curl-6 said:
480 x 640 = 307,200 pixels 600 x 1138 = 682,800 pixels |
I know, just seized the opportunity to joke at both people that don't know the number of pixels grows quadratically with linear resolution and those that do.
Also notice the irony of karma: 16:9 resolutions were liked by flat panel producers because they allow to boast longer diagonals than 4:3 for the same pixel number and screen area (16:9 was terrible, though, for the last CRT producers, as it made costs skyrocket and quality plummet, my sister was persuaded by a Sony TVs and cameras fanboy former boyfriend of hers to buy one of the last 16:9 Trinitron TVs and it's utter crap, I never ever saw Sony producing other displays as crappy), but they backfire when you state the vertical resolution, making them look not much better than some mid and low 4:3 resolutions (particularly to people that compare resolutions linearly, but the first impression is not particularly good also for the techier ones).
