Gilbert Sullivan <whirly...@comcast.net> writes: > On 12/28/2010 09:40 AM, Klistvud wrote: >> It's also horrible for web browsing, and for many other tasks. It >> actually only has two uses I can think of: widescreen movies and >> side-by-side document viewing. Given that movies are best viewed on >> large TV sets anyway, the usefulness of widescreen computer monitors is >> further reduced to just side-by-side document viewing. Arguably, even >> for that task, dual-head setups are better. > > On the other hand, there are those of us who must use portable systems > for side-by-side document reading and/or tiled terminal window use > while traveling and are, thus, limited to a single screen. Widescreen > works better for us.
Good for you. My gripe is that one can no longer choose. It's shortscreen or nothing. I had an old thinkpad t42 with a 14" 1440x1050 and it rocked. It weighed only 4.5 lbs even with cd drive. For me, it was an optimal size and weight. The current offerings are all inferior - they are heavier, have less vertical screen dimension and worse resolution. > My portable systems have 1920x1200 LCDs. I'm so > accustomed to them that I don't bother with multi-monitor setups at > home or at the office any more. Just one widescreen setup suffices, > and I don't have to fiddle around switching between multi-monitor and > single monitor setups any more. > > My totally unbiased and scientific $.02. > > ;-) -- Johan KULLSTAM -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ei8zygqo....@emmy.axel.nom