Why Widescreen

  • Thread starter Thread starter SYC
  • Start date Start date

SYC

SYC

SYC

Associate
Joined
4 Jun 2007
Posts
3
Why is everything going widescreen!?

I can understand people want the widescreen but I don't, I have a dual monitor setup which gives me the width but I want the height currently I have 2 19" TFT's but I want to upgrade to 20"+ but unless I go super big I loose height, going for a 20" widescreen I loose nearly 2" height.

Does anyone know why the standard shape monitors are slowly being phased out? and know any good sites to get standard size monitors?

Rant over.
 
16:10 is closer to natural human FOV.

If you want extra height as well then buy two 20" widescreens and stick them on their side.
 
z0mbi3 said:
16:10 is closer to natural human FOV.

If you want extra height as well then buy two 20" widescreens and stick them on their side.
Click to expand...

That's not the real reason.

It's so manufacturer's can claim larger sizes and so sell for more money.

a 20" 16:10 monitor is smaller than a 20" 4:3 monitor ;)

16:10 = 179.8 square inches

4:3 = 192 square inches

.... so a 16:10 screen has only 93.6% the physical screen real estate of an equivalent 4:3 motitor ;)



Pixel wise it's even worse

16:10 = 1680x1050 = 1764000 pixels

4:3 = 1600x1200 = 1920000 pixels

so a 16:10 screen has only 91.9% the usable screen real estate compared to an equivalent 4:3 monitor




I know where it's possible to get ahold of 4:3 20" monitors.... but it's really not worth it anymore because they are an insane price... you could buy 2 of these OCUK value 24" 16:10 monitors for the cost of 1 20" 4:3
 
Because etailers hardly stock any 4:3 monitors anymore and they are expensive as you said because people stopped buying them.

So what if it has lesser pixels, easier on the graphics card and thus better frame rates in games - win. All recent games support widescreen resolution anyway and even with the ones that don't stretched 4:3 resolutions don't look too bad either.

Besides films and dvds have much better viewing area on a widescreen than on a standard 4:3.

So why not??
 
steve258 said:
Because etailers hardly stock any 4:3 monitors anymore and they are expensive as you said because people stopped buying them.

So what if it has lesser pixels, easier on the graphics card and thus better frame rates in games - win. All recent games support widescreen resolution anyway and even with the ones that don't stretched 4:3 resolutions don't look too bad either.

Besides films and dvds have much better viewing area on a widescreen than on a standard 4:3.

So why not??
Click to expand...

Films and DVDs are for viewing on my TV - as with the majority of people

For a computer, a 4:3 aspect is much more sensible imo - for both work and games.
 
and games.
Click to expand...

Wrong. Have you played games on a widescreen monitor, with a widescreen resolution? FPS and C&C games are far better.

Also for work a huge widescreen monitor is fantastic, if it's large enough (probably the Dell 30" here) you can have to windows open with set to a decent size.
 
crowhorse said:
Films and DVDs are for viewing on my TV - as with the majority of people
Click to expand...

Apparently not, otherwise they wouldn't have been so popular.

crowhorse said:
For a computer, a 4:3 aspect is much more sensible imo - for both work and games.
Click to expand...

For work 16:10 allows you to fit two applications side by side or turn the monitor 90 degrees and view more of one with less wasted space. Also games are much better.
 
Games were an utter PITA for me in Widescreen. I found many of the hacks on WSGF wouldn't work, or would just upset my graphics drivers.

I went for the 2007FP and I love it. :D
 
badbob said:
Wrong. Have you played games on a widescreen monitor, with a widescreen resolution? FPS and C&C games are far better.

Also for work a huge widescreen monitor is fantastic, if it's large enough (probably the Dell 30" here) you can have to windows open with set to a decent size.
Click to expand...

WRONG... lmfao - you can't call someone's opinion wrong

To begin with, the OP was talking about around 20" sizes... I've had three Dell 3007WFPs & yes they're great monitors - whether or not widescreen is better all depends on if you have a single display or multi-display setup and the viewing distance when you're talking about those sizes.

And yes - I would much have preferred to have 3x 4:3 30" monitors than 3x 16:10... it was just too wide.

Now I have 24" monitors.

On this size... yes - you can fit two things next to each other at comfortable sizes to work with/use. However if it was a 4:3 24" monitor you would be able to fit four things on the screen at comfortable sizes... or certainly more comfortable sizes than on a 16:10

Raikiri said:
Apparently not, otherwise they wouldn't have been so popular.
Click to expand...

They're only so popular because no-ones been given a reasonable choice in the matter anymore per my first post.... two 24" widescreens anyone or a single 20" 4:3.... I know I'd feel like an idiot to buy a 4:3 screen in that case lol

Raikiri said:
For work 16:10 allows you to fit two applications side by side or turn the monitor 90 degrees and view more of one with less wasted space. Also games are much better.
Click to expand...

Only if you get one with a decent bezel

Some games work better... some dont... a RTS game is far better on 4:3, whereas an FPS would be better in 16:10. But then the thing I'm interested in, tri-screen gaming.... is much better with 4:3 monitors.... giving you a 16:3 widescreen.
 
crowhorse said:
Films and DVDs are for viewing on my TV - as with the majority of people

For a computer, a 4:3 aspect is much more sensible imo - for both work and games.
Click to expand...

I do work and games on the PC, widescreen is better suited in my opinion, plus movies and tv look a lot better, which i also use my PC.

Get a decent size widescreen and you won't miss anything height wise.

In my opinion the width is more important then the height anyway.

My mum also uses a widescreen monitor/tv for TV in her room, the 22" LG, it's widescreen and still perfect for it's use.

Games are much better in widescreen to imo....
 
crowhorse said:
They're only so popular because no-ones been given a reasonable choice in the matter anymore per my first post.... two 24" widescreens anyone or a single 20" 4:3.... I know I'd feel like an idiot to buy a 4:3 screen in that case lol
Click to expand...

When they first came out they cost more and yet they were still more popular, which is why 4:3 is now so hard to get.


crowhorse said:
Only if you get one with a decent bezel

Some games work better... some dont... a RTS game is far better on 4:3, whereas an FPS would be better in 16:10. But then the thing I'm interested in, tri-screen gaming.... is much better with 4:3 monitors.... giving you a 16:3 widescreen.
Click to expand...

I'll assume you mean stand, as the bezel does nothing. Just buy a better stand, £20-30 and problem solved.

As for multiple monitors... you're most definitely in the minority here, barely anybody has 2 screens let alone 3.
 
I've been playing computer games since they had to be plugged into a TV set. Then moved onto CRT monitors...so many years in front of a 4:3 screen.

But last year I got a widescreen 16:10 tft and haven't looked back. Much better for gaming and other stuff. Just feels more natural.
 
We see in Widescreen, 16:9 is the real Ratio normally.

16:10 (16:9) and 5:4 (4:3) are LCD PC monitor and 1366x768 HDTV weird Ratio's where the 1280x720 feeds needs to be upscaled anyhow.

And movies have been filmed for decades in Widescreen, has nothing to do with selling us TV's.

There is many different names for Widescreen and different Ratios but I aint going to list them you can Google it if your interested.
 
best pixel ratio for games

I have gamed for years on PCs with screens of the usual 4:3 ratio.
I will be buying a widescreen soon, but what size, i.e ratio of height/width of pixels are best?

I know that with widescreen TV, they simply chop of the top and bottom of the usual 4:3 TV picture, so you are actually seeing less on a widescreen TV (for programs like the News for example)

Do games work like that, or is more 'image' generated when you have a wide screen ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom