I have stepped back 10 yrs, and I like it :)

Funny that hey, and they say we've move on lol.. I want to know why my old XP PC is faster than my i7 10PC..lol strange but for simple tasks like the net and word it rips on its old EIDE drives and 16bit ram..

I miss the good old days of computers, when we had DOS and little more, I miss coping files at base level and my dot matrix printers...ok ok so I took it a step too far haha

I still have my old 8088 PC in the loft, twin 360k 5 1/4 inch disks and 512k of system ram, has a full height 5 1/4 in HDD boasting a whooping 10mb of storage...lol No colour and no sound... oh how things move on, good old Mr Moore.
 
lol, yeah, it's tougne in cheek, I've been building PCs for sky, Mira and many others since the beginning, my config is fine, but thanks for the advice :)
 
strumstrum said:
its a long long LONG time since I last used a 4:3 screen, possibly as far back as the G4 eMac but have been forced to use one for a few days and I tell you what, me likey.

everything seems easier on the eye.
Click to expand...
I can turn my wide screen into two 4:3 screens :p
 
I have one on my desk on one of the many pcs on different domains and I quite like it as well, that pc is only used for admin work and reading ENG docs and sharepoint stuff.
 
It's stupid that the wide screen fashion meant it's very difficult to get a normal ratio monitor, either standalone or on a laptop. And they did it by cropping them from 1200 pixels high down to 1080. That's not progress. It's "dumbing down".
 
Last edited:
ianp5a said:
It's stupid that the wide screen fashion meant it's very difficult to get a normal ratio monitor, either standalone or on a laptop. And they did it by cropping them from 1200 pixels high down to 1080. That's not progress. It's "dumbing down".
Click to expand...

Unless you get a 16:10 monitor, then you have 1920x1200.

Not all widescreens are 16:9
 
The reason manufacturers are going wider is so that they can sell less monitor surface area, thus more profit. The wider you go, the less screen panel you actually get. Biggest screen you get at the same size is square.

This table works out the area of screen from size and ratio using a^2 + b^2 = c^2. Biggest screen you get is at 1:1, the wider you go (eg. 21:9) the less area you'll get.

upload_2015-8-21_8-7-50.png

It's a shame people are actually buying 21:9 monitors, I want to stay in 16:10 land.
 
I have used two 4:3 for years, still do, something about it as you say, I also use two widescreens one landscape and one portrait, I like that setup too, think the hardest thing is going back to one display.
 
I had an old 4:3 on my games PC for years and it was great.
when I upgraded I wasn't that impressed as it slowed down as I was driving more pixels so I had to upgrade my graphics card.

my missus got the old 4:3 for her business PC
 
ianp5a said:
It's stupid that the wide screen fashion meant it's very difficult to get a normal ratio monitor, either standalone or on a laptop. And they did it by cropping them from 1200 pixels high down to 1080. That's not progress. It's "dumbing down".
Click to expand...
Just buy a higher resolution screen then??? I never understood these people getting TV resolution screens for their laptops and computers...Not enough space on it for my liking....

UWD Easily get three screens on one, and on a 4K one easily get two. With Windows 7 upwards snapping of windows, and in 10 in corners, and on the Mac as well, it was easy and great to fill the screen with side by side stuff like reviewing documents, or having a browser and IDE side by side etc....
 
dejongj said:
Just buy a higher resolution screen then???
Click to expand...
These higher resolutions on laptops weren't available a couple of years ago, when I needed one. TV resolution or lower, was all they had. You could get higher resolution standalone monitors, but they had become a niche item with a crazy price.
I haven't looked lately. I hope higher resolution has now become a selling point. I saw Apple were pushing it on their laptops, to my relief.
 
Last edited:
ianp5a said:
These higher resolutions on laptops weren't available a couple of years ago, when I needed one. TV resolution or lower, was all they had. They were on standalone monitors, but only as a niche item with a crazy price.
I haven't looked lately. I hope higher resolution has now become a selling point. I saw Apple were pushing it on their laptops, to my relief.
Click to expand...
Yes they were....Heck my Dell Inspiron was build in 2004 and had a high resolution wide screen monitor. 15" 1920x1200. They've been available for a very long time. Granted UHD resolutions like QHD is more recent, but that didn't mean you had to settle of a TV resolution for a laptop there was choice. Dell, IBM/Thinkpad/Lenovo, Sony have been doing them for as long as I can remember...Heck even Compaq Computer Corporation used to have them on their laptop.
 
Lots of places either only stocked 1080p or lower. And many just gave the monitor inch dimension. As if resolution was not important. And in the normal price bracket everything was wide-screen and 768 and 1080p. Not wanting a bulky wide laptop with a pointless wide screen, there is no way I was going to pay a premium price for something like that. Standalone monitors were the same. And many had the same complaint.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top