How much more would you pay for a 16:10, IPS display on any current Thinkpad?

Discussion in 'Lenovo' started by XX55XX, Dec 28, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. XX55XX

    XX55XX Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    38
    Messages:
    499
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    I don't get the fetish for 4:3 or 5:4. I'm glad we've moved beyond that. 16:10 is the most superior aspect ratio, but unfortunately, everything, from my TV to my current ASUS monitor is in 16:9. Manageable, but 16:10 would make everything nicer. I suppose 4:3 works if you read a lot of text. Otherwise... it's 16:10.
     
  2. ZaZ

    ZaZ Super Model Super Moderator

    Reputations:
    4,857
    Messages:
    33,640
    Likes Received:
    1,047
    Trophy Points:
    581
    I definitely prefer 4:3 aspect ratio screens. They provide more vertical resolution, 1050 on a 14" or 1200 on a 15" screen. Vertical resolution is more useful than extra space on the sides for most applications like Office and Internet, which are top to bottom oriented. Having more vertical resolution means less scrolling. You're right though, that ship sailed.
     
  3. XX55XX

    XX55XX Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    38
    Messages:
    499
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    Tis true, but for the gamer such as myself, 16:10 offers the best blend. Too bad that ship has sailed. 16:9's not bad, but it's simply less than optimal.
     
  4. Thors.Hammer

    Thors.Hammer Notebook Enthusiast

    Reputations:
    982
    Messages:
    5,162
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    216
    If you can't see the shift in quality from the T60p series several years ago to present day, then I don't know what to say. There's no question in my mind the screen on the T410s is superior to the T420s. I can't speak to the T420 because I've never seen one, but the overall trend for the past five years couldn't be more apparent.
     
  5. rumbero

    rumbero Notebook Enthusiast

    Reputations:
    65
    Messages:
    43
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    16
    It is not a fetish, it is practical knowledge based on comparison and experience. Also, without wanting to diminish the merits of 16:10, there is no superiority whatsoever, because a 4:3 UXGA resolution of 1600x1200 in fact easily contains the screen real estate of the nowadays very common 16:10 WXGA+ 1440x900 or 16:9 WSXGA/HD+ 1600 x 900 resolution, but adds the most sorely missed vertical space of an additional 300 pixels on top. This is 25% more vertical display space. The move beyond therefore actually turned out to be rather a step back.

    Nonetheless, a 16:10 WSXGA+ IPS display with a 1680x1050 resolution would probably be a very acceptable compromise. But, unfortunately, the industry is not thinking in terms of usability but rather in mere units of dollar bills, which is a rather mediocre basis for good technical design.

    I wouldn't mind additionally paying the same price one currently has to pay for an IPS UXGA after market replacement screen, which is something between 100 and 200 EUR here in Europe. But if i would still have to compromise with a vertically challenged 16:9 display, than i'd rather invest my money elsewhere. If there really is no hope for a comeback of the wonderful 4:3 UXGA form factor, then at least a 16:10 WSXGA+ IPS display would defintely be a very welcome option on the Thinkpad market place.

    If Lenovo would like to win me back as a paying customer for the hefty price tag of a brand new Thinkpad, instead of redirecting my purchase power in still viable used second hand equipment, they should better make sure to offer what i really would like to buy. If not, i have no problem to keep on working with my selfbuilt T61+ Frankenpads. This naturally means lost revenue for Lenovo, but they need to learn that the market is not only defined by the vendor, but in first place by the needs of their paying customers.
     
  6. XX55XX

    XX55XX Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    38
    Messages:
    499
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    I believe that Apple still offers matte 16:10, 1680x1050 panels on their 15-inch MacBook Pros as an option, but yes, the 16:10 option is increasingly rare, with the 4:3 ratio practically extinct.
     
  7. csclifford

    csclifford Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    139
    Messages:
    485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    I just prefer the 16:10 aspect ratio due to the additional vertical real estate yet still having a wide display which is good for side by side windows for my school work.
     
  8. Tsunade_Hime

    Tsunade_Hime such bacon. wow

    Reputations:
    5,413
    Messages:
    10,724
    Likes Received:
    1,203
    Trophy Points:
    581
    What about WUXGA 16:10 RGBLED IPS in 15.4"? Though my Alienware's WUXGA RGBLED has pretty decent viewing angles, just wish it wasn't that...glossy. I can't think of any higher resolution that in IPS on a stock screen, minus T4x with QXGA mod..
     
  9. ibmthink

    ibmthink Notebookcheck Deity

    Reputations:
    897
    Messages:
    1,931
    Likes Received:
    385
    Trophy Points:
    101
    I would prefer 16:10 if it would not cost mouch more than 16:9, so I would pay maybe 25 € for 16:10. For IPS I would pay 50 € more, because the better screen quality is important for me. At the moment I am happy with my 1600x90 LCD of my L520 (the screen quality is also good :) ). 1600x900 is so mouch better than 1024x768 like in my old R60.
     
  10. ZaZ

    ZaZ Super Model Super Moderator

    Reputations:
    4,857
    Messages:
    33,640
    Likes Received:
    1,047
    Trophy Points:
    581
    The QXGA, which had a modified LCD housing, came on the R50p, not the T4x.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page