My guess is that filling the entire entire screen is common, especially on laptops that aren't hooked up to a monitor, but not common enough to assume that'll always be the case.
It’s also an app issue. I run a 4K monitor on Ubuntu and the majority of apps take the entire screen when they start or open a window. And in many apps I have to tweak things so it becomes readable.
It might be enough to show the text, but there is still no enough space on the screen.
On 1440p disply for example there is so much more to run apps side by side.
I almost exclusively use my laptop split-screen unless I’m doing some work that requires maximization.
Over the last few years increasingly many websites when allocated half the laptop screen have needlessly contorted into less functional layouts appropriate for a phone, but stretched huge.
Why does it use less than half of my monitor width? I'm on a 1920 x 1080, and the feed pane is only 770 pixels wide - and not resizable. What's the purpose of this? Most of the screen estate is wasted for a wallpaper of author's choice, instead of displaying the content I'm actually interested in. I find this design choice really hard to understand.
I remember this happened before several years ago in a previous redesign where the top menu would just stretch to fill the entire screen. It was later changed to one with a proper max width. I guess they forgot that lesson.
reply