Remember
this report from MacBidouille about the scaled resolutions in the DisplayProductID-ae03 file?
Well, I checked out the screenshot of that file
here, made a text file from the information, and used plutil (as explained in the thread). Here is what I got after I converted the resulting hexadecimal numbers.
Code:
# Hex Dec Aspect ratio
0 1900 0e10 6400 3600 16:9
1 1680 0ca8 5760 3240 16:9
2 1000 0900 4096 2304 16:9
3 0c80 0708 3200 1800 16:9
4 1000 0870 4096 2160 256:135 (~1.9:1)
5 0f00 0870 3840 2160 16:9
6 0a00 0640 2560 1600 16:10
7 0780 04b0 1920 1200 16:10
8 0500 0320 1280 800 16:10
9 0b40 0654 2880 1620 16:9
10 0a00 05a0 2560 1440 16:9
11 0800 0480 2048 1152 16:9
12 0780 0438 1920 1080 16:9
13 0640 04b0 1600 1200 4:3
14 0640 0384 1600 900 16:9
15 05a0 032a 1440 810 16:9
16 0540 02f4 1344 756 16:9
17 0500 0400 1280 1024 5:4
18 0500 02d0 1280 720 16:9
19 0400 0300 1024 768 4:3
20 0400 0240 1024 576 16:9
21 03c0 0258 960 600 16:10
22 03c0 021c 960 540 16:9
23 0348 020c 840 524 210:131 (~1.6:1)
24 0320 0258 800 600 4:3
25 0280 01e0 640 480 4:3
26 1900 0e10 6400 3600 16:9
27 1680 0ca8 5760 3240 16:9
28 1400 0b40 5120 2880 16:9
29 1000 0900 4096 2304 16:9
30 0c80 0708 3200 1800 16:9
If the MacBidouille poster and this
link for the 13" MBP (see
here for the 15" MBP) are correct, then the native monitor resolution should not appear in the first set of rows (0-3). Since 5120x2880 and 3840x2160 are both missing from that set, the set doesn't seem to tell us anything useful. Can anyone interpret this better?