I've been baffled by the continue downward spiral of resolution for
years now. I enjoyed the pinnacle of things with 1600x1200 Flexview
screens and 1920x1200 wide screen LCDs on laptops like the T61p and Dell
M6300. Since people generally don't like the lower resolutions the only
thing I can think is that it is a cost/profit situation. I'm with you
too, in that I never watch movies on a computer. What the heck value is
there in HD resolutions that are less spacious than the prior
generations of screens?
Rob
Lee Stewart wrote:
This is a real shame... I've had 1400x1050 for several years, and loved
it. And I've never had/used a separate monitor. As I look at future
machines, they're all made for watching movies, not for computing. I
rarely use my computer for movies, and most of those are 4x3 format.
Documents, emails, PDFs are all portrait mode, but the screens are all
landscape. I'll even include things like Quicken and Google and most web
pages. They don't need wider screens, their data must be scrolled
vertically. I can see less of my documents (fewer lines at a time), and
I can't even make the font smaller to compensate because of the lower
screen resolution...
It's almost as if the only way to continue to use a laptop for real work
is to buy a separate monitor and turn it on end...
I know the ones here don't control it, but am I the only one that feels
frustrated that the screens are growing the wrong way?
Lee
or I guess that's
L
e
e
if you're on a short wide display... ;-)
_______________________________________________
Thinkpad mailing list
[email protected]
http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/thinkpad
