1440 X 900 on a 17" widescreen notebook?

From what I've seen on this site, most people would probably see that resolution as way too low. But I don't see the problem really. Most of my life I've mostly seen monitors that topped out at 1024 x 768, and thought that resolution was plenty. I'm right now using a Dell 17" LCD monitor, 4:3 aspect ratio which tops out at 1280 x 1024, and it is plenty, can't see any pixelation for native resolution images etc. unless I squint with my face 2" from the screen, everything looks sharp and icons are a good, small size. I estimate could easily fit 200 icons on my desktop if I wanted to. 1440 x 900 on a widescreen 17" display is even better than this as far as pixels/inch. So why do I see people on this site saying 1440 x 900 is too low of a resolution, even for 15.4 inch and sometimes even 13.3-14" notebooks? What's the draw of such a high resolution that I fear would be difficult to even notice? Also, it's unlikely 95% of these notebooks can run any sort of relatively demanding 3D application at anything more than 1280 x 800 with decent framerate. So what is the draw of such high resolution screens and if I'm satisfied with 1280 x 1024 on a 17 inch 4:3 screen I should be perfectly fine with 1440 x 900 on a 17" 16:9 screen correct?

Sorry I don't mean to sound complainy. I'm just sort of commenting on how it seems like 1280 x 800 used to be a pretty high resolution and now it seems to be just downright poor in most people's eyes.

 

It is a personal opinion/choice and we now know yours. I would like higher resolution only so I could fit more on the screen not because I think the picture quality will be better/sharper.

 

I have 17" and 19" monitors running at 1440x900. On the 19" it looks acceptable, 1650x1050 would be better. On the 17" it feels just right. I don't have blu-ray, so 1920x1200 is unneeded.

 

I have 1280 x 800 on my 15.4" FZ and 1440 x 900 on my 19" widescreen external display. Love'em both and if they were smaller, I could not use either.

 

I like the extra real estate that 1440 x 900 provides. I'm using an A8Js 14.1" at 1440 x 900 right now and I've gotten use to it.

I fired up my Toshiba A100-036 with 15.4" at 1280 x 800 and it seemed a little too big. That'll probably change as my eyes get older.

 

Like PowerPack says, it's a personal choice.
Personally I HATE that resolution on 17", however as you can see by the two laptops I will 'suffer' it if it means I can get the other features I want when I'm buying.

There are far more options today than there were before, however it still depends on you comfort level.
I would run WUXGA on every laptop I could, but then again I've been running 1920x1440 or higher on desktops since the late 90s, and I value the real estate, even running dual 109Ps and P260 at work.

Everyone has their preferences, but every time it's offered I'd take WUXGA over any smaller resolution on a 17" screen. On a 15" screen it's getting tight and depends alot on quality, but everyone has different preferences for pixel pitch adn scaling.

 

I like as much real estate as possible too. I have my 1920X1200 17" laptop, and when I go back to my 1680X1050 22" desktop, I feel like I'm in kiddie land with big huge icons and less space to work. I can understand I guess how some people don't like high res, but me personally, I want it as high as I can get it.

 

I was shopping for a 15.4" notebook and when I first saw the 1680x1050 res on one, I thought it was very small. I thought 1200x800 would be best. I researched a lot and completely changed my mind, I went with 1680x1050. I can tell you that this was a very good decision. I have no trouble seeing the screen and the images and text are extremely fine and detailed looking. I love it. In fact I might go for WUXGA next time. BTW- I have terrible eyesight. The res sounds scary but when you get used to it you will not want to go back. You can fit so much on the screen and everything is really crisp looking(no BS). This is the highest res monitor I have personally ever had. Of course it is all personal preference, but I would have been upset if I went for the lower res.

I have a 17" SONY desktop LCD and it is beautiful even after 3 years. My only complaint with it is the low resolution(1280x1024). I just feel I don't have enough space to do anything. I can basically open one window at a time and it gets frustrating. If I were to get a 17" notebook, I would defenetly get WUXGA, no question about it.

 

I have a 17" 1440x900 monitor on my notebook and I think it's fine.
You get used to it and it feels fine to me. This is all a matter of preference, go test out monitors and see if you like it or not.

 

I' "downgraded" from a 1680 x 1050 on a 15.4 to a 1440 x 900 on a 17". It's been okay so far. I miss the screen space occasionally, but I''m satisfied with the 1440 x 900 currently.

WUXGA on a 15.4 sounds painful though.