Gateway E-295C / C-140 deal breaker

**minmingdotnet** · 07-01-2007, 07:21 AM

What is Gateway thinking? 14.1" with 1280x768?

I hated that T4220 only offers 1024x768 (other than custom company orders), but at least is on a 12.1" screen. Its nice that Gateway has dedicated graphics card, but only 1280x768? Is way too low resolution for a 14.1".

Other than that, Gateway seems to provide good configurations. Liked the option of 12-cell battery although is heavy.

**Shogmaster** · 07-01-2007, 08:57 AM

Originally Posted by minmingdotnet

What is Gateway thinking? 14.1" with 1280x768?

I hated that T4220 only offers 1024x768 (other than custom company orders), but at least is on a 12.1" screen. Its nice that Gateway has dedicated graphics card, but only 1280x768? Is way too low resolution for a 14.1".

Other than that, Gateway seems to provide good configurations. Liked the option of 12-cell battery although is heavy.

I have used 14" R15 with 1024x768 for two years without ripping my hair out so it shouldn't as bad as you make it out for most folks. After all, it is better than my old R15 @ 1280x768.

Sometimes my R25's 1440x900 seems too small @ 14", but I need it to spread out the UI in Painter so I'm not complaining. I am getting a bit old in the eye sight department though.

I do also wish that Gateway did offer a 1440x900 option for like $50 or so. That would make it an ideal 14 incher for sure, and I don't have to be paranoid about something horrific happening to my R25 and I have nothing to replace it with. Push comes to shove, I will deal with the 1280x768 of the C-140, but my UI customization of Painter really demands 1440x900 and higher. But I'm sure I'm somewhat of a rare case.

**Darak** · 07-01-2007, 09:29 AM

I could be totally off base on this, but my 19" monitor on my desktop is running at 1440x900. That's roughly 7920 pixels per square inch. On a 14.1 inch screen with 1280x768, you're getting 11248 pixels per square inch. I could just be babbling at this point, but my 19" works perfectly fine at this resolution. Clarity isn't going to be a problem and I know the toolbars on my monitor aren't taking up too much room. So, with a higher ppi, wouldn't the toolbars take up less room on the 14 inch? I know the 14 inch is smaller than my 19", but that's a big difference in ppi.

Again, I'm a nutjob and I could be way off base here.

**Shogmaster** · 07-01-2007, 10:27 AM

Originally Posted by Darak

I could be totally off base on this, but my 19" monitor on my desktop is running at 1440x900. That's roughly 7920 pixels per square inch. On a 14.1 inch screen with 1280x768, you're getting 11248 pixels per square inch. I could just be babbling at this point, but my 19" works perfectly fine at this resolution. Clarity isn't going to be a problem and I know the toolbars on my monitor aren't taking up too much room. So, with a higher ppi, wouldn't the toolbars take up less room on the 14 inch? I know the 14 inch is smaller than my 19", but that's a big difference in ppi.

Again, I'm a nutjob and I could be way off base here.

I think the main issue is not the PPI in this case but amount of pixels available to spread out the UI for his apps.

For example, this is less constraining for my Painter UI set up then this by the virtue of more pixels available to spread out the UI.

**Darak** · 07-01-2007, 10:35 AM

Ah. I'm not an artist by any means so I wouldn't really know (I have trouble with stick figures) Couldn't you just scale down the UI? I'm sure this comes down to a matter of preference again. "Deal-breaker" just seems like a harsh word for a resolution limit, especially when other tablets have limits too.

**Shogmaster** · 07-01-2007, 10:55 AM

Originally Posted by Darak

Ah. I'm not an artist by any means so I wouldn't really know (I have trouble with stick figures) Couldn't you just scale down the UI? I'm sure this comes down to a matter of preference again. "Deal-breaker" just seems like a harsh word for a resolution limit, especially when other tablets have limits too.

I don't think it's a "deal breaker" even for me, but I would definitely appreciate more pixels for the UI. As for scaling down the UI, most apps don't give you that option and you just have to leave some parts out, which usually slows down your workflow.

**lyl** · 07-02-2007, 10:29 AM

You would think with a dedicated 128mb (atleast) you could have a higher resolution. Is it confirmed that if you add the Radeon, its still a max resolution of 1280x800?

**Darak** · 07-02-2007, 10:55 AM

The screen is what limits the resolution much of the time. For example - my 9800 pro can support up to 2048x1536, but my monitor only goes up to 1440x900. Such is the case with the C-140X

**apinkpony** · 07-02-2007, 11:19 AM

Hm. Not so much a deal breaker for me either. I guess you could call me an "artist", well photoshop by means of restoration/recreation, editing and the likes.. my current monitor is 17" with that same resolution. I can see how on a small screen w/ same resolution your gonna have more junk and less room, which sucks ... but not a deal breaker still. Again, too bad no higher res offer.