4k on a tiny laptop screen is pointless (and battery killing) its already far more pixel dense than a 4k tv for monitor due to size. Apple has P3 colour gamut and just about the brightest screen available on a laptop and its still not bright enough for HDR OLED will sort this out when it finally gets into laptop screens but then HDR will be pointless.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
120hz 10-bit HDR Display Doesn't the MBP deserve this ?
- Thread starter TheRealAlex
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The current screen resolution on the 15" is ****ed up. The default resolution is 1680x1050 non 1:1, the native panel should be 3360x2100 for 1:1 and not the current 2880x1800.
If they were to change the panel resolution in the future, I think the ideal would be 3840 x 2400. It's basically the 16:10 version of a 4K screen and the default resolution setting could be 1920 x 1200, which was the native resolution of the old 17" MBP. I run my MBP at 1440 x 900 because I prefer the integer pixel scaling, but I miss the extra screen real estate of my 2011 MBP I ran at 1680 x 1050.
As others have said, I would take a screen resolution increase over 120Hz. 10-bit and HDR will probably come along with the next screen refresh in any case. I'm guessing we might need an OLED screen for HDR on a Mac that isn't limited to full-screen videos.
Why do people care so much about 10bit HDR 4K laptop screens anyway, are people using their laptop as their main viewing device? If you care at all about video (Which I'm assuming people must given the demands here) then wouldn't you have a semi-decent living room setup for this stuff, would screen technology in such a small viewing experience be of any gain, or even noticeable?
Not trying to fan anything just curious why it's such a bug bear to people. I can understand it somewhat from a video editor, however every editor I know has an external display. Some even had old 10bit displays back when they were several thousand dollar pieces of equipment. But none of them are sitting with popcorn at their laptops.
Personally I'm not against this kind of tech, but I don't want a laptop that has pathetic battery life for the sake of it. I'll take it when it's of no consequence to the performance of the computer. It's a professional work computer, not a media centre after all.
Not trying to fan anything just curious why it's such a bug bear to people. I can understand it somewhat from a video editor, however every editor I know has an external display. Some even had old 10bit displays back when they were several thousand dollar pieces of equipment. But none of them are sitting with popcorn at their laptops.
Personally I'm not against this kind of tech, but I don't want a laptop that has pathetic battery life for the sake of it. I'll take it when it's of no consequence to the performance of the computer. It's a professional work computer, not a media centre after all.
Sorry guys, long day at work and little sleep, I was sure I was writing about wide gamut support instead of HDR
