14" @1400x1050 or 15" @1600x1200?

[ndee]

OK, I know there is a SFF, Notebook forum but this also might interest some of the ladies here. I gonna get an IBM T42 notebook but now I don't know if I should go with the 15" or 14" screen. Is 1600x1200 not too small on such a small screen? I've seen the T41 notebook with 1400x1050 and it's already quite small, just OK IMO. Thanks for any opinions

 

[NutBucket]

Higher is always better

EDIT: What's the price difference?

 

[Viper GTS]

Remember you can always run the 1600x1200 at 800x600 with no quality loss, & in spite of the technical disadvantages involved you can also run other non-native resolutions & they look just fine.

Viper GTS

 

[richardycc]

neither, I like 1280x1024 on such small screen.

 

[MrDudeMan]

Originally posted by: Viper GTS
Remember you can always run the 1600x1200 at 800x600 with no quality loss, & in spite of the technical disadvantages involved you can also run other non-native resolutions & they look just fine.

Viper GTS

i partially agree....well not really at all actually. my laptop looks friggin badass (15.4" WUXGA) on 1600x1200, but only so so on anything else really. it is ULTRA sharp and kicks the crap out of any other screen i have seen to date on the native resolution, but as i said, it is only average on anything else. it may be just an isolated case here, but i have had that same experience with many other laptops as well.

 

[Viper GTS]

Originally posted by: MrDudeMan

Originally posted by: Viper GTS
Remember you can always run the 1600x1200 at 800x600 with no quality loss, & in spite of the technical disadvantages involved you can also run other non-native resolutions & they look just fine.

Viper GTS

i partially agree....well not really at all actually. my laptop looks friggin badass (15.4" WUXGA) on 1600x1200, but only so so on anything else really. it is ULTRA sharp and kicks the crap out of any other screen i have seen to date on the native resolution, but as i said, it is only average on anything else. it may be just an isolated case here, but i have had that same experience with many other laptops as well.

Of course it won't be as sharp, but for most people (the average user) it will be fine at non-native. I helped ghost 24 Dell Latitudes this week, all with 1600x1200 displays. We set the default resolution to 1024x768 because that's what makes the students/faculty who use them happy. At 1600x1200 they get call after call complaining things are too small.

At 800x600 you will have no loss in quality due to scaling, as one pixel directly translates to four (2x2).

Viper GTS

 

[777php]

14" at 1400x1050. i love my t41

 

[usold]

Originally posted by: ndee
OK, I know there is a SFF, Notebook forum but this also might interest some of the ladies here. I gonna get an IBM T42 notebook but now I don't know if I should go with the 15" or 14" screen. Is 1600x1200 not too small on such a small screen? I've seen the T41 notebook with 1400x1050 and it's already quite small, just OK IMO. Thanks for any opinions

http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.php?t=210&highlight=133


But, just so you know, the 1400x1050 14.1" screen has 124 pixels per inch, while the 1600x1200 15" screen has 133 pixels per inch. Thus, the UXGA 15" screen actually has a higher physical resolution, which is probably not what you want.

 

[ndee]

Originally posted by: usold

Originally posted by: ndee
OK, I know there is a SFF, Notebook forum but this also might interest some of the ladies here. I gonna get an IBM T42 notebook but now I don't know if I should go with the 15" or 14" screen. Is 1600x1200 not too small on such a small screen? I've seen the T41 notebook with 1400x1050 and it's already quite small, just OK IMO. Thanks for any opinions

http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.php?t=210&highlight=133


But, just so you know, the 1400x1050 14.1" screen has 124 pixels per inch, while the 1600x1200 15" screen has 133 pixels per inch. Thus, the UXGA 15" screen actually has a higher physical resolution, which is probably not what you want.

Well, I don't mind if stuff is kinda small, it's only a matter of time til' you are used to it IMO.

 

[Yomicron]

15" T42:
5.4lbs, 1.2"x10.6"x13"

14.1" T42:
4.6lbs, 1.0"x10.0"x12.2"

I'd go for the 14.1" model

 

[Night201]

I have used both resolutions and I prefer the 1600 x 1200 on a 15", but if you don't good vision, stick with the 1400 x 1050. it's good as well.

 

[Anubis]

15 1600*1200

my friend codys dell has a 17in screen 1940x1200 that is nice

 

[sciencewhiz]

Go to a computer store and find laptops with similar screens. However, if you already think 1400 is small on a 14" screen, 1600 on a 15" screen would be worse. You get 30% more pixels for 15% more screen.

 

[slydecix]

Originally posted by: Yomicron
15" T42:
5.4lbs, 1.2"x10.6"x13"

14.1" T42:
4.6lbs, 1.0"x10.0"x12.2"

I'd go for the 14.1" model

me too

 

[ndee]

Originally posted by: Elitebull

Originally posted by: Yomicron
15" T42:
5.4lbs, 1.2"x10.6"x13"

14.1" T42:
4.6lbs, 1.0"x10.0"x12.2"

I'd go for the 14.1" model

me too

after all, it seems like I'm going with the 14.1 model, don't need more weight than necessary

 

[Confused]

I've had both screen configurations.

I personally prefer 1600x1200 on the 15" screen.

I can still sit about 2ft back from the screen, and read these forums. I'm not too sure how good your eyesight is, but 1600x1200 is awesome. It also helps because you can run games in 800x600 and they look almost as crisp, as you have 4 pixels mapping to 1 that the gfx card is pumping out.


I thought 1400x1050 on a 14.1" screen was nice when I got that laptop last year, but I can tell you that 1600x1200 on a 15" screen is MUCH nicer.


Of course, you can't really go wrong with either, i'm just glad you're not buying a 15" 1024x768


Confused

 

[ndee]

Originally posted by: Confused
I've had both screen configurations.

I personally prefer 1600x1200 on the 15" screen.

I can still sit about 2ft back from the screen, and read these forums. I'm not too sure how good your eyesight is, but 1600x1200 is awesome. It also helps because you can run games in 800x600 and they look almost as crisp, as you have 4 pixels mapping to 1 that the gfx card is pumping out.


I thought 1400x1050 on a 14.1" screen was nice when I got that laptop last year, but I can tell you that 1600x1200 on a 15" screen is MUCH nicer.


Of course, you can't really go wrong with either, i'm just glad you're not buying a 15" 1024x768


Confused

Hmmmm, I actually also like high resolutions, decisions, decisions

I was once at a friends place, they had a 19" Monitor with 800x600, I kid you not. "We like it, everything is so big!

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: ndee

Originally posted by: Confused
I've had both screen configurations.

I personally prefer 1600x1200 on the 15" screen.

I can still sit about 2ft back from the screen, and read these forums. I'm not too sure how good your eyesight is, but 1600x1200 is awesome. It also helps because you can run games in 800x600 and they look almost as crisp, as you have 4 pixels mapping to 1 that the gfx card is pumping out.


I thought 1400x1050 on a 14.1" screen was nice when I got that laptop last year, but I can tell you that 1600x1200 on a 15" screen is MUCH nicer.


Of course, you can't really go wrong with either, i'm just glad you're not buying a 15" 1024x768


Confused

Hmmmm, I actually also like high resolutions, decisions, decisions

I was once at a friends place, they had a 19" Monitor with 800x600, I kid you not. "We like it, everything is so big!

Can't stand anything less than 1600x1200 on 19".

Go for 1600x1200 because you get more real estate.
Plus a bigger screen is better anyway.

 

[zixxer]

I had the EXACT same situation a month or so ago. I had two lcd's that would fit my laptop, a 15 inch @ 1400x1050 and a 15 @ 1600x1200.

1600x1200 was TOO SMALL. I tried to deal with it for about 4 days. I messed with dpi settings, changing browser font sizes; etc etc etc and it was absolutely horrible. Pictures on webpages were screwed up due to large dpi, but if dpi was left alone then things were simply too small (and my vision is fine. I'm 19 and wear corrective lenses (contacts) and it was still just too small)

Go with the 14 at 1400x1050. Trust me.

 

[Confused]

Originally posted by: Lonyo

Originally posted by: ndee

Originally posted by: Confused
I've had both screen configurations.

I personally prefer 1600x1200 on the 15" screen.

I can still sit about 2ft back from the screen, and read these forums. I'm not too sure how good your eyesight is, but 1600x1200 is awesome. It also helps because you can run games in 800x600 and they look almost as crisp, as you have 4 pixels mapping to 1 that the gfx card is pumping out.


I thought 1400x1050 on a 14.1" screen was nice when I got that laptop last year, but I can tell you that 1600x1200 on a 15" screen is MUCH nicer.


Of course, you can't really go wrong with either, i'm just glad you're not buying a 15" 1024x768


Confused

Hmmmm, I actually also like high resolutions, decisions, decisions

I was once at a friends place, they had a 19" Monitor with 800x600, I kid you not. "We like it, everything is so big!

Can't stand anything less than 1600x1200 on 19".

Go for 1600x1200 because you get more real estate.
Plus a bigger screen is better anyway.

I find that 1600x1200 on my 19" CRT looks about the same as 160x1200 on my 15" screen. It's all due to how far away you sit. I currently have my laptop on my lap, sitting on my leather recliner sofa, and it's beautiful.


Confused

 

[MrDudeMan]

Originally posted by: se7enty7
I had the EXACT same situation a month or so ago. I had two lcd's that would fit my laptop, a 15 inch @ 1400x1050 and a 15 @ 1600x1200.

1600x1200 was TOO SMALL. I tried to deal with it for about 4 days. I messed with dpi settings, changing browser font sizes; etc etc etc and it was absolutely horrible. Pictures on webpages were screwed up due to large dpi, but if dpi was left alone then things were simply too small (and my vision is fine. I'm 19 and wear corrective lenses (contacts) and it was still just too small)

Go with the 14 at 1400x1050. Trust me.

your opinion sucks. sorry. i have good eyesight naturally, so maybe that is a difference, but 16x12 is freakin incredible. it looks 100x better 14x10.

 

[sharkeeper]

1920 x 1200 all the way! Once you go there, there is no going back. If it's too small you need reading glasses! 147 pixels per inch = super fine display!

Now when I look at most LCD's (especially a 1024 x 768 15" TFT) it looks like a crappy plasma TV!

I must have good peepers too as I use the small font size (96) at this resolution! It's all about screen real estate.

Now if web sites would fill all that wasted space to the right...

Cheers!

 

[DurocShark]

This thread cracks me up... At work we have 17" Viewsonic LCDs on the desktop, and at least half of the people are running them at 800x600 instead of the native resolution of 1280x1024.

Interesting side note: I just bought my wife a crappy DSTN 12.1" LCD (she loves it.. ick) and it has a max native res of 800x600, but will (albeit poorly) run 1024x768. heh

 

[sharkeeper]

This thread cracks me up... At work we have 17" Viewsonic LCDs on the desktop, and at least half of the people are running them at 800x600 instead of the native resolution of 1280x1024.

That's insane. I'd enforce a policy that prohibits users from changing resolution from native! :evil:

Cheers!

 

[MrDudeMan]

Originally posted by: shuttleteam
1920 x 1200 all the way! Once you go there, there is no going back. If it's too small you need reading glasses! 147 pixels per inch = super fine display!

Now when I look at most LCD's (especially a 1024 x 768 15" TFT) it looks like a crappy plasma TV!

I must have good peepers too as I use the small font size (96) at this resolution! It's all about screen real estate.

Now if web sites would fill all that wasted space to the right...

Cheers!

i have good eyes as well, but there is a limit to how much strain is worth it. that is not worth it on a 15" screen, or even a 17".