool form factor.

      --
      "Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one " -Albert Einstein
    4. Re:Don't confuse these with a laptop by utexaspunk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Are you talking about the Compaq Portable 386? Those things rocked. Mine still does. Every once in a while I boot it up (with my EGA monitor attached) to play Space Quest 2 in all of its glory. For some reason computers just don't seem as fun anymore...

    5. Re:Don't confuse these with a laptop by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Why don't you just get a Mac mini style computer? If you don't intend to use it on the road (I backpacked my Powerbook across Europe but you won't be doing that with one of these 20" monsters) you don't need a monitor, keyboard, etc. Get one just big enough to fit a CD.

  19. Same tiny keyboard? by Vo0k · · Score: 4, Insightful

    My biggest gripe with all "big screen" laptops is that tiny keyboard stuck in the middle of the huge room of the bottom part. So instead of giving us correctly placed arrow keys, full-size enter, Ins/Del placed conveniently, just for websurfing and games on bigscreen, they stuff the remaining rum with numpad. Yeah, great for widescreen accounting and displaying several columns extra in Excel, isn't it? Oh, and yes, and since the numpad took some extra place, and the rest of horizontal space was wasted with inch-wide margins on both sides and some extra column of "custom" keys, stuff all the keys that in a normal laptop fit in a column right from enter, just below it right Control, where you rest your wrists.

    --
    Anagram("United States of America") == "Dine out, taste a Mac, fries"
    1. Re:Same tiny keyboard? by grimJester · · Score: 1

      What makes it all the more weird is that a fold-in-half or roll-up keyboard is really easy to make, but electronic paper is still in its infancy. Will we get full size keyboards for mobile phones before we get them for laptops?

    2. Re:Same tiny keyboard? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, a decent quality display, roll-up or not, requires resolution of some 100 dpi of output resolution. A good quality keyboard has about 1.5 dpi of input resolution and more densely placed keys is not better.

  20. This is great by multipartmixed · · Score: 4, Funny

    Widescreen format may seem like it's aimed at windows users, but it's really a boon for us nerds, too!

    I spend a lot of my day wishing I had a wider display, about another 4", for those stupidly-wide Oracle SQL*Plus queries, other-people's code which uses insane tab widths for indenting (I use two spaces), and so forth.

    Really, I rarely want a widescreen when in GUI land, but wish for one daily as I live in Terminal Land.

    --

    Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
    1. Re:This is great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, there are text editors that convert the tab spaces into x spaces in width for you. You don't need to torture yourself.

    2. Re:This is great by hattig · · Score: 1

      And then you commit back into the repository, and BAM! 80% of the file is changed according to diff, but all you did was change a single thing besides reformat.

      This is why I demand a codebase wide coding standard where I work that includes explicit standards on white space.

      Anyway, to get back on topic ... these laptops are nice for their intended use - luggable between locations. If someone made a rigid iMac bag it would be as well (well, the base might require some work or a custom VESA stand that compresses in size well).

    3. Re:This is great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why you either have an autoindenter or indent-checker script enforcing what can go into the repository to begin with. If it doesn't conform, the script rejects the commit attempt. I personally think automatic indent output looks like crap, but it sure beats having to put up with a profusion of styles. And you can create automatic transforms into and out of the repository, so everyone can work with the indenting they prefer, if they so choose.

      By the way, there's a flag to diff to make it ignore whitespace.

    4. Re:This is great by hattig · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I know that diff has a flag for whitespace.

      however Eclipse doesn't provide a way to set this.

      Now will it deal with

      blah { ..}

      and blah
      { ...
      }

      and myriad other alternatives.

      However the Eclipse code formatter is generally pretty good, apart from braindead line wrapping (i'd prefer it to wrap on ',' before trying to put as much on the line as possible, also I want the next-line indent to be 'Match previous line')

  21. 'Only' 39%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    'Only' 39% of the market? That is a huge percentage of a market that exists to make portable computers. Given that the vast majority of people don't need the power offered by today's desktops, the idea of having a device that is small (er), quiet, and can be packed away and transported when necessary, is a significant advantage to most people. Does this indicate a transition from the traditional desktop form-factor to the 'luggable laptop' for the majority of consumers?

  22. Return of the boombox... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 2, Funny

    If the business people walked around with these things like 80's boomboxes, and doing the moonwalk, I'm going to be sick.

  23. Strange market developments by OnoTadaki · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A few months ago I was advising a friend of the family on purchasing a new computer. She was adament that she NEEDED a laptop with a widescreen monitor. After going through why she needed a portable computer over a desktop she had no answer. These new monster laptops are being marketed as full fledged desktop computers with added portability.

    Personally I'd like to see a step in the other direction, something akin the Apple 12 inch iBook, except smaller and less fruit.

    1. Re:Strange market developments by Alioth · · Score: 1

      They do exist. We have a Sony Vaio at work with a 10 inch screen. It truly is tiny. It doesn't lack features though - DVD-RW, Firewire, Bluetooth and wireless ethernet and a decent sized hard disk. It is expensive though - it's more expensive than my 12 inch PowerBook and it still doesn't have a metal case. (That's one of the things I like about the PowerBook - not only is it price competitive with similar form factor PC laptops, but being made out of metal I don't worry about it getting scratched or cracked in the back compartment of my $14 K-Mart back pack - which incidentally, it fits precisely, like the backpack was *made* for a PowerBook!)

    2. Re:Strange market developments by generic-man · · Score: 1

      I have a 12" PowerBook and have found it to be very fragile. Aluminum is quite malleable. Your laptop won't crack, but (1) it'll bend and (2) the plastic ports that line the sides will crack. Apple wants $700 for a new logic board if it finds even one port with any bit of damage during a repair, regardless of anything. Due to a slightly-chipped Ethernet port that still worked, Apple tried to charge me $700 for a new logic board when replacing a busted hard drive, for example.

      --
      For more information, click here.
    3. Re:Strange market developments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    4. Re:Strange market developments by ucblockhead · · Score: 1

      I got a laptop that's relatively small, but has a wide screen (that is, a 16:9 aspect ratio). Just that extra bit of screen realestate helps tremendously. Sometimes the screen (at 1280x800) seems a little cramped, since I'm used to 1600x1200, but I don't know that I'd want to trade much physical screen size for more pixels.

      --
      The cake is a pie
  24. I don't get it by Apreche · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why would anyone want a laptop so big? The point of a laptop is that it is portable, you can take it with you places. If it's 20"+ diagonally that really doesn't fit in any bag I know. It's one thing if you are using it as a desktop replacement. And it's another thing if you are using it for something like a display in your booth at a trade show. But for a computer you use on the plane, train and other public spaces it's gotta be smaller. Right now the only things that even come close to good enough are incredibly expensive laptops from japan, the small vaios, the fujitsu lifebook p series and the 12" apples. I haven't found any other laptop even close to small enough.

    --
    The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
    1. Re:I don't get it by BenjyD · · Score: 1

      People want odd things. I saw someone in a busy London Underground carriage the other day trying to Photoshop a company logo on a 17" Powerbook balanced on their knees.

      Personally, a 12" laptop is the largest I would call properly portable (this post typed on a 15.4" widescreen that I would not like to use anywhere but at my desk or sofa).

    2. Re:I don't get it by shadow303 · · Score: 1

      These aren't the laptops you are looking for. Seriously, these aren't intended to be used for what you want. If you want your laptop primarily as something to use on a plane or train, then clearly you want to go with one of the itty-bitty ones. However for somebody like me, a 20-inch laptop sounds great. My laptop is primarily a desktop replacement that I can use while lounging on the couch. It is also plenty portable enough that I can pack it up to go hang out at the local coffee shop, or take with me when I have to fix somebody else's computer. Size and weight aren't really of concern for me. I wouldn't have any trouble lugging it around either, and I have all of the athletic prowess of your stereotypical geek.

      --
      I've got a mind like a steel trap - it's got an animal's foot stuck in it.
    3. Re:I don't get it by LurkerXXX · · Score: 1
      Why is this 'insightful'?

      I want one that big. Not everyone uses their laptops in the same way you do. I don't take mine on plains, trains, and other public spaces. Mine migrates from my desk at work to my desk at home. I want a large screen (and yes, I already have it connected to an external monitor at both places. I like using it in dual-head mode with tons of screen space). You want a small laptop. That's great. Lots of companies are making small ones. But some of us really do want large ones. Your way isn't the only way people use laptops.

    4. Re:I don't get it by Maavin · · Score: 0

      Thinkpad X31! I love mine...

      --


      Crivens! I kicked meself in me own heid!
    5. Re:I don't get it by vadim_t · · Score: 1

      Because as somebody pointed out already, it's not a laptop, but a portable computer.

      You don't get one of those to carry around with you all day. You get it when you want an easily movable computer. This is the thing to bring to a friend's home to play games without the hassle of having to mess with wires and having to lug a monitor.

      Another reason is moving the computer around the house with you. If you live with other people it can be useful to be able to move into another room to find some peace and quiet, or perhaps the weather is good and you move to the balcony.

    6. Re:I don't get it by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 1

      "The point of a laptop is that it is portable, you can take it with you places."

      There is no one point to a laptop; that's why there are so many different models with lots of different sizes and feature sets. I use a 15" laptop during the workweek that I take home for the weekend for playing Counterstrike. It's about 7lbs, but portability is not its main purpose...I bought it for the large, ultrasharp screen. However, when I'm relaxing on the couch or travelling somewhere, my 12" iBook with wireless is the only way to go.

    7. Re:I don't get it by ucblockhead · · Score: 1

      It's for people who usually keep their computer in the den, but every once in a while want to bring it out to the kitchen table or patio for a bit. It's not meant for laps. It's meant to be easily moved from place to place when compared to a desktop.

      --
      The cake is a pie
    8. Re:I don't get it by Chris+Oz · · Score: 1

      In Australia desktop all in one luggables are all the rage mainly due to a quirk in our tax law. "Laptop" computer can be "salary sacraficed" (paid for by your employer out of your pre tax wage in higher purchase style arrangement) and can also be written off in two years for tax purposes. Desktop are treated differently and don't get as favourable tax treatment. As a result of these differences a large number of people are buying laptops who really want desktops (my boss is a good example), hence in Australia atleast there is a very health market in laptops that are actually desktops. I have seen some 6+Kg monsters floating around. I would not be supprised is happening elsewere in the world.

  25. In other news: by CortoMaltese · · Score: 5, Funny
    People are getting fatter and fatter...

    Bigger laps, bigger laptops!

    1. Re:In other news: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you ever LOOKED at a fat man? The fatter you get, the smaller the lap gets... if we were meant to be fat, we wouldn't have endoskeletons.

    2. Re:In other news: by DaEMoN128 · · Score: 1

      the problem is , the fatter I get, the less lap I have.

      --
      Stop signs are only Suggestions
    3. Re:In other news: by Eric_Cartman_South_P · · Score: 2, Funny
      People are getting fatter and fatter..


      And Leon's getting LarRrRrRrRrgggerrrrrrrr!

    4. Re:In other news: by JabberWokky · · Score: 1
      And he's shaped like a giant Tylenol with wings!

      --
      Evan

      --
      "$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
    5. Re:In other news: by thewiz · · Score: 1

      Ahem,
      You're not supposed to eat the laptop!

      --
      If "disco" means "I learn" in Latin, does "discothèque" mean "I learn technology"?
    6. Re:In other news: by pablodiazgutierrez · · Score: 2, Funny

      They should have Michael Moore publicise it.

    7. Re:In other news: by binarybum · · Score: 1

      it's going to be so cool when fat people start evolving exoskeletons.

      --
      ôó
    8. Re:In other news: by cosmotron · · Score: 1

      Hahahaha! That was nice.

      --
      Ryan - http://www.thecosmotron.com/
  26. Result of better PDA technology by RevMike · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is a direct result of better PDA technology. Devices like the Treo, Blackberry, and ultra-light tablets are allowing the normal business user avoid lugging around a normal laptop and still have access to email and office suite apps. So the pressure to make laptops more portable has been relieved by the emergence of a new market segment and devices specifically aimed at being ultra-portable.

    Meanwhile, the desktop users, all but the l33test gamers, and developers are demanding more powerful transportable devices. They don't need to travel accross the country, but would like the flexibility of using their PCs from their living room or the backyard without sacrificing their big screens and better power.

    The transportable desktop replacement business is naturally growing while the ultraportable segment is shrinking.

  27. Excellent - the more powerful the better by tcopeland · · Score: 1

    The most recent issue of Linux Magazine had an editorial article on needing bigger, more powerful laptops. I agree completely - my HP zd7000 laptop sits on my desk at home until I take it to work where it then sits on my desk there. I need it to be powerful and portable, but not necessarily great for working on at an airport waiting lounge. As long as it runs FC4 on VMWare fine, I'm happy.

  28. Are there not more compact LCDs? by JargonScott · · Score: 1

    Maybe I'm not remembering correctly, but I thought you could get tiny (like 5x5cm) lcd "chips" that do 800x600. Couldn't a display be built that's at a more reasonable 14" diagonal but has a higher resolution, like all the way to the 1080p standard?

    Thanks...

    --
    Nuke Gay Whales for Jesus.
    1. Re:Are there not more compact LCDs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. You can get laptops with higher screen resolutions such as 1440x1050, 1600x1200 and their widescreen versions. They just cost a lot more.

      My theory as to the reason why high-resolution laptops aren't available in the consumer lines is the "I can't read ao tiny text!" effect, when people first see a high-resolution laptop with Windows in its default settings. That is, the average joe honestly believes they're getting better value when buying the cheaper laptop with "more readable text" on a 1280x800 screen.

  29. I like it by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 1

    I am not sure if I am ready for a 20" laptop, but I would sure like the choices in the 17" models to increase. Maybe this will drive down the price of the displays and improve the popularity of these models.

  30. At what point ? by MajorDick · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Does a laptop become NOT a laptop.

    I have a heck of a problem opening my 15 inch Toshiba up on a plane in Coach class as it is . a 20 inch ...Id have to spring for first class...

    1. Re:At what point ? by Vo0k · · Score: 1

      Yeah, they are meant for these people who fly 1st class. :P

      --
      Anagram("United States of America") == "Dine out, taste a Mac, fries"
  31. Not laptops by unoengborg · · Score: 2, Informative

    I have a 13" screen on my current laptop. When I'm buying a new one I would probably want it to be smaller rather than bigger. Perhaps 12" with 1024x768 resolution, with a weght that hopfully will be below 1 kg.

    What the article really is saying, is that the end is near for the standard desktop computer. These new large screen semi portable "laptops" will replace them. The price of standard desktops are allready falling rapidly.

    --
    God is REAL! Unless explicitly declared INTEGER
    1. Re:Not laptops by AndreiK · · Score: 1

      I say - GOOD.

      Driving down the price of desktops is good for those of us who are traditional. I personally have a powerful desktop and a cheap, but extremely portable 12" laptop. The laptop goes to class with me, but I'm usually on my desktop.

      I know people that got a laptop, but then said it was too immobile to carry it around, so just use it like a desktop. Defeats the purpose of paying extra, does it not?

  32. Laptop gauge by VincenzoRomano · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We all hope that Philips will speed the technology up.
    Wider screens means also heavier batteries and bulkier carrying bags!
    And also more fragile devices!

    --
    Maybe Computers will never be as intelligent as Humans.
    For sure they won't ever become so stupid. [VR-1988]
  33. Samsung Laptop by monklegacy · · Score: 1
    Wow! I really dig that laptop.

    Once laptops overcome the upgrade/heat/speed issues I just might replace my desktop with a powerful, smaller (but big screened) upgradeable laptop. Until then I'll stick to my desktop which, I am able to upgrade/cool/and have faster cpu.

  34. my opinion by Dimble+ThriceFoon · · Score: 1

    i have two widescreen laptops, a 15.4" acer and a 14.1" acer. having used both, the former is unusable as an everyday portable object, and thus the reason why i got the latter. 14.1" widescreen is as big as i would be willing to carry around, ideally i would like a 12.1" widescreen like my boss has, for this is the ideal combination of power and portability.

  35. Re:12.1" with a screen res of 1280x768 by Dimble+ThriceFoon · · Score: 1

    would be ideal for me.

  36. So what should they be called? by Gubbe · · Score: 1

    Ok, they're neither desktops nor laptops and calling them desktop replacements implies laptop, so what should we call them to nod dilute the notion that a laptop is something you can *easily* carry with you in a bag?

    Let's hear some ideas for new names. Perhaps we'll manage to come up with one that'll stick.

    Fattop? Hugetop? Lugtop?

    1. Re:So what should they be called? by gcw1 · · Score: 0

      how about lapdesk ? :P

    2. Re:So what should they be called? by DragonKai · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing that "Portable PC" or "PC Portable" is simple and elegant. It implies that it can be easliy taken from one place to another, but doesn't elude to the fact that it should be as mobile as a laptop. Kind of like when they called the 13" TV a portable TV. One person can move it, but no one caries it around with them.

    3. Re:So what should they be called? by nine-times · · Score: 1
      Portable?

      I think the poster is right, though. This is a desktop computer, just a portable all-in-one model with a battery backup.

    4. Re:So what should they be called? by halltk1983 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Just a "desk" as in Ender's Game. Once muni wifi becomes availible, look for the buggers...

      --
      Watch for Penguins, they eat Apples and throw rocks at Windows.
    5. Re:So what should they be called? by penguinrenegade · · Score: 1

      I vote for the traditional notebook. I have a 17" Gateway widescreen, and it is my only computer now. It JUST squeezes in to airline regulation size for carryon with the case. I also have a printer and scanner along with all the accessories, and it just BARELY squeezes in. A 20" would require an upgrade to first class to stow it beneath the seat. But at 3 gigahertz with hyperthreading, it works just fine for all my needs, and can actually fit 3 hard drives if you remove the DVD burner. It's got a FULL-SIZE keyboard, plus numeric keypad.

      Desktop replacements are a thing of beauty. I don't need a dual-screen any longer. For portability, it is heavy with all the gear, but the convenience of taking my entire office with me cannot be surpassed.

    6. Re:So what should they be called? by sadler121 · · Score: 1

      It JUST squeezes in to airline regulation size for carryon with the case.

      Accept you don't have to squeeze it into the carry on sense most(all?) of the US airlines don't consider a laptop as carry on (same as Amtrak).

    7. Re:So what should they be called? by amilham · · Score: 0

      Except? Since?

  37. Best of both worlds: 12" laptop, 22" screen by G4from128k · · Score: 1
    My wife uses a 12" Powerbooks with a 22" Cinema display, USB keyboard, and USB multi-button mouse. On the road, she has something very compact. On her desk, she has a large screen and comfortable input devices.

    I believe that all of Apple's current Powerbooks come with DVI and I would assume that some PC laptops include it too. It's a great way to have a big screen that you don't have to carry.

    --
    Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
    1. Re:Best of both worlds: 12" laptop, 22" screen by netsyd · · Score: 1

      Exactly. This is how laptops were meant to be used, atleast in my opinion. Granted for a lot of people the 12" display is too small for them, but I personally won't use anything bigger because there's no need. I have a 19" flat panel at home, a 17" at work, and the laptop is used stricly for school, or surfing the net from my couch. - Full time work + college sucks by the way.

      Here's how you solve this 20" laptop screen for the kids going off to college and without ruining laptops for the rest of us. Buy the little brat a 12" XXXX (fill in with your favorite vendor) laptop, a 60-80GB hdd, CD-RW/DVD, wireless and a second battery (the basics). Then you buy the kid a 17 inch or bigger flat panel, as well as a keyboard, mouse and power strip. This still allows the kid to carry the laptop to class (which is where it should be used) to take notes and things like that without getting laughed at - obviously compensating jokes will abound w/ a 20"er - and then they can still go back to the dorm room and plug the laptop in to watch movies, write reports and play games.

      I say Americans need to stand up and call stupid when we see it. Forget Politically Correct - It's a fucking laptop, not a Yukon Denali. All hail the Fujitsu P-Series. Ok, well atleast I'll continue to hail the P-Series, you folks keep compensating while I carry my laptop with me on the plane.

  38. Finally I'll be able to show up that wiseass Smith by elrous0 · · Score: 2, Funny
    At last, a status symbol worthy of my small penis size!

    -Eric

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  39. Bigger smaller laptops.... by TangoCharlie · · Score: 0

    What they really need to do is squeeze a nice 20" wide screen display into the space of a 13" dispaly. That would be cool.

    --
    return 0; }
    1. Re:Bigger smaller laptops.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed and this isnt as silly as comment as some might take it. There are several ways to do this but no idea when this will actually happen. e.g. projecting the screen on a surface or stretching the screen to the required size.

  40. But where are the novel-sized palm/laptops? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You mention tablet PCs, but I find that nothing at all exists in the niche that I want covered:

    - A display the size of one page of a standard novel at minimum, and up to A5 at maximum (that's half of A4 for the imperialists).

    - Pure CompactFlash card storage for light weight and robustness, although a microdrive could of course also fit in a type II slot.

    - No physical keyboard as it wastes real estate, but PS2 connectors for optional standard mouse and external keyboard for the odd occasion when heavy input is desired.

    - Linux as standard from the manufacturer, or any BSD would be fine too. Manufacturer support is crucial here, as hacks rarely have access to all hardware facilities.

    - Wifi and Bluetooth, obviously. It's 2005.

    Hell, I'd use such a thing all day long when mobile or around the house if it existed. The closest thing to it so far is Nokia's nice Linux-based 770, but its display is just not large enough for what I want (the whole unit is only 3/4 the size of a standard novel, and the display much smaller), although the resolution of 800x480 is acceptable.

    I guess I'll just have to wait. PDAs and palmtops don't even come close, laptops are too large and have an annoying keyboard, and tablets haven't yet filled the niche well.

    1. Re:But where are the novel-sized palm/laptops? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You'll never, ever, find such a thing.

      PS2? What, are you stuck in the early 90s?

      Compact flash? Linux? Linux support for the tablet PC is a nightmare.

      Fujitsu has lightweight tablets without a keyboard with a decent size screen that fufill everything but your very minor complaints.

  41. Quite a challenge... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Using a 20-inch-wide laptop in an economy airline seat.

    I must get one immediately so my boss will be forced to upgrade all my flights to business class.

  42. Get Real by lbmouse · · Score: 0

    FTA ~ "...the M70 can be used for a romantic movie with that special someone on a Saturday night, or a session of intense gaming with your buddies."
     
    For the typical slashdotter (or person who drools over this laptop), the later is much more realistic.

  43. Oh... by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 1

    ...is that the reason for these king sized laptops? I thought it was part of an an international conspiracy to irradiate the reproductive organs of /. readers to keep them from breeding.

    --
    Only to idiots, are orders laws.
    -- Henning von Tresckow
    1. Re:Oh... by AdamWeeden · · Score: 4, Funny

      I thought it was part of an an international conspiracy to irradiate the reproductive organs of /. readers to keep them from breeding.

      I'm pretty sure that will take care of itself.

      --
      I was quoted out of context in my autobiography...
    2. Re:Oh... by CSfreakazoid · · Score: 1

      wait, /. readers breed? How did you come the that conclusion?

  44. anecdotal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was in an industrial accident, pretty bad back injury, put me into early retirement, can only work part time now. Anyway, inititally after the accident (emergency room to another hospita to another, etc) I went to several "normal" docs, *all of them* wanted to remove all my spinal disks and insert a steel rod into my spine. I freaked. I chose chiropractic instead. Result, after a year of therapy, I still have a functional spine that bends. I'm over an inch shorter than I used to be, and never got complete full use back, but I am able to do physical labor now, bend, etc, have a somewhat normal life.

    In other words, you and Randi can byte me.

  45. Pah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll stick with my Telcon Zorba thanks very much.

  46. Going Back.... by grumptech · · Score: 1

    I guess the new trend is a heavier laptop. Good thing I held on to my Commodore SX-64! Wohoo!

  47. WHAT lap? by jayloden · · Score: 1

    I think at that point, it's just considered a desktop, but the difference is that you've turned your lap into a desk.

    Could be good for the economy, might up fast-food and candy sales as people try desperately to match their lap to their "laptop"

  48. Re:MOD PARENT INSIGHTFUL by foolish_to_be_here · · Score: 1

    Come on. The truth be known, our laps are now supersized!

    --
    Please mod me 1 or troll. It's where the truth is these days, even on Slashdot. Beware the power of moderators everywh
  49. keyboard by CaptnMArk · · Score: 3, Interesting

    How about a full size (except numpad) keyboard with real keys that click.

    Based on www.pckeyboard.com?

    1. Re:keyboard by NeMon'ess · · Score: 1

      How about not. I like good tactile feedback, but I'd rather the keyboard be silent.

    2. Re:keyboard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what you're saying is, it isn't big enough. In addition to it being 20" wide, you want it an inch thicker. Great idea! Judging be these laptops, they'll embrace any idea that makes a laptop even less portable!

  50. Careful Linux users .... by phoxix · · Score: 4, Informative

    Many of these laptops with odd ball screens have a real problem: The native resolution of the screen isn't supported by the video-bios.

    Why is this a problem for Linux users ?

    Last time I checked, Xorg/Xfree86 didn't support resolutions your video card didn't advertise. Which becomes a real PITA because now you are either forced to use the screen with chopped off ends, or full screen with the image being badly stretched out.

    You could use the closed source XiG X server and you wouldn't have these issues. But a) it cost a pretty penny and b) they software itself is kinda dumb. (You'll install their X server, but you won't get any psuedo-rpm/dpkg's to trick the distro into thinking you have a regular X installed. It becomes a nightmare with dependencies.)

    1. Re:Careful Linux users .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You could use the closed source XiG X server and you wouldn't have these issues. But a) it cost a pretty penny and b) they software itself is kinda dumb. (You'll install their X server, but you won't get any psuedo-rpm/dpkg's to trick the distro into thinking you have a regular X installed. It becomes a nightmare with dependencies.)


      Oh, it's much worse than that for XiG. ATI changed their policy after the Radeon 9000 to one where they don't share the specs for newer chips. nVidia has never shared any specs with XiG, either. So XiG is basically dead in the water for any modern laptop (except one that uses Intel integrated graphics).

      That leaves X.org as the only option, and your only real hope (if you want 3D acceleration and possibly other special features) is that the ATI/Nvidia downloadable X drivers work ok with your laptop.
    2. Re:Careful Linux users .... by dfghjk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If there's one thing that's certain, it's that the native resolution of a the screen WILL be supported by the BIOS. Perhaps nothing else will support it but the machine itself always will.

      Of course, having BIOS support for a video mode doesn't mean X, or any other windowing system, will work. If it's new, you can be confident that X won't support it for a quite while. You could do it yourself as long as a driver exists for your video card.

      The usual cycle for X is that new hardware comes out, untested support for the hardware is added, then after a few release cycles someone eventually tests it and fixes the bugs. Until then you can be sure that the hardware doesn't work with X.

    3. Re:Careful Linux users .... by veediot · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, you would be surprised. I bought a gateway laptop with a 15.4 inch widescreen (native resolution: 1280x800) and Intel Extreme Graphics 2 integrated video adapter. Now, you would think that the video BIOS would advertise its 1280x800 resolution, but it does not, because that particular adapter isn't mean for that resolution. So I had to download a tool called 855resolution that lets you trick the video BIOS into advertising one of its existing modes as 1280x800 in order to get it to work with Xorg.

    4. Re:Careful Linux users .... by Kupek · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I have a Dell Inspiron 8500 which has an optimal resolution of 1680x1050. I had to hack the XFree86.config file to get the screen working at that resolution in Linux (using something I found on the internet, not figured out myself), but once I did that it worked fine.

    5. Re:Careful Linux users .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Bullshit! X can use any video mode that your card is capable of. I hooked up an oldish graphics card to a TV with a home-brew VGA-to-TV adapter and I had no problems using a 712x534 interlaced screenmode (and other resolutions aswell), which I sincerely doubt that mode is in the video BIOS. Sure, I had to use custom modelines in my xorg.conf, but that is to be expected given the non-standard nature of what I was doing. So it might be a bit of hassle getting the correct resolution with X on these laptops, it is most definately possible.

    6. Re:Careful Linux users .... by dabadab · · Score: 1

      Not quite.
      I have a Fujitsu-Siemens Lifebook with an Intel 845(?) graphic chip driving a 1400x1050 screen - and the BIOS does not support this resolution. That's why we have hacks like 855resolution that overwrite one of the predefined modes with values for 1400x1050.

      --
      Real life is overrated.
    7. Re:Careful Linux users .... by dabadab · · Score: 1

      It depends on your driver.
      If you have like full specs, you can just tweak the registers to your heart's liking - but on the Intel chipset it ain't so. The X driver can only use BIOS calls to set the resolution.

      --
      Real life is overrated.
  51. I refer to my large laptop as a "portable desktop" by kevin.fowler · · Score: 0

    I bought a 15.4" widescreen display "laptop" to use as more of a portable desktop/gaming/media device. It's got a bigger display than my TV and looks a lot better. I don't have enough space in my apt for my lumbering hulk of a desktop and CRT monitor. I can see why these "laptops" are being created. Comcast's new commercials seem to only feature people using laptops. Regardless of the ridiculous size and weight of some of them, laptops are being presented as more hip and usable than a desktop. There's a rift developing in laptops. On one side are the media beasts with 20" displays, likely ending up being used in a home... and on the other there's the compact business traveler 12" model you can actually use on the subway.

    --
    Bury me in mashed potatoes.
  52. Super Size me. by Matey-O · · Score: 1, Funny

    Is this in responce to the fattening of America? (I want a laptop that makes me look skinny)

    --
    "Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus."
  53. Dell already announced 19 inch by bmalek · · Score: 1

    Dell already announced a 19 inch laptop earlier this year (on Slashdot). Personally I have the Dell 9100 (17 inch widescreen 1920x1200 resolution) and I love it. For programming it is great as I can actually have some room on the screen for the programming window, some IDE's have so much other crap that you are stuck with a little block of 20x20 for actual coding. Yes, yes I know I can turn those off or hide them, but in many cases I use a lot of them.

    When you turn down the brightness of the laptop the battery life stays fairly long (1.5 to 2.5 hours) which is fine with me. It weighs about 8 pounds, which stinks, but I have a nice Dell backpack to carry it around with! These are definitely not laptops, they are machines that you can use at work and bring home for use, travel with them is a little difficult. i.e. try breaking out the 17 inch laptop on a coach flight - there is no room for it. I believe it is a full size keyboard (if not it is very close), but I wish I had a number pad...

    Overall I am happy with my decision to buy the 17 inch and I would have bought a 19 had it been available at the time. For certain people this is great. For people whose need is a true portable device, it's not.

  54. Old technology! by thecodeman · · Score: 1

    Nintendo has actually already come up with this technology. Do you remember Virtual Boy http://www.virtual-boy.org/ and the Power Glove? http://www.rolandit.com/games/Peripherals/viewperi pheral.asp?GID=7 :-)

  55. You insensitive clod! by supersocialist · · Score: 1

    He might be a foreigner.

  56. hmm by ajs318 · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's two thousand and freaking five, for crying out loud.

    Can't we at least say 500mm Laptop ?

    --
    Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
    1. Re:hmm by stienman · · Score: 1

      Can't we at least say 500mm Laptop ?

      No. Marketers don't like numbers with more than two significant digits.

      While you could sell a 610mm, you would rather sell the 20", 19", 17", 15", 14", 12" than the 508mm, 483mm, 432mm, 381mm, 356mm, 305mm.

      DPI is DPI. People in the US know what you mean when you say it has a DPI of 75, or 100, or 133.

      Until the US moves wholesale to metric, this isn't going to change. No company or retailer is going to push the metric agenda unless it moves product, and it doesn't.

      -Adam

    2. Re:hmm by GaryPatterson · · Score: 1

      "My car gets 30 rods to the hogshead, and that's the way I likes it!"

      -- Grandpa Simpson, on metric measurements

  57. Re: i present to you, the NEW laptop by 1800maxim · · Score: 1

    Brillian!

    Yes, let's put bigger and bigger screens. Now that we have all this space, why not make bigger keyboards? Perhaps including a numeric keypad.

    Actually, let's make a full size keyboard that folds out of the case.

    But now, what if I want to move my keyboard here and the screen there? Why don't we separate the components? What's that you say? Brilliant? Indeed!

    Let's have a separate 20" LCD, a separate keyboard, and the pc itself, which I can actually store under my desk to remove the clutter...

    And now, I shall file my patents.

  58. Laptops vs. Desktops by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 1

    laptops definitely do not cost the same amount of money as desktops, in terms of the amount of processing power you get for your money. Especially since laptops cant really be upgraded, etc. If all you're doing is word processing, then sure you can get a little £300/$500 laptop, but if you want to do anything useful, such as play games (hehe), or 3D CAD work, then laptops are nowhere near the same value as a good old desktop.

    That depends on how you do your math. The value of picking laptops over destktops is measured in more than money and benchmark results. The company I work for uses hardly anything other than laptops. How sophisticated a laptop you get depends on what you are doing, people who only do word processing and muck around with book-keeping software etc.. get lower end machines (but still high quality brands). If you are doing more demanding work or if you are a PHB you get something better. Performance at the high end is really not an issue 90% of the time since even our engineers and developers are rarely doing heavy-duty 3D CAD work or playing Halflife 2 on their laptop work stations. The latter should be done at home anyway and it is not surprising that the former reqires a very powerful laptop or a specialized desktop system (ie. expensive systems). All in all laptops come out better than desktops in many companies for the exact reason the grandparent mentioned, people take them home which means they can quickly respond to emergency situations via a VPN connection which makes you capable of very flexible responses in a crisis. That would not be possible if you only bought desktops. The size is not an issue since most laptop owners mainly just transport their laptop to and from work by car. Furthermore since people (at least where I work) also often get to use the company laptops for personal stuff you might argue the laptop becomes one of the perks of the job since it saves alot of people having to buy a computer of their own even if the company laptop does not score tops in the benchmarks since, believe it or not, most people are not hardcore computer gamers in their spare time.

    --
    Only to idiots, are orders laws.
    -- Henning von Tresckow
    1. Re:Laptops vs. Desktops by somersault · · Score: 1

      Hmm well I'd say that if the only reason you wanted a laptop was so that people can VPN in, then 1. lots of people will already have a PC at home, so they could save money by just getting people the software for home, or 2. you could probably buy 2 decent desktops for the same price as a decent laptop (I know laptops are getting cheaper, but over here for a laptop that I'd consider worthwhile I'd have to spend around £700). At our company our engineers *do* do a lot of heavy duty CAD work so I guess my perspective is different. One of the engineer has a Dell Precision M70 laptop, which is pretty the closest you can get to a CAD laptop without getting into crazy money (and even then it was £2000), but still uses VPN and remote desktop into a machine at work to do heavy duty stuff. I think it would have been better getting him a decent quality machine for home and office, £1000 for a desktop could get you basically top of the range processors/memory/storage. We bought an Athlon and an P4 system to compare to each other at £600 (not including the gfx cards, we already had Quadro 4s being used for CAD) each with 3 and 4Gb of RAM respectively, and obviously those 2 systems even individually perform better than the M70.. the Intel machine is acting up btw (only reason I ordered it was because the engineer to get the system wanted it, I was going to order 2 Athlon systems..) ;) Anyway I'll stop rambling, but I guess it is all subjective depending on what the company needs. The only way laptops are cheaper than PCs, is if you are comparing low end laptops to medium/high end PCs systems. When it comes to it though, company's will pay any price for something if they think they need it, where an individual would look for a more cost effective option.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    2. Re:Laptops vs. Desktops by 16K+Ram+Pack · · Score: 1
      I have a laptop and I also have a desktop, and use them appropriately.

      Most of the time, and when I'm at home, I'm on my desktop. It's considerably more powerful, and it's been like Trigger's Broom, costing me an average of about £200 a year to keep up to a decent standard.

      When I'm away, on the time or at a client site, I use my laptop. That's where it fits in. It's quite slow now, but that's because it's a big investment. They also suck at HDD speeds, and are a real problem if you spill coffee.

  59. Shades of Kaypro by zeke2.0 · · Score: 1

    Looks like we'll have to dust off some old terms like 'Transportable' again. Not long till we see professors tooling around campus with the things bungeed to the back of their bikes.

  60. Just wait... by kabocox · · Score: 1

    I can't wait until they try and stick 3 21" LCDs on a laptop. Maybe they'd also have a full size keyboard in there as well.

  61. Libretto by Craig+Ringer · · Score: 1

    The Toshiba Libretto is probably what you're after then. They're *tiny*, and nice little laptops. Ok, so they're getting toward palmtops, but whatever.

    I'm personally using a Toshiba Portege at the moment, and I'm very happy with the form factor. It has a 10" display that alas only does 800x600, but then it's about seven years old so it's hard to complain. They're also obviously well built, since this one has been through three war zones with a war correspondant.

    I'm seriously eyeing the new model Portege (which alas has a crap trackpad and worse button positioning, and only a 1024x768 display, but is otherwise utterly droolworthy. In particular, it weighs almost nothing) or a Libretto. The new model libretto should be out soon, and I'll decide which to bankrupt myself on then.

  62. Bah! by Greyfox · · Score: 1

    I want something about the size of a brick that uses a HelioDisplay free-space display and a laser-generated virtual keyboard.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  63. 20" laptops!?!?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Great - I've just bought a 12" iBook two weeks ago and now it's obsolete!

  64. Like many others here... by UncleRage · · Score: 1

    I'm done with large bulky desktop replacements. Instead, I've been completely sucked in by ultra-portables.

    I picked up a lot of Thinkpad X21's for resale in my shop, and my first thought when handling one was "How cute". After installing Ubuntu on the thing and playing around with it for about a month, I decided I'd had enough "big" and picked up a new NC4200 as my permanent portable.

    1.8 GHz Pentium M, 1 GB 533 MHz DDR2, 60 GB HD, bluetooth, 802.11b/g, 10/100/1k networking, sd card, 12.1" screen and weighing in at around 3.9 lbs. And an external USB burner for when I need it. Man, that's all the portable power I need. Not to mention enough HD space to store (more than) a few flicks/tv shows for travel (perfect w/ a set of stereo bluetooth headphones).

    I know, I know... different strokes. I'm sure that there's a fantastic market for 20" laptops -- and lots of people will be really happy with them. I'm just personally glad that the market isn't totally one sided. There's a good fit for everyone.

    Now, if only someone'd come out with a wireless video glasses (a la i-glasses or Innovatek) so I could get a simulated 36"-72" screen... man, I'd be in absolute bliss!

    Oh and while I'm at it, could I also have a pony to put in the backseat of my flying car?

    --
    #SickNotWeak
  65. So Much Wider... What about the keyboard then? by rubberbando · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If we're getting such a wide laptop. I hope they finally put a full sized keyboard with keypad on it. I'm tired of having to either hook up a full keyboard or a usb keypad for full keyboard functionality. My hands feel so cramped on a regular laptop keyboard and the arrow keys are attrotious.

    --
    DEAD DEAD DEAD DELETE ME
  66. Airline Seat width: 20" !lt 16" by dosboss · · Score: 1

    Is it just me, or can no-one forsee trying to put a 20" laptop into a 16-inch-wide economy class airline seat not gonna work? (16" is the correct width for US economy class standard IIRC)

    1. Re:Airline Seat width: 20" !lt 16" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even 17" laptops are too big (believe me, I tried). But I guess if you're in business/first class that wouldn't matter.

      My 15" iBook was a nice fit though.

  67. Notebooks with 19" monitors are huge! by Dan_Bercell · · Score: 1

    I cant imagine a 21" one being very portable.

  68. Higher resolution by stu_coates · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'd swap my 17" Powerbook for a 12" with the same resolution anyday. The 17" is barely portable but the screen is lovely to work on.

  69. Re:ugh.. They Are Alot Like SUV's by theManInTheYellowHat · · Score: 1

    People buy SUV's:
    to haul stuff and they are usually just hauling themselves.
    go 4 wheeling when they are usually on nice pavement.

    People buy large screen notebooks:
    so they can watch DVD's and they are usually working on letter sized docs.
    be portable and take it everywhere and it sitts on the desk.

    I have a large notebook and nice Sony Vaio SR17. The Sony is fritzy and old now but I still prefer it because it is 3 pounds and is portable. But alas it does not play Doom 3 like the Compaq R3000......

  70. The consumer laptop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These are essentially *consumer* laptops, and reflect the rise of this device in the homes of the middle class. Previously these devices were (to non-nerds) business tools owned by businesses. This new breed however reflects the high rate of adoption into the homes of style conscious buyers. They don't want a clunky PC, they want to look suave with a shiny new laptop, but at the same time these are machines designed to be used at home and rarely moved about. The wide screens reflect the taste of these consumers who are more likely to be buying the device for entertainment, and 'expect' wide screen for watching DVDs.

    So what is my point? My point is that to a nerd, these aren't *real* laptops, they're a sub breed made for the home user. A real nerd with a laptop is likely carrying it around with them on a very regular basis, and it's likely it will get used in the field for both work and play. He/She'll want something small, light and rugged with good battery life.

  71. Re:Airline Seat width: 20" !lt 16"^H^H^H 18.5" by dosboss · · Score: 1

    Woah! My bad! That'll teach me to check Google beforehand:

    http://www.viamagazine.com/top_stories/articles/ai rline_seat_space00.asp

    "Coach seats on U.S. domestic flights are usually either 17.2 or 18 inches wide; on longer flights, economy-class seats on wide-bodied planes tend to be slightly larger, up to 18.5 inches."

    It still gets my suspicious eye...

  72. Not only handy for windows by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1
    Consider moving your dock and various applets to one side or the other of your screen. Voila - extra space at the bottom of your screen to make your windows taller without having to hide your launcher buttons.

    For example, I have KDE configured so that the Kicker bar uses the rightmost one inch of my screen. Then, I make word processing or browser windows as tall as the screen so I don't have to scroll as often.

    --
    Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
  73. How big is 20" really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If it's 20"+ diagonally that really doesn't fit in any bag I know.

    If 20" screen laptops start appearing in a large enough chunk of the market, bags will be made for them.

    Truly, how much bigger is a 20" diagonal screen laptop than one of the existing 17" widescreen models? Let's see... The HDTV format has a native aspect ratio of 16:9. Applying pythagoris to arithmetic yields that such a screen would be 0.93 inches wide for every inch of diagonal resolution. Thus a 17" screen is about 15.75" wide and a 20" screen of the same ratio would be about 18.5" wide, a gain of about 2.75" or 1.375" on either side of the keyboard.

    I'll admit that this increased width is not without its problems, such as where to put the numerous ports and/or the media drive. However, with 19" of horizontal space available in the front or rear of the unit, such problems are not without solution.

    Weigh the inconvenience factor of the larger size to the coolness factor of you bypassing the in-flight movie in favor of your own digital media viewing portal that's twice as big as those measly 10" LCD screens that swing down from behind the oxygen masks.

    1. Re:How big is 20" really? by Kupek · · Score: 1

      Truly, how much bigger is a 20" diagonal screen laptop than one of the existing 17" widescreen models? Let's see... The HDTV format has a native aspect ratio of 16:9. Applying pythagoris to arithmetic yields that such a screen would be 0.93 inches wide for every inch of diagonal resolution. Thus a 17" screen is about 15.75" wide and a 20" screen of the same ratio would be about 18.5" wide, a gain of about 2.75" or 1.375" on either side of the keyboard.

      Remember that area increases with the square of distance. So even though you're increasing the heigth and width by mere inches, the respective areas are about 100 in^2 and 140 in^2 (if I've done my math correctly). That's a 30% increase in the amount of space taken up by the monitor, and subsequently, the laptop.

  74. Laptops with Built-in Projectors by SumDog · · Score: 1

    While we're at it, why not ditch the LCD entirely and just integrate projector into the laptop. Those new in-focus projects are getting pretty small. Just think about how annoying you could be on an airplane! It'd be worse than one of those laser pointers!

  75. Size matters by KayakFun · · Score: 3, Interesting
    A large-screen laptop will be a status symbol like a SUV: the bigger the better. This is opposite to the miniturization in many other electronics, but with the emphasis on the UI and productivity they are the way to go (boss/partner: are you listening?):
    • designing XSLT with 3 windows of XML, XSLT, and XHTML next to eachother,
    • DTP work (A3 + some dialogue boxes)
    • webdesign
    • GIMP
    • email, if your friends like long subject lines
    • tabbed browsing
    And the subject says it all: size matters (My desktop at home is 23.1", so my work laptop looks like a letterbox)
  76. Finally by Ma3oxuct · · Score: 1

    ...I can make myself at home, on the road by being able to watch my pornography. No more paying extra for TV channels at hotels. And no more being bored on plane rides. Seriously, I think that this is an awesome development because one of the things that stop me from buying a laptop is the size of the screen (I want 19" or more). The second thing of course is the harddrive capacities and speed. I am definitly getting a laptop when you can have at least 2 x 250 giga-byte harddrives (with potential to put in another two) that transfer at SATA 150 speeds. Don't ask what I need that storage for.

  77. How about making it PROPER HD widescreen ratio? by Quizo69 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I don't have a widescreen laptop yet, but when I do get one, I'd like to see it with a proper 16:9 display at HD resolution, i.e. 1920x1080, NOT the bastardised 16:10 ratio of 1920x1200.

    Who were the idiots that decided that LCD panels should forego proper TV scale resolutions (4:3 and 16:9) and use the non-standard 5:4 and 16:10 ratios???

    Is Microsoft responsible? Did they ask to have TV resolution plus taskbar addon resolution? I mean seriously - who watches a DVD at full screen width and keeps the taskbar visible? Anyone? Didn't think so, so why make the panels that way? /rant

    1. Re:How about making it PROPER HD widescreen ratio? by SlashNut · · Score: 0

      Those extra vertical pixels come in very handy when you are trying to remote-control a 1600x1200 screen (VNC/Remote desktop), so don't whine too much.

    2. Re:How about making it PROPER HD widescreen ratio? by funky_vibes · · Score: 1

      How about not forcing your opinion on others?
      Most people don't care about aspect ratio since this is a _software_ issue.

      Personally, I want the video player to stretch the image to use 100% of available image area, independent of the original aspect ratio/screen ratio.

      The human brain is such a wonderful thing, it adapts to different images very quickly and the added resolution gives you a better viewing experience regardless.

    3. Re:How about making it PROPER HD widescreen ratio? by canavan · · Score: 1

      Back in the days when the first widescreen computer monitors became available (that was about 10 years ago, and it was a Sony 24" screen), the additional space was advertised as beeing useful for menus, window titles and status bars ont top and below a full resolution HD frame.

    4. Re:How about making it PROPER HD widescreen ratio? by Quizo69 · · Score: 1

      I'm not talking about the resolution itself, because I realise that DVDs etc are interpolated anyway at those resolutions regardless of ratio. It's just that 1920x1080 means NO interpolation is necessary for HD material, thus giving the best possible image.

      The problem addresses exactly what you are saying, that you don't want dead space (black bars) top or bottom of your image. My film is made at the 16:9 ratio for just this reason, so people with widescreen displays don't get any bars on their TVs. At 16:10 ratio, you either fill the screen and vertically stretchthe image away from it's real aspect, or you have small black bars top and bottom. It is this that I would like to see disappear.

    5. Re:How about making it PROPER HD widescreen ratio? by Kurrelgyre · · Score: 1

      TV may be 16:9, but movies rarely are. Army of Darkness's Director's Cut has an aspect ratio of 1.61, which almost perfectly fits my 16:10 screen. You just have to pick an arbitrary ratio--and at least we have a choice other than 4:3.

  78. V\ by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    How come "laptops" only fold over once? I call them "notebooks", and they do look like books. But if we want a bigger screen in a smaller portable, why not have the screen portion fold in the middle? Two screens, with larger front pieces like slightly-magnifying lenses, carefully aligned. I know I'd like a taller screen than wider, like the proportions of paper I'm used to, for "computing". For watching movies, I could turn it on its side for a wider screen, with the keyboard panel folded behind it to stand it up. I know that aligning the screens with a mechanical hinge, at the scale of the tiny pixels, is hard. But that seems to be the only problem, and certainly the mechanical engineers making these crazy-tiny machines can figure it out. Where is my iccordion?

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  79. Oh great by realkiwi · · Score: 1
    I'm of to eat lots of junk food now so that it fits my lap...
    </redundant>
    Hey marketing man 20" may be portable but it sure does not fit in the fold down table on the TGV economy class...
    --
    realkiwi
  80. It's not that bad by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

    Any modern OS lets you change the DPI settings for your fonts, so that you can run 1600x1200 on a 15" display without having microscopic text. My Dell Inspiron 8200 has a screen with those exact specs.

    Of course, it's an LCD, so its viewable area is approximately equivalent to a 17" CRT.

    --
    retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    1. Re:It's not that bad by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      yes, but if you turn up the DPI, your text appears bigger, and therefore you can't put as much on the screen. I don't understand how people think turning up the resolution on your screen allows you to put more text, and other things, on your screen, and expect objects to maintain the same physical size. There are a few things, like icons that you can save a bit of space on, when using higher resolutions, but for the most part, having a higher resolution screen of the same size won't give you that much more usable space. However, having a larger screen with a higher resolution screen will give you much more space. I have 19 inch set to 1280x1024 and a 17 inch set to the same resolution. Because of the dpi changes, I find the 17 inch is the same as a 1024x768 monitor, while the 19 inch gives me much more usable space.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    2. Re:It's not that bad by Woody77 · · Score: 1

      If I don't change the "dpi", then going from 800x600 to 1600x1200 is 4x the screen real-estate. And my eyes are good enough that I can read that easily.

      That being said, I've found that I can handle a much lower resolution on macs than on PCs. The different layout of the GUI makes it easier to see more on the smaller screens. But coding at 1024x768 is still not fun. I'm used to 16x12 and larger.

  81. instead of a 20 inch screen by toQDuj · · Score: 1

    Why can I not have a fold-out second screen? that would add another 15" widescreen, which could be connected to my dvi port!

    B.

    --
    Every experiment which ends in a big bang is a good experiment.
  82. Get Ready For The 20-inch Laptop? by gaanagaa · · Score: 1

    Get Ready For The 2-inch Plasma TV!!

  83. Not bigger, more resolution! by Cthefuture · · Score: 1

    20" is getting a little big for a "laptop".

    What I want is smaller screens with higher resolutions. A 14" 1600x1200 display would be nice. Stick that in an extremely lightweight power saving laptop and I would have an awesome portable X terminal.

    Currently my only choices are my Dell with 15" 1600x1200 LCD which has a crap oddly shaped case that hurts my legs, is very heavy, gets hot as hell, and only lasts about 1 hour on battery... or my iBook which is pretty light (not enough though) and last upwards of 5-6 hours when using it as a dumb X11 terminal, but it has a complete ass 1024x768 screen (try running Visual Studio in VMware over X11 in OSX and see how much room is left to work when running 1024x768, blech).

    What I really want is a thin-client type thing. A very lightweight laptop that is basically just a medium/large high-resolution LCD with a keyboard and high-speed wireless card that will run on battery for 8+ hours and not get hot. No hard-drive or powerful CPU needed.

    --
    The ratio of people to cake is too big
    1. Re:Not bigger, more resolution! by Cthefuture · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I have used those before when I did work for Sun. I don't know if they have changed but I didn't like it much. It's in a regular laptop case, weighs about the same as an iBook, has about the same battery life, and not much better resolution. The thing is, it's not better than an iBook as far as thin-clients are concerned and in fact an iBook has a lot more functionality. It's like a half-hearted attempt at what I want.

      They need to start with something at least as good as an iBook or IBM X40 and then strip stuff off plus add a higher-resolution screen.

      --
      The ratio of people to cake is too big
  84. coming soon... by hutteman · · Score: 2, Funny

    dual screen laptops!

    1. Re:coming soon... by wed128 · · Score: 1

      http://www.dualscreen.com/proplus1520m.cfm -- Yes, it already happened.

    2. Re:coming soon... by hutteman · · Score: 1

      awesome - two 1024x768 screens (a whopping 7% more pixels than a single 1400x1050 screen), a superfast 933Mhz pentium III and 4 USB 1.1 ports! all that at a price of only $4995? it's a bargain!

  85. HOLY CARP!! That's the ticket right there! by Medievalist · · Score: 1

    Thanks, AC! You can play Mechwarrior or Civ on that baby, and it has a switch to turn off the power-sucking wireless and touchpad periphs when you are far from electric sockets!

    I think I'm going to get the boss to buy me one ;^)

  86. your use != my use by bradleyland · · Score: 1

    What I don't get is the assumption that everyone uses a computer the way you do. Our scenario goes something like this:

    I work with a litigation consulting firm whose accountants work in the office 70% of the time, and on-site 30% of the time. When on-site, they need a computer system that is powerful and is ergonomically comfortable. This means a large screen (currently 19") with a full sized keyboard and an external USB numpad. Never have I heard a complaint from them about the increasing size of their laptops. We have two 15" IBM ThinkPads that pretty much sit on the shelf. Everyone wants the bigger screen because they can turn up the system font sizes to a level that they can read comfortably, and still have room to spare.

    Don't get me wrong, I can completely understand the desire for a portable laptop, but don't underestimate the demand for larger, more powerful designs as well.

  87. Shortscreens by Richard_J_N · · Score: 1

    Really, it would be better if they called them "shortscreens". Eg a 15" 'widescreen' LCD is SMALLER than a 15" regular screen.
    Also, for those of use who really don't care about DVDs on laptops, short screens are a curse. Most documents and websites are Portrait mode. Likewise, photo editing - unless it's all landscapes. And most U.I.s have everything on the top and bottom (title-bar, menu bar, taskbar), so more *vertical* space is needed!

  88. more resolution, smaller screen please by LJWhorfin · · Score: 1

    i would prefer to have a 12 or 15" laptop that does 1920 x 1080. I i like text tiny and can read it just fine thanks....

  89. What the **** is a 20 inch laptop? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How many cm, meter or kilometers is that?

    Is is larger than a standard laptop or smaller?

  90. new design needed by TheSHAD0W · · Score: 1

    With screens that size, can we please redesign the machine's form-factor? Say, a detachable CPU/keyboard/drive unit taking up 2/3 of the bottom clamshell, with the rest holding the batteries and acting as the base for the display? We're getting to the point that you want to be able to sit further back from the display and not have it start directly behind the keyboard.

  91. Agreed by empaler · · Score: 1

    I have a 15.4" ASUS (Insert plug for Great Service here) which I hardly ever bring with me - the primary reason I bought a laptop was that I don't have much room in my apartment, plus I like a computer that I can just pick up and watch a movie on in my bed (Don't ask "What kind of movie?", it'll only scar you for life).

    On the other hand, I really love not breaking my back, too. That's why I'm eyeballing an Apple 12" Powerbook at the moment and doing my damned best not to buy it on credit...

  92. Why not long throw by gatzke · · Score: 1


    I have one of those 10lb monsters. It is already 2.5 inches thick, why not put a real keyboard on it? Another half inch and a few ounces won't hurt, and it would make me happy...

  93. Bizarre trend by El+Cabri · · Score: 1

    I've been an early adopter of the widescreen format for TVs (since the late 90s). However I find it completely inadequate for most of what is done on a computer and I personnaly use a conventionnal aspect "tilted" LCD in the portrait position. Most web pages are vertically formatted, so you wast less screen space reading them this way. Reading PDF is even better, since these can never been dynamically formatted and scrolling through each page is a pain. Even for photo editing in Photoshop, I find that I like to display the picture "before" and "after" during editing one on top of the other, which fits perfectly on a portrait oriented 4:3 screen if the photos are in landscape orientation.

    So if I were to purchase a laptop for personnal use I would certainly avoid a widescreen. I cannot get portrait orientation on a laptop but let's not make it worse either.

  94. Multitasking by El+Cabri · · Score: 1

    My computer multitasks so that I don't have to.

  95. Bring 'em on! by terrahertz · · Score: 1

    Yes, please please please, get these behemoths to market so they drive down the prices of 14" and 15" LCD models even more. I was just thinking about replacing my existing laptop, so this is welcome news.

    --
    Slashdot? Oh, I just read it for the articles.
  96. I find my 15 inches by indytx · · Score: 1

    is usually plenty.

    --
    Make love, not reality television.
  97. It's not the Size but the Resolution and Ratio by Whatchamacallit · · Score: 1

    19" or 20" is really too big for a laptop, however one can have a high resolution screen in 15" width that is a wide screen ratio. I am not concerned by application window height, I need screen width and a high enough resolution to make it practical. It's also good for watching widescreen DVD's! I've got a 15" Apple PowerBook which is 1280 x 854 and the new 15" PowerBooks are now 1440 x 960 which is plenty.

    This give you more elbow room to place windows side by side on the screen. This is really nice because now I can place a PDF on the side of the screen (an eBook) and have a text editor and some console windows next to it.

    Now there may be a market for 20" laptops but it's not gonna be all that big. Especially for mobile users. However, if you must have a huge screen and you are willing to carry a heavy laptop around be my guest and buy one. Perhaps you will just use it like a desktop computer on your desk ala Star Trek TNG or something. Whatever floats your boat.

    Bottom Line:

    1. Wide screen gives you more horizontal screen real estate.
    2. It will make laptops bigger and thereby heavier.
    3. It will look fabulous with widescreen DVD's.

  98. Bet on an Apple 19inch PowerBook by riversky · · Score: 1

    They will probably go with a 19/20 inch, to bring true HD resolution to the their portables. They have so much of the media market it would make sense.

    1. Re:Bet on an Apple 19inch PowerBook by bradt · · Score: 1

      Why wait? The updated 17" PowerBooks introduced last week already have that resolution... With over 1.7 million pixels, this 1680-by-1050-pixel display is 36% more spacious and 46% brighter than its predecessor.

    2. Re:Bet on an Apple 19inch PowerBook by riversky · · Score: 1

      Good point, only thing I would say is I would wait for the Intel machines. The bus, processor and the GPU are outdated. In fact the GPU is TWO years old in the market place.....I have a PowerBook and will wait until the Intel machines are out. The current PowerBooks are now far from powerful.

  99. Too bulky for my taste by funky_vibes · · Score: 1

    How about a 12" laptop with the same resolution? Now that would be a breakthrough... I honestly don't care about screen size, since it's the resolution that matters. The CRT days, when you couldn't sit too close to a screen are over since the size of the LCD only dictates how far it has to be.

  100. growing obesity=wider laptops by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Purely logical actually. As Americans and the other people in the overdeveloped world
    become more obese and develop wider laps, the demand for wider laptops will grow.
    Their increased inaction from watching movies on these wider laptops will cause
    their laps to grow wider creating a demand for yet wider laptops. Expect to see
    24" laptops before to long. Free enterprise in action ;)

  101. Why not 16:9? by mr_zorg · · Score: 1

    And why is it that none of the widescreen laptops I've ever seen have a ratio that isn't the same as widescreen DVD, or HD? That is, 16:9? They're all something different...

  102. Golden ratio? Give me a break. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The "golden ratio" is the ratio such that A:B::B:A+B. Which, if you calculate, is exactly (1+sqrt5)/2. Which is, of course, irrational, i.e., NOT 1.6:1

    QED

    1. Re:Golden ratio? Give me a break. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think "QED" means what you think it means. The Golden Ratio is equal to approximately 1.62, which rounds down nicely to 1.6.

      Next time you decide to be snooty, try to be both snooty and right at the same time. It's hard, but it's oh-so-worth it.

  103. Laptops moving to widescreen..... by King_TJ · · Score: 1

    Despite all the talk of watching movies in wide-screen format and the like being a primary factor in the move to widescreen format displays on laptops, I really doubt that's nearly as big a deal as the manufacturers seem to think?

    The *big* benefit to a widescreen notebook display (whatever size screen in inches you opt for) is the ability to display 2 applications, side by side, at the same time!

    We've always had screen resolutions with more horizontal pixels than vertical - but widescreen brings the ratio closer to something really sensible and usable. How many times have you wanted to keep a web page open and copy/paste something from it into a Word document, or into email? How often are you working in a publishing package and need to move clip-art over from, say, Photoshop after you've just edited it? How often do you want to leave something open and in the foreground because you're in the middle of working with it, yet you get interrupted with a task that requires looking something up in a second app? It's really nice to have both on-screen at the same time in any of these cases, rather than playing "shuffle" with 2 app windows. And in most cases, making a laptop display widescreen doesn't really make the machine itself much bigger anyway. (You already usually want roughly that much width to the bottom half of the system so you have a comfortable keyboard to type on.)