[tivert]

> How come? Most video being 16:9 means you useball of the screen you have, 16:10 adds bars on one side doesn't it?

Do you use your laptop to work, or just watch video all the time?

Because if you actually do work, 16:10 or 3:2 is much better.

[scrlk]

It's a shame that 3:2 is still relatively rare to find in laptops and external displays.

[aqfamnzc]

Having used 16:9 or similar my whole life, I don't get what people hate so much about it. It seems like about the right aspect ratio, when split in half (one window on the left, one on the right). Yes, a single full-screen window has wasted space on the sides usually, but what's the big deal? Perhaps I don't know what I'm missing.

[tivert]

> Perhaps I don't know what I'm missing.

I think that's it.

I've used both, and the switch from 16:9 to 16:10 was a regression. Way too much vertical cramping (and other dumb stuff, like fat bezels). I've switched back to 16:10 to the greatest degree possible.

4:3 to 16:10 was an actual improvement, because it gave more space for sidebar stuff. I'm curious if 3:2 would be a better compromise than 16:10, but I haven't had the chance to use a monitor like that.

[user_7832]

> I'm curious if 3:2 would be a better compromise than 16:10, but I haven't had the chance to use a monitor like that.

Unfortunately there was only one monitor made by Huawei that appears not in production. Panels still are available on aliexpress iirc.

[tivert]

There are also some laptops that use that ratio, but I mostly use desktop monitors.

[dmbche]

I'm not writing code, but I edit video and write text on a 16:9 and have never thought that the screen format had anything to do with anything else than video crops.

What do you get out of 16:10 for "working"?

[jwells89]

It’s less of an issue with larger screens, but with small screens 16:9 gets vertically cramped really easily with all of the taskbars, menubars, toolbars, status bars, titlebars, etc eating up that space like candy. Open up an IDE like IntelliJ or Visual Studio (not Code, full fat VS) on a 13” 16:9 screen and this problem becomes immediately evident.

Most devs would probably prefer an ever taller aspect ratio than 16:10 but laptops with those screens that fit other needs are hard to come by.

It’s one of the reasons why I think the notch was actually a net positive on MacBooks: Apple added a strip of vertical pixels to 16:10 which acts as a “nook” for the menubar and notch to live in, making it effectively taller than 16:10.

[hotnfresh]

16:10 is tall enough it doesn't feel like you're viewing your screen through some kind of short fortified viewport-slit.

[walthamstow]

It's longer, so there is more of the thing visible on the screen. More lines of an article you're reading, more lines of the document you are writing.

[regularfry]

4:3 is the one true aspect ratio.

Yes, I am old.