Why all the hate for1920x1080 displays?

[n7]

The only thing wrong with 1920x1080 is that it isn't 2560x1600.

Hehe, exactly how i feel :awe:

 

[edplayer]

If you want to see how bad it is,run the Unigine benchmark at 1920x1080 on a 1920x1200 native res monitor.
The large empty strip at the bottom of the screen is just awful...what a waste.
16:10 FTW

that might be the dumbest post in this thread


Personal attacks and insults are not acceptable.

This is a technical sub-forum, if you can't express your opinion in a way that doesn't convey a tone of derogatory rhetoric then you should consider refraining from making a post on the subject.

Moderator Idontcare

 

[imaheadcase]

I don't see a real big price difference, so no reason NOT to go 1900x1200.

 

[ViRGE]

It's 1920x1200, but shorter. It'll be acceptable when the ideal organizational method for text is something besides tall, thin columns.

 

[LokutusofBorg]

I watch movies on my TV. I use my computer to get stuff done. More vertical space helps me get more stuff done. I hate the 16:9 trend in monitors.

 

[Dark Shroud]

My 23" wide screen monitors native resolution is 2048x1152 so that's what I run in.

Normally I try to run in at least 1080 just so HD video doesn't get cut off.

 

[zerocool84]

I don't see a real big price difference, so no reason NOT to go 1920x1200.

Of course there's a price difference. Less and less monitors are being made 1200 so the ones that are left are high priced cus they know only a certain market will buy the 1200 monitors.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

If vertical space is really that much of a concern there are plenty of monitors that support rotation to portrait mode, and 1080p monitors are getting cheap enough to the point where you can buy two for the cost of what one monitor would run you not long ago.

Then of course there's always the 2048x1152, 2560x1440, and 2560x1600 monitors.

If you want to see how bad it is,run the Unigine benchmark at 1920x1080 on a 1920x1200 native res monitor.
The large empty strip at the bottom of the screen is just awful...what a waste.
16:10 FTW

Except 16:9 is better for gaming, properly supported games will extend the FOV to allow a naturally wider peripheral vision (a potentially significant advantage) without a distorting fisheye effect.

 

[velis]

It's not that 1920x1080 would be such a deal breaker per se.
The problem is that you could get monitors with higher resolution years back and that currently - not counting a few exceptions - this is just about the highest resolution you can get. AT ALL!!!!!
That and all the aspect issues already mentioned. I only have a few movies that go 16:9, all others are wider still, so movie aspect ratio matching can't really be an excuse.
We really should start moving towards QHD with a wider variety of aspect ratios (16:9, 16:10, 14:9, 4:3).
Not everybody only plays games and watches movies on their monitors.

 

[HurleyBird]

I just stretch any 16:9 videos up to 16:10 in order to avoid letterboxing. The ratios are close enough that you really cannot tell the difference. Movies in even higher ratios are better on 16:9 though, since you don't need to pan and scan as aggresively to eliminate letterboxing.

 

[Red Storm]

As someone who uses their PC for both fun and productivity, I like my 24" x1200 display much more than my 27" 1080P. The extra vertical space is definitely noticeable.

 

[amenx]

1920x1080 is a great res for those coming from 1280x1024. But a terrible one for those coming from 1680x1050. Objects are the same size, you only get a wider periphery. I went to 1920x1200 (Samsung 25.5") and am worried I have no reasonable options after this, unless its something terrible stressful on the GPU (2560x1440 or 1600). It would be inconceivable for me to downgrade to a 1920x1080, unfortunately thats the bulk of the markets offerings atm.

 

[OVerLoRDI]

I was using a 1920x1200 monitor before I switched to an Eyefinity setup with 3 1080p monitors.

I absolutely like the 16:10 more than 16:9. It isn't THAT many more pixels but it does make reading webpages or writing papers a lot easier.

My friend had a pretty epic setup that I would like to replicate, which is 2 16:9 monitors one horizontal and one vertical. The vertical monitor made reading webpages incredibly awesome, almost like reading a newspaper.

 

[ElFenix]

i still miss the vertical pixels when i accidentally bought the widescreen 20" dell LCD rather than the regular one (deleted wrong one from the cart). had been used to 1600x1200.

i never scroll side to side when reading something. i scroll up and down a lot. 1200 vertical pixels you can fit a whole page on the screen at once.

 

[Patrick Wolf]

It's not hate for 1080 precisely, but the aspect ratio of 16:9. People just need to choose a display based on usage.

16:9 is best for games (wider FOV, no black bars on console games) and video (smaller/no black bars). Probably good for video editing as well. I don't know exactly when 16:10 (1920x1200) is far superior so others can comment there. You get more pixels vs 1080, which is nice. But for games it'll be a slightly cleaner image vs. a wider FOV. A better FOV is the obvious choice as it affects gameplay.

 

[CSMR]

AFAIK most things aren't resolution independent; when I switched from my 19" 1280x1024 to my 21" 1920x1080, it was really surprising seeing what wasn't. It took quite some getting used to.

Most things have been worked with OS dpi settings for years, since Vista. A few years ago you had the odd minor app with quirks and a few major ones ones with some aliasing in some icons, but nowadays it's extremely rare.

 

[psoomah]

For those unaware, when browsing in Windows 7, pressing F11 totally clears away the top toolbars, pressing it again beings them back.

This can open up a lot of screen space.

 

[Voo]

For those unaware, when browsing in Windows 7, pressing F11 totally clears away the top toolbars, pressing it again beings them back.

This can open up a lot of screen space.

Nice - especially on notebooks you really notice those few extra pixels..

@CSMR: Actually lots of apps are still just upscaled automatically on Win7, which isn't without its problems. Just disable display scaling on high DPI settings..

 

[iGas]

I would get the largest & most pixels monitor that my wallet allows.

I love watching TV on my big wide screen 1080p TV, but love it even more when watching movies at the IMAX (72' × 52.8', some newer screens are 117.2' × 96.5').

I have not compare 1080p vs. 1200p, but I will let you know on monday when my 28" 1200p monitor arrive.

 

[TheFlyingSquirrel]

1920x1200 feels so much better when working but x1080 was what was in my price range and now i barely see any x1200

 

[konakona]

For those unaware, when browsing in Windows 7, pressing F11 totally clears away the top toolbars, pressing it again beings them back.

This can open up a lot of screen space.

or you could just use chrome and do away with all that unnecessary clutter IE or FF makes you suffer with..

dunno, I don't write my papers at home. when I read, I read paragraph by paragraph not the entire page at once. To my left, I have a 1600x1200 setup on my secondary rig which I find no better at all for reading stuff. I live by myself and see no need to get a redundant, huge TV when a 32'' on my desktop is just what I need for ideal video viewing (THX recommended viewing angle at the typing distance, I also tend to pause&rewind a lot while watching). YMMV on this too I guess

 

[Voo]

or you could just use chrome and do away with all that unnecessary clutter IE or FF makes you suffer with..

You use chrome to browse your local files? I mean it IS possible, but I doubt it nevertheless

 

[konakona]

oh, I thought he implied "internet browsing". You don't really read lengthy articles off your local file structure do you?

 

[Zoeff]

I went from 1024x768 19", to 1680x1050 21" (16:10) and finally to 1920x1080 24" (16:9). Honestly, I don't notice the difference in aspect ratio at all except when playing a game.

Yet this is exactly the opposite of what the general consensus here seems to be, anyone that went to 1680x1050 doesn't seem to like 1080p at all...

 

[Voo]

oh, I thought he implied "internet browsing". You don't really read lengthy articles off your local file structure do you?

No, but I've got some rather large directories where the extra few pixels do help (though on the desktop I can live without it, but on my laptop it's a nice help)