1920x1200 17" pb?

JoeG4

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Jan 11, 2002
2,693
204
Bay Area, Ca.

jsw

Moderator emeritus
Mar 16, 2004
22,910
41
Andover, MA
If true, that would be stunningly sweet. Perhaps we'll see the new displays shortly... it's not like 1920x1200 displays haven't been around for literally years in the PC world.
 
Comment

JoeG4

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Jan 11, 2002
2,693
204
Bay Area, Ca.
True, as I know it only a handful of 17" laptops actually have a 1920x1200 screen, so they definitely would have a nice edge to play with.

I truly would buy a 1920x1200 17" too, I was hoping for one on the last rev, and was disappointed when it didn't come to existence, so this is just funny. BTW, just dropping a note but the Rev C's manual apparently doesn't mention this, and the rev D would have mentioned the 30" if they were talking about external displays.

Hrmm, just off the top of my head, I think the sony A series is the one laptop I'm thinking of with a 1920x1200 in the 17" model.
 
Comment

jsw

Moderator emeritus
Mar 16, 2004
22,910
41
Andover, MA
At that size, true, but my ~2 year old Dell ~15" has 1920x1200. I think, if they could put that into the 15", I'd buy it in an instant. Or in the 17". I don't care. I just want better resolution!
 
Comment

JoeG4

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Jan 11, 2002
2,693
204
Bay Area, Ca.
I didn't think dell made widescreen laptops 2 years ago, though I know they made a 15" 1600x1200...

I would be surprised if the 15" got more than 1650x1080, but that would be awesome.
 
Comment

jsw

Moderator emeritus
Mar 16, 2004
22,910
41
Andover, MA
JoeG4 said:
I didn't think dell made widescreen laptops 2 years ago, though I know they made a 15" 1600x1200...

I would be surprised if the 15" got more than 1650x1080, but that would be awesome.
I have a Dell 15" (or maybe 15.x") which I received, at the latest, in May of 2003. It has a 1920x1200 screen. Definitely.
 
Comment

Littleodie914

macrumors 68000
Jun 9, 2004
1,813
7
Rochester, NY
Woah... That'd be crazy. Highly unlikely though. Why would Apple skip from 1440x900 (the 17" resolution) to 1920x1200 (the 23" resolution)? Wouldn't it make more sense to maybe upgrade the 15" to 1440x900, and the 17" to 1680x1050?
 
Comment

homerjward

macrumors 68030
May 11, 2004
2,745
0
fig tree
voodoopc has a 17" 1920x1200 laptop but it's like 4k...
anyway, if they could make a 1440x900 15" pb and a 1680x1050 17" i think that'd be really good.
 
Comment

mrgreen4242

macrumors 601
Feb 10, 2004
4,355
1
I had a 1600x1200 15" toshiba laptop YEARs ago (like 2001 or early 2002). It was nice, but has some significant drawbacks. First, for gaming you need a pretty hefty card to drive 1600x1200 pixels, and in a laptop you usually come up lacking in the GPU dep't... that means non-native resolutions, which is ugly and inefficient. Also, when you pack all those pixels into a very small space, you often have to enlarge images and whatnot to get a good look at them, which tends to take away from the quality.Text is the same way... in order for it to look decent you have to have the point size up a little higher, which ends up making it look gimpy on other displays when you share documents.

I guess my point is that at a certain point, more dpi isn't always a good thing. 1440x900 is pretty usable for 17" widescreens, maybe a little more would be nice, but not too much. It might be too much for a 15", imo.

Rob
 
Comment

Platform

macrumors 68030
Dec 30, 2004
2,879
0
JoeG4 said:
"Depending on how your Powerbook was configured, it may have a wide-screen display that has a "native" resolution of 1920x1200 or 1440x900."

-- Powerbook Rev D 17" manual, page 22....

http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=245343

just to poke a little fun at it, I posted asking why they aren't selling the 1920x1200 17" yet on apple's boards:

http://discussions.info.apple.com/webx?14@640.EU1AapLVPNY.1@.68a6948c

Let's see how long it takes for this to vaporize :)
To anyone who has got the new PB is this function working so that you can set the resolution up to 1920x1200 or not :confused:
 
Comment

Lacero

macrumors 604
Jan 20, 2005
6,639
2
Apple needs to up the rez on the PB 12" from 1024x768 to at least 1280x960. Most pro apps simply don't work or are extremely cramped on the 12" PB. Most notably, FCP and DVDSP, with the latter nearly impossible to use, unless you are constantly expanding windows. Screen resolution could be the ticket for Apple to distinguish the PB from the iBook lines.
 
Comment

Platform

macrumors 68030
Dec 30, 2004
2,879
0
daveway00 said:
I've been living in Apple land too long. I didn't know Dell sqeezed over 1600 pixels in a 15" screen. Thats like impossible.
You can see them everywhere

A freind of mine bought a 15" 2 years ago and that had 1600 pixles :eek:
 
Comment

Platform

macrumors 68030
Dec 30, 2004
2,879
0
Lacero said:
Apple needs to up the rez on the PB 12" from 1024x768 to at least 1280x960. Most pro apps simply don't work or are extremely cramped on the 12" PB. Most notably, FCP and DVDSP, with the latter nearly impossible to use, unless you are constantly expanding windows. Screen resolution could be the ticket for Apple to distinguish the PB from the iBook lines.
That would be nice but for the moment the screen on the 12" PB is not a widescreen so there can have 1280x960 but maby 1280x1024 ;)
 
Comment

Daveway

macrumors 68040
Jul 10, 2004
3,372
0
New Orleans / Lafayette, La
an upgrade to a 13.2" screen for the Powerbook line is imminent. It will distinguish it from the iBook as well as give more room for Apple to play with when adding the...ahem....bigger processors....yea
 
Comment

Timelessblur

macrumors 65816
Jun 26, 2004
1,086
0
miloblithe said:
13.2" sounds good. Am I the only one who thinks more than 1024x768 on a 12" sounds like a recipe for eye strain?
Oh I agree with you on that.
for 1200x1024 you pretty much need at least 17in monitor other wise it is really makes everything to mall. The 1024x768 running on a 13.8 in laptop monitor makes everything a little smaller 17LCD monitor running 1200x1024 on my desktop.
 
Comment

jsw

Moderator emeritus
Mar 16, 2004
22,910
41
Andover, MA
miloblithe said:
13.2" sounds good. Am I the only one who thinks more than 1024x768 on a 12" sounds like a recipe for eye strain?
FWIW, 1920x1200 on the Dell 15" (15", 15.4", whatever) looks really good, and eyestrain isn't a problem. A 17" would make 1920x1200 even nicer. I don't think 1280x1024 would be too terrible on a 12".
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.