Is 1366x768 really that bad?

[Bootleg Betty]

Hi,

my four years old macbook is getting old, so I'm looking for a new laptop.
However, there seems to be a problem with getting one that doesn't have a 1366x768 display.

I like the thinkpad edge series for example (at least I don't think it would be a downgrade from macbook), but you know.

Is that resolution really that bad?

 

[beginner99]

Depends what you use it for. But IMHO watching movies the only things you can really do without any relevant drawbacks. And minesweeper.

Web browsing does not benefit at all from wide-screen. There might be few exceptions but in general web pages benefit from horizontal space = less scrolling. I mean why do you think that Chrome and now Firefox are limiting the horizontal space used for non-page content?
I would take 1280x1024 over 1366x768 any day. 16:10 seems to be the sweet spot but we all know those days are sadly over even in business class notebooks.

(A very good idea is also to but the windows Taskbar to the side instead of at the bottom. That helps a bit too.)

I also do some stuff for my education mainly meaning development work. And the more screen space you have the better.

 

[fffblackmage]

A lot of laptops seem to have 720p-ish displays. I guess most people are fine with that?

Personally, I hate my laptop's 1280x800 display. It's usable, but I regret not spending the ~$100 for the 1440x900 upgrade. But perhaps I'm spoiled by my desktop's huge 26" 1920x1200 LCD?

 

[kowalabearhugs]

1366x768 is entry level. It is for novices and those with poor eyesight.

 

[Doclife]

Take a look at the new Sony VAIO C (14" screen) laptop. You have the option to upgrade to a 1600 x 900 resolution 14" screen.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

1366 x 768 is going to be comparable to the (1280x800) Macbook you have (between the title bar on top and the dock at the bottom, OS X needs all the vertical space it can get. Windows is a little better that way.)

But for the most part, the screens aren't going to be any better quality than what you have already, unless you spend extra and get a higher-resolution one. (Which I would recommend.)

CPU-wise, the Intel Atom and comparable AMD products aren't going to be as fast as what you already have (a Core Duo or Core 2 Duo Macbook.) The currently shipping Intel Pentium CPUs are stripped down Core 2s, and probably won't be any faster either. If it doesn't have an i3/i5/i7 in it, leave it at the store.

I am personally possessed by an irrational and unyielding hatred of excessively widescreen displays, so I shouldn't really get into it more than that.

 

[Emulex]

its fine for small display. if i need more i have 1920x1200 (17" macbook) or the 30" 2560x1600 which i'm typing on now. all 3 have their purpose .

 

[Bootleg Betty]

Take a look at the new Sony VAIO C (14" screen) laptop. You have the option to upgrade to a 1600 x 900 resolution 14" screen.

They're orange! :awe:

1366 x 768 is going to be comparable to the (1280x800) Macbook you have (between the title bar on top and the dock at the bottom, OS X needs all the vertical space it can get. Windows is a little better that way.)

But for the most part, the screens aren't going to be any better quality than what you have already, unless you spend extra and get a higher-resolution one. (Which I would recommend.)

CPU-wise, the Intel Atom and comparable AMD products aren't going to be as fast as what you already have (a Core Duo or Core 2 Duo Macbook.) The currently shipping Intel Pentium CPUs are stripped down Core 2s, and probably won't be any faster either. If it doesn't have an i3/i5/i7 in it, leave it at the store.

I am personally possessed by an irrational and unyielding hatred of excessively widescreen displays, so I shouldn't really get into it more than that.

Yeah, that's what I thought. The C2D is getting kind of caught up in harder stuff (and it's 61 C on idle so I'm not sure how much long it will last. I might have the thermal paste wrong or something)

So I'm looking either on
- VAIO C (orange! but they don't sell them here yet)-
- Dell XPS 15 (it looks awesome, but 15" is way too big for me. even the macbook feels kind of heavy sometimes)
- thinkpad 420
- thinkpad edge e420 (possible display downgrade)

did I miss something?

thanks for replies and stuff.

 

[Ben90]

Are there anymore 4:3 laptops? If not, I would have to say the Thinkpad T61 is the best laptop ever created.

 

[TheStu]

They're orange! :awe:



Yeah, that's what I thought. The C2D is getting kind of caught up in harder stuff (and it's 61 C on idle so I'm not sure how much long it will last. I might have the thermal paste wrong or something)

So I'm looking either on
- VAIO C (orange! but they don't sell them here yet)-
- Dell XPS 15 (it looks awesome, but 15" is way too big for me. even the macbook feels kind of heavy sometimes)
- thinkpad 420
- thinkpad edge e420 (possible display downgrade)

did I miss something?

thanks for replies and stuff.

That temperature sounds about right for the age. Blow out the guts with canned air to at least clear the heatsink vents, but the real concern is load temp what is that?

Also, what is your budget? There is the MacBook Air 13 with a 1440*900 screen, solves your 'even the macbook feels kind of heavy sometimes' problem, and if you were using OS X on your MacBook, it keeps you there if that is important to you (you didn't mention it, so possibly not). Plus, it has a nicer trackpad than any PC out there.

 

[Bootleg Betty]

That temperature sounds about right for the age. Blow out the guts with canned air to at least clear the heatsink vents, but the real concern is load temp what is that?

I did some tests and its 58 - 64 on idle (or almost idle, like google chrome on anandtech) and it gets up to 84 when I do some heavy lifting.

I recently changed fan (it was getting noisy like it was hitting something) and applied new thermal paste, so it's possible I did it wrong. More than possible when I think of all the screws I lost ()

Also, what is your budget? There is the MacBook Air 13 with a 1440*900 screen, solves your 'even the macbook feels kind of heavy sometimes' problem, and if you were using OS X on your MacBook, it keeps you there if that is important to you (you didn't mention it, so possibly not). Plus, it has a nicer trackpad than any PC out there.

I agree about the touchpad. I wonder what touchpad does VAIO or XPS have, hm.

Macbook air is 1.8 Ghz Core 2 Duo so that feels little obsolete now

 

[Zap]

Is that resolution really that bad?

It's fine for smaller screen sizes, not so great for larger.

A lot of laptops seem to have 720p-ish displays. I guess most people are fine with that?

Most people (outside of those complaining in forums) probably don't care as long as it is cheaper.

Are there anymore 4:3 laptops?

I saw some new Panasonic Toughbooks with 4:3 displays still for sale.

 

[TheStu]

I did some tests and its 58 - 64 on idle (or almost idle, like google chrome on anandtech) and it gets up to 84 when I do some heavy lifting.

I recently changed fan (it was getting noisy like it was hitting something) and applied new thermal paste, so it's possible I did it wrong. More than possible when I think of all the screws I lost ()

Possibly, I don't think my Core Duo ever got that hot.

I agree about the touchpad. I wonder what touchpad does VAIO or XPS have, hm.

Macbook air is 1.8 Ghz Core 2 Duo so that feels little obsolete now

The Vaio and the XPS have your better basic PC trackpads. They 'support' 2 finger scrolling, and maybe pinch-zoom, but it is a half-assed implementation at best, and downright pull-your-hair-out-aggravating at worst. Apple controls the hardware and software which is how they can get such great tracking and scrolling on their trackpads.

And yes, the 1.8GHz is more than a little outdated, however if you are willing to wait a bit (I don't know how long), they should get Sandy Bridge reasonably soon, and then should be nice and updated. Honestly though, from the reviews that I have read, for the majority of people out there, the MacBook Air 13 is just as fast as anything else (pre-sandy bridge) due to the SSD.

 

[wirednuts]

1366x768 is ok for a 10" screen because if the resolution was any higher you would have to adjust the dpi to easily read anything anyway.

but for a 12" screen or above, dont bother. get a real resolution. unless all you do is game or watch movies, then it doesnt matter.

 

[ultimatebob]

My old laptop had a 1280x800 screen, and I hated it. It's amazing how many applications simply don't fit properly on the screen with that little vertical desktop space.

My laptop has a 1920x1080 display, which is overkill but much better to view. I miss the old 1440x1050 displays that IBM/Lenovo offered... that resolution made sense on a laptop.

 

[jiffylube1024]

I can't stand 1366x768 on anything larger than 13.3", and even that's a stretch. It just completely hampers productivity since the icons and window panes are so large.

I owned a 15.4" laptop (16:10) with a 1440x900 screen that I loved, then switched to a 14.1" (16:10) laptop that was like 2 lbs lighter with a 1280x800 screen and I absolutely hated it - much harder to get work done IMO.

I then switched to a 15.6" (16:9) laptop with a 1920x1080 resolution. The icons and things were a little bit small, but otherwise it was perfect and soooo much better than the old laptop with a 1280x800 screen.

I sold the 15.6" laptop after a year when I finished my masters degree and since I didn't need something so portable I got a 17.3" laptop with a 1600x900 resolution. 1600x900 is nice, but I really would prefer 1920x1080 - especially on this size. It was just too expensive an upgrade for me to justify.

 

[zuffy]

How small are the icons/fonts running 1920x1080 on a 15.6"? 1366x768 is way too big to be useful for any real work. I have a 12.1" laptop running 1280x800, a 23" LCD running 1920x1200 and 24" at 1920x1080. I saw an HP 17" running 1600x900 and that was pretty good. So how does it compare if anyone has experience with these combos?

 

[Blahman]

The Sony Vaio Z has 1600x900 and 1920x1080 options on a 13.1" screen. It's amazing. I have the 900p and it's perfect for me.

 

[WhoBeDaPlaya]

1366x768 is entry level. It is for novices and those with poor eyesight.

Or it's for practical-minded folks who don't want to need a 5870 to drive games at 1920x1080.
That res fits my M11x's 11.6" screen perfectly.

 

[jihe]

Hi,

my four years old macbook is getting old, so I'm looking for a new laptop.
However, there seems to be a problem with getting one that doesn't have a 1366x768 display.

I like the thinkpad edge series for example (at least I don't think it would be a downgrade from macbook), but you know.

Is that resolution really that bad?

Yes it is that bad. Vertical res is important if you want to work. Already at 1280x800 I have to put start menu on the side, can't imagine what 768 would be like.

 

[Tom]

1366x768 up to a 15.4 screen is fine for most uses. That's one reason so many laptops have it as standard resolution.
It's good for a gaming laptop because it's not as demanding as higher resolutions.

But screen resolution is another one of those things some people use as a status symbol, so it's hard to get reasonable advice.

 

[Blahman]

1366x768 up to a 15.4 screen is fine for most uses. That's one reason so many laptops have it as standard resolution.
It's good for a gaming laptop because it's not as demanding as higher resolutions.

But screen resolution is another one of those things some people use as a status symbol, so it's hard to get reasonable advice.

Or you know, people who actually use their machines for more than just farmville.

1366x768 on a 15.4 is an abomination. 1440x900 should be the minimum res for that panel, and 1920x1080 or 1920x1200 should be a lot more common than it is for 15.4" as well.

 

[dawza]

I wouldn't call it a status symbol- there is a legitimate reason to have higher screen resolutions, and it's not like screen resolution is something any passerby can pick out, unlike having a big apple plastered on the cover.

I'm fine with 13x7 on anything up to 13," although I'd honestly prefer 14x9 on anything 12-13." But for productivity, anything 14" and up needs to have a higher res. IMO, the primary justification for lugging around a larger notebook is to take advantage of the higher screen resolutions that are practical with a larger display.

 

[Tom]

Or you know, people who actually use their machines for more than just farmville.

1366x768 on a 15.4 is an abomination. 1440x900 should be the minimum res for that panel, and 1920x1080 or 1920x1200 should be a lot more common than it is for 15.4" as well.

Yea,see ? Your comment is exactly what I expect here.

So whatever you do with your computer, you think it's more important than what other people do ?

Whatever 90% of 15.4 inch laptops come with, you know better ?

LOL, this place is so predictable.

 

[Tom]

I wouldn't call it a status symbol- there is a legitimate reason to have higher screen resolutions, and it's not like screen resolution is something any passerby can pick out, unlike having a big apple plastered on the cover.

I'm fine with 13x7 on anything up to 13," although I'd honestly prefer 14x9 on anything 12-13." But for productivity, anything 14" and up needs to have a higher res. IMO, the primary justification for lugging around a larger notebook is to take advantage of the higher screen resolutions that are practical with a larger display.

So you think 1920x1200 24 inch monitors are junk ? Because that's what you are saying..

15.4 inch 1366x768 is actually better dot pitch than a 24 inch 1920x1200.

Despite the elitist attitude that will pop in here, those are both very acceptable resolutions.

reasons for 15.4 inch laptops include bigger keyboard and larger screen. not higher rez screen necessarily. and more drive bays. larger speakers. lower price.