| Revision as of 12:42, 5 August 2012 editIndrek (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users3,958 edits →Industry moves away from 16:10 in 2008 to 16:9: duplicate ref -> named ref← Previous edit | Revision as of 06:03, 6 August 2012 edit undoUrklistre (talk | contribs)278 edits →Industry moves away from 16:10 in 2008 to 16:9Next edit → | ||
| (9 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
| Around 2008-2010, there was a rapid shift by computer display manufacturers to the 16:9 aspect ratio, and by 2011, 16:10 had almost disappeared from new mass market products. | Around 2008-2010, there was a rapid shift by computer display manufacturers to the 16:9 aspect ratio, and by 2011, 16:10 had almost disappeared from new mass market products. | ||
| The primary reason for this move is considered to be production efficiency<ref name="engadget"/><ref>{{cite web |url=http://forwardthinking.pcmag.com/displays/283041-where-displays-are-heading |title=Where Displays Are Heading |publisher=PC Magazine |last=Miller |first=Michael J. |date=2008-03-21 |accessdate=2012-07-09 }}</ref> - since display panels for TVs use the 16:9 aspect ratio, it's more efficient for display manufacturers to produce computer display panels in the same aspect ratio as well.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://techreport.com/discussions.x/15046 |title=DisplaySearch: Transition to 16:9 displays is 'unstoppable' |publisher=The Tech Report |last=Kowaliski |first=Cyril |date=2008-07-02 |accessdate=2012-07-09 }}</ref> A 2008 report by DisplaySearch also cited a number of other reasons |
The primary reason for this move is considered to be production efficiency<ref name="engadget"/><ref>{{cite web |url=http://forwardthinking.pcmag.com/displays/283041-where-displays-are-heading |title=Where Displays Are Heading |publisher=PC Magazine |last=Miller |first=Michael J. |date=2008-03-21 |accessdate=2012-07-09 }}</ref> - since display panels for TVs use the ] aspect ratio, it's more efficient for display manufacturers to produce computer display panels in the same aspect ratio as well.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://techreport.com/discussions.x/15046 |title=DisplaySearch: Transition to 16:9 displays is 'unstoppable' |publisher=The Tech Report |last=Kowaliski |first=Cyril |date=2008-07-02 |accessdate=2012-07-09 }}</ref> A 2008 report by DisplaySearch also cited a number of other reasons. That it is stimulating the growth of the notebook PC and LCD monitor market. | ||
| That 16:9 provides better economic cuts in existing ] fabs. That 16:9 products provide higher resolution and also a wider aspect ratio.<ref name="displaysearch"/> That it will help consumer in the entertainment sector to adopt the new products and that the 16:9 panels was an opportunity to diversify products.<ref name="displaysearch"/><ref name="engadget"/><ref name="display">{{cite web|url=http://www.displaysearch.com/cps/rde/xchg/SID-0A424DE8-28DF6E59/displaysearch/hs.xsl/070108_16by9_PR.asp |title=Product Planners and Marketers Must Act Before 16:9 Panels Replace Mainstream 16:10 Notebook PC and Monitor LCD Panels, New DisplaySearch Topical Report Advises |publisher=DisplaySearch |date=2008-07-01 |accessdate=2011-09-08}}</ref> | |||
| The shift from 16:10 to 16:9 has been met with a mixed response. |
The shift from 16:10 to 16:9 has been met with a mixed response. The lower cost of 16:9 computer displays, the suitability for gaming and movies along with the convenience of having the same aspect ratio in different devices, has been seen as a positive.<ref name="engadget"/> Meanwhile there has been critisism towards the lack of height in 16:9 screens for laptops and smaller computer displays which according to critics have had negative effects on reading and use of applications which at the time mostly was designed for taller aspect ratios and not wider screens.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2328932,00.asp |title=Stop Shrinking My Laptop Screen |publisher=PC Magazine |last=Ulanoff |first=Lance |date=2008-08-27 |accessdate=2012-07-09 }}</ref> Usually the screensize is given by the manufacturers as the diagonal. Because of that the screenarea is bigger for a 16:10 display with the same diagonal as 16:9 display the manufacturers has been accused of that monitors of a specific diagonal has schrinked.<ref>http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2328932,00.asp</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1723060/gateways-displays-common-sense |title=Gateway's 16:10 displays show common sense |publisher=The Inquirer |date=2010-07-16 |accessdate=2012-07-09 }}</ref> | ||
| === Tablets === | === Tablets === | ||
Revision as of 06:03, 6 August 2012
16:10, also known as 8:5, is an aspect ratio mostly used for computer displays. The width of the display is 1.6 times its height.
LCD computer displays using the 16:10 ratio started to appear in the mass market from 2003. By 2008 16:10 had become the most common aspect ratio for LCD monitors and laptop displays. Since 2010, however, 16:9 has the become the mainstream standard, driven by the 1080p standard for high definition television.
History
Computer Displays
Industry moves towards 16:10 from 2003 to 2008
Until about 2003, most computer monitors had a 4:3 aspect ratio and some had 5:4. Between 2003 and 2006, monitors with 16:10 (8:5) aspect ratios became commonly available, first in laptops and later also in standalone monitors. Reasons for this transition were productive uses for such monitors, i.e. besides widescreen movie viewing and computer game play, are the word processor display of two standard letter pages side by side, as well as CAD displays of large-size drawings and CAD application menus at the same time.
In 2005-2008, 16:10 took over the position from 4:3 as the most sold aspect ratio for LCD monitors. At the time, 16:10 also had 90 percent of the notebook market and was the most common used aspect ratio for laptops. However, 16:10 had a short reign as the most common aspect ratio.
Industry moves away from 16:10 in 2008 to 16:9
Around 2008-2010, there was a rapid shift by computer display manufacturers to the 16:9 aspect ratio, and by 2011, 16:10 had almost disappeared from new mass market products.
The primary reason for this move is considered to be production efficiency - since display panels for TVs use the 16:9 aspect ratio, it's more efficient for display manufacturers to produce computer display panels in the same aspect ratio as well. A 2008 report by DisplaySearch also cited a number of other reasons. That it is stimulating the growth of the notebook PC and LCD monitor market. That 16:9 provides better economic cuts in existing TFT LCD fabs. That 16:9 products provide higher resolution and also a wider aspect ratio. That it will help consumer in the entertainment sector to adopt the new products and that the 16:9 panels was an opportunity to diversify products.
The shift from 16:10 to 16:9 has been met with a mixed response. The lower cost of 16:9 computer displays, the suitability for gaming and movies along with the convenience of having the same aspect ratio in different devices, has been seen as a positive. Meanwhile there has been critisism towards the lack of height in 16:9 screens for laptops and smaller computer displays which according to critics have had negative effects on reading and use of applications which at the time mostly was designed for taller aspect ratios and not wider screens. Usually the screensize is given by the manufacturers as the diagonal. Because of that the screenarea is bigger for a 16:10 display with the same diagonal as 16:9 display the manufacturers has been accused of that monitors of a specific diagonal has schrinked.
Tablets
Tablets became a popular during the late 00s. The first tablets were in 4:3 but 16:10 tablets became soon popular.
Mobile Phones
In late 00s 16:10 became very popular in mobile phones. During 2012 there has been a shift to 16:9, however, Apple still produces their mobile phones in 16:10.
Common screen resolutions of 16:10 screens
| Name | Dimensions | Diagonal screen size |
|---|---|---|
| WXGA | 1280×800 | 13–15 in (33–38 cm) |
| WXGA+ | 1440×900 | 13–19 in (33–48 cm) |
| WSXGA+ | 1680×1050 | 15–22 in (38–56 cm) |
| WUXGA | 1920×1200 | 17–28 in (43–71 cm) |
| WQXGA | 2560×1600 | 30 in (76 cm) |
See also
- Display aspect ratio - Different aspect ratios for computer monitors.
- Aspect ratio (image)
- Computer display standard
References
- Knight, Dan (2008-09-19). "With 10% of the US Notebook Market, Where Will Apple Go Next?".
- ^ "Product Planners and Marketers Must Act Before 16:9 Panels Replace Mainstream 16:10 Notebook PC and Monitor LCD Panels, New DisplaySearch Topical Report Advises". DisplaySearch. 2008-07-01. Retrieved 2011-09-08.
- ^ Ricker, Thomas (2008-07-02). "Widescreen LCDs going widescreen by 2010". Engadget.
- NEMATech Computer Display Standards http://www.millertech.com/Technical_Specs.htm
- "Introduction--Monitor Technology Guide". necdisplay.com. Archived from the original on 2007-03-15. (currently offline)
- Miller, Michael J. (2008-03-21). "Where Displays Are Heading". PC Magazine. Retrieved 2012-07-09.
- Kowaliski, Cyril (2008-07-02). "DisplaySearch: Transition to 16:9 displays is 'unstoppable'". The Tech Report. Retrieved 2012-07-09.
- "Product Planners and Marketers Must Act Before 16:9 Panels Replace Mainstream 16:10 Notebook PC and Monitor LCD Panels, New DisplaySearch Topical Report Advises". DisplaySearch. 2008-07-01. Retrieved 2011-09-08.
- Ulanoff, Lance (2008-08-27). "Stop Shrinking My Laptop Screen". PC Magazine. Retrieved 2012-07-09.
- http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2328932,00.asp
- "Gateway's 16:10 displays show common sense". The Inquirer. 2010-07-16. Retrieved 2012-07-09.