hostadmin2012-04-13 01:19:29
hostadmin, 2012-04-13 01:19:29

14"/15.6" laptop for coding, etc. What is the best resolution 1600 or 1366?

I am engaged in web development, so the software is quite ordinary - putty, photoshop, dreamweaver, NuSphere, etc.
I want to buy a laptop for working outside the home (in the country, in the park). Most likely it will be ThinkPad T420 or T520.
I suffer from the choice of resolution and screen size. It seems that 1600 is better, because. it fits more, but on the other hand, everything is tiny, and my eyesight is far from perfect. It is clear that with the icons and the Win7 interface it is solvable, but with different editors, photoshops and other putty it is not clear.
If someone has experience with both resolutions on the same diagonals, then I would like to hear their opinion.
PS. There is also the matter of the diagonal. Is it so hard to carry a 15.6"

Answer the question

In order to leave comments, you need to log in

20 answer(s)
super, 2012-04-13

Mac is ideal for web development.

Arthur Koch, 2012-04-13

15.6 to carry really steams. If you do not need photoshop, then 13.3''-14'' for the eyes and ears.

jj_killer, 2012-04-13

If there is a full-fledged machine with a large monitor, and the laptop is only for takeaway, then you can safely take 1366.

Stdit, 2012-04-13

I took 13", the size and weight are very convenient for "mobility", 1440x800 + anti-glare (a film like on optics, making glare purple like on optics, all the more relevant in nature). Very satisfied, the resolution is enough for PHPStorm, Eclipse, terminals and I used to go with a tag of 1280x800, I got sick, and the battery sat down in an hour and a half, and not in five, as it is now.

MiXei4, 2012-04-13

If you drag, then for me it's only 13 inches no more. Or 14 if very easy. 1366 is probably better for the eyes, you just need to figure out if everything you want fits into 1366. If not, then you need to look for something more.

da0c, 2012-04-13

I always carry 15.6 "with me - it doesn't seem heavy, on the contrary, it's some kind of fitness or something. At 15" - IMHO, only 1366, everything else is too small ...

AxisPod, 2012-04-13

for 15 "1366x768 - this is a normal resolution, for 4: 3 it will be 1280 by 1024. 1600 will be small and if your vision is not perfect, ditch it even more, and you can put the ideal one, you will have to keep your eyes on your toes all the time.

1nd1go, 2012-04-13

I advise you to consider 13 "and 1440px. I had 1200x 800 - and this is not enough vertically. Therefore, 1366x 768 will be much worse. But 1600 seems to me not comfortable.
By the way, if you suddenly think about the Mac, then the zoom works well there, unlike Win.

There is also the matter of the diagonal. Is it that hard to carry a 15.6"?

Yes. The weight of a laptop for 2Kg is a lot. Another charge of 300-500 grams. Therefore, 1.5 is the maximum.

belk, 2012-04-14

I have a netbook with a diagonal of 11.6" and a resolution of 1366, while the pixel size is the same as on 14" at 1600.
From experience: the interface elements are really small, you have to strain your eyes a little (I have 100%). If you set the windows scale to 125%, the size of the icons becomes normal, but due to the scaling, they look like they are at a non-native screen resolution. Also here and there (not everywhere) the interface floats.

Shultc, 2012-04-13

But is there something that prevents you from switching to 1366 if it’s inconvenient to work at 1600 in some way?

sl_bug, 2012-04-13

15.6 - better than 1920.
14 - I don't know. probably 1600

nerudo, 2012-04-13

Everything is very individual. A colleague recently bought 15 "1366 * 768. I tell him, like what are you doing 1366 * 768 - it won't fit at all, take 1600 * 900. Then he tells - 1366 * 768 seems very small, hard to see, eyes get tired. Here I put 800 * 600 - it became normal;)

jrip, 2012-04-13

I recently took a probook 4535s for myself, with up to 8GB of memory added, it turned out about 21k
screen 15.6 1366x768, matte.
At first, the size was not enough, but I got used to it pretty quickly, I didn’t take a larger physical size, because. hard and uncomfortable to carry.
A higher resolution on the same one is not comfortable for me, and my eyesight is not very good.
Matte screen - taxis, even in the sun, in principle, you can work.
On the other hand, it has a smaller viewing angle, i.e. For example, the three of us will not be able to comfortably watch movies.

shutya, 2012-04-13

About the convenience of dragging it all depends on the physical form. A year passed with 15.6 "in a backpack, then it was traveling work, and no matter how I set myself up that this was such fitness, as a result I came to the conclusion that there was no fitness in it, my back did not become wide and muscular, but began to get tired quickly and strongly to get sick in the evening. In the end, by the time I get from home to the office, the pains already appeared. I took 13 "- there is no limit to joy.

Anatoly, 2012-04-13

At a higher resolution, everything looks prettier and neater, but at a lower resolution, it’s easier for your eyes to sit while you work. So less is better for work and more for entertainment.

avgurus, 2012-04-13

I'm also thinking about t420 from 1600) on x201 the screen does not fade under the sun, plus there is no glare.
420 weighs 2.1kg (520 is half a kilo more), if you take out the DVD and put an empty ultrabay in, it will be about 2kg - normal, sort of) 1366 has a very shallow height - 800 is already annoying me) about the most popular resolution - not an argument, the layout is possible put with black margins, but if you open it in the shop at a small resolution, then at 100% the panels will not allow you to see the full width)

Flying, 2012-04-13

I work on T500 with 1280x800, I always carry it with me. In a backpack - almost not felt. When buying, I thought about a variant with a higher resolution, but I decided that the eyes are more expensive, and so I wear glasses. In the end, I don't regret it at all. The only thing I would change in the laptop is the hard drive on the SSD, but in the T520 there are no problems with this. So I wish to get a lot of pleasure from working with this laptop, a great choice :)

uups, 2012-04-13

It should be borne in mind that the higher the resolution, the better the picture in terms of color reproduction and contrast.
The dependence here is not direct, just high-resolution matrices make better ones.
More resolution is always a blessing. But there is one caveat, it’s good if the software can scale, and the software (especially under Windows, I don’t know how under nix) doesn’t know how to do it well. I really want to believe that in Win8 the problem will be solved once and for all.

Vyacheslav Plisko, 2012-04-14

Take something smaller, it is much more convenient to wear, and where you need a large screen, you can always stick a separate monitor. I just type these lines while sitting with a laptop near a 24 inch monitor, I'm already used to programming on two screens.

Didn't find what you were looking for?

Ask your question

Ask a Question

731 491 924 answers to any question