>"""""Workstation-class"""""

>muh ten vertical pixels
Go 4:3/3:2/1:1 or go home.

ThinkPad X62 mod.

File: 1458738507053.jpg (85KB, 804x802px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 804x802px

>trying to find a laptop with a decent resolution and aspect ratio that isn't an apple product
Why is this so difficult?

>>57166882
>w530
>not the p50 or p70

low quality bait.

>>57167027

And what are the aspect ratios of those two laptops? Are you blind, retarded or both?

>>57166997

Are you TwinkPad users this fucking dumb? You're citing a machine that's not even in production. You're talking about something literally hacked together by some chink on the internet. Besides. I was clearly talking about 16:10, not 4:3.

>tfw want to get a W520 but the good configurations are still too expensive for my tastes

>>57167535
Good joke.
>>57167010
The new business laptops usually have a 4k option.

>>57167554

And it remains 16:9.

>>57167785
Aspect ratio isn't really important if the screen is over 1080p

>>57166882
>being this pissed off at extra horizontal workspace

>>57167813
That doesn't make any sense. Wide screens are just not comfortable to work with text on. Nothing will ever be in the centre of your vision.

>>57166882
Look, I understand.
However, it is very difficult to find manufacturers who produce 16:10 screens anymore. The same goes for 4:3.

>>57167896

>>57167896

>>being this pissed off at extra horizontal workspace
>extra horizontal space
>16:9 is wider than 16:10

Am I being trolled, or is everyone here literally fucking disabled? This is not a technology board.

>>57167934
Do you have the field of vision of a pidgeon or something?

>>57166882
Lenovo:
> everything new is 16:9
> literally everything

Based Apple:
> MacBooks are 16:10
> iPads are 4:3

The only decent Thinkpads are the IBM ones, all the others are just thinkpoor chink shit

>>57168239
>16:10
You mean 14.4:9? Yes 16:9 is wider you fucking retard.

>>57168286

No I mean 5:8. You're a massive cretin and you need to see the nearest optician. I'm not a TV salesman who measures screens by diagonal length. I look at resolutions and width and height.

>>57168346
And the resolutions of Lenovo laptops are much higher than those of IBM or Apple laptops.

File: Field_of_view.svg.png (165KB, 800x514px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 800x514px

>>57168253
Peripheral vision in humans lacks resolution and is mainly used for detecting movement. The actual space where your eyes can focus on small details, such as text, is best covered by a 4:3 ratio. 16:9 allows a small amount more at the sides, but at the cost of a lot of vertical space.
On a widescreen monitor you're forced to make the decision between having to scan over the screen a lot more, have it occupy less of your vision, or only use a small space on the screen.

Note: I am talking only about working with text on a computer, peripheral vision has a use in games and films.

File: image.jpg (66KB, 640x718px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 640x718px

God damn this is one angry macfag

>>57168932
THICC

>>57168932
>Look at text by using eyeballs
>Look at other text on the other side of the screen by using eyeballs
???
I agree that 16:10 is better than 16:9 but it's not like 16:9 is somehow magically garbage for looking at text. You can have two full pages side by side and just glance between them

>>57169217
The point is that on a 4:3 screen (or thereabouts, it's the closest available ratio and there's a lot of personal variation) you don't need to scan your eyes from one place to another because the shape of the monitor conforms roughly with the highly-resolving part of your vision.

Sure, you can split your screen, but you can on 4:3 too. On a 16:9 screen your options are basically limited to having 2 or three columns, anything else becomes too wide again.

>>57166926
I'd prefer 4:3 but widescreen seems to be here to stay.

>>57169280
>>57169217
I should mention that this is mostly indignation talking. I use an 8:5 monitor because 4:3 isn't easily available anymore. However, the move to exclusively widescreen was very poorly considered from the user's perspective.

>>57166882
P50 is gud

>>57167813
>Aspect ratio isn't really important if the screen is over 1080p

The 4k resolution will scale to an effect 1080p resolution