21:9 is starting to take of on PC at least. I own a 21:9 monitor, and know a few people at work that do too. There are youtube channels dedicated to ultra widescreen gaming and content.
It’s early days though.
I really miss the monitors that you could rotate – as a graphic designer, it was so handy if you were working on a single page.
I have at least one LCD monitor that can be set up in portrait mode. With these it’s even easier than a CRT.
A widescreen on it’s side is going to present a major wall of text for code and such.
I don’t know why you guys are being weird. Black bars wider than the image itself suck. It’s not at all the same as the bevels on the side, which are designed to be minimal, with constant work to make them smaller.
Already people complain about portrait mode videos, and those have the exact same problem. There’s just too much empty space on the sides on any fixed landscape screen.
I honestly doubt there will be a change unless a whole new technology comes out. That’s why 16:9 was created. Sure, some computers play around with 16:10 to give you room to watch the video and have stuff on bottom, for editing and stuff.
The upcoming standard of 4k is still 16:9, and it’s already higher resolution than needed for TVs in most rooms. And people do still want to watch movies with others, and not just on devices, so devices have to take that into account.
Many monitors can rotate. And even those that cannot normally rotate can be made to rotate if they allow a VESA mount.
I’ve been using the tilt-screen Viewsonic VP2365-LED for years. I can’t imagine not having one. I do lots of newspaper research and the ability to see a full page in readable size is critical. I can also see a full page when I write, and tilt it to see landscape spreadsheets. It’s far better in portrait mode than a giant landscape monitor displaying two pages and takes up much less desk space. Viewsonic also makes a 27" version that has to be enormous.
16:10 forever! Yea, maybe 16:9 is better for movies, but how often am I watching movies on my computer monitor? Probably less than 5% of the time. When working with photos and pages, having more vertical pixels is much appreciated.
It also works better with two side by side Word documents or code windows. Only thing that might be better is 17:11 (e.g. two 8.5x11 windows or the A4 equivalent would work) but then thats bad for widescreen, being about 1.5 times as long as it is tall.
So basically the general consensus is that 16:9 is safe for the foreseeable future. 4K, which will likely be the standard in the next 10 years or so, is 16:9 from what you’re saying. So my worries that say, in 10 years, I couldn’t walk into a store and buy a new 16:9 TV or laptop are unfounded. That’s all I am asking. Yes, there may be other options, but my question really is will 16:9 still be produced? Compared to how it is nigh on impossible to buy a newly produced 4:3 TV (not that I would want to).
The industry recognizes that 16:9 is the perfect compromise between 4:3 and 21:9…Right?