[–]▶ No.906704>>906924 >>921394 [Watch Thread][Show All Posts]
Discuss what aspect ratio is better for what and who, and why 4:3 beats all of those.
▶ No.906711>>906728 >>906845
4:3 is pretty solid, but it's still no 1:1.
▶ No.906728>>906831 >>906833 >>906845 >>909819
>>906711
you have two eyeballs, so it's like 2:1
▶ No.906730>>921398
16:10 is the golden standard. You can't beat the gold.
▶ No.906741>>907078
4:3 is the best for anything relating to text - this means imageboards/forums/programming. 16:9 is for people that only use their computers for Netflix. 16:10 is the best of both worlds; and 3:2 is inferior to 16:10 but superior to 16:9.
▶ No.906747
▶ No.906816
>1600x1200 (4:3)
>add 10% of width (160 pixels) to both sides
>1920x1200 (16:10)
>remove 10% of height (120 pixels) from the top
>1920x1080 (16:9)
mystery solved
▶ No.906831>>906840
>>906728
They focus on the same point you retard.
▶ No.906833>>906840
>>906728
They focus on the same point you retard.
▶ No.906840>>906863
>>906831
>>906833
>They focus on the same point you retard
Just like your two posts?
▶ No.906845>>906852 >>906890
>>906711
>>906728
You can find human eye FoV on the net and see why 16:9 is the prefered aspect ratio.
▶ No.906852>>906891
>>906845
You can find a lot of things on the net. But my source is a NASA study.
▶ No.906863
>>906840
Blame this shit board. Where's Hotwheels when you need to blame him for everything?
▶ No.906890
>>906845
16:9 or 16:10 is great for video media, but for reading (and also most visual media outside of video), you use a much smaller, more focused portion of your vision. This is why books and e-readers are used in portrate, and why programmers often rotate their screens.
▶ No.906891
>>906852
and they didnt take in consideration screen-size?
▶ No.906924
>>906704 (OP)
It's like you only use one window at a time. It isn't 1995 anymore computers can handle many applications at once.
▶ No.906925
Just bought a brand new 16:10 monitor. It's great, I can't imagine going back to 16:9
▶ No.906962>>909822
16:10 has more resolution than 16:9, and its good compromise against higher resolutions like 4k that take too much resources
▶ No.907078
>>906741
>16:9 is for people that only use their computers for Netflix. 16:10 is the best of both worlds
if someone would use PC mostly for Netflix, what would be the point to watch stupid movies on small (<30") computer screen when you can watch them on 50-60" TV or 200" projector?
therefore, 16:9 and 16:10 computer monitors are useless
but jews force goys to buy shit 16:9. we need to eliminate jews to stop that
▶ No.907159>>907163 >>907168 >>907646
why the FUCK can't I get a new 4:3 laptop
▶ No.907163
>>907159
pic related is a t70. A modded t60 with modern screen a ñnd hardware.
▶ No.907168>>907672
>>907159
Because nobody produces 4:3 LCD panels anymore.
▶ No.907646
>>907159
You could get a Microsoft Surface, most models are 3:2 which is pretty close.
▶ No.907672
>>907168
>Because nobody produces 4:3 LCD panels anymore.
Why nobody produces 4:3 anymore?
▶ No.907721>>907743
>>907310
MFLB is memetier vapes, get a pax of better yet an arizer solo. We know you don't leave the house
▶ No.907743
>>907721
I use mine with NiZn batteries, it doesn't get better than this
▶ No.907751
>>907310
Sick headphones. Polite sage.
▶ No.907776>>907785
A wider screen is better because your head is designed to turn horizontally, not vertically.
▶ No.907785>>909037
>>907776
If you have to turn your head, you sit too close to the screen.
▶ No.909024>>909678
4:3 is the best for dealing with text/browsing the web. Though I will admit 16:9/16:10 is great for tiling window managers, and being able to cross reference things while writing.
▶ No.909037>>909672
>>907785
Just apply his logic to eyelids instead. Books should really be written horizontally along the long side of the page rather than the short for maximum eyeball efficiency.
▶ No.909672>>909900
>>909037
Have you ever actually opened a book? If yes then' you'd know that an opened book (i.e. two pages at once facing the reader) is actually more horizontal than vertical.
▶ No.909678
>>909024
16:10 is way better then 16:9 for working with double windows of something
▶ No.909796
16:10 36 inches or more diagonal for desktop monitor = multiple windows multitasking, films.
4:3 or 3:2 13 inches diagonal (below A4 footprint) for laptop computer = 1 web browser window, 1 terminal or 1 text processor window open, desktop switching helps multitasking and focus. 16:10 is "ideal" but it gets neglected when you add taskbars, docks and other horizontal crap UI designers like to shove into our GUIs. Modern portable computers lack vertical space.
1:2 5 inches diagonal for PDA = long text articles reading, instant messages, forums, videoclips.
▶ No.909803
Aspect ratio is just a preference.
▶ No.909819
>>906728
that would be if your field of view of each eye didn't overlap nigger
▶ No.909822
>>906962
but muh 2560x1440
▶ No.909900
>>909672
You only read one page at a time.
▶ No.909956
I'd rather a small 4:3 than a big widescreen.
▶ No.913615
my laptop is 16:10 (T500) but my desktop is 4:3 (Compaq p720)
▶ No.921394>>921536
>>906704 (OP)
>查看有关计算机的基本信息
faggot indeed you are, op
▶ No.921398
▶ No.921536
>>921394
>doesn't know what T70 is