There's a new, disturbing trend in laptops that threatens to change your computer experience irrevocably. It's the implementation of the 16:9 aspect ratio screen and the potential disappearance of the 16:10 screens we enjoy today.
These 16:9 screens may be familiar to those of you who own an HDTV. It's the format for virtually all HD content. Interestingly, the folks that brought you HD didn't create it. In fact, HD channels picked up the widescreen format from the movies, which were often in a 4:3 format.
I often wonder how many people really understand aspect ratios, though. Those bringing home 50-inch widescreen wonders are often surprised to learn that the screen is only 25 inches tall. There's no need for alarm: This will not affect your home-theater experience (most movies and high-def TV shows are already 16:9, so you're not be missing anything visually). In a laptop, however, the allure of an extra-wide screen has its drawbacks.
To better understand how aspect ratios affect overall screen real estate, I brought a ruler into the labs (and had Robert Heron, our HDTV Lab Analyst, do the same in our West Coast lab) and took some measurements.
These are the approximate measurements for typical HDTVs:
- A 52-inch screen is about 25.5 inches high.
- A 50-inch screen is about 24.5 inches high.
- A 46-inch screen is about 22.6 inches high.
- A 42-inch screen is about 20.6 inches high.
In other words, a 16:9 aspect ratio is roughly 2 to 1 (or twice as wide as tall).
Look at it this way: Most of our computing and content consumption on the PC is a top-down experience. We read stories that way. Web pages are designed to put as much "above the fold" (or, above the end of the screen) as possible. Most photos are still in 4:3 format, so a shallower screen means you have to view the images at a somewhat diminished size. Also, most applications are designed for taller and not wider screens. The switch from 4:3 to 16:10 took away some of that depth on my T61's screen, but the trade-off was enough room to run apps side-by-side. The 16:9 aspect ratio offers no more width, just less screen real-estate. Period.
Some news of the transition from 16:10 to 16:9 came to light during the recent Centrino 2 (aka "Montevina") launch. One highlight of Intel's new chipset is lower power consumption than ever before. I'm all for mobile systems that can last through an entire cross-country flight, but how real is this power savings? Think about it. If there's less screen to power, it's only natural that the battery will last longer. So while I applaud Intel for finding ways to squeeze more power consumption out of its latest chipset, some of that longer battery life must have come at the expense of screen real estate.
I'd love for laptop manufacturers to stop this transition from 16:10 to 16:9, but they won't. In fact, our Laptop Analyst Cisco Cheng expects all manufacturers to switch to 16:9 within the next year. Why? According to blogger and former PC Magazine Editor-in-Chief Michael J. Miller, laptop display manufacturers aren't making the change because it's good for end users. Nope, it's all about cutting costs. They're reducing the size of the screens because it saves them time and money.
I say we need to fight for that inch, and the only way I know how to do it is to just say no. If you don't buy 16:9 laptops, manufacturers will be forced to keep 16:10 as an option. I know that it's one I want.
< Back to Notebook Displays articles
