Why 1280x1024?

Discussion in 'Desktop Customisation' started by adamg, Aug 6, 2003.

  1. adamg

    adamg Guest

    An interesting one this one. Whats the deal with 1280x1024? It's the only standard res with a ration 5:4. 640x480, 800x600, 1024x768, 1152x864, 1400x1050, 1600x1200, 1920x1440 and 2048x1536 are all 4:3. What makes 1280x1024 so special :confused:
     
  2. canadian_divx

    canadian_divx Canadian_divx

    becase it is the only one in between 1152x864 and 1400x1050. that is a big jump in between sizes.

    that is the only idea i can come up with
     
  3. adamg

    adamg Guest

    yeah but in that case why not make it 1280x960? Some games (notably half-life) cant run on the native res of 17" LCDs because they are locked into 4:3.
     
  4. canadian_divx

    canadian_divx Canadian_divx

    i dont know, very intresting question tho. i am gonna send an e-mail to samsung to see if they can tell me this. veryintresting
     
  5. Petros

    Petros Thief IV

    Messages:
    3,038
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest
    True true...ever try running a desktop at 1280x1024? It looks all smooshed and wrong. If anything, I'd like to see the width get wider, not the height. Who wants to play on a square? I'd like to see more widescreen monitors.
     
  6. NetRyder

    NetRyder Tech Junkie Folding Team

    Messages:
    13,256
    Location:
    New York City
    It's supposed to be 1280x960 according to the 4:3 ratio.
    The ViewSonic CRT on my desktop can run at that resolution. It looks much better than the deformed 1280x1024 :p

    I prefer 1024x768 though...just feel most comfortable with it.
     
  7. Friend of Bill

    Friend of Bill What, me worry?

    Messages:
    1,572
    1280X1024 for a 19" flat CRT is preferred resolution and looks nice.
     
  8. lieb39

    lieb39 Apple lover, PC User

    Messages:
    526
    Location:
    Australia
    I've seen some weird resoultions in my time, lol. At school last year this PC's resolution was something with 800x400, very very weird looking. I like my 1400x1050 on my laptop and a nice 1152x768 on my desktop.

    Cheers!

    lieb39
     
  9. NetRyder

    NetRyder Tech Junkie Folding Team

    Messages:
    13,256
    Location:
    New York City
    You mean 1152x864?
     
  10. indyjones

    indyjones OSNN.net Adventurer

    Messages:
    1,567
    Location:
    England


    Errr No it does not look nice:eek:

    I have a 19" NF Professional screen and its still just wrong use 1280x960 instead :p
     
  11. Geffy

    Geffy Moderator Folding Team

    Messages:
    7,805
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    I have a 17" TFT at 1280x1024, I see no problems with it except that games usually wont do the res and the monitor cant do 1280x960
     
  12. adamg

    adamg Guest

    its interesting you say that 1280x1024 is deformed indyjones, as my friends got a 17" CRT, and 1280x1024 shows nicely while 1280x960 becomes curved and rounded. I guess this is just one of those mysteries without an answer.
     
  13. lieb39

    lieb39 Apple lover, PC User

    Messages:
    526
    Location:
    Australia
    NetRyder, no it wasn't. and i did have 1152x768 for a while, but then.. meh.

    oh ya, i forgot to say, im on a IBM LCD.. i think a 17" and im running 1280x1024 because its the highest resolution that the laptop supports and it looks a lot more native than the lower ones.

    thats what 1280x1024 is for.

    cheers

    lieb39
     
  14. Im afraid I have a 19" normal CRT and run at 1600x1200 :p
     
  15. SPeedY_B

    SPeedY_B I may actually be insane.

    Messages:
    15,800
    Location:
    Midlands, England
    17" CRT and I run 1280x960 or 1600x1200 (if I need the space)
    I don't like 1280x1024, it just looks wrong.
     
  16. indyjones

    indyjones OSNN.net Adventurer

    Messages:
    1,567
    Location:
    England
    The resolution is a curse. :mad: The problem is that it originated from it simply being the maximum that certain monitors could support and hence people began creating wallpapers to that res. The problem is this hides the fact that it is a disproportional ratio. Indeed I even used to use it before a friend of mine shouted at me. He is an expert at all things computer graphics related and this is his augment:-
    Imagine you are creating a web page that uses for example perfectly formed circles if you design it using 1280x1024 res it will look all fine and dandy on your screen and after spending days perfecting the design you upload it to the web. Now everybody who uses a sensible 4:3 resolution wont see those perfectly formed circles instead they will be ellipses! :rolleyes:


    So get with the program one and all and ditch this awful res and use a proper 4:3 ratio resolution. – Rant over :D
     
  17. PseudoKiller

    PseudoKiller Zug Zug

    Messages:
    3,858
    Location:
    Ice Crown Citadel
    I have no distortion by using 1280 x 1024 I have used other resolutions and the only ones I see distortion is 1280 x 960... unless I really manipulate my monitor settings to the extreme and even then it still isnt that great.
    I have worked with web designers who use 1280 x 1024 and I see no problem with it.
     
  18. Petros

    Petros Thief IV

    Messages:
    3,038
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest
    I think I'll just get a 32" monitor and run it at 2048x1536
     
  19. blinden

    blinden OSNN Senior Addict

    Messages:
    268
    Location:
    Pittsburgh, Pa, USA
    i've used 1280x1024 for the last 5 years and have never seen anything wrong with it, there are definately a couple of resolutions that stretch my screen in wierd ways, but thats not one of them. Perhaps someone needs to do an in depth and detailed investigation into this matter... immediatly... or, just forget about it as it will drive you MAD.
     
  20. Petros

    Petros Thief IV

    Messages:
    3,038
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest
    I'm thinking that the people who have used 1280x1024 are just used to seeing it that way, thus it doesn't appear distorted and 1280x960 does. Personally, I must say that it just makes sense to use a 4:3 ratio on a 4:3 screen. Maybe the solution is to make 5:4 screens? Ahh, but then the letters would look tall and skinny again right? ;)