I know that there's  but it doesn't have any real answers despite having been viewed 12,400 times, and the fact that it's been closed. With that in mind...  Why in the world is 1366x768 resolution a real thing? It has an aspect ratio of 683:384, which is the weirdest thing I've ever heard of while living in a 16:9 world.   All screens and resolutions I've been familiar with have been 16:9 aspect ratio. My screen, 1920x1080, is 16:9. The 720p that I'm familiar with is 1280x720, also 16:9. 4K that I'm familiar with, 3840x2160, is also 16:9. Yet 1366x768 is 683:384, a seemingly wild break from the standard.  I know there are plenty of other resolutions all over the place, but 1366x768 seems to dominate most of the mid priced laptop world and also seems unique to the laptop world. Why don't laptops use 1280x720 or something else as a standard?
123176
Most displays get advertised with either 16:9 or 4:3 display ratio. However, if you compare the resolution with the display ratio, it's most often neither of both.   For example, the resolution of my notebook display is 1366x768. But 1366/768 = 683/384 != 688/387 = 16/9 Another common resolution is 1920/1200 = 8/5  But for some resolutions it's correct:   1024/768 = 4/3 800/600 = 4/3   Is there a technical reason / user experience reason for this? Why do displays have other ratios than what they get advertised?  (I assume that every pixel is a perfect square. Is this assumption wrong?)
5653
How do I find out the number, type, resolution &amp; refresh rate of additional monitors I can attach to my MacBook or MacBook Pro?  This is an attempt at a canonical QA, as per the Meta QA -   to try prevent the myriad "same but different" questions we get on every possible combination of computers, cable &amp; monitors There are perfectly good resources out there that Ask Different should not have to duplicate the efforts of.
14451
So I just installed Ubuntu 16.04 on my Dell XPS 13. When I get to the login screen it starts at 3200x1800 for a quick second, then I get a way lower resolution like 800x600 but as soon as I login it adjusts to 3200x1800. How would I get 3200x1800 permanently on my login screen? I didn't have this issue on 14.04.
119935
How do I change the screen resolution in Ubuntu? I am dual booting Vista and Ubuntu. The preferences tab only has one resolution option for my computer.
63569
I'm making a 2D (Android) game. Android devices vary quite a lot in screen resolution; what do I need to keep in mind when making my game?   Do I need to keep big versions of all images and scale down depending on the resolution (doesn't that waste space)? Do bitmap fonts scale well or do I need to use something else? Anything else I'm forgetting?
12880
My display driver's maximum screen width is 1280 pixels.   I need to test a website with resolution 1920&times;1080 pixels. Or 3000&times;5000.   Different browsers is optional.
47990
Here's the scoop: I have a crappy VisionQuest TV that I am currently using as a monitor on my computer running XBMCbuntu. It defaults to 1280x768 which the TV will not display correctly. It appears to be the correct size, but the screen is panned WAY to the left. The TV works fine on 1024x768 with the screen sitting in the right spot. Problem is, I have to change the resolution to 1024x768 every  time I boot up.   Any ideas?
40098
I am using my first VirtualBox VM in order to run Windows 8 Preview on my Windows 7 machine.  It looks like only a few resolutions are available for me to choose.  My physical display is 1600x900, so I'd like to be able to set my Windows 8 VM to that in order to have a fullscreen experience.  How do I add a 1600x900 to the choices I have in the "Screen Resolution" dialog?
108852
I have a DisplayPort based monitor, and a laptop with a DP out.  I recently got a second laptop with HDMI out, and went looking for a HDMI -> DP converter.  I was very surprised to find that such a thing effectively doesn't seem to exist.   and the  seem to imply that it's just not possible to go HDMI -> DP, without a very expensive converter box (not just an adaptor).  However, I can't find anything that explains why this is the case.  Is DP designed to be backwards compatible but can't interpret HDMI?  Is it a case of HDMI-quality signal not being high enough quality to be convertible?  Some other reason?  Note that this question is not looking for an adaptor - I'm looking for the underlying cause of the lack of them.
61662
I played Lugaru, the game went in Full screen mode, but when I closed the game, the screen resolution was still 640x480. It happened with Neighbours From Hell also, using Wine, and well... Almost every game i tried in fullscreen mode. Is it normal? Is there a fix for that?
71377
I have been using a 24" monitor with my macbook pro early 2011 connected via a mini display port to DVI adaptor.  I recently received an HP Z30i 30" monitor.  When I connect to it with an mini display port to display port adaptor, although it displays at the monitors native 2560x1600 resolution, the mac is scaling the desktop display down so as to leave a 1cm or so black border around the desktop.  The mac reports using a resolution of 2560x1600 and the display reports this also.   This makes the display blurry as single pixels become sub pixels.   The display looks like the same effect as having "under scan" turned on when using an HDMI cable at 1080p.  I thought that maybe there was a hardware or display problem, but when I boot off a previous system partition from a different hard-drive using the same OS (10.8.5) release, the monitor set up works perfectly.  This proves the OS release, display and the hardware, so I'm thinking that there must be a preferences problem with my current setup.  Perhaps the under scan setting is somehow being applied to this display when it's not using HDMI?  I've tried deleting /Library/Preferences/com.apple.windowserver.plist, ~/Library/Preferences/ByHost/com.apple.windowserver.HostNumber.plist and rebooting but no results.   The scaling is applied before the login screen and logging in as a different user has the same problem.  Any ideas?  It's driving me nuts, I've got this nice 30" screen and I can't use it!
68528
I am looking for a new laptop, and it will be connected to an external monitor the majority of the time, presumably via HDMI.  The monitor has native 1920x1080 resolution.  I'm not really concerned with the resolution of the screen on the laptop, so I'm mostly looking at machines with lower resolution (typically 1366x768) due to cost.   My old laptop was like this, and it was able to output at 1920x1080 (1080p), but is there a way to know that other machines will as well?  Is this a function of the graphics card or chipset?  My old machine had the normal, low-end onboard "Mobile Intel HD graphics", so does this mean that any machine with that will output at 1080p?
16067
I'm in the process of replacing two home laptops that have gotten weary with age, with rather simple/cheap desktop computers. Both laptops were unique that they were used in combination with external monitors, which was a a rather nice setup, and they (graphics cards and the external monitors) supported 1920x1280 resoution.  While browsing through ads, I noticed that it is more and more difficult to find out the maximum resolution a certain graphics card (or worse, graphics card integrated on a motherboard) supports.  Is there a place, or a way (something, anything ...) where one could go to easily find this out?
108222
Some of the newer tablets and also Notebooks (notably the iPad, Macbook Pro and the Nexus 10 tablet) use displays with ultra-high resolutions at around 300 dpi. This makes text look very, very good, but it also means that images that are not adapted to that resolution can look rather bad in comparison.  Here are some crops from a screenshot from my Nexus 10:    and    These show that the StackExchange button and the logo, which contain text and hard edges, looks noticeably softer on a high-resolution display. This is of course no big deal, but it is very noticeable.  It would be nice if at some point some of the common images on SE sites that contain text or other hard edges would be served as high-resolution versions to devices with such high-resolution displays. This is obviously not a critical issue, but it would be nice if it could be tackled at some point.
62848
I watched a video on youtube (I lost it) that shows rendering parts of the screen to combine them in a single image. I followed it to the point where I couldn't adjust the dimensions under the "set render border", but in the video he had dimensions and I have nothing.  I need it for 4K and 8K renders (without anti-aliasing), but my laptop can't handle it all at once and I don't have time for a 4 hour waiting so this feature will work perfectly.  I'm using version 2.76 so is it moved to another place or removed. Maybe a bug?
11865
The most common width to height ratio rates in the "old good" paper photography seems to be 3:2, which was adopted by today's DSLRs. Early (non-professional) digital cameras adopted 4:3 aspect ratio, which was the industry standard for computer monitors and for consumer TV sets. Prints are often 5:4 (as in 4"x5" or 8"x10"). Wide-format monitors are 16:9. Does anyone have any idea where and why these aspect ratio conventions were adopted in the first place?
25056
I'm planning on buying a 4k monitor, but have heard about some applications, (in general all operating systems) may not be ready for 4k which results in a very bad user experience.   I mostly use standard applications (office, internet browsing, eventually gimp, etc... ) and developing applications (netbeans, mysql workbench, android studio...).   I'm currently running 16.04, Unity desktop.