![]() |
Not just Toshiba. A few years ago 1600x1200 was not rare on 15". We had some truly shocking laptop resolutions. There were things like IBM T60p/T61p 15" with QXGA resolution. Now everything comes with 1366x768 (yes even 15", brrr!) and I feel all the manufacturers can get away with it just because they can slap a HD label on this absymal resolution and the consumers lap it up thinking "HD? surely good!" I am sure the Toshiba is a fine machine, I used several Porteges during the years and they were great. I feel that this is like a cancer which eats away any really usable screen, however.
|
On this screen size the resolution works fine for me. The screen size and viewing distance also have to be considered when comparing various screens. Ultimately what matters is whether the screen can resolve the detail that you need it to at an appropriate viewing distance.
|
Originally Posted by chx1975
(Post 15579455)
Not just Toshiba. A few years ago 1600x1200 was not rare on 15". We had some truly shocking laptop resolutions. There were things like IBM T60p/T61p 15" with QXGA resolution. Now everything comes with 1366x768 (yes even 15", brrr!) and I feel all the manufacturers can get away with it just because they can slap a HD label on this absymal resolution and the consumers lap it up thinking "HD? surely good!" I am sure the Toshiba is a fine machine, I used several Porteges during the years and they were great. I feel that this is like a cancer which eats away any really usable screen, however.
|
I bought a 13" MacBookPro with a 64GB solid state HD. It is light, amazing resolution and also wins all my Windows apps with no problem. I use Fusion rather than Parallels to do that. My Windows apps are Moore stable than they were with my prior ThinkPad. It is also lighter, never has any death-screens, and charges more quickly. Battery life has been running 8-10 hours for me running Statistica, which had only 2 hours on the ThinkPad.
Unless somebody does something amazing I will probably never buy a Windows machine again. |
Originally Posted by moman
(Post 15596072)
Now if one wants a good screen you have to go Apple, which is what I did. Too bad for Dell. Plus, gloss has no use in a business environment.
Apple's laptop screens aren't any better than anyone else's. Tell me which Apple has resolution as good as a maxed out Sony Z? Tell me what is wrong with the full HD Lenovo T510 or W510 screens? Resolution and color accuracy are better than Apple and they are not glossy. If you want to love Apples, feel free. Don't bore me, however, with how you think you got the best mate on the planet. "Praise Steve Jobs! Praise Steve Jobs! Praise Steve Jobs!" Enough already. |
Originally Posted by jbcarioca
(Post 15596176)
I bought a 13" MacBookPro with a 64GB solid state HD. It is light, amazing resolution and also wins all my Windows apps with no problem. I use Fusion rather than Parallels to do that. My Windows apps are Moore stable than they were with my prior ThinkPad. It is also lighter, never has any death-screens, and charges more quickly. Battery life has been running 8-10 hours for me running Statistica, which had only 2 hours on the ThinkPad.
Unless somebody does something amazing I will probably never buy a Windows machine again. I suspect you are just running a newer version of Windows on your Mac. If you want a ThinkPad that gets more than 2-hours battery life, they are available. You are not comparing similarly configured systems with similarly sized batteries, however. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 3:11 pm. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.