FRUSTRATION ON RESOLUTION ON 15" ON 74 & T42P ONLY!

[tek]

If you are replying to this, please no super technicalities. it's not needed.

At this point I've read too much from all forums here and others in regards to screen resolutions. After much debate, I find myself still in the same place from where I started. I'm pretty sure others are going through the same thing. Some people will tell you that certain screen looks too tiny, others too blurry..and when it comes down to....it's all a matter of subjectivity. However, I have asked this question so many times in the past, and I either never get a straigth answer, I get this super nerd engineered answer or it simply gets ignored.

HOW BAD DOES A 1024X768 IS ON THE 15" T42 SCREEN? IS IT THAT BAD THAT IT IS BLURRY, CAN'T BE SEEN? WHAT? And, please do not compare the clarity of things such as MSN.COM site with a clarity of a 3D GAME....it is obvious they are not the same!

Some people have indicated that it does not look good for games. (i have no time for games) This machine is for business! business applications, internet explorer, DVD, etc.

It's either the 1024x768(and definitely no less than this) or the super sharp world acclaimed 1600x1200.

Well, I though I should go for the one in the middle 1400x1050..right? wrong!


A friend of mine who has a 14.1 t41 with 1400x1050.....saved on a 16mb usb flash, my website and the msn.com page to see how it would look on a 15" r50 scrren. (the store that carries ibm did not have a t42).

Anyways, I took the flash card and tried the webpages files that were saved on the 15" 1400x1040 that the store had. It looked kinda small. When I reduced it to 1024x768 it looked good in my opinion. I'm not sure though that if I get the 1024x768 wether it would look better or the same?

At the same time, not sure wether it would look better or worse looking at the webpage online that looking at it from the saved file. someone told me, it would probably look better loading it from the files than from the website online directly.

Do you understand my frustration??

[mrbjr]

Really don't understand what answer you are looking for, fact is, everything you ask is subjective. Only you can see out of your eyes. Having said that, I have a 15" w/1600x1200, 65 year old eyes using tri-focals and read depositions all day long and would never go back. Now that's me, and as has been reiterated over and over, YMMV

[rickslate]

Don't have a T42 yet but I'm planning on buying a 15" 1400x1050 model. I can't imagine why anyone would buy a 15" 1024x768 unless they had serious vision problems. If you want a 1024 display, Go for a 14" screen with the more portable smaller T42! I've used a few different 14" 1024x768 Thinkpads and the screen is PLENTY big enough for that resolution. Just my take though. I don't think you can get a very good idea at all of what a screen looks like by taking a screen capture from one computer to another. It's something you really have to see first hand. I'd suggest going with a 15" 1400x1050 though if you're set on a 15".

[bevross]

... If you want a 1024 display, Go for a 14" screen with the more portable smaller T42! ... .

I purchased the 14" precisely for the above reasons. I tried one of those "wide-screen" wusga screens on a Dell for a month once and returned it because it's just too tiny to read without going with a non-native resolution. Then, again, you really have to try first, even if it's not on a Thinkpad (some other machine in a store or something). Plus, there's always IBM's 30-day no questions asked return (if you buy direct from them).

[lvlolvlo]

I can't imagine why anyone would buy a 15" 1024x768 unless they had serious vision problems.

you can go with the higher res 1450 or 1600 and just set the dpi to large.