I have used 4:3, 16:10, 16:9 and 21:9. I prefer 16:10 because:
1/ It suits best my workflow (all windows maximized and vertically stacked).
2/ On laptops it allows for "bezelless" design and I hate big bezels. Unfortunately for me only Apple has 16:10 displays and I do not use Apple laptops because running Linux on those is real pain.
The article is either totally incompetent or totally biased. It chooses to put in the PC configuration 2 AMD FirePro W9000 cards at $3400 each. According to AMD though FirePro W9000 has 6GB of RAM and delivers 4TFLOPs whereas the more expensive of the Apple cards has 3GB of RAM and delivers 2.2 TFLOPs. A closer much to an Apple video card would the FirePro W7000 which has 4GB of RAM and delivers 2.4TFLOPs. That however costs not $3400 but $700. So the PC system price was overestimated by $5400 (2x$3400 instead of 2x$700).
I do not believe that anybody likes screen glare. Some people though are willing to deal with somewhat more glare for the sake of having somewhat more "vibrant" colors. Other people (including you and myself) would rather opt for less glare. Yet another group does not really care too much and makes choices based on other factors. It seems to me that the third group has the majority but is least vocal for understandable reasons. I can assure you though that our group is by far not small (and therefore - doomed;). Look at what happened with unibody MacBook Pro. At its introduction Apple made very big point of glossy screens being superior and therefore - only supported. Later on though market forced the company to silently introduce anti-glare screen options.
The true solution to your problem is that as market in your country evolves, you will:
1/ Have access to vendors who provide primarily anti-glare screens - e.g. Lenovo Thinkpad series
2/ You will be able to order configuration per your liking - e.g. MacBook Pro with anti-glare screen.
Nobody mentions TV sets and yet they seem to be a quite natural hosting hardware for a network-centric OS. If Google manages to get to those with Chrome OS then everything else will be trifles in terms of commercial return. I would be very surprised if Google is not talking to vendors about this.
Slashdot Mirror
I have used 4:3, 16:10, 16:9 and 21:9. I prefer 16:10 because :
1/ It suits best my workflow (all windows maximized and vertically stacked).
2/ On laptops it allows for "bezelless" design and I hate big bezels. Unfortunately for me only Apple has 16:10 displays and I do not use Apple laptops because running Linux on those is real pain.
The article is either totally incompetent or totally biased. It chooses to put in the PC configuration 2 AMD FirePro W9000 cards at $3400 each. According to AMD though FirePro W9000 has 6GB of RAM and delivers 4TFLOPs whereas the more expensive of the Apple cards has 3GB of RAM and delivers 2.2 TFLOPs. A closer much to an Apple video card would the FirePro W7000 which has 4GB of RAM and delivers 2.4TFLOPs. That however costs not $3400 but $700. So the PC system price was overestimated by $5400 (2x$3400 instead of 2x$700).
I do not believe that anybody likes screen glare. Some people though are willing to deal with somewhat more glare for the sake of having somewhat more "vibrant" colors. Other people (including you and myself) would rather opt for less glare. Yet another group does not really care too much and makes choices based on other factors. It seems to me that the third group has the majority but is least vocal for understandable reasons. I can assure you though that our group is by far not small (and therefore - doomed;). Look at what happened with unibody MacBook Pro. At its introduction Apple made very big point of glossy screens being superior and therefore - only supported. Later on though market forced the company to silently introduce anti-glare screen options. The true solution to your problem is that as market in your country evolves, you will: 1/ Have access to vendors who provide primarily anti-glare screens - e.g. Lenovo Thinkpad series 2/ You will be able to order configuration per your liking - e.g. MacBook Pro with anti-glare screen.
Nobody mentions TV sets and yet they seem to be a quite natural hosting hardware for a network-centric OS. If Google manages to get to those with Chrome OS then everything else will be trifles in terms of commercial return. I would be very surprised if Google is not talking to vendors about this.