• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Phones size always described by height and not width. Why

Papamalo

Papamalo

Android Enthusiast
I've noticed that you can easily figure out how wide a phone's screen is pretty easily, but, in promotional materials and ads, they always refer to the height, but omit the width.
I find this strange because we read language and text on a width field, and not up and down. This has made for some great phones, (Samsung Galaxy series s7 and s8 in particular) tall and skinny, which is actually not the best field array for a text rich environment.

So why don't phone manufacturers just say "With a new screen that is 6.1 X 3.2 wide"?

Just curious.
 
I agree with psionandy.

In previous generations of android phones, the aspect ratio was pretty stable at 16:9. Everything scales together and you can describe it with one number like the diagonal.

Now there is a trend toward taller narrower phones with aspect ratio 18:9 or even higher. Using one number is a misleading comparison when comparing among devices with different aspect ratios. My new Galaxy S9+ with diagonal dimension 6.2" (at over 18/9 aspect ratio) is narrower and has less screen area area than my "old" (*) Nexus 6 with diagonal dimension 5.93". (*I miss her... she's still going strong on Lineage 0S, but has been cast aside due to the AT&T bogo sale when upgrading service on shiny new galaxy phones)
 
electricpete said:
I agree with psionandy.

In previous generations of android phones, the aspect ratio was pretty stable at 16:9. Everything scales together and you can describe it with one number like the diagonal.

Now there is a trend toward taller narrower phones with aspect ratio 18:9 or even higher. Using one number is a misleading comparison when comparing among devices with different aspect ratios. My new Galaxy S9+ with diagonal dimension 6.2" (at over 18/9 aspect ratio) is narrower and has less screen area area than my "old" (*) Nexus 6 with diagonal dimension 5.93". (*I miss her... she's still going strong on Lineage 0S, but has been cast aside due to the AT&T bogo sale when upgrading service on shiny new galaxy phones)
Click to expand...

TVs and Monitors went through a similar change.. when 4:3 was king... then everyone knew exactly what you were getting with a 19" or 22" screen...

then Widescreen came in, and a 22" was either a massive square, or a long thin letterbox
 
Wow I didn't know all that.
It's why back in the day and now, I 've always sought phones that were a little wider as opposed to long. I mean, we read side to side, not up and down, right? also lots of apps and web pages looked squished (To me at least) in models like the galaxy s7 edge (long and thin)
 
Last edited:
By current standards the S7E isn't really long and thin. It's actually got a 16:9 screen, but folding the edges down makes it narrower (but arguably makes the screen a bit less usable). Current Samsung flagships both have a taller aspect ratio and fold the edges down, taking it even further.

Personally I find wide phones unusably awkward, so my tastes are probably the opposite of yours.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom