Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

AG Hi Res Screen Advice

I'm using my 15" High Res now. My eyes do hurt a bit, not sure if its from lack of sleep and or a combo of the new computer.

I hope I get use to it. I'll try tinker tool tomorrow when I'm not half falling asleep.
 
Identity Fraud said:
I'm using my 15" High Res now. My eyes do hurt a bit, not sure if its from lack of sleep and or a combo of the new computer.

I hope I get use to it. I'll try tinker tool tomorrow when I'm not half falling asleep.
Click to expand...

Get ready for years of eye-strain and headaches if you keep it. Sorry :(
 
applebook said:
I've made the mistake of getting a 1920x1200 display on a 15" Dell Lattitude and then on the 17" MBP.

Never again. That resolution should be reserved for a minimum of 19-inch and larger desktop LCDs.
Click to expand...

I can imagine that 1920x1200 would be too high for a 15", but the apple one isn't that high it's only 1680x1050, which is perfect to me.
 
Identity Fraud said:
I'm using my 15" High Res now. My eyes do hurt a bit, not sure if its from lack of sleep and or a combo of the new computer.

I hope I get use to it. I'll try tinker tool tomorrow when I'm not half falling asleep.
Click to expand...


give it about a week. I found that after that, I wasn't even zooming in on websites, I just adjusted to the new res.
 
I had a 17" notebook with a 1080p display and a 15" one with 1080p display before that. And there's a reason why I returned them both (besides the fact that they were windows laptops).

High resolution screens do look great for viewing photos, watching movies, or working on editing software (once you get accustomed to using shortcuts instead of using the UI. BUUUT for general purpose stuff like browsing, reading and navigation your eyes will hurt until your eye eventually goes numb.

I would just get the stock screen and grab a nice large aftermarket Monitor for at home use.
 
Feeling like a minority here. Do a lot of reading (IM, web surfing etc) on my HR AG and have never got eye strain, the screen's always felt very natural. 3 of my co-workers who run the same MBP I have also have never complained to me.
 
Oh my God, this has now just confused me even more. People are suffering from severe eye-strain saying that this high of a resolution only belongs on 17'' and 19'' laptops?

Dang it.
 
I love how people complain about 1680x1050 on the macbook 15.4" screen. (text and other items are too small).

Now you have companies like sony and hp putting in 1920x1080 on 13.3" screens. Imagine that straining the eyes, I think the HR on the 15 is perfect! It's the perfect combo of space, font size and res.

On the i7 model I own this was the "1" must upgrade I told our I.T guy to purchase for me. Then he went out and upgraded ram and HD as well so I'm not complaining.

I just find the 1440x900 isn't enough for the 15", plus the HR AG is amazing, it looks even better than my ACD 23" and 30". (But I think the mini display to DVI adapter isn't reproducing the colors properly).
 
For movies / photo's hi-res is great. For reading text for long periods of time many people find it too small and eye straining.

Would be a lot easier if Apple would just offer the AG screen in standard resolution. Clearly for whatever reason they don't have interest in selling AG screens, even their description about the AG screen option is bland....
 
bigjobby said:
I've been using hi-res displays for years and for me anything less makes fonts look too large. I think the small font thing is something one just gets used to after a while.
Click to expand...

I've been using a Lenovo X300 13" with 1440x900 resolution. Will the Hi-Res 15" screen produce roughly the same size test as the 13" 1440x900 screen? I was hoping to check out the regular screen and hi res screen when I was in Ft Worth over last weekend but the Apple Store there closed a hour early, I got there at 4:05 and they had closed at 4.

I've ruled out the 13", so its between the 15" low res and hi res models. I am leaning towards the hi-res, if the text was just a bit bigger than on my 13" it would be perfect. Roughly the same size would be good as well.
 
entatlrg said:
15" hi-res will be a little smaller.
Click to expand...

How much, I've calculated the DPI and its about 1 pixels per inch difference, 127.68 vs 128.65.

Is 1 extra pixel per inch going to make the text that much smaller or will I not be able to notice it?
 
applebook said:
Get ready for years of eye-strain and headaches if you keep it. Sorry :(
Click to expand...

I think it was more that I was dog tired the first night I used my computer. I've been using it on and off now all day and my eyes feel fine. *phew* I hope it stays that way.
 
I'm not going to be doing any photo editing. I'm pretty sure the standard res will be fine, especially since I have an external monitor. The $90 upgrade (student discount) is not worth it for me I think.
 
I really wish Apple offered 1680x1050 on their 17" MacBook Pro. I really want the 17" - I bought one before and loved it, but had to return it after a week of use because of the resolution.
 
owlbabu said:
Do u have the hi res on ur new 15"?

Talking to Kilamite
Click to expand...

Nope. Had the high res antiglare 15" for a couple of days before swapping it for the standard res 15".

Stuck with glossy unfortunately, but nothing else I can do. I wish Apple offered the standard res antiglare, even as a BTO option only available online.
 
Kilamite said:
I really wish Apple offered 1680x1050 on their 17" MacBook Pro. I really want the 17" - I bought one before and loved it, but had to return it after a week of use because of the resolution.
Click to expand...

Low resolution would be tragic on such a big notebook screen.
 
DesmoPilot said:
Low resolution would be tragic on such a big notebook screen.
Click to expand...

It would be the same Pixels Per Inch (roughly) as the standard resolution on the 13" and 15" MacBook Pros. It was the standard resolution until Apple discontinued it and only offered 1920x1200 on the 17".
 
I just picked my HiRes AG up two weeks ago. What kept tripping up my decision was putting the standard screen and HiRes next to each other in the Apple Store and comparing them for hours. I had myself convinced the small text would strain my eyes. I finally decided to just go in and buy the HiRes and see how it was in real world use for a week.

Within a day I grew used to the screen font size and now am very happy I went with the HiRes AG display.

I might add, that I do not have the best eyesight, which for some odd reason, seems to worsen with age. :p

In the end, it really turned out not to be an issue with me personally.

Give it shot and see how it works for you.

BC
 
Scorecard said:
I love how people complain about 1680x1050 on the macbook 15.4" screen. (text and other items are too small)....
Click to expand...

You probably enjoy it as much as the "those of us with good eyesight" comments assailed at the 1440 aficionados. Moreover, most are defending their purchases. It is arguable that the smaller text and icons can stress your eyes.

Regardless, it is whatever suits you. My advice remains the same, test it out for yourself and see what you like.
 
1920x1200 vs. 1680x1050

Kilamite said:
I really wish Apple offered 1680x1050 on their 17" MacBook Pro. I really want the 17" - I bought one before and loved it, but had to return it after a week of use because of the resolution.
Click to expand...

I totally agree. Until OS X gets resolution independence, I think 1680x1050 is a better resolution for those of us who read and write a lot. It's sad that Apple stopped offering this resolution in their 17" MBPs. I'm still on my 17" 4GHz Santa Rosa MBP for this reason only. I really want the new 17" Sandy Bridge MBP, but 1920x1200 in a 17" doesn't work for me, at least with the way OS X displays things at the moment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back