HiDPI Retina Images in Mountain Lion, Already Functional in OS X Lion

[gugy]

PLEASE!!!!
Larger than 30" ACD with matte screen. Come on Apple, 27" is too small.

[QuarterSwede]

Originally Posted by slapple

But is the Mac OS X any closer to having resolution independence?

I want to stop running my 1680x1050 15" MBP in the slightly blurry non-native 1440x852 resolution. (I do that because all the text at 1680x1050 looks too small.)

It's assumed Apple's stopped working on that in favor of HiDPI bitmaps and larger fonts. If they do the conversion they way they did iOS (from non retina to retina) then the user won't notice a difference with the exception of a much sharper screen. The text will scale perfectly and look sharper to boot.

[Moonjumper]

HiDPI definately looks to be on the way. Hope we don't have to wait a Mountain Lion before it mauls the opposition.

[QuarterSwede]

Originally Posted by applesith

The text should not be so pixelated like the graphics. Text is a vector by default and will not get fuzzy when it's increased.

Oh he was talking about the left image. Got it. Should've thought of that.

Either way, as you said, text is easy to scale, it's the bitmaps that show you the big difference and that was my main point.

[Kafka]

Originally Posted by xgman

Why would this signal anything but "air display" for the ipad?

Just what I was thinking...

[neilpryde23]

Retina display would be awesome but I really want IPS display!!

[gklka]

http://gk.lka.hu/2012/03/retina-display-mac-en/

Here are some other screenshots on my blog. It seems the Preferences is fully Retina-enabled now.

[Ironduke]

Originally Posted by QuarterSwede

It's assumed Apple's stopped working on that in favor of HiDPI bitmaps and larger fonts. If they do the conversion they way they did iOS (from non retina to retina) then the user won't notice a difference with the exception of a much sharper screen. The text will scale perfectly and look sharper to boot.

Agreed essentially its all about apple getting the GUI sorted for Different DPI's
The View of an application is already where it should be, You can already zoom apps like Safari to what ever suits you

[coldmack]

Originally Posted by neilpryde23

Retina display would be awesome but I really want IPS display!!

Though it would be pricey, at least it is a pricey option for those HP notebooks, I would love an IPS display.



I am sure if Apple brought out a "Retina" display on the MBA/MBP line there would be a lot of people complaining the text is a bit small. Hell, when the Sony Vaio Z came out with its optional 1080p display there were a few Apple fans saying that too high of a res for 13in display. Hell, I even read a few people who own that model with that particular res, found a bit hard to use as text is a bit small.

[bedifferent]

New displayS for my Mac Pro!

(and please make the cables long enough to reach, and more than one size would be nice, say 20/23/30 - seem familiar )

I tried this on one of my 24" LED LCD's at 960x600 (HiDPI) and I was amazed! What a difference, I would love to see this at higher resolutions with HiDPI displays. Wow.

[Kludge420]

The good news is when Apple puts the beautiful hires displays in the iMac and MacBook Pros they will finally have to put a decent video card into them by default.

The bad news is Apple will once again put in just enough horse power to drive the new display but we won't see any real improvement for gaming. Just like the iPad 3rd gen.

Of course when you're looking at a 27 inch Retina display you'll be too busy drooling for much of that to matter.

[coldmack]

I dunno how much we would be drooling if that retina display is a bog standard LCD display. IPS on the other hand we would drool, but only away from the computer as at least on some brands its a $400-600 option over LCD. Hopefully, that means if they do keep it LCD, they would increase the color gamut from crappy budget levels(seriously 50% level for the MBA is abysmal) to a more respectable 85% or higher(and matte options on all models would be nice).

[Crzyrio]

I am very happy with my screen, everything looks as clear as it needs to be from where I sit.

I don't want a 'retina' display mac, especially on the 13in MacBooks. These MacBooks just have enough graphic performance for me to play my games, a retina display would require a much beefier graphics card would it not?

I would much prefer a better graphics card that in my macbook that will help me to run games, render etc, that have it use its power to give me a hi res screen.

[dusk007]

Originally Posted by Kludge420

The bad news is Apple will once again put in just enough horse power to drive the new display but we won't see any real improvement for gaming. Just like the iPad 3rd gen.

You forget that you have the option to play the games at a lower resolution. With a retina display and a good scaling algorithm it should not result in fuzzy graphics like it does today. If you play on a 20% lower res it looks bad.
If you play at 50% the res it looks perfect.
It is back to CRT scaling for gaming in a way. You can pick the resolution you want and it will always look good. Today I usually prefer to play at native (1080p) and disable AA rather than play at 900p or 720p and enable more details.

A stronger GPU, decent scaling logic and the resolution to choose sounds like a very good deal to me.

I still doubt it will show. I just don't believe it is viable yet. The cost is too high and no real pressure on Apple to do it. The iPad had lots of competition with screens at least as good. Samsung developed the display and it would have ended up in some tablets. The higher power consumption doesn't hurt as much.
MBP's there is hardly any real competition. Most notebook displays are crap. A bigger screen cost a lot and you'd need a bigger battery to balance it out. Not sure if they think it is worth it.

[[DL]]

Originally Posted by charlieegan3

ask for more.

Uh, no thanks. Retina-displays are quite fine.

[BRLawyer]

Until they come up with a 2560 x 1440 HiDPI mode for big-screen iMacs (or, at the very least, 1920 x 1200), this is virtually useless for anyone other than 11" MBA users...

[twoodcc]

really looking forward to this! especially on the next macbook air!

[CarlosTheJackl]

MBA = new standard Macbook Line?

MBP = old MBP with design / tech queues from the MBA, such as no optical drive and flash memory etc., however will still be thicker due to a retina display?

[Kludge420]

Originally Posted by dusk007

You forget that you have the option to play the games at a lower resolution.

Good point. I often play at lower than native resolution but as you also said it can look fuzzy so it's not optimal.

With a Crossfire 6870 setup on a PC you can play at 2650 x 1600 with virtually no problems and that setup will only cost you about $380. That's about what Apple would charge you for video card upgrade and a tiny bit of memory that won't make a bit of difference.

Of course we all know it's not about the cost it's about the experience and gaming on Macs isn't an optimal experience when compared to the PC.

[Mr. Gates]

Oh my god...how ever will I live without this hardly noticeable bump ?

It this what goes for an update nowadays in Apple Land ???

[Gruber]

Originally Posted by QuarterSwede

It's assumed Apple's stopped working on that [Resolution Independence] in favor of HiDPI bitmaps and larger fonts. ... The text will scale perfectly and look sharper to boot.

At the moment, MacOS is designed for a resolution below 100dpi (extremely noticeable in the scaling of Office documents!) and current Macbooks already run above that. As a result, people above the age of 35 often have difficulty using MacOS.

If Apple simply quadruples the resolution, the squinting problem won't change. Especially since every Macbook form factor has its own resolution.

It is embarrassing that Microsoft has nailed resolution independence since Windows XP, while Apple has given up on it.

[Gruber]

Originally Posted by Tatonnement

We'll have retina display MBPs before summer!!

That is what the rumors say. However, some caveats:

1. The Macbook Air has been the technology showcase in the past. Also, its last refresh has been quite a while ago.

2. Lion has HiDpi modes still hidden, so the update is likely to appear at or after the launch of Mountain Lion (June). Also, Ivy Bridge, which will help in rendering all that goodness, is due in summer.

3. 13in MBPs are Apple's low end model, so the 13in MBA would be a more logical choice.

The current max resolution for Thunderbolt displays is 2560×1440. It might make sense to keep it that way for now, so the logical resolution of HiDpi screens would be 1280 x 720. That means a noticeable drop in what you can fit on your screen on all models, but it is close to the 11in MBA (1380 x 768) and the 13in MBP (1280 x 800). On the other hand, while the 15in MBP would loose a lot of useable space, its current dot pitch is the lowest (at 110dpi). A retina update might bring that up to a reasonable 200dpi.

[hayesk]

Originally Posted by slapple

But is the Mac OS X any closer to having resolution independence?

I want to stop running my 1680x1050 15" MBP in the slightly blurry non-native 1440x852 resolution. (I do that because all the text at 1680x1050 looks too small.)

Agreed. Macs work with many different screens with many different pixel sizes. HiDPI only makes sense when you have constant screen sizes - e.g. 3.5" and 9.7" iOS devices.

However, I'm sure Apple's reasoning is that it's mitigated on the desktop by the use of a high precision pointing device rather than a touch based UI.

[andreiru]

Retina screen is really cool. Everything comes to life so much. I love it.

[QuarterSwede]

Originally Posted by Gruber

At the moment, MacOS is designed for a resolution below 100dpi (extremely noticeable in the scaling of Office documents!) and current Macbooks already run above that. As a result, people above the age of 35 often have difficulty using MacOS.

If Apple simply quadruples the resolution, the squinting problem won't change. Especially since every Macbook form factor has its own resolution.

It is embarrassing that Microsoft has nailed resolution independence since Windows XP, while Apple has given up on it.

The point was that Apple will use a larger font so that the user will have no idea that anything has changed other than the screen sharpness increasing. Think about going from the iPhone 3G's screen to the iPhone 4's. They look identical (the font doesn't look smaller) other than the iPhone 4's screen is incredibly sharp. Same thing will happen here.

I get the point of different screen sizes but there are also different font sizes.