16:10 floated around for a measly 3 or so years before it was also killed off (excluding any Apple discussion here). E.g. W500, T500, possibly the T410 being the last 16:10 Thinkpad.
Does anyone who was involved in the industry, with suppliers etc., know how it specifically unfolded? Did the suppliers, e.g. LG.Philips, Hydis etc., just refuse to continue making non-16:9 panels?
I know there was also an "energy saving" discourse going around at this time which may have had something to do with it, with CCFL being replaced by LED, and an emphasis on less materials. The shift to widescreen panels meant that more could be cut from a wafer of silicon. But that's as much as I remember...
Former: X61 T8300 [Slow GPU] | W510 FHD QM [Top screen but 16:9 sucks] | T420s [Portable but worst LCD ever] | X201 | X200 | X60T [Slow & hot]
Enter Netflix and the likes and laptops were turned into portable TVs, and most TVs have 16:9 screens.
No big deal for LCD manufacturers.
And nobody asked the businessmen.
Sad but true.
Check out The Boardroom for Parts, Mods and Other Services.
- Senior ThinkPadder
- Posts: 8431
- Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 5:07 am
- Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Another reason for the move to 16:9 was that it enabled the industry to use the terms "High Definition" and "Full HD" to market their panels and laptops. For most people, "WXGA", WXGA+", "WSXGA+" and "WUXGA" didn't make sense, but they knew about "HD" and "Full HD" through TV marketing, and "High Definition" sounded great. And the coexistence with netbooks (which were typically 1024x576 or 1024x600) justified calling 1366x768 a "high" resolution.
Though many of us consider that period the dark age of computing, it benefited lots of people who had been unable to afford laptops.
Dell OptiPlex 5040 SFF (Core i5-6600); HP 8300 Elite minitower (Core i7-3770)
Acer ET322QK, T272HUL; Crossover 404K; Dell U2715H, U2711; Monoprice 10734; QNIX QHD2410R; Seiki Pro SM40UNP
- Similar Topics
- Last post
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 4 guests