Survey: Widescreen Aspect Ratios, 16:10 or 16:9?

Survey: Widescreen Aspect Ratios, 16:10 or 16:9?

Anthony Nguyen
May 4, 2009

While many of us have come to accept the strange resolutions provided with the 16:10 aspect ratio seen on most widescreen LCD monitors over the years, we're starting to notice a slow push towards the 16:9 HDTV standard over the past few months. Are we comfortable with this? Well, it kinda makes sense. Who doesn't enjoy some added immersion by means of expanded horizontal screen estate?

Here's what the advocates for 16:9 have to say about this:

When a traditional 16:10 LCD monitor handles 16:9 signals in generating Full HD image, there are usually two ways to get it done. The first way would be to stretch the image which results in picture distortions. Another way would be to cover up the surplus image using horizontal black bars. Either way - stretching the image by 10% or covering 10% of the image - would cause a seriously impact to quality of your visual entertainment.

And as for us, the 16:10 supporters, we believe:

As a computer monitor, it should act like one. When monitors first came out, they were 4:3 ratio for reason. People need to be able to type documents with a comfortable and maximized work area. The introduction of widescreen monitors made this slightly more difficult, but was ultimately accepted due to its improved aesthetic. However, these monitors stuck to the 16:10 aspect ratio for that very reason. Shrinking it even more will only cause users to lose precious vertical screen estate that they're already running very low on, even on 20" monitors.

Of course, these are all opinions. The best part is that there's always room for more. Let us know yours in the comments below.

(Image: Flickr member pablokdc licensed for use under Creative Commons)

moving--truck moving--dates moving--dolly moving--house moving--cal Created with Sketch. moving--apt