1 |
Apparently, though unproven, at 17:24 on Wednesday 08 September 2010, Grant |
2 |
Edwards did opine thusly: |
3 |
|
4 |
> > Since 16:9 panels are the same shape as the ones TVs use, I assume |
5 |
> > that's why they are cheaper and why the industry prefers them. |
6 |
> |
7 |
> I thought about that, but the sizes and pixel densities don't overlap |
8 |
> at all between laptop panels and TV panels, so I don't see how they |
9 |
> can be leveraging production processes or equipment. |
10 |
|
11 |
The intent is probably more that the picture will visually appear the same |
12 |
whether you view it on a laptop, HD TV or widescreen monitor. |
13 |
|
14 |
Which raises another layer of confusion: when a spec says "16:9" does it mean |
15 |
physical dimensions, or pixel density? I've yet to find a device that clearly |
16 |
states *how* it arrived at the numbers it quotes in it's spec. |
17 |
|
18 |
|
19 |
-- |
20 |
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |