Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    Dell releases powerful, well-supported Linux Ultrabook

    (arstechnica.com)
    520 points iProject | 13 comments | 29 Nov 12 14:09 UTC | HN request time: 0.725s | source | bottom
    1. jwcacces ◴[29 Nov 12 14:44 UTC] No.4847913[source]▶
    Nice, but that screen resolution is awful!

    How did 1366x768 ever become acceptable?

    I know it's a 13" screen but still...

    replies(9): >>4847932 #>>4848013 #>>4848094 #>>4848145 #>>4848198 #>>4848333 #>>4848688 #>>4848848 #>>4849324 #
    2. tluyben2 ◴[29 Nov 12 14:48 UTC] No.4847932[source]▶
    I clicked the article to check that. How depressing :(
    replies(1): >>4847957 #
    3. jebblue ◴[29 Nov 12 14:53 UTC] No.4847957[source]▶
    Agreed, web sites today pretty much demand far more resolution than what we had in the 1990's. I imagine it's cheaper and that's why the trend has gone this way but this is a pitiful trend. I think it might be lower than new smart phones.
    replies(1): >>4848495 #
    4. CitizenKane ◴[29 Nov 12 15:03 UTC] No.4848013[source]▶
    I was with them right up until this. Even the very similarly speced Lenovo Yoga 13 has a higher resolution screen (1600x900). I've nearly given up on using my 2011 Mac Book Pro simply because the screen resolution is awful.
    5. mtgx ◴[29 Nov 12 15:15 UTC] No.4848094[source]▶
    2560x1600 or bust.

    https://plus.google.com/+LinusTorvalds/posts/ByVPmsSeSEG

    6. reidrac ◴[29 Nov 12 15:24 UTC] No.4848145[source]▶
    Yep, that's what I thought. And it is advertised as "developer edition"...
    7. yungchin ◴[29 Nov 12 15:33 UTC] No.4848198[source]▶
    What's funny is that they put this project on their IdeaStorm website when they started it a few months ago, to get feedback from Linux devs. Almost all of the higher ranking suggestions were about the need for a higher screen resolution, and still they went for 1366x768...
    8. JasonFruit ◴[29 Nov 12 15:52 UTC] No.4848333[source]▶
    I'm happily using a laptop at 1280x800, and though I miss the big monitor I used when I had my big beast of a machine set up, I can't say I feel constrained; I just use fewer screen splits in Emacs. Still, for $1500, I'd expect better.
    9. tluyben2 ◴[29 Nov 12 16:17 UTC] No.4848495{3}[source]▶
    Yeah and especially tablets (with smaller form factors), so it's weird to hang on to this pitiful resolution.
    10. threedaymonk ◴[29 Nov 12 16:55 UTC] No.4848688[source]▶
    How did 1366x768 ever become acceptable?

    I think it's a combination of two factors.

    First, at the low end, manufacturers emphasise the screen size, but avoid mentioning resolution, so in my local supermarket there are cheap laptops prominently advertised as 15", but they only have 1366x768 resolution. Perhaps that's what the customers want: a big screen that they can use to watch videos in their bedrooms.

    Second, even if you do care about resolution, it's hard to find out what it is. It's usually advertised as some cryptic series of letters ending in GA. QWERTYUGA; ASDFXGA; WTFGA. Look at this madness! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_display_resolution

    I wish they'd specify screens in size, aspect ratio, pixel density, and megapixels. (I know some of those are redundant, but shoppers shouldn't need a calculator.)

    replies(1): >>4848767 #
    11. CitizenKane ◴[29 Nov 12 17:07 UTC] No.4848767[source]▶
    If this were a low end laptop destined to be used by everyone I could understand. But this is a high end computer meant to be used by developers and it's just a hair under the price of Retina Mac Book Pros and right up with the price of a Mac Book Air. The offering isn't quite as competitive as I would have hoped and for that cost there are a multitude of other options available that are better.
    12. mcguire ◴[29 Nov 12 17:19 UTC] No.4848848[source]▶
    That's the resolution of all the XPS 13's, I believe. The specs that are different for this model are CPU, memory, graphics card, etc.; things that are likely easy to change. I suppose laptop screens aren't one of those.
    13. majorlazer ◴[29 Nov 12 18:17 UTC] No.4849324[source]▶
    It's not. Anything lower than 1440x900 is a deal breaker for me. I rather take a hit in performance than go down to 1366x768. You know something is wrong when your 4.3" phone screen has the same resolution as your 13" laptop.