Dear People, There's a real problem with electronic screen sizes - all of them. This includes cameras, video cameras, computers, DVD players GPS monitors and television sets.
1 Because the screens are different shapes, there is no fixed relationship between the size of the screen and the measure given. 2 Even in cases where there is a fixed ratio between shape of the screen and the size of the screen, the increase in the size is not linear, but is related to the square of the number given. 3 As a result, power consumption on larger screen sizes is far higher than might be anticipated by looking at the screen size. For example, a 15 inch computer monitor is very nearly a 33% larger than a 13 inch model whereas 15 is just over 15% larger than 13. 4 With the issue of global warming, the power consumption of larger screens is a matter of increasing concern. 5 Even if you express screen sizes in metric terms the diagonal is still a misleading measure of the size of the screen. It seems to me that the best way to express the size of the screen is to give its area. So here is my conundrum: would it be better to express this size in square metres, square millimetres or square metres? What do others think? Michael Glass
