Hands-on with Toshiba's Ultrawide 21:9 14-inch Ultrabook

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
768... The bar at the top of excel / powerpoint / word... will take up 1/3 of the screen? With most videos incompatible to the format, it would definitely be super practical...
 
This is stupid. It's not as good for web surfing or word processing as a 16:9 screen (or 16:10), and 21:9 movies look just fine on a taller screen anyway.
 
Wow KelvinTy what a trollish comment. Seriously. Are you unaware that a very large majority of notebook screens in a 14- and 15.6-inch size come standard at 1366x768, which is the same number of vertical pixels as the screen mentioned above? No, the bar at the top of Office programs will not take up a third of the screen. This would be extremely useful for multitasking. Run two programs side-by-side with nearly a 1024x768 resolution for EACH.
 
It is sad that 768 pixels has been the standard height since the '90s. You would think that there would have been some progress since then. At the very least 1080p should be the norm given the proliferation of HD video.
 

Except it'll only be 896x768, not 1024--I wouldn't consider that "nearly" 1024. It's a 15% difference, which is significant to screen real estate. It's honestly in the gray zone of practicality for dual-document viewing (or dual-webpage viewing), especially given the pixel-density of the screen. It won't make side-by-side document access very practical without tedious zooming, where you'd have to pan-and-scan, which is annoying. It WILL make single-document + multitasking (i.e. folder browsing, bkg. apps, etc.) a bit more practical, which is a pretty common thing for most general users. Interested to see how it's received by consumers. I'm not against it, but I will say that I hate wide-screen tablets (a bit neither here nor there in this case, but I think the 16:9 that Asus used for their TF line sucks--and I can say that as a TF owner :)).
 
If they made a 1080 vertical pixel with 2520 horizontal pixel, I'd buy it.
 
[citation][nom]Pyree[/nom]21:9 is like 2x 10.5:9 screen. The ration is 1.17, where as 4:3 is 1.33. So basically the ultrabook has 2x 4:3 screen.[/citation] Not bad.. Considering I already browse the net with 2 windows side by side on our 14" 1366x768 laptop.
 
As for those downvoting my comment, my point is that a 1600x900 screen, for example, would be much more practical. (it has a few more pixels than this anyway)
 
I can't wait to see one of these, in person. I am usually a big fan of a 16:10 screen, because i love that extra vertical space but this thing would be great for movies.
 
I work mostly on Word. So I have a 4:3 monitor set up vertically at 1200 x 1600 resolution. In short, widescreen is not that great for office work. My ideal res would be 1400 x 1600.
 
Stupid looking extra-wide screen. How about this... a 1920x1080 screen, at the very least? Wow, that would be a much better screen. Rather than looking down this dinky tunnel.

Toshiba tends to make stupid things.
 
[citation][nom]pyree[/nom]If you look carefully at the glossy screen of the laptop you see a person. Is that Jane?[/citation]
It's probably Marcus... the credits above the article state that Marcus took the photos.

Sorry to disappoint you.
 
I am all for having super wide screens... but not at this resolution. If you cannot get 900+ lines on a screen then it is pretty much useless for anything other than movie watching. Personally I think 16:10 is the happy medium of aspect ratio. Tall enough for work, and a good compromise between wide screen and full frame media.
Still... A large desktop screen at 3360x1440 would be pretty impressive for video editing and gaming...

... What ever happened to fold out monitors with side panels?
 

Both conventions are acceptable, like how most people discuss 16:10 screens as opposed to 8:5.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom