15" vs 17" screen size and resolution

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by spooky69, Apr 15, 2010.

  1. spooky69 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2010
    #1
    I know the issue of the 15" versus the 17" has been discussed ad nauseum, BUT... has anyone seen the same items on a 15" high resolution screen compared to the 17"? I am interested in how the size of fonts and menu items appears and how much fits on the screen. Is the added size of the 17" of less benefit now that the high resolution screen is available?

    The 17" does not seem a huge amount bigger on paper but when you see them in the flesh the 17" looks a lot bigger.
     
  2. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #2
    There are 117 600 pixels per inch in 15" while there are 135 529 pixels per inch in 17"

    (1680 x 1050) / 15
    (1920 x 1200) / 17

    So 17" is still sharper so everything is smaller
     
  3. spooky69 thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2010
    #3
    Thanks.

    So you are still going to get significantly more on the 17" screen than simply the additional size would allow. Would be great to see a picture of the two next to each other displaying the same items - doesn't seem like any stores have the high resolution in stock though and I expect it is too soon for anyone to have the opportunity to take such a photograph.

    I guess it is the same old discussion after all - the relative bulk of the 17" compared to the 15", with the high resolution reducing the gap between the two new models in terms of working space.
     
  4. rcappo macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    #4
    It is only 14% bigger. 1 inch wider, .7 inch deeper, and 1 more pound (.5 kg). I really like the 1920x1200 screen though. If the 15" had that, I would have gone with it.

    I thought that when I was at the store, I had a hard time figuring out which was which from across the room.
     
  5. Sneakz macrumors 65816

    Sneakz

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    #5
    I'm confused how you arrived that those numbers?

    I think its 128.65 for 15" and 133.19 for 17".

    [​IMG]

    and

    [​IMG]
     
  6. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #6
    1680 times 1050 divided by 15
     
  7. Sneakz macrumors 65816

    Sneakz

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    #7
  8. Jaro65 macrumors 68040

    Jaro65

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2009
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    #8
    You do realize though that in terms of the weight, you're only looking at a 1lb difference. I find my 15" MBP easier to carry around, but the 17" one is amazing when you consider that you have with you a full desktop replacement machine. If you really don't need a full HD screen, I think the 15" MBP with 1680 screen is perfect.
     
  9. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #9
    Yeah I know it's not the right way to calculate it (you should first calculate the area of the screen and then divide the amount of pixels by it to get the amount of pixels per cm2 for example)

    It was just quick way to do it as I was lazy :p
     
  10. lily69 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2010
    #10

Share This Page