1440x900 & 1280x800 Make me want to cry

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Thunder82, Feb 15, 2010.


How do you feel about the current MBP screens?

  1. A resolution bump would be a welcome improvement

    300 vote(s)
  2. Current resolutions are ideal for me

    120 vote(s)
  1. Thunder82 macrumors 6502

    Jul 16, 2008
    Chicago, IL
    The one thing that's always held me from buying a 13 or 15" MBP is the hysterically awful screen resolutions. I'm really hoping for a screen improvement on the upcoming refresh so I can ditch my current 17" in favor of a 15. I'm curious if everyone else feels the same as I do. What do you guys think?
  2. JosX macrumors regular

    Dec 27, 2009
    Northumberland, UK
    I too would love a higher res screen, but when comparing to other brnads - the resolution is already higher than most. 3 people in my family own 15" laptops, all are 1280x800, the resolution of the 13" MBP.
  3. Inutopia macrumors 6502


    Apr 8, 2009
    South of Heaven
    Really? What kind of ghetto ass laptops are those?
  4. iShater macrumors 604


    Aug 13, 2002
    Higher res displays might be a mixed bag. At some point, it can be too many pixels for a such display sizes, and it wouldn't be comfortable for post people to use.
  5. Thunder82 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Jul 16, 2008
    Chicago, IL
    The current resolutions for the 13"ers may be excuseable, but the 15" given it's size and cost isn't. (especially given it's the lowest dpi screen apple uses in any of their devices).

    I just really hope apple bumps this a bit..
  6. JosX macrumors regular

    Dec 27, 2009
    Northumberland, UK
    2005 Toshiba Equium, 2009 Toshiba Satellite Pro, Some 2009 HP & some 2009 Acer. All low-mid spec'd computers, all running 1280x800 screens, I HATE them after using any mac, everything appears blurry. I also have a HP screen I used to use with my Equium, 19" & runs 1440x900.
  7. Clete2 macrumors 65816


    Sep 20, 2008
    I stay with 17" basically because of the increased resolution of 1920x1200.

    I'd probably buy a 15" @ 1920x1200 for 16:10 (or 16" at 1920x1080 for 16:9).

    As others have speculated, they may make a 14" and a 16" for 16:9 resolutions and just cut out the 17" altogether. I'd be happy with that so long as the resolution is 1920x1080.
  8. Thunder82 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Jul 16, 2008
    Chicago, IL
    Was my inital thought too. Only 500$ notebooks these days have screen resolutions so poor. Heck, my 3 year old Dell m1530 has a 1920x1200 screen (granted it's ccfl) but it certainly wasn't 2000$ new either.
  9. odinsride macrumors 65816


    Apr 11, 2007
    I had the 17" mbp with 1920x1200 screen some time ago. It was too hard to read text on it without squinting and getting a headache.

    1680x1050 is ideal for 17", 1440x900 is ideal for 15" imo.
  10. aross99 macrumors 68000


    Dec 17, 2006
    East Lansing, MI
    I agree. I have been holding off on getting a new 17", because I thought the 1920x1200 makes text too small.
  11. atari1356 macrumors 68000


    Feb 27, 2004
    I might purchase a 17" when the updates happen... I agree that 1920x1200 is small, but having tried it in the store I think it's okay at 17".

    1920x1200 on a 15" or smaller laptop seems like it would make the text way too small. Sure you can change your font size in a web browser, and font size in the finder.... but there are many applications where you need to be able to read certain elements of the user interface and can't change the font size.
  12. Prhymeate macrumors member

    Jan 31, 2010
    I really hope that they do. I don't have a mac yet and this next macbook pro may be my first if the specs seem worth buying. I'm used to using a 24" and 1920x1200 and find going to resolutions that are much lower quite painful. I think 1920x1200 may be too difficult to use on a 15", but I'd have to think twice about making the jump to a mac if the resolution doesn't improve at all.
  13. BlizzardBomb macrumors 68030


    Jun 15, 2005
    1680x1050 seems perfect on a a 15". However, given that Apple's moved the iMacs to 16:9, would be interesting to see if they do the same with MacBooks.

    ~13" MacBook - 1366x768
    ~15" MBP - 1600x900
    ~17" MBP - 1920x1080

    The only real problem there is the loss of vertical resolution on the 13" MBP, which can only be fixed if Apple finds a display with a non-standard resolution, which would be more expensive anyway. The 17" would see a slight loss too, although that would be a benefit for those complaining the text is too small on the current MBPs (given Apple's reluctance to give us resolution independence).
  14. entatlrg macrumors 68040


    Mar 2, 2009
    Waterloo & Georgian Bay, Canada
    My notebook book is for working and reading text, not movies, leave the res alone!

    Higher resolution is great for all of you who use your notebooks for watching TV/Movies and photo editing.

    BUT - what about those people who use their notebooks for 'work' - reading, typing etc.

    Higher resolution means small fonts and for many of us, that sucks. Resizing fonts or working in a resolution other than it's native resolution does not work.

    So what's the solution? For me, it's leave the current resolution alone, I don't want to have to use a magnifying glass to read my screen, nor do I want to strain my eyes. Even if you're eyes are good it doesn't mean anyone should be straining their eyes to read a screen....

    YES, for sure.
  15. Harmless Abuse macrumors regular

    Mar 21, 2008
    I actually hope they don't increase the resolution.

    If they do, I'll be forced to go to an older model.

    I'm hoping to get a 15in and the screen resolution is the sweet spot for me in terms of my vision.

    The 17in looks so small, and my family got a 27in iMac and the text on that thing is so small I can't actually use it. I've been confined to an old Emachine until I can scrape the money together to replace my stolen MacBook Pro.

    I loved the 13in just because of the resolution.

    High resolution is great when it comes to watching movies and whatnot, but if you have to use it for extended periods of time, it starts to hurt. Then again, my vision is poor anyways. I wish OS X's font smoothing wasn't so crippling, so I could down the resolution, but that just makes it worse.
  16. seb-opp macrumors 6502

    Nov 16, 2008
    I really hope the new 13 inchers wont be 1366x768 or what ever. 800 pixels high is small enough as it is! I find 16x9 pretty useless anyway, fine for video but who really watches movies often on their macbook? I reckon only while in a hotel or somewhere away from home. When it comes to actually working, 16:10 is much better as text documents, websites, PDFs etc are portrait format! 16:10 lets you have 2 documents side by side, but with more vertical pixels there's less scrolling
  17. Thunder82 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Jul 16, 2008
    Chicago, IL
    This is why i really wish Apple would CTO some of their notebooks, theres just too many things that people prefer.

    I do use my notebook primarily for work and it's the reason that i DO need a higher resolution screen. Tiling spreadsheets.. among other things, is impossible on such low resolution. Expose/F3 is nice, but it isn't quicker than tiling windows in all circumstances.

    Also, I'm not sure whats wrong with some of your eyes, but im on a 15" 1920x1200 screen currently, and it's great.
  18. tomjleeds macrumors 6502a


    Jul 19, 2004
    Manchester, UK
    Options, Apple! Give us options!

    I'm firmly in the "MOAR PIXELZ!" camp but it's clear from this thread that there are plenty of people who think the opposite. For the sake of all our customer satisfaction (and in some cases, sanity), please give us display options!
  19. BlizzardBomb macrumors 68030


    Jun 15, 2005
    Agreed, 16:10 is more useful to me, I was just merely pointing out the path Apple could take given what they did with the iMacs.
  20. keysersoze macrumors 68000


    Jan 6, 2004
    I'll take a healthy dose of resolution independence any day. Until then, 1440 is all my poor eyes can take.
  21. hundert macrumors regular


    Jan 24, 2010

    hahaha, when I read " everything appears blurry" I had POD - blurry.mp3 running and it hit the line Everything's so blurry.



    that might help you, if you are looking for opinions of others about the upcoming displays.
  22. chaosbunny macrumors 68000


    Mar 11, 2005
    down to earth, far away from any clouds

    1440x900 is perfectly fine for me. I didn't even have a problem with the 1280x854 on my previous 15" PowerBook. :eek:
  23. Thunder82 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Jul 16, 2008
    Chicago, IL
    Thanks :) hadn't seen that thread. I've seen a ton of talk recently about screen resolution, but none with a poll to easily see what people thought.
  24. zync macrumors 68000


    Sep 8, 2003
    Tampa, FL
    What about those of us who define 'work' more broadly than simply reading and typing?

    Perhaps there are other people—shock!—who actually 'work' in photo editing, graphics and animation, video editing, print, print layouts etc. who do need such resolutions?

    Add more pixels, but give us resolution independence please. If they add more screen options costs will just increase because they'll have to make smaller batches of standard models in order to decrease waste in production for build to order models.
  25. secretanchitman macrumors 6502


    Sep 13, 2007
    1680x1050 on the 15" would be perfect. im sorry, anything higher is overkill for me.

    i agree, 1440x900 is getting old now. CTO apple!!!

Share This Page