It literally makes no sense to make screen 16:9 on anything smaller than 14", and Macbooks and Surfaces are the only ones who are not following that stupid trend.
The worst offender has to be lenovo thinkpads - they make "business" laptops, but they cripple productivity with 16:9 screen and they are no good for entertainment because of shitty speakers and display panel quality.
>>54356417
What's even worse about Thinkpads are that their bezels look like they're made to accomodate 16:10 panels but they stick in 16:9 panels anyway because you tryhard "professionals" will buy anything we shit out!
>>54356417
>The worst offender has to be lenovo thinkpads - they make "business" laptops, but they cripple productivity with 16:9 screen
100% This.
I now have to lug around a fucking 14" behemoth (which is actually an even worse 15" behemoth, because the top and bottom bezels are sized as such that the whole lid is a 16:10 lid), in order to get the same screen space I had on my 12" 4:3 Ultraportable. And in order to keep that fucking giant portable, I had to get an ultrabook, which means decreased robustness, less ports, a worse keyboard and a much higher price.
Seriously, the current laptop landscape is not about finding the best one for your use case, its about finding the least shitty option.
Like choosing between dogshit and cattle shit to step into. I chose cattle, because it smells less bad and is a bit easier to clean of than dog shit, but there is not way around it, I am still going to have to step into shit.
>and they are no good for entertainment because of shitty speakers and display panel quality.
I do have to say, the X1 has some quite nice speakers for its size, but I would gladly go back to the shitty mono speaker on the X61, if I could get a proper screen in exchange for my second spekaer.
>>54356436
TPs have always had shitty displays, that's a thing about Lelnovo (and why I don't buy from them)
The main reason people buy TPs is that you can replace pretty much everything and do all the repairs on your own for pretty cheap so they can last way longer than an average notebook
I'd love a laptop with a 3:2 display though, shits all over 16:10
>>54356417
I like 16:9 on laptops, gives me a bigger trackpad and wider keyboard with more keys. Deal with it.
>>54356496
I can deal with 15" laptops having 16:9 panels, at least there's bit more of space, but anything below 15" is unacceptable being in that god awful aspect ratio.
>gives me a bigger trackpad
How do you get a bigger trackpad? If anything, 16:9 makes it smaller, since you have less vertical space.
>wider keyboard with more keys
How many laptops below 15" do you know that has a numpad?
There's no reason for any kind of display to exist that isn't 4:3. It was a near perfect standard and we destroyed it.
>implying 16:9 or 16:10 makes any significant difference
But hey, it gives you an excuse for your overpriced toy. So let's pretend it's vital.
>>54356496
>gives me a bigger trackpad
OK, valid reason, I guess. Apart from the fact that the machines with the biggest and best trackpads are NOT 16:9
>and wider keyboard with more keys.
No. If anything, "modern" laptops have less keys. When "upgrading" from 16:10 to 16:9, I lost sysreq, volume +, - and mute, wifi toggle, break and numlock and all indicator lights.
>>54356598
It makes an immense difference.
>>54356708
This. you dont notice it till you have it. I fucking love my 16:10 monitors even though they are shitty and old.
>>54356708
Have ever you been diagnosed with autism?
>>54356598
actually after getting used to a 16:10 display it's very hard to go back.
>>54356741
Aspect ratio has a tremendous ergonomic significance, whether you choose to believe it or not.
>>54356763
You probably went from 4:3 to 16:9/10 sometime in your life without much trouble.
Going from 16:10 to 16:9 isn't a problem.
>>54356774
Post relevant meta-analysis
>>54356417
I would so buy a laptop with a 3:2 screen or even 4:3. On large screens it doesn't matter that much, but on the small screen every piece of actually usable space is valuable af.
>>54356793
i went from a 4:3 monitor to using a 16:9 vaio for about a year and since then I've been using 16:10 macbooks. 16:9 is only good for muh no black bars on films
>>54356793
most people transitioned from something like a 15 inch 1024x768 monitor to a 22 inch 1680x1050 monitor, so they only perceived that it had gotten larger
if you ever transitioned from a 4:3 monitor to a widescreen monitor of comparable size, the difference is much more jarring
>>54356848
>dem goalposts
>not using 1280x1024
>>54356436
Same with Alienware, the damn bezel is always fuckhuge on the bottom and it definitely looks like a 16:10 panel could fit in there
>>54356847
Actually, for most films there will still be black bars, so I never really got that argument. Plus after literally my whole life of black bars I'm kind of used to them to the point that it's actually part of the cinematic vibe. Similar to 24 Hz framerate really.
>>54356848
I went from a 17" CRT with 1600x1200 to a 15" 1366×768 laptop screen without troubles.
>>54356915
I had a 15" 1600x1200 laptop.
16:9, 16:10 and 4:3 all look practically the same to me. Only thing that matters is resolution for workspace.
Though I do hate the 4:3 we have at work since they're always too fucking small
>>54356915
Agreed. 17" 1366x768 is a completely valid and perfectly usable resolution
>>54356861
I didn't move the goalposts. Most people were fine when widescreen monitors became ubiquitous because they were all around larger than most 4:3 monitors. If you use a 20 inch 1600x1200 monitor for a while, and then try to use a 22 inch 1920x1080 monitor(similar overall size and pixel density), the difference is extremely obvious and unpleasant.
>>54356575
Human vision isnt 4:3, its more closer to 16:10.
>>54356965
>the difference is extremely obvious
that it is
>and unpleasant.
not everyone is an autist that has troubles adjusting to changes
>>54357132
There's no advantage to it. 4:3 is already wider than it is tall. Everything on a computer looks worse on a 16:9 display unless you place applications side by side, and even then, 16:10 is better for that.
16:9 is a horrible compromise aspect ratio that should never have been made standard.
>>54356477
>Seriously, the current laptop landscape is not about finding the best one for your use case, its about finding the least shitty option.
>Like choosing between dogshit and cattle shit to step into. I chose cattle, because it smells less bad and is a bit easier to clean of than dog shit, but there is not way around it, I am still going to have to step into shit.
Goddamnit, it's refreshing to find someone who shares your thoughts once in a while. The current laptop scene is truly disgusting for the power user, who knows what he needs.
>>54357179
Are you one of those fags that have their browser maximized?
>>54357196
why would you not?
>>54357231
unless you're pivoting you're screen that's just a retarded format to display text
While I've always been a fan of 16:9 on a desktop as a primary and a 4:3 as a secondary I feel that laptops are perfect as 16:10.
>tfw 20" 1600x1200 CRT
Feels good.
>>54356417
wtf is that ratio, 2:1?
>>54357269
It's fine on a 4:3 monitor, depending on the text scale in the browser. Also, 3:4 is a better rotated aspect ratio that something as crazy as 9:16.
>>54357304
7:3
>>54357339
3:4 is the best portrait aspect ratio. Full screening PDFs and documents is perfect because it is pretty much the shape of a normal page. 9:16 is awkwardly tall and skinny to me.
>>54357339
4:3 is already kinda awful for that
3:4 is good but it's not like you get pivoting in a laptop (which is what the thread seems to about) anyway
>>54356490
>TPs have always had shitty displays, that's a thing about Lelnovo (and why I don't buy from them)
They've had 130+ppi displays for at least 16 years.
>>54357269
implying i browser only for chan
>>54356733
literally no difference.
>>54356417
this is a big reason I've been considering picking up a Chromebook Pixel (to install GNU/Linux on, of course).
Are there any other decent 16:10 laptops out there that might not be as pricey as a pixel
>>54357443
Usually when talking about games they only render wider not taller.
>>54357439
the fuck sites are you using that's not essentially text with a few images? (except porn)
>>54357367
9:16 works on websites because it's the same aspect ratio as phones, and simply by having that aspect ratio some websites will force to the mobile site, which I find much cleaner and easier to read.
>>54357451
Nope, just buy it. It's worth it. I'll be doing the same thing this summer
>>54357480
3:4 is much closer to based 1/sqrt(2)
>>54357518
just go 1;1
>>54357600
Yes, we know that 16:9 is the best for televisions. Laptops are not televisions
>>54357679
yet you insist on running shit on it maximized like it was a tv
>>54356774
>whether you choose to believe it or not.
Belief is the exact problem here, because it's a placebo
>>54357087
Its more closer to 21:9
>>54357421
with <70% aRGB. Believe me Thinkpads have their own niche that they're good in but displays isn't it
>>54356417
Blame idiots who buy "business" laptops with 16:9 screens.
>>54357819
Yes but 21:9 screen on a laptop would be horrible, 16:10 and 3:2 is where it's at.
>>54357754
>having a bigger screen without giving up portability is a placebo
>>54357443
>vidya
>>54357720
>IMPLYING
>>54357995
Then why care about the ratio of your display?
checkmate atheists
>>54356417
You have no idea what literally means.
Totally agree. And I love my X220, but this screen is just stupid. Loved how the new Macbook went 4:3, if only it had a clitmouse.
>>54358242
You mean that Macbook with one usb-c port? It still has 16:10 display.
iPad Pro on the other hand does have 4:3 display, if only it had more functionality.
>>54357836
>with <70% aRGB
Then get a W Series you poor fuck.
>>54358007
Because I max out vertical pixels, not horizontal
>not getting a based pixel with God tier 3:2 screen and slapping a real distro on it
Why? How can you babies even cry when you ignore the answer
>>54359530
I want one of those, but i dont have the need for a laptop right now. Apparently the early ones go for ~$400.
I like having the extra vertical space on my MBP.
>>54359547
Yea I've been keeping an eye on eBay. Sadly the battery life on the first gen is ass so I'm waiting for the pixel 3 to come out and the pixel 2 to drop to 30% msrp too
>>54359530
>chiclet
>aluminum slab
>xboxhuge trackpad taking up half the space
>no nipple mouse
>no physical mouse buttons
I want apple memes to die
>>54359564
eh, 4 hours is acceptable i guess. I get double that with my 9cell t420 though.
>>54359565
Why don't you go to your Thinkpad with even bigger bezels on a 1366x768 tn panel you mong. Did you even read the point of this thread?
>>54359530
Why do people keep using based like this? That shit aint right.
>>54359770
It's about stupid trends in laptops, so it's completely on-topic.
>>54358641
Wow, was confused about that. Yes, having one USB C port was another reason not to get it, along with the keyboard. Also, I'm a huge sucker for the Thinkpad aesthetics.
>TFW forced to buy Chromebook pixel because literally every other laptop ever made sucks
>>54357836
New x1 carbon has 75% argb and 100% sRGB
>>54359801
It's a rap meme
>>54360442
I mean even in that context "based" is usually only used when referring to people in a positive way, I keep seeing people use it for everything.
>based x
or even worse using it in a negative way
>based idiot
I'm wondering what's up with the heavy use of it lately. I probably shouldn't care but I'm curious.
>>54361239
It's been around for about 3 years now. Surprised you haven't seen it
>>54361244
No, I'm saying I've seen people using it correctly for a while, it's only recently that I'm seeing people use it as a fluff adjective when it has meaning and isn't just empty. Like it makes no sense to call someone a based idiot, or say that an object is based, I've seen a lot of people here use it to describe a person in a positive way which makes sense. Maybe I'm too tired to talk right now, sorry.
>>54359565
>aluminum slab
>xboxhuge trackpad taking up half the space
>no nipple mouse
>no physical mouse buttons
How are these bad things?
>>54361656
How are they not?
>>54361723
Tracks pads have gotten bigger because that's what people want.
Aluminum slabs are also what people want. See every fucking premium device released now days.
Nipples mice are for old people.
Physical mouse buttons are messy and introduce more clutter on the keyboard. How do they even help anything anyways?
>>54361800
>How do they even help anything anyways?
I personally hate trying to do any click and drag with a trackpad, it always sucks.
>>54359530
the internal memory is way to little. otherwise i would have bought this yesterday. i know it can read sd cards but i don't want some sd card half sticking out of it at all times
>>54359560
i no rite? on 16:9 web surfing feels weird after getting used to 16:10, i imagine people who code appreciate the more vertical space too
>>54359565
>xboxhuge trackpad taking up half the space
>no physical mouse buttons
now here's someone who hasn't used a trackpad since 2008
>>54360146
the keyboard isn't actually horrible. i've typed on one. it feels weird at first cuz of almost no key travel but the keys are HUGE and after like two hours it feels almost normal. the one port thing is what makes it useless for anyone who doesn't want a strictly facebook machine to use at cafes and shit. such a shame since the display and trackpad are nice too.
>>54361800
>that's what idiots browsing facebook want
ftfy
>See every fucking premium device released now days.
exactly, boring and unoriginal as fuck plus can't even take a beating
>Nipples mice are for old people.
they're great and they take up barely any space
why would a "premium" device not have it?
>hysical mouse buttons are messy and introduce more clutter on the keyboard.
>muh minimalism
Hiding common functionality is never ever good UI design.
Actual tactile physical buttons are much more user-friendly.
>>54356417
>>54356477
>>54357181
we enlightened individuals should all get in a circle and jerk off some time
but for real, 16:9 and even 16:10 are absolutely retarded on portables
>wider form factor means even sub-13'' models are fucking hambeasts that waste space in cramped environments like airplanes and trains for a use case nobody needs a laptop for
>shittier for text and other "productive" tasks one would take a computer with them on the go to do
>even the potential multitasking advantage is lost on the tiny screen
>phones, tablets and proper televisions are more convenient for mindless media consumption than a laptop ever will be
>have to get a bulk-ass 14-15'' laptop with massive bezels just to get the same vertical real estate I could get on a 12'' 4:3 ultraportable
>>54361951
>exactly, boring and unoriginal as fuck plus can't even take a beating
There are still all the 100s of other plastic or other material laptops you can buy. I don't get how aluminum or magnesium could be more boring than black plastic which is what you'll get with anything else anyways.
>they're great and they take up barely any space why would a "premium" device not have it?
I've used them before. They are slow.
>Hiding common functionality is never ever good UI design. Actual tactile physical buttons are much more user-friendly.
Everyone knows where the mouse buttons are. You don't need a separate button for them and they still "click" even if it's integrated with the track pad. Cluttered design is poor design.
>>54356417
Apple's "brilliant" hardware form factor is rapidly looking like Epcot Center - tier tech. Outdated as fuck.
>>54362447
>Cluttered design is poor design.
Any designer who can't manage to put two fucking buttons on the huge space available without it looking cluttered or even confusing should end himself.
Unintuitive design is poor design
>>54362447
>I've used them before. They are slow.
so it's the mouse's fault your too much of a retard to up the sensitivity?
or did you just use a floor model with the default settings and call yourself an expert?
>Cluttered design is poor design.
can you tell me how exactly adding two or three extra buttons that fit snugly in with the other fucking 80+ keys on a standard keyboard are "clutter"?
or why it even matters when the kind of person who is confused by something as benign and universal as mouse buttons isn't buying an expensive laptop anyway?
my 16:10 display puked a while back and i went to a $70 16:9 to hold me over
i thought there was going to be a difference in the feeling of the workspace
there isn't
you lose like three and a half lines of text, and you won't notice it
>>54362447
plastic allows you to do interesting designs with it very easily
it's fantastic
>>54362651
how big was that display? bet it was more than 15"
>>54362897
And metal allows more fine details that wont rub/snap off. They both have their pros and cons.
>>54356417
>>54361800
>people want it
>that makes it good
You had two legitimate points here and you fucking blew it because you're retarded
>>54362651
On a monitor it doesn't matter as much
On a portable device it does. 4:3 tablets are becoming the norm for a reason
