Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Dec 21, 2011, 11:37 AM   #26
Small White Car
macrumors G3
 
Small White Car's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Washington DC
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardBeer View Post
Won't the increase in pixels put an increased strain on the GPU? Apple doesn't supply very powerful ones to begin with. I imagine if people want to do any 3D work it would maybe then cause performance issues?
I'm betting that the "Open in HIDPI" button in that screenshot will change to "Don't Open in HIDPI" in the final version.

Just like the "Open in 32 Bit" option, it'll be there for those who need it. Yeah, probably After Effects and Motion users will end up disabling it for those programs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RoboCop001 View Post
I believe the problem being referred to exists more with 3rd party displays rather than the Apple displays.
Perhaps, but I still think that's a great bit of knowledge for developers...that a 2013 Mac product will work the same, screen-wise, as a 2011 version of that same product.

Which is all I'm saying...that this is helpful info to have.
Small White Car is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2011, 11:43 AM   #27
kiljoy616
macrumors 68000
 
kiljoy616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: USA
So what is going to run this video wise. That is a lot of pixels to push, have to wonder what new GPU are going to be implemented for the Pro and then Air.
__________________
AppleTV 2 + Ipad 2 64 GB (My jukebox) + iMac 27" i5 2.8Ghz 256GB SSD + 1TD HD + Macbook Air 2011 13" SSD 128GB iPhone 4S White
kiljoy616 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2011, 11:48 AM   #28
akira2501
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
for the geeks

the normal consumer who doesnt come here will buy and buy away. this is for us so that we can drool and buy one when it comes out. Do you really think this billon dollar company is dumb enough to leave this stuff in the code without trying to start rumors. It's a controlled leak. Behold the awesomeness of apple's marketing dept.
__________________
i don't drink kool-aid

i eat the powder
akira2501 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2011, 11:50 AM   #29
thesheep
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yvan256 View Post
I wish people would stop saying "provide developers with an easy way to scale existing artwork" when it's about computers, that's just nonsense.

That might be true for devices with known, fixed resolutions that are upgraded (ex: iPhone's 320x480 upgraded to the iPhone 4's 640x960), but it's completely pointless for computers which have various resolutions to begin with.
Whilst they don't target a specific overall screen size, the various UI components (buttons, menus, lists, etc) are usually created at a specific size. This would give developers a way to increase the resolution (quality) of these graphics, keeping the size the same.
__________________
www.thesheep.co.uk
thesheep is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2011, 11:53 AM   #30
JHankwitz
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Send a message via AIM to JHankwitz
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3bs View Post
Would this have any effect on battery life?
Of course it will. Having to perform 4 times the calculations will use more power.
JHankwitz is offline   -2 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2011, 11:56 AM   #31
somebody else
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: NJ
New displays

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmChimera View Post
So are they going to have a unified resolution for the Macbook Pro's? Right now they have the 1680 x 1050 and the 1440 x 900. Are they pixel doubling the former or the latter? I really don't want to lose the extra estate the higher resolution afforded, but wouldn't mind if they increased the resolution as a whole and pixel doubled that.
Yeah what is the deal here - will they only offer one screen resolution? Will the new "retina" screen still be better than the current upgrade to 1680 x 1050?
__________________
iPod Hi-Fi, Black 5th Gen iPod 80 GB
Verizon iPhone 4 16 GB
Retina Macbook Pro 2.7/16/500
somebody else is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2011, 12:01 PM   #32
mbh
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Since we are talking about pixels here, not printer dots, shouldn't this mode be called "HiPPI" ?
mbh is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2011, 12:02 PM   #33
nagromme
macrumors G4
 
nagromme's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yvan256 View Post
I wish people would stop saying "provide developers with an easy way to scale existing artwork" when it's about computers, that's just nonsense.

That might be true for devices with known, fixed resolutions that are upgraded (ex: iPhone's 320x480 upgraded to the iPhone 4's 640x960), but it's completely pointless for computers which have various resolutions to begin with.
Not relevant: you’re thinking about the “working area”—or whatever you want to call it: the size of windows and buttons as seen and experience by the user. That varies and always has.

This feature is nothing to do with the size of the display itself, but rather the pixel density. That matters just as much when the display size is unknown as when it is known. Your own quote makes the point: “scale existing artwork.” Not scale entire apps and UIs—we’ve met that challenge long ago. But scale the artwork, specifically.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WildCowboy View Post
The statement refers primarily to onscreen elements. Buttons, icons, and other user interface elements need to be scaled up so that they appear at the same relative size as on current-resolution displays.
Exactly! The challenges of a desktop app are NOT the same as for an iOS app.

Desktop apps already have to adapt to different “working area” sizes. Doubling the res doesn’t add that much to that challenge: the app doubles automatically and the “working area” remains the same. The app often need not even be aware that each pixel now means two. The OS will handle most of that.

It’s the assets within the app that are a challenge to scale, and using an even double IS a big help.
nagromme is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2011, 12:03 PM   #34
jhende7
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: May 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yvan256 View Post
I wish people would stop saying "provide developers with an easy way to scale existing artwork" when it's about computers, that's just nonsense.

That might be true for devices with known, fixed resolutions that are upgraded (ex: iPhone's 320x480 upgraded to the iPhone 4's 640x960), but it's completely pointless for computers which have various resolutions to begin with.

Nobody out there makes software that targets exactly 1440x900. Computer users use anything between 640x480 up to 2560x2048. Even the aspect ratio isn't fixed.
It's still a lot more convenient to scale interface elements in multiples (ie 2X) then to scale them some awkward resolution. It's lot easier to scale a 2X2 image to 4X4, instead of scaling some weird increment.

Additionally, the resolution doubling makes it a practical move for the development environment for Retina iPhone and iPad displays. For instance a Retina iPad graphic on a Retina MBP, will look the same as a non-Retina iPad graphic on a non-retina MBP. By consistently doubling the resolution of all products the only perceived difference for developers will be the clarity of the graphics.

Last edited by jhende7; Dec 21, 2011 at 12:07 PM. Reason: grammar...
jhende7 is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2011, 12:22 PM   #35
dagamer34
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Houston, TX
I shudder to think how much power the GPU will be sucking down to push that many pixels on screen. That's more than the 27" ACD.
__________________
15" MacBook Pro with Retina Display | Mac mini | iPad Air with LTE | iPhone 5
dagamer34 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2011, 12:24 PM   #36
Phenotype
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
As a Web Designer this makes very little sense to me. Every 72 DPI web graphic you view on a HiDPI display is going to be pixelated because it will have to scale to double the size. So what does this mean for Web Designers? Will we be forced to create 2 versions of every website? And every website that isn't HiDPI is going to look awful on a HiDPI monitor?
Phenotype is offline   -1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2011, 12:31 PM   #37
avanpelt
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Maybe I'm just dense, but am I really going to notice the improvement of a "retina display" when I sit a foot and a half away from the screen? My phone is usually four to six inches from my face, and I can definitely see a difference between, say, an iPhone 3G and an iPhone 4.

Apple displays are crazy expensive as it is. How much more of a premium will a "retina display" be and would it really be worth it -- that's the million dollar question.
avanpelt is offline   -1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2011, 12:50 PM   #38
Yvan256
macrumors 601
 
Yvan256's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phenotype View Post
As a Web Designer this makes very little sense to me. Every 72 DPI web graphic you view on a HiDPI display is going to be pixelated because it will have to scale to double the size. So what does this mean for Web Designers? Will we be forced to create 2 versions of every website? And every website that isn't HiDPI is going to look awful on a HiDPI monitor?
Just zoom every element at twice the size. Means the exact same image as far as bitmaps are concerned but sharper text rendering.

Most decent browsers can already do this. Last time I checked, Opera even had the setting in percentage.
__________________
The first 90% of the code accounts for the first 90% of the development time. The remaining 10% of the code accounts for the other 90% of the development time. -Tom Cargill, Bell Labs.
Yvan256 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2011, 01:01 PM   #39
timd.mackey
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phenotype View Post
As a Web Designer this makes very little sense to me. Every 72 DPI web graphic you view on a HiDPI display is going to be pixelated because it will have to scale to double the size. So what does this mean for Web Designers? Will we be forced to create 2 versions of every website? And every website that isn't HiDPI is going to look awful on a HiDPI monitor?
If you leave your images at the same resolution, you have only 2 options when doubling the pixel density of a screen. Either all your images become ridiculously small (which is what would happen with current software), or they get scaled to the right size with slightly less sharpness than if they were full-resolution for that screen's pixel density. Apple's solution makes perfect sense when applied to current websites.
timd.mackey is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2011, 01:01 PM   #40
heisetax
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Omaha, NE
What is new here?

The only thing that would make this new is if this was to make an easy way to change the resolution of the display used without changing the size of the output. It isn't just the size of the buttons & icons that cause a problem. I know that it is a lot harder for those that are becoming more visually challenged that the 1920 X 1200 resolution on the 17" MacBook Pro makes most items very hard to read. Part of that may be because I use 30" displays,a 28" one & a 47" one. So most things are at a much larger size.

This work needs to be done whether any new displays are ever made,
heisetax is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2011, 01:13 PM   #41
quazitron
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phenotype View Post
As a Web Designer this makes very little sense to me. Every 72 DPI web graphic you view on a HiDPI display is going to be pixelated because it will have to scale to double the size. So what does this mean for Web Designers? Will we be forced to create 2 versions of every website? And every website that isn't HiDPI is going to look awful on a HiDPI monitor?
DPI doesn't make *any* difference on a screen. It's pixels that count. 72 is not a magic number, and you will not be affected.

http://www.dpiphoto.eu/dpi.htm
quazitron is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2011, 01:24 PM   #42
Ryth
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Seriously...just take my money already...been waiting for this MBPro for a year now.
Ryth is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2011, 01:41 PM   #43
hayesk
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: May 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by dagamer34 View Post
I shudder to think how much power the GPU will be sucking down to push that many pixels on screen. That's more than the 27" ACD.
Uhm... said machines are capable of driving two, sometimes, three 27" ACDs today. One slightly higher than a 27" ACD will be handled just fine.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phenotype View Post
As a Web Designer this makes very little sense to me. Every 72 DPI web graphic you view on a HiDPI display is going to be pixelated because it will have to scale to double the size. So what does this mean for Web Designers? Will we be forced to create 2 versions of every website? And every website that isn't HiDPI is going to look awful on a HiDPI monitor?
Remember, the pixels will be twice as small, so it will look pretty much the same. Doubling an image is not a problem. It's when you don't have integer scaling factors that it becomes a problem. And if put in the effort you make 144 dpi web graphics, they'll just look much better.

Unless you are a terrible web developer, you won't have to create two versions of every web site. Non-HiDPI images will look the same, Hi-DPI images will look better. As long as you pay attention to the scaling factor that is already accessible and supported in web browsers today, you'll be fine.
hayesk is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2011, 01:54 PM   #44
johnnyturbouk
macrumors 65816
 
johnnyturbouk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: London
a 'retina' display on a MBA and touch screen interface is the way apple is heading Imo

soon iOS will consume osx -
__________________
An fanboi since in-utero
johnnyturbouk is offline   -3 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2011, 02:20 PM   #45
Akack
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: T E X A S
/drool
__________________
Enough gadgets.
Akack is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2011, 02:22 PM   #46
marcusj0015
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dokujaryu View Post
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

This is coming with Ivy Bridge? I wonder how this relates to the possible move to nVidia for graphics, and how the performance of Ive Bridge gpu can handle that Rez.

Edit: I mean with gpu enhanced ui elements like melt into dock and shadows. I find weak GPUs slow significantly with resolution.

In any case, I'll probably wait for rev. b if they make such a huge hardware change like this.
I SO hope they stick with AMD for graphics.

especially since the 7x series has DirectX 11.1
marcusj0015 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2011, 02:38 PM   #47
marcusj0015
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: U.S.A.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Small White Car View Post
Well, wait.

If I have some software that appears to be 6" x 4" on a 15" Macbook Pro, I will know that it will be 6" x 4" on a retina 15" Macbook Pro. (Rather than the expected 3" x 2" which would necessitate changes on my end.)

As a developer that's useful information. It means I can start work on making sure it works fine on a 27" iMac and an 11" Air but that I DON'T have to spend time making 2 versions for both 'old' and 'new' 15" Macbooks.

Knowing what I do and do not have to spend time working on is not "nonsense."
Ok, but how won't this doubled image be doubled on the non-retina devices? is there a script or something that will load the right images?
marcusj0015 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2011, 02:44 PM   #48
Small White Car
macrumors G3
 
Small White Car's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Washington DC
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcusj0015 View Post
Ok, but how won't this doubled image be doubled on the non-retina devices? is there a script or something that will load the right images?
No no....I'm talking about the other way around. I'm talking about the developer who does nothing to their program. So:

Original Image on old screen: Normal
Original Image on new screen: System automatically doubles both ways

So the point is that a developer doesn't HAVE to change anything if he or she doesn't want to.

What you're talking about is the developer who wants to go in and change their software to have higher-resolution graphics. In that case I'm not sure if they'll have to put both sizes in their program of if they'll somehow code it know when and where to shrink to half size. I don't know how that works.

But the point is that that person has gone out of their way because they want to mess around with their program. They'll learn what they need to do because they want to.

But all of my other comments were about the opposite person...the developers who don't update their apps.
Small White Car is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2011, 03:20 PM   #49
Fraaaa
macrumors 65816
 
Fraaaa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: London, UK
Nice thing. How about a cinema display with a graphic card that can be plug to the Thunderbolt port in my MacBook Air?
__________________
MacBook Air & iPhone4S
The Next Generation of MacBooks is Here!
Fraaaa is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2011, 04:12 PM   #50
sampers
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Belgium
So for now checking the box doesn't do anything? why is it there then..

If it is something in the line of doubling an image, can't it be more viewable when monitor is put in lower resolution?
let's say you put the monitor in 800*600 of a screen that's capable of showing 1920*1200. than maybe if checking that box means doubling, the monitor should be capable of doing it?
__________________
Blog of unintended apple usage <!> Death Straight to Live Wrong!
sampers is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:55 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC