From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1OtMlY-0005AD-0w for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 08 Sep 2010 15:40:52 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1553EE0A43; Wed, 8 Sep 2010 15:40:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ew0-f53.google.com (mail-ew0-f53.google.com [209.85.215.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD56BE0A43 for ; Wed, 8 Sep 2010 15:40:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ewy3 with SMTP id 3so163387ewy.40 for ; Wed, 08 Sep 2010 08:40:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:subject:date :user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:message-id; bh=FgDSWSu4/kOnVEciRJBZ3axTppK2Y9oVXr7EnZPlpv0=; b=v67UA1RQOGMfne8Ya/yhxf/XTusrDjg7Wyqexb/d1ejxFMbL8bRnzg3/KLMSpXKjsP T7RSHWt1iZMQ9T6OPrMFR0iD1DpPb/t+2M/r9fDASMMVx+qetbeRFGKjYxwvoLCiVIH3 M9njFTdqqjCaCeqanbH3OqShSyeHWJRwMuhGY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:message-id; b=iLsDCJo/oSLyh4P0MqqU/kOGKF/OsHGMSq9QSjD0/3qobMEILG08a0yW4Bhwl7aBK2 lIeBpTRS4pIqkDkyBoXCU7DOOhHQ8dOaPtkURtUjJtQkmiX7Ch6UoUdKKud0Bg/p8yVY oSYMm843pJiwwOw2bf/WNE8bIxTaOsbed3jz4= Received: by 10.14.127.69 with SMTP id c45mr83285eei.20.1283960425681; Wed, 08 Sep 2010 08:40:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nazgul.localnet (dustpuppy.is.co.za [196.14.169.11]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id u9sm231229eeh.17.2010.09.08.08.40.20 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 08 Sep 2010 08:40:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Alan McKinnon To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: OT: advice sought on new laptop for Gentoo Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2010 17:40:17 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.35-ck-r2; KDE/4.5.1; x86_64; ; ) Cc: Grant Edwards References: In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201009081740.17896.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> X-Archives-Salt: 6badbb8c-945f-4875-ac63-c90738685cf8 X-Archives-Hash: d9aef3b650f6f0c5cf9a90e7aa73c3a0 Apparently, though unproven, at 17:24 on Wednesday 08 September 2010, Grant Edwards did opine thusly: > > Since 16:9 panels are the same shape as the ones TVs use, I assume > > that's why they are cheaper and why the industry prefers them. > > I thought about that, but the sizes and pixel densities don't overlap > at all between laptop panels and TV panels, so I don't see how they > can be leveraging production processes or equipment. The intent is probably more that the picture will visually appear the same whether you view it on a laptop, HD TV or widescreen monitor. Which raises another layer of confusion: when a spec says "16:9" does it mean physical dimensions, or pixel density? I've yet to find a device that clearly states *how* it arrived at the numbers it quotes in it's spec. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com