Live data from Hacker News

Professionals need our 4:3 screens

cs.put.poznan.pl

21–30 of 96 posts

Re: Professionals need our 4:3 screens

#21
post #11

Same! I hate the freaking wide screen madness. It's not just laptops though. There are not a ton of manufactures making LCDs with modern resolutions in a 4:3 aspect ratio. Also a lot them are quite expensive. Eizo makes 1:1 desktop monitor, I managed to get one used for a good price I love it! I would get a second if they did not cost so much. http://www.eizoglobal.com/products/flexscan/ev2730q/index.ht... Also 5:4 i…

Just open two buffers side by side and it's almost like you have two 4:3 monitors. Isn't that better?

Re: Professionals need our 4:3 screens

#22
post #9
post #7

4:3 and matte and a proper keyboard. These no longer exist because Apple and shiny.

If there would be a demand then it would exist (from Apple or other companies).

It does exist-- from hobbyist entrepreneurs. 51nb has been selling motherboard upgrades for the old 4:3 ThinkPad models for a few years now, and others have begun to specialize in whole-system integration, additional mods, and complete systems based on this work (I'm one of those people, though I also do it as a hobby).

My three ThinkPads X60s machines are all Broadwells, with nice 12.1" 4:3 high res screens using modern backlights I fabricate myself. They work so well I intend to build more.

Re: Professionals need our 4:3 screens

#24

Or is this a call for mainstream operating systems and applications to get creative (read, nice tiling or splitting by default)? What if all browsers suported single page split view? So that the left side was your regular view, half width, and the right side was the continuation of the same page, where the left side ended.

There's only so much you can get with good tiling. I used to not care about the aspect ratio debate until I started increasing font sizes in my applications. My eyesight is still good, but being able to work farther from the screen feels better, and I can keep brightness low.

I work on a 16:9 27" display where this is moot (still, I feel like I use the center 50% of the display 90% of the time) but I feel this pain in laptops.

At 16:9, for page-based content (all text editors and code tools, productivity tools, web browsers; terminals less so), you're forced to display two pages side by side. Still, they're shorter vertically than your eye can handle. Horizontally, your eye will either gravitate towards the center of the display, or have to switch between the two sides (ultimately rendering the extra area of the display temporarily useless)

At 4:3 in full screen (especially important for smaller displays) you can have a sidebar or ancillary tool occupying 1/3 or 1/4 of the screen, and the paged content occupying the rest.

I've made my peace with 16:10.

Re: Professionals need our 4:3 screens

#25
post #7

4:3 and matte and a proper keyboard. These no longer exist because Apple and shiny.

Apple was one of the last holdouts. They were shipping matte and 4:3 laptops until relatively recently.

Reflective screens are the biggest shame. They’re worse but they sell better. For a while 4:3 looked “old fashioned.”

Turns out that a tall form factor works for phones, but thankfully most manufactutors relize that tablets should be 4:3 or close to it.

Re: Professionals need our 4:3 screens

#27
post #9
post #7

4:3 and matte and a proper keyboard. These no longer exist because Apple and shiny.

If there would be a demand then it would exist (from Apple or other companies).

You assume there is actual competition taking place in computer display panels. Not sure how you can get that impression.

Re: Professionals need our 4:3 screens

#28
post #21
post #11

Same! I hate the freaking wide screen madness. It's not just laptops though. There are not a ton of manufactures making LCDs with modern resolutions in a 4:3 aspect ratio. Also a lot them are quite expensive. Eizo makes 1:1 desktop monitor, I managed to get one used for a good price I love it! I would get a second if they did not cost so much. http://www.eizoglobal.com/products/flexscan/ev2730q/index.ht... Also 5:4 i…

Just open two buffers side by side and it's almost like you have two 4:3 monitors. Isn't that better?

Not if you're only working on one document at a time. Being distracted by some other stuff on the side is not always a benefit and many editors are surprisingly hard to set up to center documents on the screen while blending out anything on the sides.

Re: Professionals need our 4:3 screens

#29
this is so stupid. this guy doesnt want a laptop but a tablet or netbook, and should be asking why chromebooks dont come in 4:3

this guy's real problem is probably that 768 pixels isnt enough, not the wasted pixels to make the width 1366; so the solution is probably not being as cheap, and getting a higher resolution screen on a small latptop

Re: Professionals need our 4:3 screens

#30
post #14

The author presents his own personal opinions as though they were shared by the majority of programmers, but they're not. 4:3 ratio offers little space and I found that I actually prefer ultrawide monitors (21:9) to regular HD ones. The extra width lets me open 4 emacs buffers side by side (or 5-6 if I'm editing smaller files) which gives me unparalleled possibilities for editing and comparing code. Of course when it…

Where does the author imply that a majority of programmers prefer 4:3? The expressions he uses are "many of my colleagues", and "only a part of [academics and IT professionals, but] still a large group". I think they are accurate.

I do strongly prefer 4:3. As an academic, a large portion of my time is spent reading papers in PDF, and opening papers side by side is mostly useless - you want to read, not compare or copy from one to the other. When coding, it depends on how your mind works. I understand that many people may want to have several files on screen at the same time, but my mind works mostly by focusing on a single file at a time, and rapidly switching context to another. Having several windows visible at the same time distracts me.

All the author (and other people wanting 4:3, like myself) are saying is that we want to have 4:3 as an alternative. We do not want to force 4:3 on anyone, just to be able to buy laptops with 4:3 screen, even if they are a minority of the product range. Is that that much to ask? Would it be that bad for people who prefer 16:9 to have 90% of laptop screens designed for them, instead of 100%? Because as long as you are OK with that and you don't need 100% of the screens to cater to your preference, I don't see why posts like this should create any controversy at all.

Post reply on HN