Quote from: Jeremy on April 01, 2020, 19:38:48To me, that only makes sense when you actually need the width. On a 13" laptop, you need the width to fit a good keyboard. On a 15", you don't unless it has a numerical keypad. To me, that was the only advantage of wider 15.6" laptops over the narrower 15.4" laptops. So yes, if you want to preserve a numerical keypad, you'd either have to make the bezel thicker or make the display wider (increase diagonal). Without it, there is a tonne of space even on a 15.4" laptop with big, full size keys.
What's really funny? To preserve the same width as 16:9 15.6" (see my previous post about the math and deception of 16:9 vs more square aspect ratios), Dell would need to move to a 16.0" 16:10 display. The new hotness in laptops displays (nowadays, where Apple "courageously" goes, every company meekly follows).
Quote from: Jeremy on April 01, 2020, 19:32:44Well, I believe DVDs were 16:9. Of course, they supported 4:3. And actually, I believe even the 16:9 content is stored as 4:3 by compressing the horizontal like it's done on film. It might appear super wide in a cinema, but the film itself is 3:2. And as a result, pirated movies were 16:9.
I think you can see why manufacturers moved to 16:9 over 16:10 (16:10 came first). While it's not the only reason why, but it allows them to advertise larger diagonal numbers while actually producing less screen in reality. Even fewer pixels (it's true of most common 16:10 resolutions - they just got snipped at the bottom to make a 16:9 screen).
Who even made 16:9 content when 16:9 was introduced? Cinema is often 2.35:1 or 1.85:1 (or 21.15:9 and 16.65:1, respectively), neither of which is 16:9. So even on common content, there are still black bars at the top and bottom (negating the common "complaint" made up by people about 16:10 and 3:2).
In the end, 16:9 was chosen because it was shorter than 16:10 and less square, both of which contributed to a lower manufacturing cost (marginally). We got stuck with 16:9 so the likes of Samsung, LG, BOE, AUO, etc could save a few pennies per display while advertising larger numbers. Who cares about the ergonomic and workflow analysis that lead IBM to develop 16:10? Who cares about the fact that laptops cannot get less tall (without compromising either the KB or the touchpad), leading to chin bezels all around (or drop-hinges to hide the chin)? At least Apple actually cared, preserving 16:10, even as that aspect ratio all but disappeared.
Quote from: PaulM on April 01, 2020, 18:28:15Duh... if they remove that bezel, the chassis just becomes smaller, unless they actually change the screen size.
The existing XPS15 has a large bezel at the bottom. If they remove that, like they have done for the XPS13 then it will actually be bigger.
Quote from: Lum Dërmaku on April 01, 2020, 18:10:13
If it's still a 15.6" screen, 16:10 will not make it larger. It's the same size, just horizontally narrower, vertically taller..
Quote from: Lum Dërmaku on April 01, 2020, 17:57:13
Take a look at the resolution on the right of the first image, it is 3840 x 2400 which is a 16:10 resolution. At least the overall design of the laptop is changing since it looks like it will finally have 16:10 display configs.
Quote from: PaulM on April 01, 2020, 18:28:15
16:9 is not tall enough, so will be an improvement IMO regardless.
Quote from: Lum Dërmaku on April 01, 2020, 18:10:13Quote from: PaulM on April 01, 2020, 18:02:44Quote from: Lum Dërmaku on April 01, 2020, 17:57:13Well spotted! 16:10 will be a big improvement, allowing a larger screen in a similar chassis if it's anything like the XPS 13.
Take a look at the resolution on the right of the first image, it is 3840 x 2400 which is a 16:10 resolution. At least the overall design of the laptop is changing since it looks like it will finally have 16:10 display configs.
A couple of other features they should add would be pen input (with a slot to hold the pen so you don't lose it), and auto-brightness for the display like every mobile phone already has. An Ethernet port would be nice too.
If it's still a 15.6" screen, 16:10 will not make it larger. It's the same size, just horizontally narrower, vertically taller..
Quote from: PaulM on April 01, 2020, 18:02:44Quote from: Lum Dërmaku on April 01, 2020, 17:57:13Well spotted! 16:10 will be a big improvement, allowing a larger screen in a similar chassis if it's anything like the XPS 13.
Take a look at the resolution on the right of the first image, it is 3840 x 2400 which is a 16:10 resolution. At least the overall design of the laptop is changing since it looks like it will finally have 16:10 display configs.
A couple of other features they should add would be pen input (with a slot to hold the pen so you don't lose it), and auto-brightness for the display like every mobile phone already has. An Ethernet port would be nice too.
Quote from: Lum Dërmaku on April 01, 2020, 17:57:13Well spotted! 16:10 will be a big improvement, allowing a larger screen in a similar chassis if it's anything like the XPS 13.
Take a look at the resolution on the right of the first image, it is 3840 x 2400 which is a 16:10 resolution. At least the overall design of the laptop is changing since it looks like it will finally have 16:10 display configs.