>16:9 won the format war
I guess we cant win everything after all
>>58737642
THIS IS NOT MY ASPECT RATIO!!!
21:9 for president
4:3 or 3:2.
Nothing else.
>>58738494
I wish.
4:3 Is the fucking best, but the only thing I can buy modern anymore still natively 4:3 in a decent resolution is projectors. At least I have 16:10 monitors.
16:10 number one
>>58737642
How hasn't anyone superimposed the words "DELTE THIS" onto that picture of Trump holding a gun yet?
>>58738520
You can buy an iPad
>captcha: road gay
>not anamorphic
wew lads
17:9 is the master race and you know it. You're just embarrassed to admit it.
>>58737642
it literally didn't though.
Tablets and 2:1 laptops are forcing manufacturers to switch to 3:2
Just look at the Surface Book as a good example
5:4 not wide enough, 8:5 too wide, so 4:3 it is indeed, the one aspect ratio which doesn't receive even one annual panel release (Eizo SX21something and NEC P212 use LG AH-IPS 21" 1600x1200 panel, which is edgelit by blue led's with white coating. This panel went to production over two years ago and as far as I know, no other similar panel have been released after it. It is in production currently though.)
I like the MS is trying to push 5:4 displays, hopefully it'll catch on
>>58737642
>>58738526
16:9 video is usually made with some slop around the edges because consumer trash TVs cutting off the outer 10% of video by default.
THUS, you can nearly always play 16:9 video on a 16:10 monitor
>left and right of the image are *slightly* cropped
>no black bars at the top or bottom
>image is not distorted
>>58738761
I have not seen single LCD TV with 16:9 AR that uses overscan by default and I've seen at least two dozen.
>>58737642
doesn't widescreen make the most sense, considering that we have much higher horizontal field of view than vertical?
>>58738952
All /g/ cares about is fitting a few more spreadsheet rows with 16:10.
>>58738925
My grandma owns one :-D
>>58738494
3:2 is comfy as fuck on my surface
>>58738461
This. 21:9 master race
>he doesn't own a 21:9 monitor
>>58739617
moot go back to work