I'm one of those web guys who is guilty of designing for 1024x768 screens (and I really push it!) . It used to be 800x600 displays.snife wrote:I personally don't see this as a good usage of widescreen, human processing should focus on 1 task at a time to be most effective: It is simply not a good idea to have 30% of the screen dedicating to distractions (or blank space). And machine designs should support effective work, multi-tasking / task switching costs are bad for efficiency
It's a debate that's raged for years - fluid vs static layouts, and it probably will be around for years to come. There are certain things that fit into a fluid layout better than a static, such as forums or a heavily text-oriented site like a Slashdot. Other things look better when designed with a static design.
I completely agree here - I have a MacBook in addition to my X41t, and I much prefer things like Photoshop on the MacBook with a widescreen display.However, widescreens are good for those applications that are designed to work on a WS: applications with lots of panels, e.g. Photoshop... I'd say business users will accept WS more eventually, as more and more business applications start to build primarily to work best on WS
I do think the X series will be widescreen by this time next year, but even if it wasn't, the X series has its niche and fills it well.




