1920x1200 planned for 15"?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by deadsenator, Jun 19, 2007.

  1. deadsenator macrumors newbie

    Jun 8, 2007
    I like the hi-res screen, but do not want the bulk of the 17". I currently own an old 15" Dell that is limping along, but it has a 1920x1200 screen and I really like that. I feel it maximizes the smaller physical size of the 15" screen. I am pining for a new 15" with a 1920x1200 resolution. Any reasonable guesses if Apple is planning on issuing one soon? Thanks for any input.

  2. munckee macrumors 65816

    Oct 27, 2005
    Since they JUST put that resolution in the 17", my guess would be you won't see it for quite some time (if ever :confused: ) on the 15". That's got to be tiny!
  3. Trepex macrumors 6502a


    Apr 5, 2007
    Ottawa, Canada
    That's a lot of pixels for a 15" screen...
  4. L3X macrumors 6502a

    Oct 18, 2006
    Chesapeake, VA
    my boss' Dell XPS has this resolution and it is very tiny, although, if you sit close enough to the screen, it's beneficial if you don't have access to a second monitor.

    I wish the MBP had that option, though.
  5. shiato storm macrumors member

    Jun 7, 2007
    Bristol UK
    i suspect 1680x1024 might be the next step but 1900x is very teeny tiny...impressive to cram it all into that space but I don't think you'll be wanting it that small all the time.
  6. uicandrew macrumors 6502a

    Jan 19, 2006
    i don't think it is coming to the 15" EVER.

    i had a compaq laptop (x1000, a thin fast laptop) with 1920x1200 in a 15" screen.

    it was legible only if you were directly in front of the laptop and i'm in my late 20's. so if you plan on using a stand (icurve or whatever) and using an external keyboard, be prepared to squint.

    also, before apple would jump to 1920x1200, it would make a separate jump to 1680x1080 in the 15"

    the 15" started as 1280x800 then got an upgrade to 1440x960
    the 17" started as 1440x960 then got an upgrade to 1680x1080, and only just now had the option of 1920x1200.

    apple will likely look at sales of the 1920x1200 17" and decide carefully whether or not to offer the option of 1680x1080 on the 15"

    I just don't think thaqt 1920x1200 is a mass market resolution, and apple would have to start with a 1680x1080

    (ps - i know my pixel count for the vertical is probably inaccurate, but that is because adding the isight into the laptops changes the number of pixels vertically relative to previous isight-free laptops and pc laptops)
  7. deadsenator thread starter macrumors newbie

    Jun 8, 2007
    That's too bad. I really love this resolution on my 15". I can see so much more here. I guess I'll just hafta head down to the store and look at them side by side. I am just reluctant to schlep around the 17".
  8. whateverandever macrumors 6502a

    Nov 8, 2006
    I should have expected the people-who-have-no-business-posting to come here commenting about how small 1920x1200 is on a 15" screen.

    It happens everytime. If you can't see well at that resolution, wonderful. Nobody cares. Really.

    If you're interested, the pre-LED MacBook Pros can be upgraded to 1920x1200 displays manually. There's a whole thread about it.

    As for Apple offering it, there's a slim chance. Historically they haven't offered different screen options, but now that the 17" is, it may be possible that they offer different screens down the road for the 15" as well.

    I for one would love it :]
  9. munckee macrumors 65816

    Oct 27, 2005
    :rolleyes: ..."wonderful. Nobody cares. Really."
  10. katorga macrumors regular

    Oct 28, 2006
    Actually .....

    Even if you have good vision now, straining your eyes at 19x12 on a 15" will, over time cause problems with your eyes.

    Where it will be a benefit is when true resolution independence arrives and you can render a 1440 or 1650 desktop on a 1920 panel giving you much better detail. Like printing a 12pt type on a 300 dpi laser versus the same 12pt text on a 1200dpi Linotype.
  11. whateverandever macrumors 6502a

    Nov 8, 2006
    This is a post about people that care about 1920x1200 displays.

    Thank you for trolling.

    Not really. People upgrade to high resolution displays mostly for increased working area in a portable environment.

    Using the "resolution independence" on a high-res display is a total waste. Does anyone really care about smoother OS fonts and widgets? Increased sharpness in exchange for price is really only something gamers congregate towards.
  12. cubbie5150 macrumors 6502a


    Mar 4, 2007
    Ehh, I'd be more than happy w/ 1680x1050... I don't "mind" 1440x900, but come one, MBP is supposed to be a "pro" machine...
  13. uicandrew macrumors 6502a

    Jan 19, 2006
    and this pro machine is appropriate with the 1440x900 screen. normal "consumer" widescreen 15" laptops have the 1280x800 screen, just check out best buy or circuit city
  14. psychofreak Retired


    May 16, 2006
    Resolution independence will be the number one Leopard feature for my granddad who likes things big and clear...none of this tiny menubar crap he gets now, where he has to lean forward every two seconds.
  15. mavherzog macrumors 6502

    Jun 11, 2005
    Columbus, WI
    15" WUXGA (1920x1200) is the perfect laptop display IMO. These have been available from other vendors for at least the past 5 years. All of my crappy, old Dell work laptops have 15" WUXGA displays. I've been waiting for Apple to offer this for quite a while. I really don't get why higher-density screens have been eluding us Apple users for such a long time.

    It's also frustrating that I have to go with a Mac Pro (or MBP with external display) to get something better than WUXGA. Even the massive 24" iMac doesn't buy me any desktop real estate over this crappy 15" Dell laptop.
  16. Flaki macrumors member

    May 14, 2007
    I'll buy the mbp when it have the 1680x1500 option.

    I hope they will update the mbp when Leopard is realised:D
  17. Pressure macrumors 68040


    May 30, 2006
    That means never then heh.

    Seriously, with Resolution Independence 1920x1200 will not seem to small on a 15.4" screen.

    It basically mean that you can scale everything to be the size you want but with much more detail, because they can take up more pixels.
  18. mirffy macrumors member

    Feb 5, 2007
    I'm surprised nobody's complaining about not being able to fit 10 sofas in a 4 by 3 meter room....

    at some point high res just gets pointlessly tiny, don't you think?

    Even if you think you gain more real estate, having 200 icons in the dock is just not economic, if you need magnifying glasses to figure out which one you're hovering over.
  19. Marioz macrumors member

    Aug 6, 2006
    Rivarolo C.se, Italy
    I think the right way to get more real estate will be Spaces, not to add higher resolutions.
  20. Martov macrumors newbie

    Jun 20, 2007
    Higher resolution is need when developing, CAD (and probably in all media creation apps), in general when you have lots of toolbars, toolboxes, and a content window in center

    Spaces won't solve the problem when you have one application that needs lots of pixels... but it would still be great to divide all your open apps into categories

    I've had 1920x1200 on different 15" since 2003, though I've had 1600x1200 since 2000 (the standard aspect ratio of the wide 1920x1200). And I wouldn't say that it has affected my vision any more than age has in itself. what has from time to time affected it is doing 16hrs workdays staring at the screen.

    You really need a good screen though, I had a Dell (Latitude 810?) with a really unsharp screen and then it was a pain on the eyes, now with HP NW8240 with a really sharp screen it hasn't been any problems.

    A couple of years from 40, I will probably take the step up to 17". What has been holding me back from MBP with Bootcamp is the crappy resolution, but now I can get a MBP for my heart & soul, and the resolution I need for my work in the windows world:D
  21. munckee macrumors 65816

    Oct 27, 2005
    I'm hardly trolling. In fact, I think you'll note that I was quite happy to add a reasonable response at the beginning of the thread. But when you start adding crap like "Nobody cares. Really." what kind of response are you expecting from them?

    Sorry, but when you start saying stuff like that, it just makes it much easier for someone to immediately discount your opinion in the future.
  22. whateverandever macrumors 6502a

    Nov 8, 2006
    And you continue to troll.

    Do you need me to list the sixteen other threads with people saying "WUXGA is tiny."?

    There are some of us who are tired of hearing about it. And I honestly don't care if you discount my "opinion" in the future. I contribute to these forums with facts and experience, not speculation and whining.
  23. whateverandever macrumors 6502a

    Nov 8, 2006
    Spaces does not add screen real-estate, it just creates more "screens" (only they're less useful because you can't see them all at the same time).

    There are already virtual screen solutions for Mac OS if you want them.

  24. Eric1285 macrumors 6502

    Feb 22, 2007
    The day Apple bumps up the resolution on the MBP will probably be the day I sell my C2D MBP and get a new one. I can't stand the fact that the display is only 1440x900. I bring my MBP to work every day, and I don't usually hook it up to an external monitor. As such, I do all my work on the MBP's screen and I always run out of desktop space. I'm used to having 1920x1200 at home, so maybe I'm spoiled =)
  25. amc382 macrumors regular

    Nov 4, 2003
    you could always have some warranty voiding fun: take the 1920x1080 from your dell and put it in your MBP.

    other things like this have been done, of course you would be losing the advantages of the LED backlight.

Share This Page