Much has been written in these pages of Unplggd about going vertical with your monitors. It's time we sat down and definitively find out if going vertical makes sense. Come check out our findings!
Computer monitors used to be a 4x3 aspect ratio across the board, and when widescreen technology became all the craze we jumped to 16x9 to match HDTVs. As computer screen and TV technology started to merge, manufacturers seem to have settled on a weird 16x10 aspect ratio.
So what's the big deal about the widescreen aspect ratio, and why does every manufacturer insist on sticking with it? We run through several computer use cases in a battle of widescreen vs. vertical to see who the winner really is (or should be), starting with probably the single most time consuming thing we do on our computers, wasting time browsing the web.
Viewing Websites
According to w3schools.com, as of January 2011 14% of web browsers were running 1024x768 (a 4x3 aspect ratio), and 85% at a higher resolution.
Having run a web design firm for the past 10 years, one of the things we pay careful attention to is the amount of real estate we have available. We want our websites to show up well on everyone's computer, and screen resolution is something we have to carefully consider. We've very slowly inched up the maximum dimensions of websites that we create, but believe it or not we're only now starting to use 1024x768 as a baseline. Taking into account user variables such as scrollbars and toolbars, we actually design for something just shy of 1000x700. That's a miniscule amount of space to work with before content starts to be deemed "below the fold" - where the user has to start to scroll to see more content. While users are extremely hesitant to scroll left and right, vertical scrolling is slightly more acceptable, and generally considered the norm for websites.
Since websites are designed for the lowest common denominator in this sense, let's consider websites designed to fit within a 1024x768 screen. Using our very own Unplggd as an example, it's designed at a snug 1017 pixels wide. In the following screen cap, on my own expansive 1920x1200 screen, you can see that the space on the sides is completely wasted, and we can see one visible article and an ad space.

Now take a look at Unplggd with the orientation flipped to portrait view at 1200x1920. We can see two articles and an ad, with a second ad peeking through. Much, much better!

Winner: Vertical
Watching Movies, TV, Widescreen Videos and Photos
Ok, so we get a screen that's formatted closer to modern HDTV content, widescreen movies to match the cinema experience. But let's face it, how is sitting hunched up at your desk watching your computer monitor anything close to an "experience." Eeven with a large monitor (23", 24", 27", 30" or what have you), that's still puny compared to the TV you have in your living room. Many of us consider 32" or even 42" small for the living room. Plus we get to sit on our comfy couch and relax.

For those streaming content to their computers, most modern video cards have HDMI outputs so you can hook up your computer to your TV anyway. So why suffer through a poor computer using experience for a widescreen monitor that only barely gets used for video content?
For photos and videos such as those from YouTube, we're all generally viewing them in tiny reduced formats as part of a website anyway, so unless we're busting out with the full screen view, the content isn't always going to require your full screen resolution anyway.
Winner: Widescreen, but really why are you watching content on your tiny computer monitor?
Word Processing and Spreadsheets
One of the arguments for widescreen monitors has always been the ability to have two documents open at one time. Admittedly, we don't edit very many documents, and when we do we're working on them one at a time. So there's probably a use case out there that this comes in handy for. Plus, spreadsheets work great for the widescreen format.

Winner: Widescreen
The Winner?
So the score's 1 to 2 in the battle of vertical versus widescreen. There are tons more use cases such as specific software, games, of course, so your mileage may vary. We guess widescreen still has its place, and that's why manufacturers keep making them the way they do. But with most our computer use focused around the web, it really does start to make sense to go vertical.
So what's a guy to do? How about dual monitors - one vertical, one widescreen? :)
More on aspect ratios and vertical monitors at Unplggd:

Comments (15)
I love vertical - it makes so much more sense online, but many programs I use at work are so dated that they must be on 1024x768 horizontally for the program to be visible on screen!
At the moment, my home/work desktop has two vertical monitors although I have run two widescreen verticals as well as a 4:3 the normal way at the same time.
Only downside with vertical, older video games (the only ones I play) tend not to work very well
How can I turn my 24" Apple cinema display into portrait mode? Any tutorial or hacks?
I run a two-monitor setup. Left is horizontal -- for Outlook, menu bar and Excel. Right is vertical -- for reading PDFs, and working on documents. I can't stand using word with two pages side by side. By the time I get two pages small enough to fit, I can no longer read the text.
As to why we were all sold on the widescreen monitor format, I think it goes back to a time when wanted to have buddy list windows and itunes/winamp open and constantly in view -- this was also before tabbed browsers and fast/reliable application switching. IMO, wide monitors have mostly outlived their usefulness, but they hang on regardless.
same as above. dual 22", left is horizontal, right is vertical. When we got our new computers I immediately set mine up this way. Since then a few coworkers have switched this way as well,
Funny you mention this. I went with the 50/50 setup yesterday.
<img src="http://i53.tinypic.com/2mg8lko.jpg" border="0" alt="Image and video hosting by TinyPic">
Well that didn't work...
http://i53.tinypic.com/2mg8lko.jpg
@sirWMBartilson - your link doesn't work, would love to see the pic!
@teahugger - check out how this guy turned his cinema displays - Unplggd via Lifehacker
@DavidAlex - I remember those days of buddy lists and winamp and such - ah, the good old days. :) now we go for the dedicated third/fourth monitor to display all that stuff. Better yet, someone convince me to turn my desk into a monitor too. :)
@SirWmBartilson - Thanks for the corrected link, you posted that while I was writing my comment. I've seen some folks do a 30" main horizontal monitor paired with a 24" vertical monitor to match up the sizes, have you thought of trying it?
All that damn branding makes vertical monitors look funny though. Reminds me of *one nice feature of my (useless) Sony Dash, when you turn it to lay it flat the logo disappears so it's not upside down.
A 30" horizontal matches a 20" vertical. A three monitor setup, with two "flankers" in portrait mode surrounding a single landscape, is often referred to as PLP for shorthand. It loos great with a 20", 30", and 20".
@David - awesome, is this what you're running? Any pics?
In my office I've seen a variety of vertical/horizontal combinations. I tried vertical for a while, given I read a lot of letter docs, but it gets messy when I have a huge spreadsheet or our timeline tool up. What I ended up doing was keeping one as a 'blotter' and the other for active content unless I need to span both. Composition on one, reference doc in the other.
@ Jason : but really why are you watching content on your tiny computer monitor?
Really? Why would I fork out money for an appliance I barely use? How big is big enough?
@mindjudo - Never! :) I understand if you don't watch much TV, but for me TVs/movies are an immersive experience. Consider the required suspension of disbelief for content and it's difficult when you're framing your experience around a 24" monitor.