The first thing I see is a 16x9 screen, think "pass", and close the page. There have to be other LCD panel makers out there. Either their customers don't care and/or the company doesn't care to make a better laptop.
So, please, its hard to call your product "premium" if its screen is worse than a bottom of the barrel tablet.
Because they're cheaper.
>My laptop has a 16:9 that looks worse, and has lower resolution despite the machine costing 6x as much.
Right, so your laptop mfgr spent less money on the screen, charged more money, and got a higher profit margin -> win! This lets their execs get bigger bonuses so they can buy better yachts. What's not to like here?
it was on sale for $199, or $299 with the keyboard.
https://www.bestbuy.com/site/hp-11-tablet-intel-pentium-4gb-...
But only that second link is still in stock.
Its a bit weak on the CPU/RAM front, but for what i'm using it for (ebooks, netflix, and random PCish tasks (largly RDP) when i'm to lazy to get out of bed and grab the laptop) its not a bad device except for the one "issue" which is that it doesn't have a headphone jack. Something I would have probably returned it for had I paid closer to MSRP on it. Its a reasonable upgrade to the chewi windows tablet I was using before, which also has a weak cpu (but more ram) and a screen that isn't as nice.
I like 16x9. What do you want instead?
MS Surface Books are 3:2 for example (2256 x 1504 on 13,5" / 2496 x 1664 on 15"), or some Thinkpad X1 models are 4:3 (probably just the Fold?). The Framework laptop is also 3:2 (2256 x 1504 on 13,5")
On the other hand, I still prefer 16:10 over 16:9 for modern displays.
I agree video content might look a little strange unless it was kept on either the top or bottom, and not full screened.
Maybe in time that will change, but that's just how Linux is for now.
The fix, unfortunately, is blame the hardware. Desktop monitors that don't approach standard DPIs shouldn't be still produced in the 2020s, 24" 1080p and 24" 4k are perfectly common and optimal for their intended uses.
And yes, I think 27" 1440p shouldn't exist... it isn't an integer multiple of 1080p (thus a poorly handled edge case of scaling rasterized media resources, ie, videos), but also, if you wish to maintain proper intended DPI scaling for ye average asset, 1440p needs to be 32".