Just how small is 1920 x 1200 on the Inspiron 6000

teddyFBI · #1 04-25-2005, 07:29 PM

I just purchased the 9300, and while I'm psyched about it, the thing truly is MASSIVE: 17" WUXGA so I could 4-table...the reason i shied away from the 6000 was that I thought 4-tabling on a 15.4" would be too small...but a lot of people seem to manage just fine...for those who have the 6000 and run it at 1920 x 1200 for 4 tables no overlap, can you comment on just how small the tables / cards are? Are we talking "have to squint to make them out" small, or "i really think i'll do damage to my eyes in 2 years" small, or simply "on the smaller side, but i have no trouble making everything out without straining my eyes."

If it's not too much of an eye strain, i might return my 9300 in favor of a 6000 just because the portability of the 9300 isn't all that great...it's gigantic.

smb394 · #2 04-25-2005, 08:37 PM

I've had mine for about a week now, and I think the 1920x1200 is pretty good. I can read the text boxes on each table and the GT+ overlays. When I'm not playing though, I do kick up (down?) the resolution or just make the text on webpages bigger. So, poker is pretty good at that resolution, but I wouldn't use 1920x1200 100% of the time. FWIW, I don't use corrective vision (yet) [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] Hope this helped

Sandstone · #3 04-25-2005, 08:40 PM

When I ordered my 6000 I was worried that the 1920x1200 on a 15 inch screen was going to be way too small.

However, having played around with it for about a week now, I feel those fears are unfounded. The screen is ultra clear and crisp and I feel this ofsets the small size of the text.

All in all, I recommend it.

bonaparte · #4 04-25-2005, 10:25 PM

Glad to hear it's not a problem for you. My 6000 comes tomorrow. I too was torn between the 6000 and 9300. I posted a thread a lot like this one and people seemed to say that the 15.4 inch screen was fine. (You could also use the money you save to help buy a 21 inch monitor for when you do play poker).

AncientPC · #5 04-25-2005, 11:16 PM

I got the 6000, not a problem at all.

IlliniRyRy · #6 04-26-2005, 01:06 AM

yeah the 6000 is awesome. yes, the screen is pretty small but i'm already used to it. there's tons of room even with 4 tables up, i'm really satisfied with my choice.

JeffO · #7 04-26-2005, 03:11 PM

Why is it when people discuss multitabling on laptops they always refer to 1920 x 1200. Is there no such thing as 1600 x 1200? When you do 4 table at 1920 x 1200 are there spaces between the tables, or do they fill out the screen with no overlap?

BusterStacks · #8 04-26-2005, 03:14 PM

The size difference between the 6000 and the 9300 is small. I would evaluate this situation more carefully if I were you.

PuckNPoker · #9 04-26-2005, 03:28 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Why is it when people discuss multitabling on laptops they always refer to 1920 x 1200. Is there no such thing as 1600 x 1200? When you do 4 table at 1920 x 1200 are there spaces between the tables, or do they fill out the screen with no overlap?

[/ QUOTE ]

There are 1600x1200 laptop screens (UXGA) it is a 4:3 aspect ratio, the Inspiron 9300 is UXGA. The Inspiron 6000 is a WUXGA ("Wide" UXGA) which is a 16:9 aspect ratio with 1920x1200 max resolution.

teddyFBI · #10 04-26-2005, 04:00 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The size difference between the 6000 and the 9300 is small. I would evaluate this situation more carefully if I were you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you explain what you mean? I know you have the 9300...are you saying that there's not much dif b/t the table sizes as they appear on the 9300 and 6000?? Are you happy with the 9300 you got or do you have some misgivings about not having got the 6000, which would have served your needs just fine and is not as bulky??