Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Dec 14, 2011, 04:28 AM   #1
MacRumors
macrumors bot
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Apple to Launch 2880x1800 Resolution 'Retina Display' MacBook Pro in Q2 2012?




In a report sure to excite our readers, DigiTimes is saying that Apple may be readying an ultra high-resolution MacBook Pro for as early as second quarter (Q2) 2012:
Quote:
Apple is likely to launch its new MacBook Pro lineup with a display resolution of 2880 by 1800 in the second quarter of 2012, setting a new round of competition for panel specifications in the notebook industry, according to sources in the upstream supply chain.
The publication cites supply chain partners as the source for the information which would double the resolution of the MacBook Pro to 2880x1800 pixels.

This new high resolution MacBook Pro would presumably be a 15" model which currently carries a native resolution of 1440x900 pixels. By doubling the resolution in each dimension, Apple would achieve four times the number of pixels and provide developers an easy way to scale existing artwork.




TextEdit running in HiDPI mode, via Arstechnica
We've known about Apple's work to support these ultra high resolution screens, but we didn't necessarily expect them to arrive so soon. That said, support seems to be building for exactly such a thing.

Intel's upcoming Ivy Bridge processors are known to support resolutions as high as 4096x4096. Meanwhile, Apple has already added new "HiDPI" modes in Lion that support this resolution-doubling mode. Apple has even added ultra-high resolution artwork in Lion with desktop images at 3200x2000 pixels and icons at 1024x1024 pixels.

And Apple's not the only company preparing for the possibility. Microsoft is also building in support for high dpi monitors in Windows 8.

A Q2 2012 launch would place it near what has been expected to be the arrival of a 15" MacBook Air. Based on the expected timing of that product (Q1 2012), it seems this MacBook Pro may be a different product altogether.

Article Link: Apple to Launch 2880x1800 Resolution 'Retina Display' MacBook Pro in Q2 2012?
MacRumors is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2011, 04:30 AM   #2
Steve121178
macrumors 68020
 
Steve121178's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Bedfordshire, UK
That would be amazing if true!
__________________
13" rMBP Haswell i5/16GB/512GB (Late '13) 21.5" iMac i5/16GB/1TB Fusion (Late '12) iPhone 6 64GB iPad mini 2
Steve121178 is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2011, 04:30 AM   #3
The Great Boony
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Someone is now going to say that this wont be as good as Chromebook...
The Great Boony is offline   -23 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2011, 04:31 AM   #4
fox10078
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Oh just take my money now
__________________
Vortex 8: Super Hackintosh Vortex 4: Render pal for Vortex 8, Also Hackintosh. Galaxy Nexus. iPad 2, My always trusty Macbook(Late 2006). Mac Pro 3,1(RIP) iPhone 4S(RIP)
fox10078 is offline   26 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2011, 04:32 AM   #5
talkingfuture
macrumors 65816
 
talkingfuture's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: The back of beyond.
Yes please, that sounds great.
talkingfuture is offline   13 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2011, 04:32 AM   #6
The Great Boony
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
I hope this is true... I think me 2007 MBP is coming to the end of it's life and am waiting on a new model.
The Great Boony is offline   10 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2011, 04:34 AM   #7
arn
macrumors god
 
arn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Send a message via AIM to arn
Seems a little soon I guess. But I suppose the same advances with the iPad retina display would carry over to 15" screens?

arn
arn is offline   15 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2011, 04:34 AM   #8
The-Pro
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Germany
Sweeeeeeeeeeeeeet
__________________
2012 15" 2.6 i7 AG MBP, 2009 17" AG MBP, 2009 8C 2.26 MP, 2010 4c MP,2010+07 MM, 17" 2007 MBP,20" iMac G5,17" PB G4,4x30"CD,2x23" CD, G3's,G4's, 17"iMac g4,iMac G3 turquoise,macintoshes dating to 1985
The-Pro is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2011, 04:34 AM   #9
Ahheck01
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by fox10078 View Post
Oh just take my money now
I second this. I would gladly pay a $500 premium on a 15" MBP for this. That said, if they pull it off for less than that, where can I preorder?
__________________
Soon: 2012 27" iMac ; 3.4Ghz i7 ; 32GB ; 1TB Fusion ; 2GB 680mx
2012 rMBP ; 2.3Ghz i7 ; 16GB, 256GB SSD ;
iPad 3 16GB Black with Verizon LTE
iPhone 5 ; 16GB ; White
Ahheck01 is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2011, 04:38 AM   #10
porky
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: BELGIUM
Send a message via MSN to porky
Good! 1440x900 is waaaay to low. Even 1680 x1050. Laptops with that price should have full HD standard.
porky is offline   10 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2011, 04:39 AM   #11
andalusia
macrumors 68030
 
andalusia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Manchester, UK
I am very much looking forward to a 'retina' display laptop. I am not looking forward to it's price. I imagine it won't be pretty.
__________________
Signature deleted.
andalusia is offline   13 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2011, 04:40 AM   #12
H17737
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
I don't see why double resolution would make it a retina display MBP
You only need to double the resolution for iOS devices in order to simplify the migration for devs
Desktop OS doesn't need to exactly double the resolution
H17737 is offline   9 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2011, 04:43 AM   #13
camsoft
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Brighton, Sussex, UK.
What about hi-res display option?

Does this mean that even though the screen will have a native resolution of 2880x1880 visually it will be the same as current MacBook Pro 15" resolution of 1440x900 but with a higher DPI so it will just look sharper.

This actually won't give you more desktop space.

Also what happens to the 1680 x1050 hi-res option displays will they also get bumped up to 3360x2100?

I personally would prefer to just have 2880x1880 of desktop space at the current DPI.

Last edited by camsoft; Dec 14, 2011 at 04:51 AM. Reason: Got hi-res MacBook res wrong, now correct.
camsoft is offline   -2 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2011, 04:48 AM   #14
RichardBeer
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: England
I'm just wondering if current laptop GPU solutions would be able to push this kind of resolution. And if they could, how would this affect performance; I imagine the resolution would need to be dropped when playing games.
__________________
13.3" Aluminum Macbook Pro, 2.53ghz, 4GB DDR3 RAM, 60GB OCZ Vertex-II SSD, Nvidia 9400M 256MB DDR3, OS X 10.7.2 Lion, iPod Nano 8GB.
RichardBeer is offline   -2 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2011, 04:49 AM   #15
exscape
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by porky View Post
Good! 1440x900 is waaaay to low. Even 1680 x1050. Laptops with that price should have full HD standard.
Since this is a retina display, things should appear the same size as 1440x900, but a lot sharper. Thus this display would fit less things than a 1680x1050 display (if it works like the retina display in the iPhone/iPods).
exscape is offline   -2 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2011, 04:51 AM   #16
Swedishbacon
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Sweden
...and then imagine retina on 27'' iMac. *drool*
__________________
| iMac 2,9 GHz i5, 8GB RAM, 1TB Fusion Drive | MacBook 2,13 GHz Core 2 Duo, 5GB RAM, 500GB Seagate Momentus XT Hybrid Drive | Mac Mini 2,4 GHz Core 2 Duo, 2GB RAM, 160GB HDD | iPhone 4S 16GB |
Swedishbacon is offline   9 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2011, 04:51 AM   #17
djrod
macrumors 6502a
 
djrod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Madrid - Spain
You know this 2880x1800 screen will look like a 1440x990 with sharper text, right?

Unless you can choose it to run in HiDPi or regular mode, though
__________________
404 : Signature not found
djrod is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2011, 04:52 AM   #18
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
 
KnightWRX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Quebec, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by porky View Post
Good! 1440x900 is waaaay to low. Even 1680 x1050. Laptops with that price should have full HD standard.
Hum... 2880x1800 is 1440x900, only "sharper". Quadrupling the pixels is nice. Keeping the same real-estate while doing so.... yuck.

Let's hope this is for the 13" model, not the 15". The 15" at the current 1440x900 is abysmal. The "optional" "hi-res" display (all in quotes yes) should be standard. There should even be a 1920x1200 option for the 15".
__________________
"What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others."
-- Pericles
KnightWRX is offline   8 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2011, 04:53 AM   #19
Swedishbacon
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Sweden
Quote:
Originally Posted by exscape View Post
Since this is a retina display, things should appear the same size as 1440x900, but a lot sharper. Thus this display would fit less things than a 1680x1050 display (if it works like the retina display in the iPhone/iPods).
That's really something I've been wondering about. Will it work like in the iPhone or will it just increase resolution? Either way it'll be amazing for photo editing.
__________________
| iMac 2,9 GHz i5, 8GB RAM, 1TB Fusion Drive | MacBook 2,13 GHz Core 2 Duo, 5GB RAM, 500GB Seagate Momentus XT Hybrid Drive | Mac Mini 2,4 GHz Core 2 Duo, 2GB RAM, 160GB HDD | iPhone 4S 16GB |
Swedishbacon is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2011, 04:54 AM   #20
BeamWalker
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
The first good news about that is obviously the great resolution and the second good news is that they're sticking to a 16:10 ratio. Yeah.
BeamWalker is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2011, 04:54 AM   #21
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
 
KnightWRX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Quebec, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardBeer View Post
I'm just wondering if current laptop GPU solutions would be able to push this kind of resolution. And if they could, how would this affect performance; I imagine the resolution would need to be dropped when playing games.
Oh no not this again.

Yes, the laptop GPUs would be fine. Performance would be great. We're talking desktop framebuffers here people, not gaming. In 1996, GPUs could push out desktops at 1600x1200 without sweating. I think 15 years later, we're covered for way more pixels.

As for gaming, just drop back to a lower res for 3D graphics.
__________________
"What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others."
-- Pericles
KnightWRX is offline   12 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2011, 04:58 AM   #22
Jayse
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sydney, Australia
The world is better when everything is more detailed! Thankyou Apple!
Jayse is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2011, 05:00 AM   #23
Hildegunst
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by camsoft View Post
?
I personally would prefer to just have 2880x1880 of desktop space at the current DPI.
This would require you to have a 30" laptop. And if you mean you'd prefer to have the 2880x1880 resolution at the current screensize with the current UI dimensions, than that would make small text and UI elements completely unreadable.

This is not to say that increasing resolution without scaling the UI can't be good the current MacBook Air models show that but that wouldn't work for such a drastic resolution increase.
Hildegunst is offline   10 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2011, 05:01 AM   #24
Summersify
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: UK
Send a message via Skype™ to Summersify
Won't this mean that all the pictures on the internet will either be pixelated or smaller than before?

Why don't we all just move to vector graphics!
Summersify is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2011, 05:01 AM   #25
wikus
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Planet earth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightWRX View Post
Oh no not this again.

Yes, the laptop GPUs would be fine. Performance would be great. We're talking desktop framebuffers here people, not gaming. In 1996, GPUs could push out desktops at 1600x1200 without sweating. I think 15 years later, we're covered for way more pixels.

As for gaming, just drop back to a lower res for 3D graphics.
Considering that the resolution of a monitor would be THAT high, would FSAA then be useless? The pixel density would be insane on a large screen like that, I doubt the quality would need to be any better or any more noticeable.

I would think taking into account not using FSAA would let the card run faster (but then slower at a higher resolution).
wikus is offline   -1 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

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Running the Retina MacBook Pro at Full 2880x1800 Resolution MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 413 Sep 15, 2014 07:34 AM
MacBook Pro retina 2012 changing resolution mrmarts MacBook Pro 7 Jan 6, 2013 11:18 AM
13-Inch Retina MacBook Pro Reportedly Still on Track for 4Q 2012 Launch MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 128 Oct 21, 2012 10:04 AM
Confused with resolution of the Macbook Pro Retina Display beebs76 MacBook Pro 8 Sep 26, 2012 10:09 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:39 PM.

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

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