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 Jun 21, 2012, 02:29 PM   #26
BornAgainMac
macrumors 601
 
BornAgainMac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Florida Resident
In all the years, we mostly use the maximum size resolution. Now to use that resolution to control quality and viewing at a lower size will seem strange.
BornAgainMac is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2012, 02:29 PM   #27
appleguy123
macrumors 603
 
appleguy123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: 15 minutes in the future
This makes me want to sell my MacBook air for it. My 20:10 eyes will love this!
__________________
[Steve Jobs was] brave enough to think differently, bold enough to believe he could change the world, and talented enough to do it. -Barack Obama
appleguy123 is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2012, 02:29 PM   #28
Dr McKay
macrumors Demi-God
 
Dr McKay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Kirkland
Send a message via MSN to Dr McKay Send a message via Skype™ to Dr McKay
Quote:
Originally Posted by belltree View Post
- "not authorized by Apple"?

If I buy the hardware I will do with it as I please.
It's changing the Operating System that you don't own. You only license it.
__________________
If only I could be so grossly incandescent.
Dr McKay is offline   -23 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2012, 02:30 PM   #29
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
 
KnightWRX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Quebec, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by iVoid View Post
Actually, this is apple's description in the rMBP specs:

Supported resolutions: 2880 by 1800 pixels (Retina); scaled resolutions: 1920 by 1200, 1680 by 1050, 1280 by 800, and 1024 by 640 pixels


So if you can't set it to 2880x1800 directly without the hack, then the specs are false.
How so ? It says right there (Retina). Retina 2880x1800 means your UI is rendered the same size as a 1440x900 screen, just using more pixels and thus looking sharper.

There is nothing false there.
__________________
"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   10 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2012, 02:30 PM   #30
Starship77
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by iVoid View Post
Actually, this is apple's description in the rMBP specs:

Supported resolutions: 2880 by 1800 pixels (Retina); scaled resolutions: 1920 by 1200, 1680 by 1050, 1280 by 800, and 1024 by 640 pixels


So if you can't set it to 2880x1800 directly without the hack, then the specs are false.

Lawyers have sued over much, much less. (eg. the recent fine from the Aussie government).

The specs are absolutely not false. The resolution is 2880x1800. Is just the size in which the elements are displayed in the screen that change. They are showed to you in a size that makes them similar to 1440x900, but that doesn't mean is not 2880x1800…

Starship77 is offline   11 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2012, 02:31 PM   #31
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
 
KnightWRX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Quebec, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sensation View Post
I dont get it, the desktop is normally 1440x900, I guess doubled up? So why not just use a normal 1440x900screen in it?
Because it looks much better.
__________________
"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   14 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2012, 02:31 PM   #32
TheGenerous
macrumors 6502a
 
TheGenerous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: I'm an Austronaut
Here's the neverending waiting game when I want to buy a newer macbook.
I'm guessing retina will be available for the 13' sometime next year, and it makes just that. Guess.
__________________
I have a cool Alf picture in my profile!
TheGenerous is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2012, 02:31 PM   #33
kniemann
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Well official bootcamp drivers haven't been released yet. It seems unlikely but Apple could limit the resolution to 1920x1200 in the display settings.
kniemann is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2012, 02:32 PM   #34
Starship77
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjy91 View Post
It's changing the Operating System that you don't own. You only license it.
It's not "changing the operating system" in any way…




If it was recompiling the kernel or something… then maybe...
Starship77 is offline   17 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2012, 02:33 PM   #35
jbimler
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
I can't even stand 1920x1080 on my 24 inch monitor. I still use it but my browser text is turned up.
jbimler is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2012, 02:34 PM   #36
Apple Key
macrumors 6502a
 
Apple Key's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Can anyone post a screenshot please? I would like to see it at full quality.
__________________
You know what they say... once you go Mac you ain't never gonna go back.
Apple Key is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2012, 02:35 PM   #37
So Random
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2012
Seems some people still don't get what "Retina" means in the context of displays.
So Random is offline   14 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2012, 02:36 PM   #38
locust76
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRumors View Post
the default display options do not allow users to run their systems at that full resolution.
This makes it sound like the Display is 2880x1800, but the image being produced is 1440x900 stretched across 2880x1800, which is so unfathomably stupid it defies logic.

Of course the thing is running at full resolution! Otherwise you'd get an effect similar to running a non-retina App on a retina iDevice: ****** image quality. That's not what you want from your Macbook with Retina Display.

There's a huge difference between using high-resolution image elements to display an image the same physical size as it's low-res counterpart and taking a low resolution image and stretching it across a high resolution display.
locust76 is offline   11 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2012, 02:37 PM   #39
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
 
KnightWRX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Quebec, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple Key View Post
Can anyone post a screenshot please? I would like to see it at full quality.
A screenshot will be shown on your screen's PPI. Unless you can mimic the proper PPI ratio of the 15 MBP on your own screen, you won't be able to see it "at full quality" without simply seeing it straight on the device.
__________________
"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   4 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2012, 02:37 PM   #40
cheriowhooza
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by belltree View Post
- "not authorized by Apple"?

If I buy the hardware I will do with it as I please.
Exactly. I just ordered mine and figured this would probably require a hack, but I'm kind of disappointed to see that I'm right once again. The audacity...
cheriowhooza is offline   -1 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2012, 02:39 PM   #41
Dr McKay
macrumors Demi-God
 
Dr McKay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Kirkland
Send a message via MSN to Dr McKay Send a message via Skype™ to Dr McKay
Quote:
Originally Posted by Starship77 View Post
It's not "changing the operating system" in any way…




If it was recompiling the kernel or something… then maybe...
Ok misread the original article, I thought this was enabled by a "hack" not a simple app. It's not authorized simply because Apple doesn't want to take responsibility in case it screws up.
__________________
If only I could be so grossly incandescent.
Dr McKay is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2012, 02:39 PM   #42
tdmac
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by iVoid View Post
Actually, this is apple's description in the rMBP specs:

Supported resolutions: 2880 by 1800 pixels (Retina); scaled resolutions: 1920 by 1200, 1680 by 1050, 1280 by 800, and 1024 by 640 pixels


So if you can't set it to 2880x1800 directly without the hack, then the specs are false.

Lawyers have sued over much, much less. (eg. the recent fine from the Aussie government).
No. Read again. As you wrote "2880 by 1800 pixels (Retina). Not scaled. What the article described is scaling the resolution, for real estate, to 2880 x 1800.

You also have to remember that these computers are running a modified version (patch) of Lion to support the retina display for just a few short weeks until Mountain Lion is released. That should have full retina display support and scaled resolution support. That upgrade for these machines is free.
tdmac is offline   7 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2012, 02:40 PM   #43
echobucket
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
This entire discussion and the amount of confusion about this just goes to show that for decades we've been using the wrong word. "Resolution" should mean the pixels per inch of a display. But instead we use it to describe the number of pixels horizontally and vertically.

*sigh*
echobucket is offline   9 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2012, 02:41 PM   #44
cvaldes
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: somewhere else
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sensation View Post
I dont get it, the desktop is normally 1440x900, I guess doubled up? So why not just use a normal 1440x900screen in it?
It improves the overall sharpness.

For example, text will render much smoother, even though the individual characters might be the same height on the Retina MBP and the non-Retina MBP.

This benefits certain people more than others, particularly people who use logographic character systems (Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Arabic, etc.).

Same thing with the Retina display on the iPhone 4/4S versus the non-Retina display of earlier handsets (or the iPad 1/2 versus the third-generation iPad). There's a pretty simple way to see the benefit. Fire up Safari on both an iPhone 3G/3GS and an iPhone 4/4S and visit a website like www.nikkei.co.jp. The characters will look remarkably better on the Retina displays.

Of course, Westerners will see improved sharpness, but not quite as dramatically as those international users in Asia/Middle East.
cvaldes is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2012, 02:41 PM   #45
djrod
macrumors 6502a
 
djrod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Madrid - Spain
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sensation View Post
I dont get it, the desktop is normally 1440x900, I guess doubled up? So why not just use a normal 1440x900screen in it?
You are joking right? or freshly awake from a coma!

Apple is been doing this resolution X 4 (2x horizontal and 2x vertical) with the iPhone, iPod touch, the iPad and now with the Macs.

Retina display means in Apple terms "We give you the same screen physical size but with 4x the resolution"

Thats pixel x2 both horizontal and vertical, so a 1440x900 is 2880x1800 Retina.

Since the screen real state is the same everything has the same size onscreen but we get a lot more detail:

__________________
404 : Signature not found
djrod is offline   21 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2012, 02:43 PM   #46
hamean
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Starship77 View Post
The specs are absolutely not false. The resolution is 2880x1800. Is just the size in which the elements are displayed in the screen that change. They are showed to you in a size that makes them similar to 1440x900, but that doesn't mean is not 2880x1800…


Your sound logic and reason are not welcome on this thread of moronic posts.

Guys, the resolution is 2880x1800... no one is getting sued... the UI elements are just doubled in size in retina mode.

I do hope for some different UI scaling options in Mountain Lion (not sure if that's planned or not), but it's MUCH NEEDED in OSX. I'm not sure the reasoning behind not offering it.
__________________
Mac enthusiast since 2006. Mac Pro '06, MBP '07, iMac 27 '11, iPhone 4. MBA 13" '11, iPad (3rd Gen), rMBP '12
hamean is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2012, 02:45 PM   #47
mtfbwy
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
You won't have great eyesight after using this for awhile.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GFLPraxis View Post
Actually surprised this requires a hack.

I have great eyesight so I would actually love this.
mtfbwy is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2012, 02:46 PM   #48
Apple Key
macrumors 6502a
 
Apple Key's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightWRX View Post
A screenshot will be shown on your screen's PPI. Unless you can mimic the proper PPI ratio of the 15 MBP on your own screen, you won't be able to see it "at full quality" without simply seeing it straight on the device.
Yes, I realize that. What I am looking to see is the size relationship between the elements on the screen.
__________________
You know what they say... once you go Mac you ain't never gonna go back.
Apple Key is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2012, 02:47 PM   #49
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
 
KnightWRX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Quebec, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by echobucket View Post
This entire discussion and the amount of confusion about this just goes to show that for decades we've been using the wrong word. "Resolution" should mean the pixels per inch of a display. But instead we use it to describe the number of pixels horizontally and vertically.

*sigh*
Hum... "number of pixels horizontally and vertically" is 2880x1800. I think you mean "96 PPI pixel count equivalent scaled UI size". That's why we use "Resolution" even though it's not proper .

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple Key View Post
Yes, I realize that. What I am looking to see is the size relationship between the elements on the screen.
That's exactly what you won't be able to see, unless you have a 1440x900 15.4 MBP. If you do, you can already get the size of elements without a screenshot from a MBPR. Grab a fullscreen shot of your 1440x900 desktop, use photoshop to scale it down to 720x450. make the zoom 100%. The size of icons/windows/buttons on the 720x450 image is what you'd get on a 15.4 MBPR at 2880x1800.
__________________
"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   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2012, 02:49 PM   #50
Apple Key
macrumors 6502a
 
Apple Key's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightWRX View Post
That's exactly what you won't be able to see.
I can already see how small the menubar is compared to the other screen elements (and compared to my current screen resolution. I just wanted to see it as a screenshot.
__________________
You know what they say... once you go Mac you ain't never gonna go back.
Apple Key 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 01:58 AM.

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

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