Monitors:Widescreen or Non-widescreen.
- Thread starter redmanc
- Start date
- Status
skippednote
M3TAL H3AD M3
Obviously widescreen
a stranger
Broken In
Why u prefer wide screen?????
its the simple reason why u prefer watching a movie in theater ... the screen aspect ratio is 16:9 or 16:10 ...which looks elegant for movies and most of the people tend to like watching movie and other stuff in that aspect ratio ...it has more to do with aesthetic sense of general public ....
ashu888ashu888
Core i7 (nehalem) Owner
Widescreen any time 
dheeraj_kumar
Legen-wait for it-dary!
Widescreen allows more working space. Especially for programmers, developers and designers. You can have more toolbars or more area to work, whatever you like.
You can have more icons in the desktop, and um... people can post more thoughts about why they like widescreen... cant think now, its very late night now!!!
You can have more icons in the desktop, and um... people can post more thoughts about why they like widescreen... cant think now, its very late night now!!!
It's not just aesthetics. It's science
why make a square monitor if wide screen monitor is science ...??
Last edited:
desiibond
Bond, Desi Bond!
why make a square monitor if wide screen monitor is science ...??
maybe because CRT tube does not allow widescreen
comp@ddict
EXIT: DATA Junkyard
Though I agree that a widescreen monitor looks better, I think it is more because of the novelty factor. Screen clarity and resolution has nothing to do with a monitor being a widescreen or 4:3.
As far as screen area is concerned please note that FOR SAME DIAGONAL SCREEN SIZE A CONVENTIONAL SCREEN HAS MORE AREA THAN A WIDE SCREEN...it's a simple mathematics calculation...infact the screen area is largeby 15-20%. That is the the reason why conventional screens are costlier than widescreen for same diagonal size. Hence saying that Widescreen allows more working space is wrong. Infact with a 4:3 monitor you can view larger portion of your drawings or documents in one go provided their native size is not in landscaspe mode.
The only advantage you get with a widescreen monitor is while watching a widescreen movie (so that you can eliminate the black stipes while retaining the aspect ratio). Infact in India the tv telecast is in 4:3 so if u watch tv on a widescreen then either it will be in incorrect aspect ratio or picture is crroped.
As far as screen area is concerned please note that FOR SAME DIAGONAL SCREEN SIZE A CONVENTIONAL SCREEN HAS MORE AREA THAN A WIDE SCREEN...it's a simple mathematics calculation...infact the screen area is largeby 15-20%. That is the the reason why conventional screens are costlier than widescreen for same diagonal size. Hence saying that Widescreen allows more working space is wrong. Infact with a 4:3 monitor you can view larger portion of your drawings or documents in one go provided their native size is not in landscaspe mode.
The only advantage you get with a widescreen monitor is while watching a widescreen movie (so that you can eliminate the black stipes while retaining the aspect ratio). Infact in India the tv telecast is in 4:3 so if u watch tv on a widescreen then either it will be in incorrect aspect ratio or picture is crroped.
arijit_2404
still find time for games
in my opinion it's totally depends upon the user/viewer.
i am using 19" wide screen LCD for last 6 months after using square monitors for last 9 years(still using at workplace).
here are some points i would like to say:
1. widescreen provides more screen area than square. so if you need more screen area - go for widescreen.
2. more and more movies are coming out in widescreen format - so u can go for it if you watch lots of movies.
3. widescreens are very convenient especially for spreadsheets where you can display more on the screen horizontally. for word docs, widescreen doesn't help much.
4. on the other hand, webpages are formatted in a portrait mode and at a lower width than most screens anyway, so you'll probably get little benefit with web viewing in widescreen.
5. today's games are widescreen supported ... gaming is awesome in widescreen monitors too!
6. widescreen really helps a lots of apps like, programming editors, graphics design softwares etc.
So make a list of your work area. then point out which one works best in widescreen and which one suited best for square monitor.
now go for most voted way.
I hope some confusion is gone now.
This is not true. they're same now.
even if widescreen becomes cheaper tomorrow then it'll be because of popularity or manufacturing cost factor. like, DDR1 is costlier than DDR2
i am using 19" wide screen LCD for last 6 months after using square monitors for last 9 years(still using at workplace).
here are some points i would like to say:
1. widescreen provides more screen area than square. so if you need more screen area - go for widescreen.
2. more and more movies are coming out in widescreen format - so u can go for it if you watch lots of movies.
3. widescreens are very convenient especially for spreadsheets where you can display more on the screen horizontally. for word docs, widescreen doesn't help much.
4. on the other hand, webpages are formatted in a portrait mode and at a lower width than most screens anyway, so you'll probably get little benefit with web viewing in widescreen.
5. today's games are widescreen supported ... gaming is awesome in widescreen monitors too!
6. widescreen really helps a lots of apps like, programming editors, graphics design softwares etc.
So make a list of your work area. then point out which one works best in widescreen and which one suited best for square monitor.
now go for most voted way.
I hope some confusion is gone now.
This is not true. they're same now.
even if widescreen becomes cheaper tomorrow then it'll be because of popularity or manufacturing cost factor. like, DDR1 is costlier than DDR2
Last edited:
Kalyan
Journeyman
square monitors were used before with a aspect ratio of 4:3 before as that was the standard for most formats before. document reading and other activities were supporting that format. and not the main reason but one of them was the resolutions of the movies. they were in 4:3 ratio.
But now, widescreens have more advantages, as @desiibond says, its science.
eye strain: your eyes would get more tired moving vertically than moving horizontal. so, the eye strain would be minimal while using the widescreen formats.
document space: with applications growing more and more gui specific, using a widescreen would accommodate more tools/pallets in a widescreen (eg: photoshop/eclipse/flash etc.) and using them with a 4:3 monitor would give u less workspace to work.
movies: as for the movie formats, there was the scope picture which was developed to accommodate more picture in the image. in a 4:3, the image would be smaller, covering the upper and lower picture which would be of lower importance like the sky/land we could see more people/scenery in a scope/widescreen format. as a consequence, the widescreen format would be better to view these movies in this format, as the normal one would have to set the upper and lower screen areas with a black image i.e., the scope to be able to view all the widescreen picture. same is the case when viewing a 4:3 picture in a widescreen. the black scope is placed on the sides.
my view: on first looks, widescreens dont look good compared to normal ones. the ws ones look a bit smaller than the normal ones. resolution wise, the widescreen ones accomodate less no of pixels than the normal ones.
ws: 1440 x 900 = 1296000 px
norm: 1280 x 1024 = 1310720 px
the lesser no of pixels is compensated by more usable area.
hope this helps.
But now, widescreens have more advantages, as @desiibond says, its science.
eye strain: your eyes would get more tired moving vertically than moving horizontal. so, the eye strain would be minimal while using the widescreen formats.
document space: with applications growing more and more gui specific, using a widescreen would accommodate more tools/pallets in a widescreen (eg: photoshop/eclipse/flash etc.) and using them with a 4:3 monitor would give u less workspace to work.
movies: as for the movie formats, there was the scope picture which was developed to accommodate more picture in the image. in a 4:3, the image would be smaller, covering the upper and lower picture which would be of lower importance like the sky/land we could see more people/scenery in a scope/widescreen format. as a consequence, the widescreen format would be better to view these movies in this format, as the normal one would have to set the upper and lower screen areas with a black image i.e., the scope to be able to view all the widescreen picture. same is the case when viewing a 4:3 picture in a widescreen. the black scope is placed on the sides.
my view: on first looks, widescreens dont look good compared to normal ones. the ws ones look a bit smaller than the normal ones. resolution wise, the widescreen ones accomodate less no of pixels than the normal ones.
ws: 1440 x 900 = 1296000 px
norm: 1280 x 1024 = 1310720 px
the lesser no of pixels is compensated by more usable area.
hope this helps.
comp@ddict
EXIT: DATA Junkyard
I'm able to run normal 4:3 videos on my POWERDVD in 16:9 with no probs
- Status