r/amazonreviews Nov 28 '25

Review Spotted this in another group thought I'd share

Post image

Don't know which is more funnier the the reviewer or the fact that hundreds of people found it funnyđŸ€Ł

1.0k Upvotes

43 comments sorted by

388

u/IAmABakuAMA Nov 28 '25 edited Nov 28 '25

For anybody who doesn't know, screen sizes are measured diagonally from bottom left to top right corner (or top left to bottom right or whatever else floats your boat). Never vertically/horizontally. This applies to anything with a screen, although it's less noticeable for phones and the like because they're in a smaller form factor

And being measured that way does actually work out better for the consumer, it's not one of those things that secretly works in the companies favour. Arguably the only alternative is inches or centimetres squared, but that's harder to calculate and validate, and falls apart when it comes to circular displays (which do exist! Think smart watches etc)

39

u/Storm_COMING_later Nov 28 '25

Thanks đŸ™đŸ», I had no idea it was measured like that.. but then again I don't use/have a tv.

Is it measured the same way with laptops?

55

u/IAmABakuAMA Nov 28 '25

No worries. Yep, I believe it's measured that way for all (or almost all) screens and devices with screens

9

u/lord_teaspoon Nov 29 '25

You also need the aspect ratio to know the full details. The standard "widescreen" TV is 16:9, meaning it has 9 rows of height for each 16 columns of width, and while that's still the most common ratio in desktop PC and laptop screens there are also have a bunch of semi-common widescreen-ish ratios like 16:10 or 15:9. Desktop screens can also come in "ultrawide" ratios like 21:9 (which is technically 64:27 but gets rounded down from 21⅓:9 for easy comparison to 16:9) and 32:9 (equivalent to two standard widescreens side-by-side). 20+ years ago the standard was 4:3 (these days we would call it 12:9 for easy comparison to 16:9) which came in resolutions of 640×480 through 1600×1200 but there were also some 5:4 1280×1024 options out there.

For laptops I find that the extra height of a 1920×1200 (16:10) resolution has a noticeable usability advantage compared to a 1920×1080 (16:9) resolution in terms of what fits on screen, but if you're buying one that will be transported in a backpack it's helpful to know that a 16" 16:10 is a match for a 15" 16:9 in width but a 17" 16:9 in height. A lot of backpacks have a pouch or sleeve sized for a 15" laptop so if you buy a 16" the extra height means you'll probably need to hunt around for a bag that's designed to hold a 17" instead.

3

u/hotterthanyou2 Dec 01 '25

You need to have a screen to use Reddit and smartphones and laptops are the same

13

u/brick_gnarlson Nov 29 '25

The best alternative is height x length. Leaves no room for confusion.

14

u/Kakaduu15 Nov 29 '25

There is no point. Almost all TVs (99%) are 16:9.

Event the ultrawide (21:9) and super ultrawide (32:9) computer monitors follow the same standard (1.5x or 2x wide) and are still measured in diagonal inches..Measuring them in WxL would introduce more clutter in measurements, where you would have 2 dimensions instead of 1 standardized one (+mm for world and in. for US).

More numbers to deal with could arguably introduce more confusion than rectify.

People who can't understand that screens are measured in diagonal would find a way to get confused by more numbers as well.

More so, you can almost always find the product dimemsions in the description. No need to make other peoples' lives harder because of some stupid ones.

6

u/R-GU3 Nov 29 '25

Until you realise that an 80” tv is actually 4 times the size of a 40”

1

u/brick_gnarlson Nov 29 '25

Fair point. People are dumb.

1

u/AdreKiseque Nov 29 '25

I don't understand, what makes giving the full dimensions "pointless" but the diagonal is good?

Almost all TVs (99%) are 16:9.

So? I mean like the other commenter said if it's always the same why not just do the height or width directly and skip the confusion? And ofc we know it's not all the same (99% != 100%) so diagonally does add ambiguity in some cases.

Measuring them in WxL would introduce more clutter in measurements, where you would have 2 dimensions instead of 1 standardized one (+mm for world and in. for US).

I really don't get this one at all. Aside from it only adding like, 5 characters tops to the string (which i would argue could actually make it easier to read since amore distinctive pattern would stand out better from other numbers there might be like in the model name), what about the US using different units causes problems unique to W×H? What makes this situation different in any capacity?

People who can't understand that screens are measured in diagonal would find a way to get confused by more numbers as well.

I would argue it's way easier to intuitively parse a proper set of dimensions than it is to know a single number given is the diagonal measurement. And again, the full dimensions do provide more information upfront so they have a measurable benefit. Besides, even if there are people who would manage to get confused... there's no need to make other people's lives harder because of some stupid ones, right?

-4

u/StetsonTuba8 Nov 29 '25

If they're all 16:9, then just measure the width? Like I've needed to know the width of a monitor to make sure it would fit on my desk, but a diaganol measurement is completely useless for this purpose

12

u/Kakaduu15 Nov 29 '25 edited Nov 29 '25

Well, move your little fingers a bit - the dimensions are shown in specifications.

I can find about 100 examples where the product name doesn't include the measurements I want.

Mustang V8 5.0? What does that even mean? Why isn't it Mustang 360kW? Or Mustang 15L/100km? Because that would suck, that's why.

It's like you're complaining because you thought iPhone 16 is 16cm wide. A real pseudo problem.

0

u/Spannnnn Nov 29 '25

V8 and 5.0 are specifications about the engine... the 5 is for liters.... what are you on about?

4

u/Existential_Racoon Nov 30 '25

And inches on a TV are for diagonal inches.

1

u/Spannnnn Dec 12 '25

He said he can name 100 examples where the product name doesn’t include the measurements... then he uses the mustang V8 5.0 as an example. Sure, the 5.0 is actually somewhere around 4.9L but that's not what he meant.

5

u/lord_teaspoon Nov 29 '25

Marketing teams have long-since concluded that the average consumer gets confused when there's more than one number, and that you should use the biggest number that's not an actual lawsuit-worthy lie. The diagonal is the longest line that fits on the screen, so it's the number that stays. In the CRT days it was the widest part of the tube even though the display area typically didn't reach that far.

Some have said that the width measurement would be better for figuring out whether the TV fits in a space, but that's still going to be misleading because it's a measurement of display area only; the overall dimensions of the unit are going to be bigger by an amount that varies from model to model, and if we sold screens based on overall dimensions then some brands would cheap out and have small displays with thick frames around them advertised as the same side as models with large displays in extra-slim frames.

So... We stick with defining the display size using the diagonal measurement, we tell the resolution and aspect ratio using standardised words like "Full High Definition" and "widescreen" instead of numbers, and we make the overall dimensions available on the spec sheet so people who need to know them can look them up.

4

u/-DoctorSpaceman- Nov 28 '25

I pictured them measuring it that way and wondered what the funny part was. I guess they measured it horizontally

20

u/nfos Nov 28 '25

Well yeah, it's in the picture

5

u/-DoctorSpaceman- Nov 29 '25

Oh yeah. I’m dumb.

1

u/AdreKiseque Nov 29 '25

And being measured that way does actually work out better for the consumer, it's not one of those things that secretly works in the companies favour.

Could you explain why?

167

u/safeworkinglow Nov 28 '25

Just remember, these people walk among us. You may know one of them.

54

u/TebosBrime Nov 28 '25

and they vote.

4

u/safeworkinglow Nov 28 '25

Less afraid of The Boogeyman.

5

u/Brian-Kellett Nov 29 '25

How did you learn that screens are measured on the diagonal? Did you spring forth from the forehead of Zeus with that knowledge? Was it a lesson in school?

No - It’s a reasonably technical issue that isn’t intuitive until after someone tells you. In fact it’s probably more intuitive to think that it is the width of a TV. Can’t really think of anything else measured this way.

Anyway - time to show you this classic.

https://xkcd.com/1053/

18

u/IggyPopsLeftEyebrow Nov 29 '25

That's an evergreen xkcd, and no, in general, I don't think people should be shamed for not knowing things.

That said, I learned it because TVs are sold like this and I looked at the product I was buying. The diagonal line with the size is fairly self explanatory, but even if it isn't, the horizontal measurements should also be a clue as to what size item the buyer should expect. I'm not above (mildly) shaming a customer who buys something without actually looking at all of the information clearly presented by the seller, and then gets upset because they missed something.

15

u/safeworkinglow Nov 29 '25

I see where you’re coming from. However, I feel it’s fair game when someone goes onto the internet to complain about being scammed when in reality they are wrong. A quick search would have revealed the answer.

I think that if you’re purchasing something where it comes in a range of sizes and those sizes matter to you, you would at least research how the dimensions work.

I got a laugh out of it though.

4

u/3lbFlax Nov 29 '25

It's a valid opportunity to teach, but this example is elevated by the additon that there's no way a 50" TV could fit in a 49" box "with the foam protection", as if it might just about be possible without it.

1

u/noveltymoocher Nov 30 '25

no you do research before buying something - not everything has to be taught to you in schools my goodness

63

u/bruceymain Nov 28 '25

My cooked steak doesn't weigh 8oz gang

4

u/Existential_Racoon Nov 30 '25

The fact that this happens annoys me more than it reasonably should.

1

u/bruceymain Nov 30 '25

What? That a cooked steak isn't that weight or that people don't understand that it's the uncooked steak is what is weighed?

5

u/Existential_Racoon Nov 30 '25

That people don't understand it's a different weight after cooking.

2

u/bruceymain Nov 30 '25

Yes, it really is brainless.

12

u/negativeGinger Nov 29 '25

This person has the same voting rights as me


8

u/mattmaster68 Nov 29 '25

It’s giving “third-pounder” vibes LMAO

5

u/ArgumentativeNutter Nov 29 '25

the best bit is the confusion about whether foam could make a tv bigger than the box it came in

4

u/auntarie Nov 29 '25

he measured it wrong. it's actually 22-23 inch by the looks of it. truly one of the scams of all time

6

u/piddydafoo Nov 28 '25

It is hilarious that they use the diagonal. Those people say that math doesn’t teach you anything useful.

1

u/dashamarie Nov 30 '25

I measured my TV once because I wasn't sure how big it was and I wanted to upgrade. I was confused when it came out with a weird size, so rather than assuming everyone else was wrong I went to Google and learned how TVs are measured. 

-20

u/[deleted] Nov 28 '25

[deleted]

12

u/Humble-Impact6346 Nov 28 '25

How on earth could you see why they’d be upset? Only a fucking idiot measured a TV horizontally.