16:10 screen | PCSPECIALIST

16:10 screen

AMacG

Member
It is disappointing that PCS appear to be late to the 16:10 screen party.
I asked them when they might update to what it becoming the required norm but was told sometime 2022 perhaps.
I for one will now buy elsewhere. Come on, PCS - join the revolution!
 

loso64

Well-known member
highly doubt 16:10 will get popular anytime soon. Ever since 2008-2010 the popularity of this resolution went nose dive down. There has been some resurgence lately, but considering how common 1920x1080 is and also 4k having this resolution and most ultrawides also having 9 vertically.

Yeah that wont happen. Just look at ultrawide, definitely more popular than 16:10, but the adoption has been abysmal so much so that people with ultrawide are still considered niche. At least games start to support it more often.
 

DarTon

Enthusiast
highly doubt 16:10 will get popular anytime soon. Ever since 2008-2010 the popularity of this resolution went nose dive down. There has been some resurgence lately, but considering how common 1920x1080 is and also 4k having this resolution and most ultrawides also having 9 vertically.

Yeah that wont happen. Just look at ultrawide, definitely more popular than 16:10, but the adoption has been abysmal so much so that people with ultrawide are still considered niche. At least games start to support it more often.

The OP might be referring to laptop screens. For productivity purposes an aspect ratio that is more 'square' than 16:9 is often better - you just need more vertical height. My wife's 16:10 Dell 13" ultraportable is far more usable than a 16:9. Hence why the MS Surface Pro is 3:2 and Ipads are 1.33 - 1.43:1.
 

mdwh

Enthusiast
It's a common claim from people who like thinner aspect ratios, but I've never understood it. One could just as well say wider displays are better for productivity because I can do more side by side - indeed, that's exactly the argument for ultra wide displays and dual monitors. It can't both be true that wider and thinner aspect ratios are better for productivity. When I recently bought a monitor, I could see arguments for both, so stuck with 16:9 as a compromise.

If it was so obviously true, then hence every manufacturer would be doing this. In reality, different people have different preferences. (And as much as apple try to claim otherwise, I wouldn't call tablets with mobile OSs primarily productivity devices, after all apple themselves still have their separate PCs which are better suited to productivity than their tablets.)

I think one reason for this argument is because of the tradition of measuring screen sizes by diagonal, so for a given diagonal, a squarer aspect ratio is larger. But that just means using the diagonal is a poor measure - if we compare screens of equal area, it's not clear squarer is better for productivity.

Of course choice is a good thing so it would be nice to have different aspect ratios at PCS - although I suspect they're limited by what Clevo and Tongfang offer?
 

SpyderTracks

Bingo Bango Orchestrator
Moderator
I think as @mdwh says, it's really down to the application you're using for.

PCS mainly sell gaming laptops, for gaming, you'd pretty much always expect 16:9 on a laptop, as that's what games are natively designed for.

They sell a couple of more business oriented chassis where 16:10 would make sense, but only one currently has a 16:10 aspect ratio which is the Fusion Studio 14".

There's only a couple of chassis anywhere really that have started adopting 16:10, I'm not sure PCS are late to the party.
 
Top