*spin-off* Personal Aspect Ratio Issues

zed

Legend
MS just dont get it, Why oh why
It looks like theyre gonna repeat the failure of the zune, by trying to make a ipod killer
this time with an ipad killer. They are not Apple. This time the hardware/screen doesnt even look like it will match whatever apple has at its launch
look at this picture
steve-balmer-with-the-new-microsoft-surface-tablet.jpg

now tablets you use portrait or landscape, now does this 16:9 device look comfortable to use portait wise [facepalm]
(not very) bold prediction the google nexus 7 will of sold more than the best selling suface device by a large margin by the end of 2013
 
MS just dont get it, Why oh why
It looks like theyre gonna repeat the failure of the zune, by trying to make a ipod killer
this time with an ipad killer. They are not Apple. This time the hardware/screen doesnt even look like it will match whatever apple has at its launch
look at this picture
steve-balmer-with-the-new-microsoft-surface-tablet.jpg

now tablets you use portrait or landscape, now does this 16:9 device look comfortable to use portait wise [facepalm]
(not very) bold prediction the google nexus 7 will of sold more than the best selling suface device by a large margin by the end of 2013
Actually, the 16:9 is one of my favourite parts of the device, considering I've tried to watch movies on the iPad, and seeing half (well, 43%) of the screen empty is sucky as hell.
 
@bkilian so watching 16:9(*) films is you most used thing for a tablet, is it the most used thing by average tablet owners?
actually that would be interesting, to see what ppl are using their tablets for, does anyone have any actual numbers?
also 43%!!! you might wanna check your math its 25%, not to mention a lot of video is not 16:9. In fact I' wouldnt be surprised if theres more best film oscars for 4:3 films than 16:9 films (eg the winner last year was 4:3)

Btw 10" display WRT ratio's
4:3 48.03 cm2
16:10 44.94 cm2
16:9 42.7 cm2

(*) 16:9 films well theres a lot of various film ratios 1.66:1 1.77:1 1.85:1 2.35:1
 
Oh I see where you get 43% from
youre goggled and found someone say that (i.e. not your maths), well it makes sense watching a 2.35:1 film on a 4:3 screen
BUT if you watch that same 2.35:1 film on a 16:9 you still have ~25% wastage! Is that OK? cause by coincidence its the same ratio as watching something 16:9 on a 4:3 screen, which is 'unacceptable' :)
 
now tablets you use portrait or landscape, now does this 16:9 device look comfortable to use portait wise [facepalm]

What's wrong with it? When you read a book it's comfortable to hold even tough a book page aspect is very narrow and tall. Reading a menu at a restarant is fine, they are also very narrow and tall. I guess maybe I just don't understand what you mean, what's wrong with holding a 16:9 aspect ratio device in portrait? Seems to me like it would be very familiar.
 
16:9 makes a tonne of sense, as you can have side by side two window view where the main window is 4:3. Like this example pic they had.
 
I'd rather have 16:9 than 4:3. Obviously you're not going to make everyone happy (of course Zed was a foregone conclusion).
 
@bkilian so watching 16:9(*) films is you most used thing for a tablet, is it the most used thing by average tablet owners?
actually that would be interesting, to see what ppl are using their tablets for, does anyone have any actual numbers?
also 43%!!! you might wanna check your math its 25%, not to mention a lot of video is not 16:9. In fact I' wouldnt be surprised if theres more best film oscars for 4:3 films than 16:9 films (eg the winner last year was 4:3)

Btw 10" display WRT ratio's
4:3 48.03 cm2
16:10 44.94 cm2
16:9 42.7 cm2

(*) 16:9 films well theres a lot of various film ratios 1.66:1 1.77:1 1.85:1 2.35:1

...

Oh I see where you get 43% from
youre goggled and found someone say that (i.e. not your maths), well it makes sense watching a 2.35:1 film on a 4:3 screen
BUT if you watch that same 2.35:1 film on a 16:9 you still have ~25% wastage! Is that OK? cause by coincidence its the same ratio as watching something 16:9 on a 4:3 screen, which is 'unacceptable' :)
Most films hover between 16:9 and 2.35:1, which means anywhere from 25% to 43% wastage. And I did not "goggle", I worked it out using math. I worked on HD DVD for 3 years, I know exactly what the main aspect ratios of movies are, and most movies I watch (the blockbuster types) use 2.35:1, so that's what I used, since it was also the ratio of the one movie I tried to watch on the ipad. The 0%-25% wastage on a 16:9 screen is a lot less jarring than on a 4:3. Eerily similar to my flatscreen TV, actually. Almost all TV content being produced now is 16:9, and almost all movies produced are at least that, so, in general, for video watching, 16:9 is a really good aspect ratio.

Also, I'm typing this on my PC, which has a 16x9 24" monitor in portrait mode on it. A lot of programmers do that, since it gives a vastly superior view for programming or reading any long-form text, like... say... websites.

And your comparison of ratios to areas, while accurate, is irrelevent. The iPad screen is 9.7", with an area of 45.16 square inches. The Surface screen is 10.6", with an area of 48 square inches.
 
you and me are not average users thus our ideas of what ppl use their PC for will be squewed, I remember reading a few years ago, the monitored average PC user spends over 50% of their time on a PC on the internet, this percentage would of only grown in the intervening years what with the rise of webapps,tablets etc

Now you get it. I'm closer to the average person than most people here. But then again, I'm an edge case too since 100% of my computer use is Internet use.

Tommy McClain
 
In my experience 16:9 or 16:10 in portrait mode is great for web surfing. I hate surfing the web in landscape mode on a 10" screen as it requires way too much vertical scrolling to see a full page.

As for running full Windows programs on a tablet...I personally see very little need for this given that a 10" screen is way too small for the programs I use...mainly SolidWorks and Mastercam. Also think of the storage space needed to store these full blown Windows programs. SolidWorks requires about 10GB of space...

If I get a tablet I will use the streamlined apps which don't require huge amounts of resources. For example I don't need the gazillion options in the desktop version of MS Word on a tablet. I just need some basic document creation/editing features. The word processing app shouldn't be more than 10MB in size.

One thing that I think is critical is the cost of these apps....they need to be cheap. I'm not willing to spend more than $15 for a mobile Word app.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Too bad 16:9 is only US HDTV and movies are either 1.85 or 2.39 to 1 so that "ugly" empty space is still there :(
 
After much agonising, I've just ordered an Android 4:3 tablet instead of a 16:9 one.

Not much to choose between the specifications of the device but I decided that I'll not watch that much widescreen video on it so the slightly more awkward dimensions of a 16:9 display (well, 3:2, I suppose it would have been) make it slightly less preferable. The tablet has HDMI output as well so I actually plan to use it as media player on occasion which would mean I won't need to watch video on it all that often.

I've ordered it online from a (apparently reputable!) seller in China so let's hope I don't get ripped off... :smile:
 
What's wrong with it? When you read a book it's comfortable to hold even tough a book page aspect is very narrow and tall.
typically u hold it open both pages so its wider than it is high, but OK we'll consider a single page
the standard size is A4 right
ratio = 1.41 == 16:11.3 which is way closer to 16:12(4:3) than it is to 16:9

16:9 makes a tonne of sense, as you can have side by side two window view where the main window is 4:3. Like this example pic they had.
are you taking the piss? :) theres plenty of ppl with 16:9 screens around now, why do you never see them do this already?
Just wander through any campus or whatever 99+% of ppl have the browser fullscreen, if it was such a great idea side by side why arent ppl doing it already

And your comparison of ratios to areas, while accurate, is irrelevent. The iPad screen is 9.7", with an area of 45.16 square inches. The Surface screen is 10.6", with an area of 48 square inches.
Its relevant cause it shows how how marketting works, & using a single diagonal metric can give a false impression (better to use cm2) eg the average consumer will not believe that a 42" 4:3 tv is bigger than a 44" 16:9. they'll go no 44" is bigger than 42"

and most movies I watch (the blockbuster types) use 2.35:1, so that's what I use
fair enuf, but other ppl (like me) who watch heaps ~50 films a month eg heres the 10 dvds I currently have at home (yes a lot crap but I dont have much choice since Ive seen so many already, a few of these are rewatches also)
you will notice 4 of the 10 are actually ~4:3 sure if you only watch the transformers,avengers then you'll be 90+% 1.85 & 2.35
http://zedzeek.com/junk/100_9772.jpg
the great muppet caper 1.85:1
The Reluctant Dragon 1.37:1
The Witches of Eastwick 2.20:1
Malevolence 1.33:1
perfect blue 1.85:1
Vampire Journals 1.33:1
night skies ? 1.85:1
now and then here and there 1.33:1
dinoshark 1.85:1

toshiba-satellite-14-4-inch-21-9-ultrabook-sku-28225-large.gif

Im sure some ppl here are overjoyed with this baby 21:9 ratio monitor, mark my words since theres been little outcry (cause of the marketting) going from 16:12 -> 16:10 -> 16:9 (dont be surprised if 16:7 monitors start showing up) hell you can now watch those 2.35:1 films in all their glory (point 5 font) doing anything else sux though
 
Last edited by a moderator:
After much agonising, I've just ordered an Android 4:3 tablet instead of a 16:9 one.
why not the new ipad, im waiting for one ATM but theyre scare. you know you can update the OS, Ive got an android tablet here (2.2 I think, piece of crap, someone gave it too me, only used it once, cant update the OS, which is made for a phone not a tablet )
or if youre trying to save some cash the new android from google, Im pretty sure they will update the OS at least for the next couple of years, excellant machine for the price, Im tempted myself 7" nice size
So does your version of Windows 8 have a start menu??? I want it baaaack.
I think its a good idea to drop it, Ive been saying this for at least 10 years. why on earth when u press the windows key or click on a button you get this tiny menu that I have to work my way through to get to my ultimate choice (bad design), instead utilize the whole screen! disclaimer I havent seen win8 but this seems like a major improvement
 
fair enuf, but other ppl (like me) who watch heaps ~50 films a month eg heres the 10 dvds I currently have at home (yes a lot crap but I dont have much choice since Ive seen so many already, a few of these are rewatches also)
you will notice 4 of the 10 are actually ~4:3 sure if you only watch the transformers,avengers then you'll be 90+% 1.85 & 2.35
http://zedzeek.com/junk/100_9772.jpg
the great muppet caper 1.85:1
The Reluctant Dragon 1.37:1
The Witches of Eastwick 2.20:1
Malevolence 1.33:1
perfect blue 1.85:1
Vampire Journals 1.33:1
night skies ? 1.85:1
now and then here and there 1.33:1
dinoshark 1.85:1

Almost every studio movie made since the 60s is filmed in one widescreen format or another which will vastly favor 16:9. So yes if your preference is movies made in the 40s like the reluctant dragon you should probably buy something in 4:3. I think you'll find that most people generally watch more modern content.

16:9 works great for splitscreen (using it right now on my monitor although its actually 16:10), widescreen profile works great for books. And what frigging books are you buying that come on A4 paper?
 
After much agonising, I've just ordered an Android 4:3 tablet instead of a 16:9 one.

Not much to choose between the specifications of the device but I decided that I'll not watch that much widescreen video on it so the slightly more awkward dimensions of a 16:9 display (well, 3:2, I suppose it would have been) make it slightly less preferable. The tablet has HDMI output as well so I actually plan to use it as media player on occasion which would mean I won't need to watch video on it all that often.

I've ordered it online from a (apparently reputable!) seller in China so let's hope I don't get ripped off... :smile:

Ultimately, I think people will watch movies via things like AirPlay, rather than directly on the tablet itself, which will also have a problem of limited storage for space-hogging content like full-length movies. You can load movies on tablets but is it really the best use of the limited space?

If tablets have special apps. which stream video and then you can re-stream it locally to your big screen, that is probably a better use.

In the mean time, 4:3 is better for reading material in portrait mode.
 
Back
Top