Comments on: Widescreen vs Standard Monitors

By: Bob Job

Bob Job — Wed, 18 May 2011 15:26:00 +0000

Part of the reason is that they can advertise and sell you a monitor as a certain size (22″) while actually providing less screen area. Basic geometry tells me that a 22″ 16:9 monitor has less area than a 22″ 16:10, which has less area than a 22″ 5:4 or 4:3.

By: Bob Job

Bob Job — Wed, 18 May 2011 15:26:00 +0000

By: Bob Job

Bob Job — Wed, 18 May 2011 15:24:00 +0000

Like you said, you can’t compare an older 17″ monitor to a newer 22″ monitor. The aspect ratio has little to do with you favorable impression. In fact, a 22″ widescreen monitor has less screen area than a 22″ 5:4 or 4:3 monitor.

By: Bob Job

Bob Job — Wed, 18 May 2011 15:24:00 +0000

By: Phil Thwing

Phil Thwing — Fri, 21 Jan 2011 23:41:10 +0000

My 19″ monitor fritzed out on me as well, and I had a similarly frustrating search for a normal monitor. They are not to be had in retail stores.

Thank goodness for eBay! My 19″ 4:3 monitor is on the way (about $80)

Actually, I hope to find someone who still actually fixes monitors as I loved my Hyundai. Currently it sits sadly on the floor.

By: Tom Clancy

Tom Clancy — Sun, 07 Nov 2010 05:36:15 +0000

Recently my 19″ 4:3 monitor went out and I had to purchase a new one right away so I went to three local places looking but none of them carried 4:3 any more so I had to get a 22″ widescreen.

Absolutely hate it.

By: Satish

Satish — Fri, 17 Sep 2010 01:20:02 +0000

I really hate widescreen laptops (and monitors).

The transition from square (4:3) screens to 16:10 widescreen was itself very painful. I used to have a IBM T42 with 14″ 4:3 square screen. I loved it. I wanted to buy a new Thinkpad, so I last year, around August 2009, ordered Lenovo Thinkpad T400. It was light weight, but widescreen. Did not like it. Thought of getting adjusted, but the palm rest area was too small to rest. I mean the depth of the laptop is not good as that of T42. My wrists started paining, as I type more being a programmer. Returned it with 15% restocking fee :(

Then again, 3 days back I got a new Lenovo Thinkpad T510. What a shame. 16:9 (HD+) widescreen. My neck started paining a lot, as I have to keep my neck tilted to left side, while typing the code in my favorite Editplus editor. One day of use and such a bad experience. I am again returning it with 15% restocking fee :(

I don’t know why the industry moved to widescreen, and that too 16:9 stuff, for business laptops. I really really really need a 4:3 laptop again.

Regards,
Satish.

By: steve

steve — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 04:28:38 +0000

I agree about the widescreens being over-rated.
For basic web surfing and watching a video clip a regular aspect monitor seems like the better bet.
I actually bought one of each. Both Samsung-a 19 inch 4:3 which I actually find to be too big for my space and a 20 inch widesscreen which I like because its not as tall (I don’t like to have to scan with my eyes too much) but don’t like because I can see my desktop when browsing the web and the base is unsteady.
Can someone please recommend a good 17 inch standard LCD with DVI Input?

By: The Obfuscated One

The Obfuscated One — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 21:06:10 +0000

Excellent presentation
I’ve been searching the web for a year and been finding nothing but bias and selective images in regards to Widescreen vs. Full Screen. I also found a lot of corporate misinformation at YouTube’s web site (Widescreen vs. Full screen).
This is the first web site I found so far that includes other forms of media beside JUST the small portion of movies that are widescreen. Did the promoters of widescreen include any tall buildings? How about outer space scenes where space craft is at twelve-o-clock high and there is no horizontal land mass?

I hate widescreen. Just some of my reasons follow:

1) Word docs (8 1/2 x 11) are cut short with a lot of unused space off to the sides.

2) Web pages are a lot taller than they are wide so they are chopped short

3) I work with blueprints of buildings so height is just as important as width.

4) I also play video games and while flying a plane I am no longer constrained to the world being flat. It is now modern times and a pilot flies in a 3 dimensional world, not the flat horizontal world. When doing loops and dive bombing I pull back or push forward on the joystick which is an up and down direction on the monitor. If I had purchased a widescreen I would have to turn it sideways to regain vertical height. With my 20″ full screen I can see the enemy before the widescreen user can see me. That’s an advantage.

5) Arguing with my misinformed friends and family that full screen is better. The ONLY thing widescreen is good for is a small portion of movies that are widescreen. For everything else NO!

6) Widescreen is a misnomer, it is actually short screen. Turn it sideways and you will have a squeeze screen or is it tall screen?

I am knowledgeable of geometric shapes and use trigonometry to calculate the areas, lengths of sides, and etcetera for the basis of my analytical conclusion that full screen presents a larger picture.

Remember that full screen is absolutely capable of capturing all the subjects that a widescreen camera can. And Pan-and Scan is not a full screen image. It only has the same width to height ratio as the viewer’s TV/monitor so when the image is ENLARGED it will then fit the screen. Full screen means FULL, complete, 100%, no missing parts. Pan-and-Scan is missing a lot of parts, it is not full.

Conclusion: Buy a full screen that’s just as wide as the widescreen you want. Now you can see the BIG picture instead of just the half truth (art of deception).

By: cdg

cdg — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 11:41:49 +0000

If you are upgrading, you may find that you can’t use the widescreen without also replacing your video card.

By: Bilbs

Bilbs — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 13:22:41 +0000

I just upgraded from a 17″ 4:3 Crt to a 22″ 16:9 – Truly amazing compared to the 4:3, i dont care if webpages are made for a 4:3 screen, at 1680×1050, i still have more webpage area verticaly than my old 1280×1024 resolution (even if it is only 26 pixels) But i have gained an extra 400 to the side of it, widefox is a great solution to fill these extra pixels, and, i gain several more at the top of the page again, or i can just have my IM or sys monitors to the right of the browser. I admit, if you were going from say 19″ 4:3 to 19″ 16:9, you are loosing out, but considering that a lot of upgrades at the moment are from smaller monitors to larger ones, then you are gaining anyway, and with the cost of them falling, now large LCD’s are getting into the price range of Basic users, which is a great thing all round

By: Governor

Governor — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 18:22:04 +0000

Just gave up and got a Widescreen.

No, it is not better. In fact it looks pretty goofy with the stretched images.

The battle is lost, though, because someone decided that the normal monitors would no longer be made.

By: Aneres

Aneres — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 07:46:42 +0000

hate widescreen, and cant seem to find any standard ones :/ that arent meant for industrial applications lol

By: karlkrist

karlkrist — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 04:35:48 +0000

Two monitors is the best way to go for programming.

I *just* got a widescreen monitor for home. So far it’s not so great. Web pages are tall- not wide!

By: homeboy8181

homeboy8181 — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 09:16:55 +0000

well in my opinion i like wide screen better although my screen 1440 X 900 i will amitt is not the greatest for web browsing. i usually need to make the page smaller so i can see all the content. but i might be getting a larger monitor so the web browsing issue should be fixed.