…all the attempts to copywrite these things was like copywriting the toothbrush…
“Grammar is the difference between knowing your shit… and knowing you’re shit.” 
-e
And then one can be casual when the context makes it clear, but point taken.
I feel like a good compromise is using square monitors, but then again that’s where it all started, isn’t it?
phones like the samsung z fold could be 2:4 for mobile use, and open up for 4:4, or even just be used bent in a 90 degree angle for a quick touch keyboard, much like the Lenovo x1 fold.
Fascinating reply! Thank you for the reveal!
That whole period I find fascinating. The scale of innovation in the USA was awesome then. Research wise I mainly focus on innovative developments is “bodywork / somatics” during that period but got very aware that “Feldenkrais leg movements” were not so different from improved “variable height thumb” coding! .
Best, TT
I don’t know. How far are you going back? When is the “start?”
Small comment: cathode-ray tubes (the first monitors) were easiest circular, I think?
I really don’t know. Some social-historical facts might be useful here?
But, where do we find them?
Just a comment, not a critique, TT
You guys can keep reminiscing, but I am kind of done with this topic…my practical outcome was removing the base from my external screen. Most of the time I use it horizontally, but when I want to read on my Kindle for PC app or my Logos software, I flip it to portrait orientation and change the screen settings.
My next step needs to be to find a way to secure it better, in case of earthquake, since we live in an earthquake zone.
Thanks to all for your interesting comments!
2 Likes
Yep, more like a sectioned sphere which the beam could “sweep” radially – radar scopes are like a 2D full-360 sweeper, to give you an idea.
The “shape” initially was “serial linear”, if anything, and essentially endless – teletype/printer.
1 Like
Ah, fair point, I was mostly referring to when personal computers were becoming more mainstream, when 4:3 displays were used commercially.
And I believe you are right, cathode-ray tubes came in all shapes and sizes, so not necessarily square.
@DaveGifford Something I could recommend as far as earthquake proof is doing as someone above suggested, using a VR headset, such as an Oculus Quest 2 and Virtual Desktop (An application the device can run.) or running Android apps from the device itself, then all you would need to worry about is a keyboard.
An interesting keyboard I saw was the tap strap 2, though it doesn’t type in the traditional way that other qwerty keyboards do.
Oh we’ve long ago forgotten about you Dave (careful what you wish for get started) 
1 Like
How kind of you.
You might need Acme Glue …
Happy sticking with it,
TT
Right! 4:3 aspect ratio. The same as TV of the time that likely shaped it’s uptake.
TT
Yeah by saying “you guys can keep reminiscing” I was trying to avoid arrogance, not to be arrogant. It wasn’t about giving you permission…I was just trying to say, “I’m checking out, you guys do what you want with this thread.”
1 Like
Eek. You are right. But my reply was not anti-arrogance either. Just a fun attempt!
J, x
There was a startup streaming company, just the last couple years that was based on creating very short media segments that were for portrait mode only. Their studies indicated that people didn’t like turning their screens 90 degrees for netflix, amazon, etc. They commissioned their own little movies and what-not, with producers that only worked from the portrait perspective. I was skeptical, because I think people are a little pickier about content than that. But I’ve been wrong so many times about tech that I tried to keep an open mind. They went under.
Edit. Quibi. Made content that would work in portrait or landscape. Raised nearly 2 billion in capital.
Just a comment. Portrait has real advantages on line length that improve readability of text (all other things being equal) … BUT the morphing of what a web page can natively do obviates any claim to fame that portrait(text)-in-portrait(ratio) is best when you can easily do (centraled, narrowed) portrait text in a landscape viewport.
TT
I will just add a few points relating to this subject;
- Even when people claimed a cathode ray screen or TV was 4:3 or square this was not technically also flat (it was convex in one dimension). It took the lcd etc before flat screens were available.
- It all depends on the size of your screen, which large table top or wall screens demonstrate
- When you have lots of screen the apps on it can be portrait or landscape as needed
- Consider a very wide screen, perhaps curved “concave” like a gaming monitor. If wide and especially tall enough then it is possible to have a portrait window that is practical to use.
So in conclusion I am saying it’s all about size, as long as we have “small” screens it is about screen orientation, larger screens it is about application window orientation.
[Typos fixed]
1 Like
You will? Is that how one does this?
1 Like
I think that is very true.
But the form-factor has a strong relation to “possibilities” that are viable.
There is a socio-cultural-techno thing too. Arbitrary sizing of “windows” is becoming foreign, even though there for yonks (for a long time), mainly because most people’s computer’s are now smallish phones.
Assertion: Smart phones Resurrected Unassailable Portrait.
Just a comment
TT
1 Like