> On 05/05/2011 08:11 AM, [email protected] wrote: > > I'm not a big fan of the new "landscape" monitors. I use an older 4:3 20 > > inch LCD because I like the vertical space for text reading/writing > > work. I dread the day it gives out because only the band-aid form-factor > > monitors seem to be available now. They don't deliver the vertical size > > I like without going into something like a 27 inch or larger, a > > seriously spendy proposition. The 16:9 monitor may be great for watching > > movies online or for HD gamers but that's what I have a TV for; a 4:3 > > form-factor makes more sense for my desktop PS use.
I fervently agree with the 4:3 minority, but there are many who agree with the screen marketing departments instead. The reason for the disappearance of 4:3 screens is that manufacturing has gotten good enough that they can make two 16:9 screens out of one very large blank. The job of marketing departments is to convince people to buy what is cheap to make. Our waistlines grow and our intelligence shrinks. As manufacturing continues to improve, they will be able to make slightly larger blanks, capable of two 16:12 or even "16:12.8" (aka 5:4 ) screens. Then the marketing departments will try to sell all of us full-sized screens again, and convince us to discard our band-aid aka runt screens. Until that happy day, I am stockpiling 4:3 screens, including replacement screens for my laptop. When this change happens, I will do my best not to say "I told you so", as the formerly young defenders of "wide screens", now middle aged, fight a losing battle against the young turks pushing new screen technologies (and no doubt even smaller fonts). Watching the young become middle aged is one of the most amusing parts of getting old. I'm not making this up - some of us are old enough to have used computers like the Tandy 100/102/200, the Apple Macintosh Portable M5120, etc. Those were wide, and small. 20 years ago, full-sized screens replaced the previously common wide screens. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose. Regards viewing "2 up" pages, and given the usual top/bottom placement of tool bars by apps, screen space is optimized on a 4:3 screen. See these screen captures: http://www.keithl.com/twopage2048x1152.png (16:9 aka wide) http://www.keithl.com/twopage2048x1536.png (16:12 aka 4:3) For the few of us who /write/ documents, a tallscreen (say 3:4) is even better, though I'm not sure how that would fit on a laptop. Oh well. The world spent two trillion hours watching television last year, while Wikipedia represents 100 million hours of creative effort, 20,000 times less. Perhaps when more people become creative, more tools will be available for creation in addition to the abundant tools available for consumption. Keith P.S.: for those stockpiling like me, be aware that fluorescent backlights age and get dimmer with time. Overdriven LEDs will do the same, but backlights with sufficient LEDs at conservative drive levels will last a long time. Also, some companies (like Dell) have widely varying product quality and durability - be sure to google the particular used model you plan to buy, and learn what experiences others have had. -- Keith Lofstrom [email protected] Voice (503)-520-1993 KLIC --- Keith Lofstrom Integrated Circuits --- "Your Ideas in Silicon" Design Contracting in Bipolar and CMOS - Analog, Digital, and Scan ICs _______________________________________________ PLUG mailing list [email protected] http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
