Work - 1024x768, two slow-dying CRTs
Home - 1600x1200, native resolution
Mine is set to 1152 x 864, but the maximum is 1280x960.
What do you guys think of standard vs. widescreen? I’m inclined to think that a standard shape is better for sizes up to 17" or 19", but over 20" widescreen is probably better. I’ve been thinking of buying an LCD lately.
I’ve had two or more monitors since 1987, when I bought my Mac II. I think you’ll find that the percentage of Mac users that run multiple monitors is considerably higher than Windose users, since the Mac has supported multiple monitors in the OS for 20+ years.
Ditto.
3360 x 1050 (dual monitor setup)
Dual 1600x1200, with large fonts.
1680x1050 22" widescreen.
Works for me. Besides, any other resolution and my fonts appear fuzzy.
For page layout, I don’t like widescreens (unless they’re really big, so I can easily work on two pages side-by-side), but portrait-oriented monitors are really hard to find these days. For graphics and spreadsheets, I like widescreen.
Unfortunately, since I put in a widescreen at my bookstore, I found that the point-of-sale software doesn’t support it properly and Windows XP doesn’t deal properly with some of the resolutions. It’s very frustrating.
Both of my Macs have widescreens and that’s worked well for me.
Upper - 1280x1050
Lower - 1920x1200
What is the resolution of your desktop?
Very sad. It knows it will be replaced with an LCD monitor.
Whut?
1650x1080, 20-something inch Viewsonic LCD.
I see a lot of high resolutions in this thread. Maybe that’s because the people that upgrade their equipment to run a high resolution are the ones that know what that resolution is? Out of 61,115 hits on one web site I manage, the resolutions are:
1. 1024x768 27,157 44.44%
2. 1280x1024 9,493 15.53%
3. 1280x800 5,932 9.71%
4. 800x600 5,791 9.48%
5. 1440x900 3,688 6.03%
6. 1680x1050 2,249 3.68%
7. 1152x864 2,062 3.37%
8. 1280x960 963 1.58%
9. 1280x768 898 1.47%
10. 1920x1200 629 1.03%
What runs at 1280x800?
Widescreen is really nice for gaming because you get a more natural field of vision. The downside is not all games (I’m looking at you Electronic Arts) support widescreen properly.
Widescreen is also nice for watching movies and surfing the web. It lets you have two windows open side by side.
Well, it might be that people with multiple monitors are more likely to post in a thread like this.
It’s a self-selecting group, like threads about IQ where everyone is a genius, or about penis size where everyone has at least 8 inches.
Good question… And nearly ten percent of your users are running that res. Googling it just brings up links for wallpapers…
So I’m guessing it’s people with widescreens not using them at their full res.
Looks like 1280x800 is the resolution of certain Macbooks and the Sony Vaio PCG-K2 (a laptop), at least.
Currently 1600x1200 single both work and home. I can’t stand anything less, for whatever reason, and supporting 1600x1200 has been my main criteria for monitors for a long time (only broke it when the first LCDs started coming out and anything over 1280x1024 was insanely pricey).
When money, home will go to 2x 1920 x 1200. I love dual monitors. Within a month or so, work will go to either 2x 1600x1200 or 2x 1680x1050, depending on whether I get old or new monitors.
More screen real estate! Give me more!
A LOT of low to midrange 15" laptops use that as native resolution–HP Compaq business class machines in particular.
Another dual 1280x1024 user here.
1280x1024.
At work, dual 1024 x 768 (financial related, actually)
At home, the desktop is a 22" widescreen running 1680 x 1050, and the laptop that I am currently on is a 13.3" widescreen at… wait for it… 1280 x 800! 