Slashdot Mirror
1366x768 Monitors Top 1024x768 For the First Time
mpol writes "Statcounter released new statistics today and 1366x768 is now the most used screen resolution on the internet. These screens are available in most cheap laptops, and therefore probably sold and used very much. With 19.2%, it is beating the old 4:3 resolution, which still has 18.6% usage share. (But as you know, you have lies, damn lies, and statistics.)"
The numbers are still close, but it sounds like the tide has turned.
Horizontal resolution is entirely irrelevant. Your ability to read lines peaks at about 80 characters. There's no limit to how long a column of text can be. Therefore, vertical resolution is the important issue.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
No, 1920x1200 should be standard.
Why do I always have to be the one to point out that porn looks better in wide screen?
Writing this comment on an iPad with a 2048x1536 screen.
Why do I always have to be the one to point out that porn looks better in wide screen?
Because you're the only person who thinks "People of Wal-Mart" is a porn site?
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
My wife and I have 1920x1200 screens on our desktops and laptops. The laptops are getting old and have become almost impossible to replace unless we want to step into the "mobile CAD workstation" market of laptop at 3 times the cost we paid for her Dell. Even desktop screens have all moved down from 1200 vertical lines to 1080 "HD". I had hoped my 24 to 27 inch screens would have bumped up to 2560x1600 by now but it's going the opposite direction.
The point is that 16:9 is fine for HDTV, but it sucks for computers. 16:10 is better, and some people prefer 16:12 (4:3). Vertical space is usually more constricted than horizontal space for computers, therefore, decreases in screen height are far more constraining, and not offset by increases in width.
Still using a 16:10 display, will not buy 16:9 unless that's the only option I can afford.
make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
... and web pages are getting narrower.
and while we are at it, why are 27" monitors the same resolution as 14" laptop screens?
and why is the highest resolution device easily available a 10.7" iPad ?
The world makes no sense to me.
EMail: 0110001101100010010000000110001101110010 0110000101111010011011100110000101110010 0010111001100011011011110110
Riiiight. What if you need access to three or more windows, and need to switch back and forth between them quickly. Maybe copy-n-paste between them, and just plain compare them visually. I have three "meld" windows, and two bash windows open -- not to mention this browser and my windows-VM.
Right now, I arm running a 2560x1600 30" central monitor, and a pair of 1200x1600 (portrait mode) on either side. So, my desktop is 4960x1600 (almost 8 million pixels). I am using every square inch, and could probably use a little more.
I got so spoiled by this, I decided to buy a 2560x1600 for home use -- and I will never go back.
"-1 Troll" is the apparently the same as "-1 I disagree with you."
1. Another reason to let XP die. People say its fine but its holding all of us back just like IE 6 and 7 are holding the best web experience to our phones only.
2. I will say my theory on why laptops only carry crappy 1366 x 768 is because cost accountants and not engineers make the decisions. Worse, because of economies of scale if you wanted to make a laptop screen with a better resolution it would significantly increase the cost forcing you to only include 1366 x 768 and making the problem worse. No one makes anything but 1366 for laptops so your customers would have to pay $$$$ and you would lose money.
I hate Apple these days but they are the only ones who make screens that do not get dark when sunlights hits them and are not cheap pieces of plastic crap. They have the power with economics of scale but even for them it raises the cost of the units. The race to the bottom is getting very old.
Retina may help but the demand for XP is quite huge from corporate on new equipment sadly and no cost accountant can justify spending more than .02% on any product.
3. Consumers are stupid. The Joe Six packs who bought P IV over the AthlonXPs because the Pentium IV was 3.2 ghz while the AthlonXP is only 1.8 ghz! Wow it must suck. 1366 is a bigger number than 1200 therefore to Joe 1366 must somehow be better probably witthout looking at the second number.
http://saveie6.com/