Screen Resolutions

[rose_red]

So, what screen resolutions do you guys keep your screens set at? I have my screen set to 1280x800, which is the max setting for mine. How many of you still use 800x600? Anyone still using 640x480? D: Has everyone joined the over 1024x[something] club yet?

[ninja9578]

I have one monitor at 1080p and my laptop is at 1280x800. 800x600 hasn't been standard in 10 years, 640x480 hasn't been default since Windows 95. 1024 is usually coupled with 768 btw

[rose_red]

800x600 hasn't been standard in 10 years[...] 1024 is usually coupled with 768 btw I work in computer repair, and you'd be surprised at how many computers still run a 800x600 resolution. I'd say most of the ones I've worked on are still using 1024x768 or 800x600, mostly 800x600. So, don't discount 800x600 just because there are higher resolutions out there. Also, yes on normal computers it is coupled with 768 but on netbooks the resolutions are usually 1024x576 or 1024x600. EDIT - Oh, and also, pretty soon 640x480 will be making a comeback via phone screens. There are already some.

[Marvo]

I think that people are using 800x600 because they got bad eyes. I'm personally using 1920x1200 on my desktop computer and 1280x800 on my laptop. 1920x1200 is a little better than 1080p, which is 1920x1080. The difference is the aspect ratio, 16:10 and 16:9.

[Supernova]

On my desktop, 1920x1200 Currently, something very small (iPod)

[Specialis Sapientia]

1280 x 960 Can unfortunately not go any higher.

[slayer]

1440x900 for me

[ninja9578]

1920x1200 is a little better than 1080p, which is 1920x1080. The difference is the aspect ratio, 16:10 and 16:9. Depends on what you want it for. I like watching movies. If you're at 1920x1200, you get letterboxes. I don't like those, I'd rather have the HD aspect ration than the extra space.

[khh]

On my desktop computer I use 1680x1050, it's a screen I've had a few years. On my laptop I've got 1440x900. EDIT - Oh, and also, pretty soon 640x480 will be making a comeback via phone screens. There are already some. My phone actually has a higher resolution than that, 854x480. Depends on what you want it for. I like watching movies. If you're at 1920x1200, you get letterboxes. I don't like those, I'd rather have the HD aspect ration than the extra space. The letter boxes aren't a problem, they're the perfect place for putting the subtitles.

[rose_red]

My phone actually has a higher resolution than that, 854x480. Wow, that's a heck of a resolution for a phone. Also, (@Marvo) yeah, that's pretty much the reason that the resolution hasn't died out yet, though it aggravates me to no end how little you can fit on the screen.

[Kromoh]

1280x1024 Can't stand the lack of space +.+

[Taosaur]

At home I'm on 1680x1050, mainly a media and gaming machine with some internet use. Working/traveling, my netbook is 1024x600, used mainly for web surfing but also as an ebook reader (perfect!) and occasional movies. Some site layouts come out cramped, but most work just fine. I do adjust my zoom quite a bit in Firefox for the most comfortable layout. Anywhere I don't feel like pulling out the netbook, or want internet where there's no wifi, I use my dumbphone which is 240x320, and adequate for light browsing w/ Opera Mini.

[guitarboy]

my ibook from 05 is at 1024x768

[Forsaken]

I use two screens on my desktop, both set at 1920x1200.

[Supernova]

I use two screens on my desktop, both set at 1920x1200. Nice!

[Taosaur]

I use two screens on my desktop, both set at 1920x1200. I don't think we can fully appreciate that kind of set-up without a Google Street View of the location and the codes to any alarm systems on the premises

[LRT]

I have a single 1280X1024 monitor.

[youssarian]

I run 800x600. My CRT monitor just isn't wide enough to run 1024x768 even if I were to adjust the settings on the monitor itself.

[Keresztanya]

Still rockin' my 1280x1024 CRT

[guitarboy]

iMac 27 inch, if i get it - 2560 x 1440

[ninja9578]

iMac 27 inch, if i get it - 2560 x 1440 Even I think that's overkill, and I like my pixels.

[guitarboy]

Even I think that's overkill, and I like my pixels. Haha, that's why I'm probably going with the 21.5 inch, (HD-1920x1080) which is also 500 dollars cheaper, despite 1 tb hdd and 8 gigs ram.

[Taosaur]

A lot of people these days (apparently no one in this thread) are using 32"+ 720p/1080p HDTVs for a monitor and a TV. 27" isn't all that crazy. Also, guitarboy, storage and RAM are dirt-cheap, and I'm betting that's not a 10,000RPM hard drive. The main upgrades between the highest-end iMac and the others are the quad-core i5 processor and the video card, which are significant upgrades but really only relevant if you'll be doing intensive photoshopping/video-editing or playing 3D games. Just looking at the components and price tag, that's the only iMac that you're getting anywhere near what you're paying for.

[guitarboy]

A lot of people these days (apparently no one in this thread) are using 32"+ 720p/1080p HDTVs for a monitor and a TV. 27" isn't all that crazy. Also, guitarboy, storage and RAM are dirt-cheap, and I'm betting that's not a 10,000RPM hard drive. The main upgrades between the highest-end iMac and the others are the quad-core i5 processor and the video card, which are significant upgrades but really only relevant if you'll be doing intensive photoshopping/video-editing or playing 3D games. Just looking at the components and price tag, that's the only iMac that you're getting anywhere near what you're paying for. Yah, unfortunately the 21.5 can't use the quad core processors, which i find silly. I'm mostly going to be using it for just that. photoshop, garage babd, logic studio/express, after effects, and maybe halo or cod or something for when i get bored. oh, the hd is 7,000 i think, but that's pretty fast to me Machine Name: iBook G4 Machine Model: PowerBook6,7 CPU Type: PowerPC G4 (1.2) Number Of CPUs: 1 CPU Speed: 1.33 GHz L2 Cache (per CPU): 512 KB(!) Memory: 768 MB Bus Speed: 133 MHz Boot ROM Version: 4.9.3f0