Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

ronnbot

macrumors newbie
Oct 27, 2012
5
0
Terrible news. With the latest 10.8.2, SetRes app is now DEAD.

NO more 2880x1800.

I'm now going to backup my data and return this MacBook Retina. I only bought it because of the 2880x1800 resolution.

First they take away our rights to make films, then freedom of 2880 resolution, next freedom of speech :)

What are you talking about? I'm on 10.8.2 and my display is at 2880x1800. I use quickres and there's no problem.
 

Xiroteus

macrumors 65816
Mar 31, 2012
1,297
75
Any good reason why this is just not an option, the user can think for the self if it is too small or not.
 

George Knighton

macrumors 65816
Oct 13, 2010
1,391
346
While Apple's new Retina MacBook Pro includes a display measuring 2880x1800 pixels, the default display options do not allow users to run their systems at that raw resolution. Instead, the extra pixels are used to display a higher level of detail on a canvas representing the previous 1440x900 resolution. As a result, windows and user interface elements appear to be the same relative size as on a 1440x900 15" display, but with four times the detail.

That was a very, very intelligent decision for them to make!

If I'd known they were going to do that, I might've been scheduling a replacement for my Macbook Pro.

OSX's lack of a Windows-like "Large Fonts" Option has plagued me ever since I switched to OSX.

My iMac is a 27" with a 2560x1440 native resolution, and I could really and truly use a "Large Fonts" option with it. If I drop down to 1920x1080 there is a visible and drastic reduction in detail that...well...just sucks.

:)
 

arnamak

macrumors member
Dec 8, 2012
39
0
I know this is a pretty old thread, but somebody running this at 2880x1800:
Could you fullscreen terminal and run "tput lines" and "tput cols" solely to to cure my curiosity?
 

Tech198

Cancelled
Mar 21, 2011
15,915
2,151
People siiting close enough to read text at 2880x1800? The only think good this resolution would good for would be graphics, and watching moves.... That would be it.

If your gonna be doing allot of reading of documents in Office/Pages, highlighting cells etc in Numbers.., be prepared to see a doctor after.
 

jevel

macrumors regular
Dec 7, 2003
166
0
I know this is a pretty old thread, but somebody running this at 2880x1800:
Could you fullscreen terminal and run "tput lines" and "tput cols" solely to to cure my curiosity?

On a 13" retina at 2560 x 1600 my numbers are 113 / 425.

-KJ
 

thetruest

macrumors regular
Oct 21, 2012
131
0
I sometimes regret the HD option of my MBP. Too small for my eyes (I hit 40 this year)... So imagine this...

IF I ever get a rMBP, it would be for the "crisper" 1440x900 resolution not the "kill my eyes in 2 months resolution".

But that's just me. To each his own!


it doesnt goddamn kill ur eyes in 2 months. It improves ur eyes in 2 months. No, that fact is not to each his own: just dont (never) strain or squint while looking at the screen (or anything). MOVE closer to the screen instead, until the detail becomes legible for you. If for some reason u cant discern whats on the screen without doin so, or u feel ur nose touching the txt ur tryin to look @ then 1) get glasses/see a doctor (possibly a shrink), or 2) dont use the resolution.

sigh thread - so much misinformation on eyesight
 

NewbieCanada

macrumors 68030
Oct 9, 2007
2,574
37
it doesnt goddamn kill ur eyes in 2 months. It improves ur eyes in 2 months. No, that fact is not to each his own: just dont (never) strain or squint while looking at the screen (or anything). MOVE closer to the screen instead, until the detail becomes legible for you. If for some reason u cant discern whats on the screen without doin so, or u feel ur nose touching the txt ur tryin to look @ then 1) get glasses/see a doctor (possibly a shrink), or 2) dont use the resolution.

sigh thread - so much misinformation on eyesight

Not a whole lot of point in giving advice to someone who posted over two years ago and wasn't seeking advice.
 

thetruest

macrumors regular
Oct 21, 2012
131
0
Not a whole lot of point in giving advice to someone who posted over two years ago and wasn't seeking advice.

too much coffee today? i dont care if he wasnt seeking advice or not; there was alot of misinformation on eyesight in the thread, and i got tired of seeing, havin to read, etc., the same damn erroneous rhetoric repeated over and over in the thread (a main thread that comes up on search engines for rMBP native res), with no correction. Thats why i mentioned that very point at the end of my post - and if u had any reading skill whatsoever u should have been able to infer that.

Not a whole lot of point in posts that offer 0 advice or help and miss the point entirely.

sigh thread readin comprehension now
 

GenesisST

macrumors 68000
Jan 23, 2006
1,802
1,055
Where I live
too much coffee today? i dont care if he wasnt seeking advice or not; there was alot of misinformation on eyesight in the thread, and i got tired of seeing, havin to read, etc., the same damn erroneous rhetoric repeated over and over in the thread (a main thread that comes up on search engines for rMBP native res), with no correction. Thats why i mentioned that very point at the end of my post - and if u had any reading skill whatsoever u should have been able to infer that.

Not a whole lot of point in posts that offer 0 advice or help and miss the point entirely.

sigh thread readin comprehension now

Wow... two years after the fact... I had to read my post back...

I didn't mean that retina would be bad for my eye sight. I meant that the (pre-retina) 1680x1050 versus 1440x900 was a bit too small for me.

With retina, size-wise, it is equivalent to 1440x900 with more crispness... So text will be both bigger and crisper than my current 1680x1050.
 

George Knighton

macrumors 65816
Oct 13, 2010
1,391
346
I didn't mean that retina would be bad for my eye sight. I meant that the (pre-retina) 1680x1050 versus 1440x900 was a bit too small for me.

With retina, size-wise, it is equivalent to 1440x900 with more crispness... So text will be both bigger and crisper than my current 1680x1050.

Can't wait to finally get a choice like that with a 27" iMac.

:)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.