4:3 ratio and the iPad

[Mindfulness Quebec]

Here's an interesting and fairly recent article touting the virtues of the 4:3 aspect ratio for tablets, which is apparently becoming the industry standard thanks to the example set by the iPad. The irony is pretty heavy for Thinkpadders ... but does this offer a ray of hope that 4:3 screens could make a comeback in notebooks? http://www.theverge.com/2015/7/21/90087 ... ad-android

Moderator edit: Thread moved from the T6x-forum.

[ajkula66]

but does this offer a ray of hope that 4:3 screens could make a comeback in notebooks?

I'm afraid that the answer to your question would be "no". At least IMO.

Laptop manufacturers have for the most part shifted away from "productivity" machines onto the "media consuming" ones, and are engaged in an awkward "race to the bottom" of who will offer the cheapest and flashiest - not to mention thinnest - notebook.

While systems like P50/70 have offered a ray of hope in the respect of their nominal specs, their execution when it comes to LCD-related-flaws - notice that I'm not even touching the screen ratio aspect issue here - as well as the stubborn sticking to 6-row island keyboards leads me to believe that the hope of us ever getting to see a proper 4:3 hi-res, well-built machine is as dead as disco...

[Cigarguy]

We can always hope........probably in vain.

[Puppy]

No, but 3:2 is possible.

[pianowizard]

Here's an interesting and fairly recent article touting the virtues of the 4:3 aspect ratio for tablets

I remember reading this article when it came out last year. The author neglected an important factor: portability. I can't speak for all other tablet users but for me, as far as portability is concerned, the best tablet is one that barely fits inside the front pocket of a pants. Samsung got it right with its 8.4" Tab S with 16:10 ratio and relatively thin bezels, because that's pretty much the biggest tablet that fits. I had an 8.4" Tab S (the SM-T705, which has phone functionality) as my main phone for half a year and I carried it in my pants pocket every day. I can also carry my current Thinkpad 8 tablet (8.3" 16:10) the same way even though its bezels are thicker -- see http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.php?f=58&t=121458 . Samsung's adopting 4:3 in the Tab S2 generation made even the 8.0" model too large to fit in a pocket, thereby necessitating a carrying case. 4:3 is also not as good as 16:10 for displaying two pages of sheet music, which is one of the main ways I use my tablets.

Laptop manufacturers have for the most part shifted away from "productivity" machines onto the "media consuming" ones

I hope that one day I can see how you 4:3 supporters "work" on your laptops. I work more productively on 16:10 and 16:9 laptops than on 4:3 or 5:4 ones. In fact, I used to prefer 4:3 too, until I started to do more multitasking, which benefited from going widescreen.

[Ibthink]

Tablets are Tablets, Notebooks are Notebooks. I personally agree with pianowizard that I prefer wider aspect ratios in a notebook, because of multitasking. My preferred aspect ratio is still 16:10, though I also would be ok with 3:2, and I don´t mind 16:9 if the resolution is high enough. 4:3 is likely never coming back in the notebook space, and thats a good thing in my book. If you want to go squarer, 3:2 is a good compromise. Plus, the manufacturers can sell it as something new, which they always like.

[exTPfan]

Whenever anyone mentions 4:3 or 3:2 there are endless posts by people saying how much they like 16:9. Well, we know you like 16:9. However, there is no reason that anyone has been able to explain why laptops must come in only one shape. Nothing else does.

[coolcat37]

Tablets are Tablets, Notebooks are Notebooks. I personally agree with pianowizard that I prefer wider aspect ratios in a notebook, because of multitasking. My preferred aspect ratio is still 16:10, though I also would be ok with 3:2, and I don´t mind 16:9 if the resolution is high enough. 4:3 is likely never coming back in the notebook space, and thats a good thing in my book. If you want to go squarer, 3:2 is a good compromise. Plus, the manufacturers can sell it as something new, which they always like.

You sound like a marketing drone, in your posts

[Ibthink]

Really?

TVs - almost 100 % 16:9 these days.

Phones - also 95 % of most modern Smartphones are 16:9.

Thing is, manufacturers like to standardize things whenever they can to save on costs. The notion here is that if you move to a different aspect ratio, the whole category has to move as well, or the manufacturer has to pay extra money to get non-standard screens. Thats why you don´t see 16:10 screens on Workstations, 4:3 screens on business notebooks or 21:9 screens on notebooks meant for multimedia.

Note that in this case its the display manufacturers who simply said that 16:9 is the standard now.

You sound like a marketing drone, in your posts

Uhm...sorry to have an opinion, I guess Would you like it more if the whole thread was filled by people praising 4:3 endlessly and moaning its death?

But thanks, your post really contributed much to this discussion.

[ajkula66]

Note that in this case its the display manufacturers who simply said that 16:9 is the standard now.

I never bought into this argument. Apple and Panasonic - who target very different, arguably directly opposite ends of the laptop marketplace - have proven me to be correct so far.

[pianowizard]

Whenever anyone mentions 4:3 or 3:2 there are endless posts by people saying how much they like 16:9. Well, we know you like 16:9.

And usually I am one of them. But you need to understand that I am not responding to someone merely mentioning that they like 4:3, but rather to the assertion that 16:9 or even 16:10 is intended strictly for entertainment. This is what ajkula66 wrote earlier in this thread:

Laptop manufacturers have for the most part shifted away from "productivity" machines onto the "media consuming" ones...

If you haven't figured out how to work productively on widescreen laptops, that's your own problem and so it has zero impact on me. But when you declare that widescreen is useful only for media consumption, you are implying that us widescreen fans use our laptops just for fun, so now your comment does have an impact on me. (By the same token, I almost always respond when people on this forum declare that only novices use touchpads, because I do use touchpads and these people are calling me a novice.)

Whenever you say something that implies certain people are inferior, you shouldn't be surprised that they respond.

Note that in this case its the display manufacturers who simply said that 16:9 is the standard now.

I never bought into this argument. Apple and Panasonic - who target very different, arguably directly opposite ends of the laptop marketplace - have proven me to be correct so far.

Actually, Apple and Panasonic have proven Ibthink and others correct. Both make non-16:9 devices, and so their products are substantially more expensive than virtually all other brands'. I do agree it's silly for Lenovo and others to stick with 16:9 even for premium laptops, where the price difference between 16:9 and 16:10 corresponds to just a couple percent of the entire laptop's cost. But Ibthink's statement is correct.

[Mindfulness Quebec]

The interface also includes the normal working distance between the user and the screen. With the standard ratio ThinkPads I find I'm actually too far from the screen to use a touch screen, whereas with a contemporary notebook, with its lower screen and touch interface, one is expected to be leaning forward into the machine---in effect, the ergonomics mimic those of the tablet. These things, in turn, determine the amount of angle on the screen that the eye subtends. The entire interface and ergonomics are different in the two styles of laptop ... the new, lower widescreen requires a closer approach to the screen, finer fonts, and higher resolutions in order to have enough information vertically deployed to the eye. Biomechanically, this sucks.

[Puppy]

I do agree it's silly for Lenovo and others to stick with 16:9 even for premium laptops, where the price difference between 16:9 and 16:10 corresponds to just a couple percent of the entire laptop's cost.

These laptops are 'premium' by the price only It is just a consumer line that mimics a pro tool.

2-in-1 devices like Microsoft Surface or even better Acer Switch Alpha 12 are 3:2 so the statement "everything is 16:9" is not correct.

I am writing this post using good old 4:3 monitor because I haven't found any setup (tried as smaller as possible fonts, move taskbar to the right, auto-hide main menu items, shrink window titlebar) how to use the 16:9 format for productive work. The lack of vertical screen estate is just irrecoverable.

Thats why you don´t see 16:10 screens on Workstations

That's why Lenovo is trying to create MacBook clones because of their marketing success but fails on the screen ratio to save $10 on display component per box.

[Puppy]

We just need another 'Fuji' in laptop market that brings good old features back. The same had happend in digital camera market. Old mechanical controls and knobs were replaced by "modern" multi-function buttons and touchscreens because "it is cost saving". It had the only issue, these devices were useless for a serious use. Fuji has created the X100 camera concept by just bringing back what worked before.

[evening_hunger]

Funny part about current Lenovo line-up is the allmighty bezel. Just a look at any of current TPs and you can see it would accomodate 16:10 equivalent of its screen no hassle (that is not to say such a panel exists). So basically we get the feeling of looking at this when instead I would much rather this (even Dell could try harder).
I fully agree with Puppy display is not the place to save five dollars, they should go all out on it, keeping some el cheapo options for corporations.

[ajkula66]

. But when you declare that widescreen is useful only for media consumption, you are implying that us widescreen fans use our laptops just for fun, so now your comment does have an impact on me.
Whenever you say something that implies certain people are inferior, you shouldn't be surprised that they respond.

There's a *lot* more involved in building a true productivity laptop than just its screen ratio. I don't consider Macs to be productivity machines regardless of their 16:10 screens, although they most certainly serve that purpose for numerous users.

Actually, Apple and Panasonic have proven Ibthink and others correct. Both make non-16:9 devices, and so their products are substantially more expensive than virtually all other brands'. I do agree it's silly for Lenovo and others to stick with 16:9 even for premium laptops, where the price difference between 16:9 and 16:10 corresponds to just a couple percent of the entire laptop's cost. But Ibthink's statement is correct.

Well, what they've both proven beyond reasonable doubt is that fact that people are willing to pay for quality even if it's just perceived quality...which holds true for Macs on some levels...

Choice is the key. I've got no problem with people enjoying/loving/adoring 16:9 ratio. My problem is the lack of choice for those of us who are less keen on it.

Imagine that you wake up one morning and by the latest government decree as of January 1st next year the only car that one would be able to register is a Yugo, which will come as 2 or 4 door sedan, pickup truck or SUV. But it will still be a Yugo. With 101% of its renowned build quality.

What would you do?

If one lives in NYC or D.C. they could easily say "go get lost" and decide not to own a car in the first place. For those of us - majority of population in the U.S. - who can't possibly survive without a vehicle, there would be no choice but to adopt a Yugo in some shape or form. Would it make us happy, though? Would it make our lives better by default since it would only cost $6K and get 50MPG?

I've got no problem with someone owning, driving and thoroughly enjoying their Yugo which is a far better vehicle than the press had made it out to be - but I'm not delving into that discussion now - as long as I'm allowed to own, drive and enjoy my Explorer AND replace it with a comparable vehicle when its time is up.

[Puppy]

There's a *lot* more involved in building a true productivity laptop than just its screen ratio. I don't consider Macs to be productivity machines regardless of their 16:10 screens, although they most certainly serve that purpose for numerous users.

Maybe this is our biggest mistake. Is anyone actually designing a true productivity laptop these days ? It looks like some models can act as such laptop with more or less compromises but is rather a side effect than original purpose. That's why people started to use gaming laptops for that purpose (Acer V Nitro series is becoming popular over here) because its quality, reliability and power is very good these days compared to the rest of production.

[ajkula66]

Maybe this is our biggest mistake.

I can only speak for myself, but I found it impossible to work for a prolonged period of time on a Retina screen, and for just about any amount of time with that keyboard...

Is anyone actually designing a true productivity laptop these days ? It looks like that some models can act as such laptop with more or less compromises but is rather a side effect than original purpose.

My answer would be "no".

It's a shame, really. Depriving people of the tools that make their jobs easier. And tools are not expected to be cheap in any trade....

If I wanted to leave my job and work as a contractor - which will never happen for a slew of reasons but that's a whole different subject matter - I'd have to dish out something along the lines of $20K for just one piece of equipment. Sounds like a lot of money for a machine that is barely larger than a carton of cigarettes, right? Well, taking into equation that owning such a tool - and knowing how to properly use it - allows for $100+ an hour, it starts to look a *lot* better...

The same holds true for just about anything in this world. Pay to play.

[Ibthink]

2-in-1 devices like Microsoft Surface or even better Acer Switch Alpha 12 are 3:2 so the statement "everything is 16:9" is not correct.

Sure, but this is because Microsoft managed to establish a new class of devices I would call "Surface like Detachables". These devices usually come in the 12" formfactor, and they sport 3:2. Lenovo also has these models in their lineup (X1 Tablet and Miix 700).

In this case, screen manufacturers pushed by the market-response to mass-produce 12" 3:2 displays, so in that sense, 3:2 has become a standard here as well.

My statement wasn´t so much "everything is 16:9", as "every class of device has a certain standard". Lenovo is following the standard, I don´t really think they care which aspect ratio is better, they just go with the flow of the market. For example, the first 10" Windows ThinkPad Tablet, the ThinkPad Tablet 2, had a 16:9 display. Then, 16:10 became standard in the 10" slate tablet category, so with next years ThinkPad 10, they moved to 16:10 1920x1200 WUXGA displays. The same goes for the ThinkPad Helix line, which was 16:9. Its successor, the mentioned X1 Tablet, is 3:2, because thats the new standard now.

If it would become clear that 3:2 is becoming the new standard for all notebooks, I have zero doubts Lenovo (and also HP and Dell) would move their notebooks to 3:2 in an instant. I guess we have to wish Microsoft good luck in their Surface Book endeavors if we want the 3:2 revolution to happen.

We just need another 'Fuji' in laptop market that brings good old features back. The same had happened in digital camera market. Old mechanical controls and knobs were replaced by "modern" multi-function buttons and touchscreens because "it is cost saving". It had the only issue, these devices were useless for a serious use. Fuji has created the X100 camera concept by just bringing back what worked before.

You can´t compare the DSLR market with PCs for multiple reasons. For one, DSLRs are not a mass market like PCs, aimed at ordinary consumers. DSLRs are aimed at people who want to do semi-professional photography at least. Also, if we are talking about ThinkPads, these are business notebooks, also mainly aimed at big organizations like businesses, not individual Pro-users, although individual users do buy ThinkPads of course.

Thats also the difference between todays laptop market and the 90s laptop market. Back then, laptops were still relatively rare, not everyone could afford them. So back then it was much more aimed at individual professional users, who were willing to pay higher prizes too. This all changed in the early to mid 2000s, when the prizes went down. Laptops became a commodity, which is one of the reasons, if not the reason, why IBM wanted to sell the PC businesses. They don´t want to do commodities. Lenovo on the other hand, is willing to deal with a commodity market.

With the PC market becoming smaller now, maybe the PC makers do see the opportunity in creating more niche devices. I do hope the Retro ThinkPad could be such a device...

[Puppy]

If it would become clear that 3:2 is becoming the new standard for all notebooks, I have zero doubts Lenovo would move the ThinkPads to 3:2 in an instant.

Why ? What prevents to use the 3:2 format in a regular laptop ? A secret agreement among all laptop vendors ?

You can´t compare the DSLR market with PCs for multiple reasons. For one, DSLRs are not a mass market like PCs, aimed at ordinary consumers. DSLRs are aimed at people who want to do semi-professional photography at least.

So you admit there are no mobile computers for people who does "semi-professional" computer related work these days ? Ok, including Lenovo P series, that's just a fake. I agree there

How comes there are several vendors who produce DSLR (or mirrorless) as their core business for many years while you state "DSLRs are not a mass market like PCs" ? The fullframe cameras and special video lenses are even more niche products. Small and cheap P/S cameras are already dead replaced by mobile phones. I still can see the same target group, pro or semi-pro customers who want tools for a serious use. While they can get it in digital camera market they're out of luck when it comes to laptops. Strange.

I do hope the Retro ThinkPad could be such a device...

I wish it would happen but I have doubts Lenovo has a competence to design and produce such machine in decent quality.

[Ibthink]

Why ? What prevents to use 3:2 format in a regular laptop ? A secret agreement among all laptop vendors ?

What prevents them? The displays don´t exist. 3:2 is only produced in small sizes up to 13", the 13,5" in the Surface Book is the biggest 3:2 screen.

So no, no secret agreement. As often, where some see conspiracy, there is none. Its just a lack of risk-taking. No one wants to take the risk to bring a 3:2 laptop to the market, since its more expensive and success is not guaranteed. I guess its human, no one wants to loose his job.

So you admit there are no mobile computers for people who does "semi-professional" work these days ? Ok, including Lenovo P series, that's just a fake. I agree there

Actually no, Workstations are an exception to this rule. I really can´t complain about my P50. Though Workstations are also influenced by consumerization and the success of the Macbook Pro series, of course, I agree with that.

The fullframe cameras and special video lenses are even more niche products.

And they are also expensive enough to still make a decent profit, even if you don´t sell that many.

[Puppy]

What prevents them? The displays don´t exist. 3:2 is only produced in small sizes up to 13", the 13,5" in the Surface Book is the biggest 3:2 screen.

Which is the exact size I'd like to have in laptop.

Its just a lack of risk-taking. No one wants to take the risk to bring a 3:2 laptop to the market, since its more expensive and success is not guaranteed. I guess its human, no one wants to loose his job.

How can you innovate with such attitude ? Lenovo already have multiple 3:2 products with questionable marketing success (mostly ruined by reliability issues). What risk represents just another one similar device, especially when competition does not have such ?

And they are also expensive enough to still make a decent profit, even if you don´t sell that many.

Exactly. I'd to see their laptop counterparts. It has proven it works.

[Mindfulness Quebec]

"I do hope the Retro ThinkPad could be such a device..."

I can't see who would buy them. Most of the classic ThinkPads were sold to corporate/institutional buyers. What motivation would today's IT execs have to equip their employees with such a product? Moreover, any IT administrators who selected a retro model would be ridiculed as Luddites.

[Puppy]

What motivation would today's IT execs have to equip their employees with such a product? Moreover, any IT administrators who selected a retro model would be ridiculed as Luddites.

Because it suits better for doing the job ? Wait ... do you actually want that ? If you prefer just latest trendy-flashy design over anything else it is not product for you, of course.

Just ask all these photografers who buy these new retro-styled digital cameras with all the mechanical knobs whether they feel as Ludditee and try to sell them those modern flashy touchscreen ones instead

I see a different issue. I haven't seen any new ThinkPads in companies over here, the last was .30 series era. Everything is HP or Dell (or MacBook). So I am wondering how many ThinkPads over Idea* consumer ones are actually sold nowadays.

[Ibthink]

I can't see who would buy them. Most of the classic ThinkPads were sold to corporate/institutional buyers. What motivation would today's IT execs have to equip their employees with such a product? Moreover, any IT administrators who selected a retro model would be ridiculed as Luddites.

I guess thats the mindset many people in Lenovo may have had as well. However, the Retro blog was really successful, which is something I think they didn´t expect.

Exactly. I'd to see their laptop counterparts. It has proven it works.

Problem is, many people are hypocrites. They complain about low quality and such. But then 5 minutes later, they might complain if a certain product just becomes 50 € more expensive.

How big is the market for 2500+ laptops, thats the question. Like, the X1 Yoga with OLED I am currently reviewing is a very nice product, but it also costs 3300 € new here in Germany, which is prohibitively expensive for most people.

I see a different issue. I haven't seen any new ThinkPads in companies over here, the last was .30 series era. Everything is HP or Dell (or MacBook). So I am wondering how many ThinkPads over Idea* consumer ones are actually sold nowadays.

Oh, don´t worry about that. I think they only took a small dive in sales with the Tx40 line. In Germany, I see plenty of newer models in the hands of company people.

Of course Germany is not the Czech Republic, maybe things are different over there.

[Puppy]

I guess thats the mindset many people in Lenovo may have had as well. However, the Retro blog was really successful, which is something I think they didn´t expect.

Wasn't the success created mostly by those "semi-professionals" or old ThinkPad fans rather than company IT departments who actually don't care about the features at all in most cases ?

How big is the market for 2500+ laptops, thats the question.

Nobody knows since there are no products in this category.

Like, the X1 Yoga with OLED I am currently reviewing is a very nice product, but it also costs 3300 € new here in Germany, which is prohibitively expensive for most people.

First, it is not a laptop. Second, the price itself is not an issue, the current quality of Lenovo products is.

[pianowizard]

I am writing this post using good old 4:3 monitor because I haven't found any setup (tried as smaller as possible fonts, move taskbar to the right, auto-hide main menu items, shrink window titlebar) how to use the 16:9 format for productive work. The lack of vertical screen estate is just irrecoverable.

16:9 works fine for me because to me, physical height matters much less than the vertical resolution, and also because my productivity really, really benefits from tiling windows side by side. I can see why many of you much prefer 14.1" 1400x1050 over 13.3" 1920x1080: the former is 8.46" tall, versus only 6.52" for the latter. But I prefer the latter because having 1920 pixels across makes it much easier to arrange two windows side by side, and since I scale things exactly the same way on both screens (e.g. 100% zoom within Word and Internet Explorer, and 100% scaling for Windows), I can actually display more lines of text on the 13.3" FHD than on the 14.1" SXGA+. I am completely okay with things looking smaller on the 13.3-incher. This could change when my vision gets worse, which will of course happen eventually, but for now I can handle very high pixel densities without scaling and that's the key reason I enjoy 16:9 more than you or ajkula66.

Choice is the key. I've got no problem with people enjoying/loving/adoring 16:9 ratio. My problem is the lack of choice for those of us who are less keen on it.

Let me emphasize once more that I have no problem with others liking 4:3 and hating 16:9, unless they insinuate that 16:9 users are somehow inferior, which happens from time to time on this forum. I am sure it's usually not done intentionally, but nonetheless I feel compelled to object.

Regarding "choice", I see a lot more choices today than 10 or even 5 years ago. There are traditional laptops, super light laptops, 2-in-1's, tablets, touchscreen laptops, ultra affordable laptops barely over $100, etc. etc. The problem is that none of them meet your criteria, i.e. aspect ratio, trackpoint and keyboard layout.

My statement wasn´t so much "everything is 16:9", as "every class of device has a certain standard".

Exactly. I don't know how Puppy could interpret this statement to mean "everything".

What prevents them? The displays don´t exist. 3:2 is only produced in small sizes up to 13", the 13,5" in the Surface Book is the biggest 3:2 screen.

The largest 3:2 panel is actually humongous: the Panasonic Toughpad tablet's 20" 3840x2560 panel. Imagine a mobile workstation with this screen! If someone could make a 20" 3:2 laptop under 8 lbs and with super slim bezels and a small charger, I might be interested in buying it. It would not be much less portable than my HP 8740w.

Its just a lack of risk-taking. No one wants to take the risk to bring a 3:2 laptop to the market, since its more expensive and success is not guaranteed. I guess its human, no one wants to loose his job.

Well said. Makes perfect sense to me.

[Mindfulness Quebec]

Pianowiz, how close are you to the screen with that horizontally tiled display - can you lean back or are you up close?

[ajkula66]

The largest 3:2 panel is actually humongous: the Panasonic Toughpad tablet's 20" 3840x2560 panel. Imagine a mobile workstation with this screen! If someone could make a 20" 3:2 laptop under 8 lbs and with super slim bezels and a small charger, I might be interested in buying it. It would not be much less portable than my HP 8740w.

I was actually looking at it on Panasonic's U.S. site a couple of nights ago, in absolute awe. I've got no use for it but it's impressive nevertheless, on many levels.

Its just a lack of risk-taking. No one wants to take the risk to bring a 3:2 laptop to the market, since its more expensive and success is not guaranteed. I guess its human, no one wants to loose his job.

Well said. Makes perfect sense to me.

Neither of you believes that Panasonic took a significant risk with the aforementioned monster-tablet?

[brchan]

16:9 can certainly be productive and is easier for side by side tiling. However, they are less ergonomic since the screen height will be a bit shorter for a similarly sized or even smaller 4:3 displays. Adjusting seat height or stacking books still has its limitations.

The most functional laptops still come from fully rugged laptop manufacturers like Panasonic, Amrel, and Getac. Unfortunately, even these companies are moving away from 4:3. For example, Panasonic's toughbooks have slowly shifted to widescreen with the semi rugged CF52, CF53, CF54, and even fully rugged CF20. Its only a matter of time before there won't be any 4:3 displays left. On the flipside, nearly all these displays are XGA, so with 16:9 or 16:10, you will actually gain some pixels.