Hacker News Reader

Comment by pook1e | Hacker News Reader

Laptops are still used as a media device for many, so mimicking the resolution of televisions makes sense in those cases. Personally, I prefer a 16:10 screen because I spend more time programming than watching videos on my laptop, but I'm sure there are plenty that beg to differ.

You can still buy laptops with 16:10 aspect ratio, but I think the people that explicitly prefer it are the minority at this point. I'd say most people don't really care.

View on HN

> Laptops are still used as a media device for many, so mimicking the resolution of televisions make sense in those cases.

Actually, laptops as media devices is an argument against having the same resolution as televisions.

When one watches a television, one generally operates the television and media source via a remote control, which has dedicated buttons for most functions.

When using a laptop for a media device, one generally does not have a remote control. The controls are usually done as on-screen controls that you manipulate with the pointer.

Hence, for a laptop used as a media device, 16:10 makes more sense than 16:9, because it provides room for the controls outside the video.

Aren't the on screen controls almost always hidden? The only time I could see them actually getting in the way would be while adjusting the volume, but I'm fairly certain most (if not almost all) laptops come with hardware volume buttons nowadays anyways.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com