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.
1440x900 & 1280x800 Make me want to cry
- Thread starter Thunder82
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I agree whole-heartedly with this post.
1920x1200 or even 1680x1050 on a 15" would be dreadful.
I had a 17" laptop with 1440x900 (a Fujitsu M3438G) and that was really usable. At the moment I'm using 1680x1050 on a 22" screen (Samsung SyncMaster 226BW) and it's perfect although 1920x1200 would also be great at this size.
I also utterly, utterly, utterly detest the new 16:9 ratio screen of current notebooks as opposed to 16:10, but that's another topic. Stop miniaturizing screens!
I've never owned a Mac (updated Macbook Pro will be my first), but do you have the option to change your resolution to a smaller size like you do on a PC? From a PC point of view, I don't understand all the higher resolution hate. I doubt I'd ever use 1920x1200 on my 15" laptop, but I wouldn't complain if I had the option because that would also mean I could choose from any size smaller than that. Considering I've been using 1680x1050 on my Dell Inspiron for years I can't imagine anything smaller.
Amen on the resolution independence part. Microsoft is moving that direction with their WPF technologies. It's slow going for them though - and it'll be forever before most useful apps are written to use WPF.
I sure hope Apple does it right, and soon.
Not good, anything but the native (highest) resolution looks like crap on lcd or led screens. This doesn't work like it used to with crt monitors. The image will look blurry and pixelated.
I wish I could understand how anyone would feel this way. I'm using snow leopard on my Dell m1530 (1920x1200 WUXGA 15" screen) and it's absolutely phenomenal.
Too bad Dell's are such pieces of crap. I really hope Apple gives us some screen options with the next refresh! I can't wait to get back on mac hardware.
I think Apple should offer the MacBook 13" with 1280x800 standard as they do now but with 1440x900 as an option. Same goes for the MacBook Pro 15" with 1440x900 standard and 1680x1050 as an option.
I just posted this in different thread...
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/352057/
Just so others can relate to this issue...try looking at a US One Dollar Bill and the size of the "WASHINGTON, D.C" located under the serial number. For me, this is quite uncomfortable and a strain to see.
Those with Macbook Pro 17" high resolution screens may consider:
1) First, take a One Dollar bill (this one is 2006). Compare the size of the "WASHINGTON, D.C." located just below serial number (right, front-half of bill), make a lengthwise fold either through or just above "WASHINGTON, D.C.".
2) Next, in Safari, make a new bookmark(anything) in the Bookmark Bar and label it... WASHINGTON, D.C. (ALL CAPS). Remember this is just an exercise to compare user interface font size to something we see everyday so you may immediately delete when finished.
3) Now, those with 17" high resolution screen in native 1900 x 1200 setting, hold dollar bill to screen and compare.
Does anybody know what font point size this is?
Is this a fair comparison?
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/352057/
Just so others can relate to this issue...try looking at a US One Dollar Bill and the size of the "WASHINGTON, D.C" located under the serial number. For me, this is quite uncomfortable and a strain to see.
Those with Macbook Pro 17" high resolution screens may consider:
1) First, take a One Dollar bill (this one is 2006). Compare the size of the "WASHINGTON, D.C." located just below serial number (right, front-half of bill), make a lengthwise fold either through or just above "WASHINGTON, D.C.".
2) Next, in Safari, make a new bookmark(anything) in the Bookmark Bar and label it... WASHINGTON, D.C. (ALL CAPS). Remember this is just an exercise to compare user interface font size to something we see everyday so you may immediately delete when finished.
3) Now, those with 17" high resolution screen in native 1900 x 1200 setting, hold dollar bill to screen and compare.
Does anybody know what font point size this is?
Is this a fair comparison?
1920 I could understand I suppose; but 1680x1050 is a perfect resolution for a 15" screen, anything lower is just unacceptable.
2048x1152 for 17"? If that happens, then similar DPIs for the MacBook Pros would be:
13": 1600x900
15": 1920x1080
17": 2048x1152
Can't say I understand what your trying to accomplish. Are you trying to justify purchasing a 17" MBP? or just trying to say the fonts are too small with this resolution? I've used one of the new Vaio Z notebooks with the 1920x1200 screen (13") and loved it.
Screen size and resolution all boils down to personal choice.. for me, the higher resolution the better. I don't have perfect eyes and higher res screens don't give me any issues whatsoever.
You may be running Windows in which case it is my understanding that adjusting the user interface font size is as easy as selecting small, medium, or large. With Mac OSX 10.6, I, and others who have posted cannot make this seemingly simple adjustment. It is easy to adjust fonts in applications, but global user interface font size is another matter.
One reason I upgraded to a Macbook Pro 17" was for the the beautiful crisp and clear 1900 x 1200 high resolution antiglare screen... and now I need to squint to see the user interface system fonts and icons. The only remedy I have found so far is to run Windows where this is an easy adjustment, reduce screen resolution to a fuzzy focus, or zoom in and out. Very frustrating.
I posted the comparison for people who do not have a 17" high resolution 1900 x 1200 screen (which is only option for a 17" Macbook Pro) so they can understand what to expect prior to purchase. Other than this font size issue, it is an amazing screen. It seems this is an OSX operating system issue.
If someone can help, please do.
Thanks.
Yes, I am just trying to say fonts are entirely too small. I agree, for the most part higher resolution is preferable but when you cannot control user-interface font size it is most frustrating.
Are your system fonts as small as the "WASHINGTON, D.C." on a One Dollar bill?
Thanks
The Vaio Z i used was a Windows 7 machine, which did have interface scaling. Also, I agree, in that OSX really does need to adopt some form of font scaling.
Personally, nothing on the 17" or 15" HR screens come across as being too small. (Within OSX) My whole office is now using a mixture of these two screen types and everyone loves them. People should really go into their local Apple store or Best Buy and spend some quality time with each screen type before purchasing.
As for your dollar bill trick, I never carry cash, so don't really have a way to test this.
First, I hope Apple doesn't go backwards and lower the resolution on the 17" to 1920x1080. If they did, this would be my last Mac purchase (just got an i7 17"). I've been using 1920x1200 screens on 15" and 17" laptops for years. The screen real estate available while working is invaluable.
What Apple really needs to be doing is working on resolution independence and higher resolution screens.
What Apple really needs to be doing is working on resolution independence and higher resolution screens.
So far every single Mac I've seen had a higher resolution than every single PC I've seen. I'm of course talking about the resolution relative to the screen size. And now Apple added an even higher resolution option to the MacBook Pros, I think that's and extremely good res for a 15 inch screen. On PCs mostly you can count the individual pixels, that's how big they are.
thank you
This myoptic chicky thanks you for this to-the-point post. I was crushed when I saw how terrible the resolution is on the current 15" and 17", waaay too small and that completely negates my purchase of these MBPs. Too bad, because I love my 13" but wish I had more screen space. And I can't because I use this for writing/reading/online classes.
This myoptic chicky thanks you for this to-the-point post. I was crushed when I saw how terrible the resolution is on the current 15" and 17", waaay too small and that completely negates my purchase of these MBPs. Too bad, because I love my 13" but wish I had more screen space. And I can't because I use this for writing/reading/online classes.
*yawn*
My HP had 1680x1050 back in 2003, and that was standard, not a BTO option.
At the same time, Dell even offered up to 1920x1200 on their 15" Inspiron models.
Don't compare Apples with Oranges (e.g. $2500 machines with $500 crapbooks).
Have you been living under a rock? Well, for me, it's the other way around (except for the 17" though).
I don't think I'd like higher resolutions. 1920x1200 on my 23" is great, but I can't imagine trying to use that on a 17" display. As for the 15" MacBook Pro, 1440x900 is just fine. I actually prefer the 1280x854 on my TiBook in some situations over the 14x9 on the Pro.
External Display
I was very disappointed after buying my Macbook on Jan 27, 2010 for the purpose of having a small portable computer to plug into large screens for doing presentations, only to find that it's largest capacity was 1280x800. I saw a mac mini plugged into a 30" and presenting very nice image quality. I told the sales guy I was intending to plug into large screens, and was not not told by the sales guy that the notebook I was getting can't do that (I should have done more research). The image looks fine on the notebook display and is even capable of playing games nicely, just looks terrible on any screen larger than 13". I have recently been shown by a mac sales guy that the 13" and 15" now come with a better card, I guess he want to make another sale.
I was very disappointed after buying my Macbook on Jan 27, 2010 for the purpose of having a small portable computer to plug into large screens for doing presentations, only to find that it's largest capacity was 1280x800. I saw a mac mini plugged into a 30" and presenting very nice image quality. I told the sales guy I was intending to plug into large screens, and was not not told by the sales guy that the notebook I was getting can't do that (I should have done more research). The image looks fine on the notebook display and is even capable of playing games nicely, just looks terrible on any screen larger than 13". I have recently been shown by a mac sales guy that the 13" and 15" now come with a better card, I guess he want to make another sale.