T420 screen options for 50yr old user

[Rory]

After 14" T43 & T61 with 1024 x 768 4:3 screens both running XP I 'm looking at getting a T420.

Logically I would go for the 14" HD 1366 x 768 screen, but I'm seeing negative comments about it. As a long-sighted 50yr old user for email, docs etc, if I go for the 14" HD+ 1600 x 900 then I assume the fonts are going to be too small in its native reolution.

If I get the HD+ screen and blow the fonts up with Windows 7 is it going to OK, or will it be horrible?

[ZaZ]

People with a problem tend to complain much more often then those without one. Both panels are rated at 300:1 contrast ratio. I wouldn't think one is significantly better than the other, but I've not seen either. Vista, Windows 7 and even Linux work pretty well at making things bigger via the DPI adjustment.

[Harryc]

If you are used to 1024x768 and prefer it, then you made the right choice at 14" HD 1366 x 768.

[Rory]

Thanks - I was thinking that if fonts do need to be resized, then I'd be better doing that with a higher resolution display. Wouldn't starting with a lower res display be more likely to end up with a blurry result?

[ssd_thinkpad]

The contrast of both T420 displays are at around 150:1. Which is worse than your display you are used to.

You should use bigger fonts. Consider a T520, the FHD display is a good one. You have to pay 250 USD for upgrading to it.

[Neil]

Keep in mind also, that while WXGA and XGA have similar vertical resolution, a 14" 16x9 screen is going to be considerably smaller (vertically) than 4x3.

For me, even though I'm 50+, and have rather poorsight, I prefer higher resolution displays. I would rather wear my reading glasses than have to deal with a low rez screen.

Check out this site, to see what I mean.

[Rory]

Keep in mind also, that while WXGA and XGA have similar vertical resolution, a 14" 16x9 screen is going to be considerably smaller (vertically) than 4x3.

Thanks - it's the reduction in vertical size which is of greatest concern.

I did think about the 15.6" T520 but the overall physical of the laptop width increases by 3" over my T61 and I just don't want that.

[Rory]

Well, I went for a 14" T420 with the standard HD (1366 x 768) screen and it arrived a couple of days ago.

The brightness and contrast of the screen are adequate (no better) for normal Office type stuff, and at standard size the fonts are perfectly readable. But the 16:9 aspect ratio really is truely terrible!

The worst thing is that, with the top and bottom menu bars of any typical application, you've only got about 5.5" of useful height, so with the extra width of the screen this exaggerates the letterbox effect. Hard to describe, but it's almost as if I've got to manoeuvre my eyes between the top and bottom bars and peer into the screen.

These machines are expensive in the UK (with tax is was £1200) and at that price I can't justify putting up with something so compromised. I've asked for an RMA number to return it.

[pianowizard]

I've asked for an RMA number to return it.

What will you replace it with, a 1600x900 T420?

[Rory]

What will you replace it with, a 1600x900 T420?

I really don't know at the moment, but probably not the above.

I'm thinking T520 just to give me a physically taller screen but I'm unsure about the resolution. If I go for HD+ 1600x900 and have to resize it due to the fonts being too small then it might look terrible.

On the other hand, maybe I should go the whole hog and get the FHD 1920x1080 as perhpas that would be better able to cope with resizing?