Why is the ipad 4:3 and not 16:9?

[Tapmyapple]

Do any of you know why? 16:9 is the modern size, its widescreen, this is the 21st century where everything from monitors to tvs to smart phones are 16:9. Just dont get why apple is sticking with 4:3.

 

[DontUnderstandMyIpad]

SWAG: 4:3 screens are more widely available at a lower cost then 16:9

 

[Catfiend]

Do any of you know why? 16:9 is the modern size, its widescreen, this is the 21st century where everything from monitors to tvs to smart phones are 16:9. Just dont get why apple is sticking with 4:3.

I can't say for certain but I can say that I'd rather try to hold a less oblong tablet in my hand - particularly if I'm trying to hold it in landscape mode. I'm really glad they didn't go 16:9 for a largish screen that is intended to be hand held.

Isn't the iPhone also 4:3? If so that would also provide some explanation as they were planning to have the same apps available on both and not having to adjust for different aspect ratios would make life much easier for developers.

 

[Tapmyapple]

SWAG: 4:3 screens are more widely available at a lower cost then 16:9

Thats a poor excuse from apple. Again this is 2011 we live in, not 1992. Get with the times Apple!

Do any of you know why? 16:9 is the modern size, its widescreen, this is the 21st century where everything from monitors to tvs to smart phones are 16:9. Just dont get why apple is sticking with 4:3.

I can't say for certain but I can say that I'd rather try to hold a less oblong tablet in my hand - particularly if I'm trying to hold it in landscape mode. I'm really glad they didn't go 16:9 for a largish screen that is intended to be hand held.

Isn't the iPhone also 4:3? If so that would also provide some explanation as they were planning to have the same apps available on both and not having to adjust for different aspect ratios would make life much easier for developers.

Not sure what iphones are sized at but its definitely wider than 4:3. Ipad isnt exactly handheld to begin with, so if they were to do a 9.7" LCD in 16:9 it wont make it anymore cumbersome. 16:9 is much easier and better to view stuff on.

 

[Catfiend]

Not sure what iphones are sized at but its definitely wider than 4:3. Ipad isnt exactly handheld to begin with, so if they were to do a 9.7" LCD in 16:9 it wont make it anymore cumbersome. 16:9 is much easier and better to view stuff on.

I was thinking of the screen on the iPhone, not the device itself.

I definitely consider the iPad to be handheld and that's the way I use it a large portion of the time. I also don't understand why you feel 16:9 to be easier or better for viewing stuff on. To me the aspect ratio makes pretty much no difference as far as the viewing experience goes - maybe it would for a movie but I'm not a fan of movies - and I still appreciate that there's less moment from the more nearly square aspect ratio so I'm still glad that they stuck with 4:3.

 

[Diane B]

Try to read a book in 16:9. I'm a photographer and sometimes choose the 16:9 format but 4:3 or 3:2 is more visually "good" feeling for using portrait or landscape. 16:9 is fine for watching movies or TV but the Ipad is used for many more things than that. I'd hate working on a doc in 16:9.

 

[Martlet]

I prefer 4:3

 

[twerppoet]

Other than watching movies, in what way is a 16:9 screen better than a 4:3?

Sure I watch an occasional movie on the iPad. Doesn't mean I want to hold a mini HD TV wantabe in my hands. 4:3 is a useful and versatile proportion. It's also comfortable in the hands.

I'm perfectly happy to leave 16:9 screen for the bigger devices that have enough room to accurately display non-16:9 stuff undistorted and at great resolution.

 

[SweetPoison]

Other than watching movies, in what way is a 16:9 screen better than a 4:3?

Sure I watch an occasional movie on the iPad. Doesn't mean I want to hold a mini HD TV wantabe in my hands. 4:3 is a useful and versatile proportion. It's also comfortable in the hands.

I'm perfectly happy to leave 16:9 screen for the bigger devices that have enough room to accurately display non-16:9 stuff undistorted and at great resolution.

I like this ^^

 

[graywolf]

The iPad was made to be mostly held in portrait, so, I don't think apple wanted holding the iPad to be like holding a foot-long 2x4.

 

[Seadog]

Apple did extensive research in both formats. The only advantage was in looking at video made for the 16:9 HDTV units. Movies are an even wider format and until HDTV, television shows were 4:3. In almost every aspect, people were more comfortable with the 4:3 screen. Books were easier to read, web pages looked better, and most important, it fit the hand better. This was not a cost issue, it was a comfort issue.

 

[graywolf]

This was not a cost issue, it was a comfort issue.

Agreed.

 

[USBill]

The iPad was made to be mostly held in portrait, so, I don't think apple wanted holding the iPad to be like holding a foot-long 2x4.

I didn't know I was doing it wrong. I never hold my iPad in portrait mode unless I'm reading a book. My first GUI PC had a 17" 1024x768 monitor, so it's natural to use it that way.

 

[graywolf]

I didn't know I was doing it wrong. I never hold my iPad in portrait mode unless I'm reading a book. My first GUI PC had a 17" 1024x768 monitor, so it's natural to use it that way.

There is no right or wrong way, I have it in landscape 99% of the time! Apparently, this guy doesn't know how to hold a child though.

 

[Harley man]

I. was at besybuy looking at the xoom that has a 16 .9 10.1 screen. I put it on top of a iPad 2 to see if was better to have the 16.9 and I think the 4.3 was better to my surprise I would thought that 16.9 would have been better size but looking at then one on top of the other the 4.3 is better .