i "hate" 1080p because the more resolution for me the better. i dont game much or watch movies on the computer..
browsing, 1080 is not much upgrade from 1050. not that 1200 is enough but it is a considerable upgrade from 1050.
when browsing and multitasking i like as much resolution as i can get.
if i were a gamer resolution wouldnt be much of an issue and probably would prefer 1080 to 1200.
when i game on my 1200 monitor i have resolution down to 1280x1024 so that i can play it on max. when i have the res up to 1200 i dont really gain any advantage. i just have to tone the graphics down and gameplay is average. i prefer 1280x1024 coz i can play the game on max. i also prefer a smaller resolution vs larger resolution for the mouse to cover the screen *faster.
so for me since i barely watch movies or play games i prefer 1200. i like to maximize all pixels i can get.
2 of my monitors 1200p are in portrait mode and pages fit perfect. i can have 3 pages on one monitor unlike having only 2 in landscape mode.
the more pixels up-down the better for me. they should have kept the 5:4 format alive
. or given us more options instead of only have 2 choices with 16:10 and 16:9.
- _________ - 1024Ã—576 - 1024Ã—640
1280x960 - 1280Ã—1024
- 1280Ã—720 vs 1280Ã—800
- _________ - 1366Ã—768
- _________ - 1600Ã—900 - 1680Ã—1050
1856Ã—1392 - 1800Ã—1440
__________ - 2048Ã—1152 - 2048Ã—1280
2560Ã—1920 - 2560Ã—2048
when 5:4's not present 4:3 pwns 16:10 and 16:9. otherwise 5:4 pwns them all... in pixel count.
if only we had more choices i'd have 5:4 monitors.
those are the reasons i "hate" 16:9. they lied to us by selling us less resolution. i dont even consider 16:9 monitors. its too bad 16:10 are also dying breed..Edited by Remix65 - 7/26/11 at 10:02am