Slashdot Mirror
16.5-inch LCD for Notebook PC
An Anonymous reader dropped us a note saying that Samsung
has introduced a
16.5-inch LCD with a 4:3 aspect ratio for notebook PC.
The first generation of 15" laptops looked like tanks- but it really
would be smooth to have a super thin (I've been tapping on a VAIO
lately) laptop with that size screen. Maybe in a few
years.
Although those powerbooks are one pound closer to light than similarly priced PC laptops, "light" in a laptop means pick-it-up-easily-in-one-hand four pounds light.
don't forget about the European A4 standard, which is signifigantly longer (although about the same width...)
Your Brain + EEG + LEGO Robots = Brainstorms
Hmm... that wouldn't even be that hard either. Use an embeddable PC board, maybe an Aaeon PCM-5894 with a portable K6-2 233Mhz (fastest possible), with 64 or 128megs RAM. need a new graphics display board though, the on-board one is only 1024x768 @ 64K colors. Maybe there's another Little Board form factor board with a better gfx controller.
.5" thick (just a guess, could be thinner). add in the Little Board, and it's another half inch or so. with another video board, that's another inch (could be less with a board with connectors on the side). So, it'd be about 2" thick, allowing for a case. That also leaves room for such items as blueprints/paper/paints/pencils/etc. in a pocket.
Anyways, add in a hard drive, then you just need a screen. Ah, there's all those catalogs. Well, here're display kits from 9.4" to 42" in the Inside Technology catalog. 1998 version, though. I'll have to get all those companies to send me new ones, I need updated prices (getting a new computer soon, considering a wearable, otherwise dual celerons). There's a 21" plasma display. The largest TFT listed is 12.1", but I'm sure there are larger ones now. If not, use plasma, oh well.
The whole system would be really expensive, though, with that screen. Without the screen, it's under a thousand, but the screen's going to be really expensive. Then you need a power supply. The board only needs about 50W with the K6-2, with another gfx board it'd probably be more like 70W. Voltage levels are unfortunately unlisted here for the screens. Anyone else know how much a 21" plasma screen would use? or a 21" TFT?
The entire unit would be the width, etc. of the screen, which is about
As an estimate, I'd put the entire unit at 4000, assuming you can build the thing yourself. The hardest part would be the case, since that's gotta be the right size/shape and designed well to boot. But, if you're in college, then there's tons of people around, some of which will know how to make plastic cases, especially if you offer monetary
incentive.
A custom designed single board computer would do a better job, and if a company wanted to sell these, at a better price too (at least above a couple thousand units, and depending on what is removed/added). A custom screen would be just the same. Then it could be just the right size though.
Well, I've finished my off topic rant for the day. Hope someone learned something from my little foray back into my SBC catalogs. I've gotta admit, I'm really glad I asked for ALL the companies that make SBCs to send me info. That's the way to go about it if you want real info. If you don't buy something, of course, they won't send you them again, although one of them recently proved me wrong on that one. Agh, ranting again. Sorry.
---
END OF LINE
Who can forget the Compaq Portables....
the slide-out panels on the sides were cool, especially since you could shove the power cord in there.
Forget the fact, though, that the "Portable" is far larger than the case of my desktop machine... don't try hauling this thing onto a plane.
Close: Most Hollywood movies have aspect ratios of 1.85:1 to 2.35:1. 16x9 is 1.78x1. However, given overscan and some automatic reframing, 16x9 sets can display full resolution DVD _AS LONG AS THE DVD WAS ANAMORPHICALLY ENHANCED!!!_ Elsewise, if the disk was _NOT_ anamorphically enhanced, you do _NOT_ get the enhanced DVD resolution on the widescreen set. IIRC, displaying anamorphic 16x9 discs as widescreen on a 4x3 set requires your DVD to perform a 4:3 pulldown and drop a largish percentage of resolution on the fly. Some older machines don't do this well, and anamorphically-enhanced discs look quite bad on those early decks.
It took me awhile to actually figure this out, but search dejanews in alt.video.dvd for links to the full anamorphic story: it's worth it.
btw: I will _not_ purchase a movie that was shot in widescreen which is not anamorphically-enhanced. I may rent, but I won't buy. This pisses me off: the Kubrick box set is mega-shite for this reason. Doesn't hurt that they didn't bother to remix the audio masters to an up-to-date format (many of the Kubrick discs are matted w/Dolby Digital MONO.. Sheesh guys, couldn't you even at least try to emulate a theater soundfield? I _hate_ my receivers DSP modes....)
I'm also working with a sony VAIO, it's been keeping me in touch wonderfully while I've been studying abroad in France this summer. It has a 10.4" screen, does 1024x768 @ 16bit, came with 64 megs of RAM, a 300 mhz processor, and a 6 gig harddrive, all for just under $2000. The damn thing is 0.9" thick and weighs in under 3 lbs. *with* the battery.
Personally, I don't see how much smaller notebook computers can become. If it was any thinner, I couldn't plug a PCMCIA card into it (it only has room for one card) and if it were any smaller I couldn't type comfortably on it (it's warm pourrage right now) Most of the larger parts are already external, e.g. the floppy drive and all of the standard I/O ports (although it has one USB as well) because they would take up too much real estate otherwise. It actually works out better that way, since it's like a free port replicator that comes with the machine.
I think that laptops will not be able to shrink appriciably past what is sitting in front of me right now, due to interface limitations. A wearable computer would be excellent, but without a keyboard we're going to have to come up with an easy, convenient, and flexible means for people to find new ways of interacting with computers first.
Voice won't do it, I think much faster than I type, and who want's to program by spelling out variables and procedure calls? Single-handed keyboards don't appeal to me, I don't need to learn a new way to get carpal-tunnel syndrome. Following my eyeball around on the screen would be interesting, but how would you click? Blinking would look silly after awhile. Pen based with decent hand-recognition would be useful, but my hard gets tired whenever I have to write more than a page, I don't think long computing sessions would be very nice. At least pen recognition would half the size of the computer, since you'd only need the screen (and a cover of course).
In the meantime, all of my communication, information gathering, and programming needs are taken care of my "ultra-portable". I can even play Q2 rather descently (ok, so we still have to wait for descent video acceleration in a laptop) so I'm off to relieve some post-exam stress gib'in and cap'in...
Your Brain + EEG + LEGO Robots = Brainstorms
Absolutely correct M_F_A_C. Why bother with some huge damned screen when you can just plug a pair of LCD glasses into a portable base unit? Sure it will be expensive, but probably just as much as a hit as a huge LCD screen. You can't show it to anyone else (multiple goggle hookups would be neat if everyone has a pair) unless you plugged into a monitor, but think of all the weight and battery power that this would save. The technology is already out there in those gaming goggles, I'm just surprised that no one has started to make a laptop using these. Do they get painful after extended use? Not reliable? Anyone know?
"I love California. I practically grew up in Phoenix." -Former Vice President Dan Quayle
what resolution were you running it at? a "feature" of a lot of the dell lcd's is that they only display properly at 1024x786
I have a 15" laptop right now, and the screen is just fine. 16" in 4:3 aspect ratio is going to be about the same height but a bit longer.
These things are more luggables than portables, and it has little to do with the screen size. Here's my wish list for things to improve on laptops:
Wireless connectivity is not widespread for these things. The only good service I've found is the riccochet modems, but they are limited to Seattle and the Bay Area. Cell phone companies don't seem to have any reasonable pricing schemes for 24/7 data connectivity. Apple's airport and similar technologies look ok if you don't mind being home bound, but their limited range really reduces their effectiveness for even luggables.
The battery lifetimes are terrible. I have 2 lithium ion batteries in my laptop giving me approximately 8 hours of power if I'm not tethered to some power cord. I'm running Linux, so it seems unnatural to turn off my computer. However, it won't even stay on overnight without a power cord. I've also noticed that 8 hours won't even get me through a whole work day. This number needs to be quadrupled, at least.
Most laptops aren't very rugged. I want to be able to drop the thing down the stairs, brush it off, and go. I don't want to carry a newborn infant around all day.
Weight/power/features: These things are really secondary to the above. Reducing weight might make the laptops more impact resistant and thus durable, so it's good. Of course faster processors and more memory are good. Hard drive space is always nice for my portable MP3 station as well.
Hi Mom!
In all this complaining about 16.5 inch screens being too big for a portable computer, people seem to be forgetting that there is a real difference between a notebook computer and a portable computer. Think back to the old Compaq luggables. Those were portable, but certainly not notebook-sized. Whether such a screen is too big really depends on the use for which you intend it. If you want something to type into on the plane then it might be too big, but if you're looking for a desktop replacement that you can take from place to place without pulling 15 different cables and carrying 12 different parts then this is great.
On my 21" monitor I stay at least 4/5 feet from the monitor and the keyboard is 2/3 feet from the monitor.
Is this right? Are you saying 4-5 feet/2-3 feet? Or are you meaning 0.8 feet and 0.6 feet (respectively)? I am only asking this, because, right now, my face is maybe two feet from my 21 inch monitor, and the keyboard is about one foot away...
Reason is the Path to God - Anon
You know, I support this, but from a different angle.
Being ultra portable would be great - but my take on things is that it seems each year they come out with one of two things regarding laptop screens: Higher res, or bigger display. What does this get us? HIGHER PRICES! Why?
Because they can't get the yield up to a point where the screens don't have bad pixels on large runs, because of various factors (simply increasing size or density increases the statistical chances of failure, for one). So we pay more for these screens, then we bitch because laptop either don't come down in price, or that they go up in price (not to mention every year a new cpu comes out, so that has to go in the laptop as well)...
Laptops would be a great thing for school use, at nearly every grade level - if they didn't cost so much. For most tasks (think about it - it is true!), higher resolutions/bigger screens/faster processors aren't needed! But you have no choice when you buy a new laptop.
I know some of you will think/say "Go away, whiner - buy a laptop off of Ebay if you are so hard up for money!"...
The truth is, I have bought a laptop off of Ebay that suits my needs (486 DX2 50, 24 meg ram, 1 gig drive, sound, 10 inch double scan LCD - cost $350!) - however, I don't get a warranty, support, or much in the way of upgradability. And why should I spend more on a laptop (new or used!) when next year it will be discontinued by the manufacturer or obsolete?!
I want to buy a new laptop that has a perfect 10-12 inch TFT display, with a low power Pentium 120 in it. This would be enough to do what is normally needed by a laptop. It should be cheap (around $500.00), have a long battery life (8 hours), and modular enough that I don't have to stick to a single manufacturer for any parts (for repair or upgradability - this alone would be nice to see in laptops today!).
We have the technology for this today - why the fuck aren't we using it?
Reason is the Path to God - Anon
Desktop! I dohn neehd noh steekin desktop!
My desk at home is a full 8 feet wide and 24 inches deep, made of 2x4 (support), 4x4 (legs) and 1x12 (top) - a smaller piece of 1x12 exists for my keyboard and mouse. I built this thing because I didn't have enough room for my three machines - and I needed it solid so I could pile so much on it.
I don't know about you, but I get a kick when I see advertisements and magazine articles that seem to support the idea that a computer is supposed to be "pretty" and blend in with the surroundings (fuckin' designers!). If I could afford a Thinking Machines Blinkin' Lights Special, I would have that over the latest Uber-Cool Case...
Actually, what I have been thinking about doing is getting rid of my cases and building some kind of slide rack system for the boards - make the entire affair an open-air design, and say "Screw the FCC!"
Reason is the Path to God - Anon
IBM's got, what, 150dpi in production now? I think their 770 13.8" screen is 1280x1024, and they've got a lot of R&D invested in fine dot-pitch display technology....
seriously folks, what we need is not a bigger screen, but higher resolution screen. current LCD has such a huge pixel compare to printing paper, it's not even funny.
There is a reason why regular office paper is 11 by 8, not 16.5 inches.
Sure. I'd buy one. But for my desktop at work. Why the fudge do flat panels for desktops, for the same quality, cost more than notebooks with those same panels?
Anyway, it's not my money, so I'll eventually break down and buy one, but I'm bidding my time for the technology to mature a bit. I guess I'll have to stick with my cheezy old dual head with 20" and 17" Trinitrons. *sigh*
Yes, everything changes, but then again it doesn't. Think about it: is anyone ever gonna want a machine that sits in their lap w/ a 50" monitor? Hell no. You wouldn't be able to see the whole screen without moving your head all around. The fact is that laptop screen size will soon get to it's max(it if hasn't already, 16.5 sounds awfully big).
I think desktop screen size may get somewhat bigger, but probably 24" is as big as you'd want unless you were sitting a ways away from the screen.
Yes, while I'm sure I *could* have said that more, "delicately" I didn't really feel like it.
All I wanted to do was make it *perfectly* clear that I *did not* like those fuckign huge ass laptop screens, and I felt strongly enough about it to use "more colorful" language.
To be perfectly honest, I don't get what the deal is with huge ass laptop monitors, I mean really, it doesn't matter how thin, or light it is, if it's two square feet, it just isn't portable. Light and small is the only way to go. It's just always something that's bothered me.
As far as weather or not my post was offensive, I suggest you might want to thicken your skin a little bit, a raving tirade about large laptop screens is hardly the worst of what's out there.
"Subtle mind control? Why do all these HTML buttons say 'Submit' ?"
ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
thank you.
:)
I must say that I was verry impressed with your spelling and punctuation myself
I'm making the assumption that 'verry' means the opposite of 'very' right?
not that I'm not the worlds worst speller or somthing....
"Subtle mind control? Why do all these HTML buttons say 'Submit' ?"
ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
Yes 44 megabyte hard drives *were* good enough 10 years ago or whenever, but while hard drive's *data* sizes have been going up, there *physical* size has been going down. I have a 50 meg MFM hard drive sitting in my 386 (with 20 megs of ram :) it takes up 2 5'' drive bays!
there are no *bad* effects of having a large hard drive (other than M$ bloatware, I suppose) whereas having a 21' screen on a portable well, makes it less portable.
At some point, the resolution of a laptop is going to be limited by the human eye, and the only recourse will be to have larger monitors. That point may already have been reached There is only so far you can 'virtual' screen size....
I'm sorry, but while a 17' monitor might be great, I don't want a 17' laptop.
"Subtle mind control? Why do all these HTML buttons say 'Submit' ?"
ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
Well, you don't want it to be TOO light. I mean, you don't want to forget that it's a computer. Though 4 lbs would be nice.
Seeking enlightenment about all this aspect ratio stuff, and why you need to care? Why don't you check out How film is transferred to video? And then pop over to the DVD FAQ. And finally, jump to this list of anamorphic DVDs.
Then don't get one.
I am not saying that the size will forever continue, but as far as most people are concearned bigger is always better...
Kinda OT - but I remember working at a small mom/pop software shop that had a stand custom built and molded to look like a computer case - on top of this they mounted an IBM RS/6000 model 320 (at the time, it was classed as a workstation machine - as in desktop) - just to impress potential clients/investors (musta worked, to some extent - every year we made more sales and got larger)...
Reason is the Path to God - Anon
Actually, the article calls it XSGA+. But, I still hate it when they just don't tell you the numbers. After doing a little poking around, I found that XSGA is 1280x1024. Maybe XSGA+ is 1600x12[80]0? I can only dream. I'd love to replace my 19" CRT with one of these.
mike
The problem with that is that most 3D chips are power-hungry monsters that produce a _LOT_ of heat. Noticed the gigantic heat sink on the Voodoo3 or the TNT? Try putting that in a laptop and the poor thing will melt into a puddle of plastic and silicon. Anyway, my impression was that the Rage Pro 3D wasn't all that bad... It is pretty much middle of the pack as far as modern 3D accel goes, which means it will play Quake 3 just fine and whatever else you want to throw at it just fine...
:|
Then again I could be wrong, but I'm planning on getting a laptop with an 8MB Rage Pro 3d in the near future so I sure hope it's decent
FYI here's a link to the Samsung Electronics press release
My laptop is a couple of years old now and only has a 13.3" screen, so I'm looking forward to my next one (about 8 months off) when I can get one of these :-)
It's gonna get real hard opening it up on the airplane though...
Andrew.
And 1024x768 is barely adequate. And yes, the screens are ugly. Compared to a Thinkpad with the 1280x1024 13.8" screens, I will take the smaller Thinkpad every time (and I did, despite the cost). And Dell has been less than cooperative with Linux until very, very recently, unlike IBM.
250dpi for 18" screens with twice the refresh (IIRC). They should be in production by the end of the year, but they will cost about $5,000 each for a while. When they come down, give me several hundred with NCs in the back of them and a nice kepboard with a stress stick (the little red IBM clit-mouse) and I can get everyone back on X, where they belong, and all the computing power off the desktop and back in the machine room, where it belongs. THAT will be a sweet day.
Xerox has (either in production or very close) something with 400dpi (IIRC) B&W only for X rays and so on -- designed to replace light tables for the use of stored cat scans, and those panels are big -- like 24". They are also $30,000, and really only useful for, well, looking at high resolution images. Possibly for satellite stuff too, I suppose, but probably most will be used for X rays.
Well, I am typing this on my cell modem on a Thinkpad 600 with 320MB RAM and a 14" screen with a 333MHz PII and a 10GB hdd. I can do some decent work on this beast, although the extra RAM cuts battery life to 2 1/2 hours. It is a little pricey, but it is very nice. I used to laugh at people with laptops. Now I wonder how I got along without them!
Get a Thinkpad -- they already have decent sized keyboards.
In a few years' time, laptop design will have revolutionised... thin screen.. li ion battery... blue tooth; we'll wonder what we were doing back in the 20th century.
:-)
And it'll all run Linux
james
Tally-ho, yippety-dip, and zing zang spillip. Looking forward to bullying off for the final chukka?
I didn't realize that 4:3 was a new development on the laptop front (If you read the article you'll see 5:4 is typical.) In any case, my next wish is for 16:9, so I can get the most while watching my DVDs.
A little big for a laptop, isn't it? Still, I can't wait to see it. Even better, I can't wait to have one on my desk. It will be a nice upgrade from the 14" lcd that sits there now.
I have a 15" right now on my Dell Insipron 7000... it's big enough. The Laptop would become too huge with a 16"5 LCD panel on it.
They're making 'em 4 at a time, on a single 35" substrate; forget the portable, I want a 35" flat screen monitor!
I just got a Dell Inspiron 7000 with the 15" display, and I think it's great. The machine has a couple gotchas though, all of which (I think anyway) stem from the huge screen. I have no idea how a 16.5" screen would work but I'll speak from experience about the I7K:
1. The notebook weighs 9 pounds. If you have to walk real far with this, it will kill your shoulder.
2. The physical case is huge. Frankly I like that part, because it gives the notebook a nice solid feel (not like those Sony ones which feel as flimsy as a matchbook). It still fits comfortably on a lap, but I think if it were any bigger, it would be uncomfortable.
3. The bigger the screen, the more chance you have to end up with dead pixels. I remember reading on Dell's customer service discussion board that the 15" displays on the I7K notebooks have 2.3 million transistors in them... statistically, the chances of any one of those failing is higher since there are more to 'possibly' fail. What this translates to is more possibility of having dead pixels on your screen. My notebook came with one dead pixel, and from what other people have told me it's a common thing on such big screens. Luckily if the problem gets worse, the warranty covers it.
4. Just where would the screen go? The I7K screen is actually as big as the base of the laptop, so when the lid is shut, the lid actually hangs over the edge. I'd hate to see how they can wrangle a 16.5" screen into it.
5. Think of the power consumption... the I7K has a huge battery which (according to the Linux APM meter) still holds 3 hours worth of power, as long as you're not playing Half-Life. Another inch and a half's worth of backlight could eat into your power requirements and require a bigger battery... adding more weight.
I'm sure someone will make a laptop with a 16.5" screen. It might be great for graphic artists to show things to clients, or in other situations where portability doesn't matter. But I wouldn't expect this thing to go far in the normal portable PC market, it's just *too* big.
16.5 is just too damn big. Even 15 is pushing the limits. I want a laptop because it fits on my LAP; if I wanted to compute sitting at a desk, I could get a 19" monitor for a hell of a lot less than whatever this monster LCD is going to cost.
:)
Even if they made it incredibly light, it's just too LARGE to be really portable. And let's not kid ourselves; any laptop with this is going to weight a LOT. Materials science and battery tech, unfortunately, have thus far stubbornly refused to obey Moore's Law.
The only people who will buy these laptops will be those who want to show off and those too dumb to realize that bigger isn't necessarily better. And then only if they can afford it.
The Laptop Law isn't going to change in the near future: you can have any three of Fast, Light, Inexpensive, and a Large Screen. But never all four. (The Laptop Corollary, of course, states that if you're extra dumb you could end up with only two of those.)
God dam, what is up with these huge ass Laptops?? I mean 16.5 inches? that's like a god dam 19 inch monitor on the plain with you! I don't see why anyone would want somthing like that, I mean, it's supposed to be *portable*........
"Subtle mind control? Why do all these HTML buttons say 'Submit' ?"
ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
On my 17" monitor I like to keep my face about 3 feet from the monitor, and the keyboard about 18" away.
On my 21" monitor I stay at least 4/5 feet from the monitor and the keyboard is 2/3 feet from the monitor.
OK, what about a 16" laptop? How confortable will it be to work with the keyboard only a couple of inches from the screen and my face no further than I can confortably stretch my arms?
Perhaps the fact that these are LCD's mean it will be more comfortable to have my face plastered up against the screen?
Any pointers to CHI (computer/human interaction) studies that try to determine, what the maximum size for a useable laptop screen is? Or putting it another way: how big can a computer screen be, while having the keyboard a couple of inches from the screen?
/.
That thing is going to take a lot of power
Ya know -- it's hard enough ordering a custom laptop from dell online since you really have no clue about the power consupmtion... what ticks me off is that they give you no clue as to how much power you're going to be sucking down --
I mean, the difference between a 300 celeron and a 400 PII is BIG.
Oh well -- Gyserville will solve all our problems (sha right) -- anyway...
...my desktop with a 16.5" LCD! My desktop now has a 15" CRT (14 viewable ;) so the new "laptop" display represents a huge upgrade in screen area for my desktop... I'm so cheap, however, that it'll be two or three years before I ditch this 15" tube!
Geeky modern art T-shirts
does everyone keep coming out with these enormous screens on laptops. Laptops are meant to be portable, not desktop replacements. These bigger screens only reduce battery life even more than the Pentium II chips running them. Come on, two hours battery life? Thats horrible, a Powerbook G3 will get you about 6 hours, an AMD powered notebook will probably get you about 3-4 hours. Laptop makers are missing the point, you buy a PORTABLE computing because it's supposed to be something you can use to take your work on the road with you, without needing an AC outlet. Instead of making screens that make laptops impossible to fit into a backpack, how about working on getting a longer battery life out of laptops, making them a little cheaper wouldnt hurt either. The iBook is a great example of a Good Thing in laptops. It's relatively inexpensive, it's got a long battery life and powerful processor, not to mention it's built-in v.90 modem and 10/100 ethernet. What's Apple's secret? A 12.1 inch screen that doesn't use much power and a processor with better conductors. The 12 inch screen isn't a problem because it comes with 4MB of video RAM for a high resolution even on the small screen. Given the choice between a PC notebook and an iBook, the iBook would definitely get my money, which it probably will when it's released.
I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
2. The physical case is huge. Frankly I like that part, because it gives the notebook a nice solid feel (not like those Sony ones which feel as flimsy as a matchbook). It still fits comfortably on a lap, but I think if it were any bigger, it would be uncomfortable.
I've been usung one of the 14" Sonys for
a few months now, and it stands up pretty
well to a bit of punishment. I don't know about
the wafer-thin ones, mind you. I went for one
with a built-in CD and floppy, as you only end up
carrying them around with you anyway.
But I can see what you mean about the 16" screen.
For start, it's going to be unwieldy on a plane
unless you're in fat capitalist git class.
Oh, and to CmdrTaco and anyone else thinking of
getting one - make sure that you either get
a version with an ESS chipset or the Soundblaster
extensions to the (Neomagic) audio chipset, as
sound's a bitch to get working under Linux with
the vanilla Neomagic 256av chipset.
K.
-
How come there's an "open source" entry in the
-- Proud descendant of semi-nomadic cattle-herders.
I hate when the computer press try to dumb down the story by using terms like SVGA+ resolution.
What does that even mean? I'm guessing it's 1280x1024, but it would sure be nice if that just said that.
Rick Niles.
I think there are other technologies coming that will allow for flexible screens so the laptop will be no bigger than the keyboard (imagine a standard desktop keyboard) with a pull out screen that comes out of the top almost like a piece of paper going into one of those paper port keyboards. A couple of side stiffeners and it would be stable. The electric ink technology is showing it can be done on 3mm vinyl for posters. The speed and color will come with time. The biggest thing with flat panels today is the protection from damage. If it rolls up in the keyboard like a window blind (maybe I should trademark that as a name? 8^), it's pretty safe. We know that the other components will fit in the housing. We're doing it in the Palm and WinCE world already. I'd much prefer a standard keyboard. I'd also prefer a portrait display which addresses the big screen, small footprint better since you're rolling up the large axis into the smaller width. With a standard laptop there's no advantage to screen orientation.
One thing that most people seem to be ignoring is that this is also the basis for your 17" flat desktop display.
A 16.5 inch panel pretty much defeats the point of calling it a "notebook". Doing some simple math based on a diagonal size of 16.5" and an aspect ratio of 3:4, we discover that the width of the screen *alone* is 13.2" and 9.9" high. A "notebook" is only supposed to be a hair over 8.5" X 11" right? This portable will be at the very least 10.5" X 13.5", even if they manage to slim the whole notebook down to .7-.8" high thats still a large notebook, not to mention the heft they are going to add too it trying to fit a battery large enough to power a screen that size for a long time. Man, I bet some notebook/briefcases won't even fit something that big! Thanks, but no thanks, I'll keep screens that big on my desk, get me higher res for my lap.
Spyky
Sony has the KL-W9000 monitor which looks awesome. I posted it here but I guess it wasn't as cool as all that Amiga vaporware. I have a question regarding LCDs I hope someone can answer it. I posted it through "Ask Slashdot" but i guess it wasn't that important either. Do images in LCDs get burned in, like in CRTs? I ask because I heard that if you have a 16:9 TV and only see 4:3 programs eventually you will notice the side bars in widescreen movies. Is any of this true?
Then again I could be wrong, but I'm planning on getting a laptop with an 8MB Rage Pro 3d in the near future so I sure hope it's decent :|
It plays Q3Arena acceptably. That's all I need it for.
Hurrah!!! Thats what i ment to say(i was the poster of the message you replied to), however i haven't evolved to use words too well. I hope a lot of people read your message (especially the people at dell)
Personally, I'd rather have a quality 14.1 inch LCD than the 15" screens I've seen on the Dells.. The text is so blocky it's almost unreadable, and the graphics look horrible.
I work with IBM hardware, and we get a lot of ThinkPads. If you've ever entriley taken apart a ThinkPad, you'll know that the actual LCD panel is about 0.4 cm thick, regardless of height or width. Then why is the entire LCD unit (case included) so thick? Well, the LCD sits on top of some beams in the case. Underneath the LCD panel run a few ribbon cables from the bottom of the case to the right hand side, where they plug into the LCD panel. Aside from that, there's nothing under the LCD. It's all empty space. THis is just to keep the LCD panel safe, because it is extremly delecate. So it's not making the LCD thinner that we have to worry about. It's about making it stronger. Once it's stronge enough, it won't even need casing.
If they do, I doubt they will take it to heart - after all, there is profit involved...
Reason is the Path to God - Anon
If I could get one of those Dell Inspirons or an IBM Thinkpad 770 with the rough equivalent of a RIVA TNT2 in it, I'd be there in 1/4 uSec.
>16.5" screen. It might be great for graphic
>artists to show things to clients, or in
>other situations where portability doesn't matter.
I've always wanted a computer for precisely that! Specifically, I'd like a very flat computer that could be built into an 11"x17" portfolio case. Theoretically, you could put a display approaching 20" into such a form factor -- the same viewable area as a 21" CRT.
If you could also add a pressure-sensitive stylus that would work directly on the screen, you'd have a neat machine for digital artists, some of whom would like to truck out of the studio and work on-site just like those beret-wearing guys with the charcoal pads and easels and watercolours.
This would be a great specialty item for architects and designers and so on. As long as we need to carry a big ol' case containing our comps or blueprints, it might as well have a neat computer in it too.
When it happens, that is. A portable, PIII Linux station with about 256Mb RAM and a 16" screen is NICE. I wonder if these will do something around 1280x1024 ever.
Hopefully they'll finally have space for a decently sized keyboard.
Can somebody explain what an aspect ratio is, and what it means to me? I remember seeing 16:9 in GoldenEye somewhere, but I had no idea what it was.
Help?
While it sounds big for a laptop, it sounds great for a desktop LCD display, particularly if they make enough so the price is reasonable.
----
----
Open mind, insert foot.
That's all we need. Another reason for the laptop-toting morons to make themselves out to be more important than the rest of us who can't even afford a used 486 laptop...
Basically anything weight more than 2 pounds is NOT a laptop in my book. LCD Goggles is the future.
cy
Hmm. I've always wondered why, with the (relatively) cheap 12" screens and such for the laptops, there is no cheap, small flat screen for desktop systems...just 15" ones that cost US$800 or more. With 16" and larger laptop screens out now, do manufacturers really have an excuse anymore for marking up their flat panel prices? I'd rather have an inch-thick screen on my desk than the beastly 19" CRT I use at home now.
-Skeptic
I was talking about the superslim notebooks.... a person in my office has one, and I helped him put Linux on it. I could hardly type at the thing, since it was so small -- there isn't much room for key travel when the computer itself is almost as thick as the keyboard on my Dell. He got the low-end model (although they only offer 2 models) so maybe the high-end one is better; I don't know.
The only upside about the Sony (that I can see) is that it's ULTRA-portable. If you weren't feature/power hungry, and just wanted something for coding or writing papers on the go, then it's great. As for me, though, I'm power and feature-hungry, and the Superslim didn't have enough bells-and-whistles for me to justify paying its higher price.
I can see a market for something like this maybe with desktop displays, but I, too, think 16 inches is too large for a laptop. And if they made it a desktop display, it might be a great (read: cheap) competitor for this monster.
if i chunk out 3 grand for a portable computer i want it to be exactly that, portable. If we could spend more time working on wearable computers with tiny little lcds that could support super high resoultions i'd be happy.
That's why i don't want a laptop, i already have my own computer which sits on my desktop running 24X7 churning apart RC5-64. What I want in a computer is exactly what Palm is offering to me now. I want a palm IIIx.
I don't need a 16 inch screen on a laptop, if i want a 16 inch screen i'll buy a crt.
I dunno, sounds pretty big to me, that's why I like my libretto, (although crunching my fingers on the keyboard took awhile to get used to) its really a computer you can take around with you. This 16" screen sounds like about 4 of my screens.
It would be nice, but not if you like carrying a linux box in a CD player case.
I've never understood that. What does censoring one's language have to do with respecting the people around you? It only has to do with respecting that which one is swearing at. Agh, too many 'one's. Ah well. You get the idea, I hope.
---
END OF LINE
then what about just getting a flat panel tv screen of that (or larger) size?
Insert mind here.