With retina displays we can choose many NON-Native resolutions and still look better!
The desktop space of this HiDPI display would still be the same as the current 1440x900 display.
However, I just had a nice thought: using the Display Control Pane, instead of setting it at 2880x1800 HiDPI, couldn't we set the display at 1680x1050, 1920x1200 (or even 2560x1600) non-HiDPI and it would still look better than a display at those native resolutions given that the anti-aliasing uses the full 2880x1800 pixels?
Think about this, I can choose to have a 1440x900 sized desktop like I have now on my old MBP, or I can set the resolution to 1680x1050 and it would still look better than my current 1680x1050 native resolution MBP. (As long as the anti-aliasing uses the full 2880x1800 pixels!)
In other words, any resolution above 1440x900, even though it's not native would look as good or better than any old fashion CRT at the same resolutions (because CRTs have a fixed shadow mask and phosphors that don't line up anyway).
That would be fantastic, although everything on the desktop would look very small, even at non-native resolutions, it would still look better than lower (higher than 1440x900) fixed resolution monitors at native resolutions! (Again, with anti-aliasing using all the pixels.)
(Actually this would be sort of like pseudo resolution independence.)
I'm surprised I hadn't thought of this before now. This must be true, any errors in this thinking?
----------
Actually I read some where else, that the integrated graphics on the Ivy Bridge CPU can support 4096x4096 pixels.
I did think this to be a strange shape, but it allows for rotation of 4K monitors too? Or it's just simply more flexible to apply any display (taller, 16:10 or 4:3 ratio), you may need. Or perhaps to support up to 16.8 MegaPixels like a retina 27 inch iMac display at 5120x2880 (which would be 14.7 MP).
----------
Of course any future MacBook Pro that would have an optical drive would support CD and DVD read/write capability. But I would hope that they get rid of the optical drive like the MacBook Air has. If you really need an optical drive once a while (annually?), hook up a $49 Apple Super Drive, or FireWire Target Disk Mode to an older MacBook with an optical drive for the rare moment you need an optical drive.
As for the Blu-ray capability, Mac OS X supports it, I have it on my iMac now, (since 2010, and I haven't used it since then). But Apple will never put one in internally at this point. (If they were, Apple would have done it at least 4 years ago.)
The desktop space of this HiDPI display would still be the same as the current 1440x900 display.
However, I just had a nice thought: using the Display Control Pane, instead of setting it at 2880x1800 HiDPI, couldn't we set the display at 1680x1050, 1920x1200 (or even 2560x1600) non-HiDPI and it would still look better than a display at those native resolutions given that the anti-aliasing uses the full 2880x1800 pixels?
Think about this, I can choose to have a 1440x900 sized desktop like I have now on my old MBP, or I can set the resolution to 1680x1050 and it would still look better than my current 1680x1050 native resolution MBP. (As long as the anti-aliasing uses the full 2880x1800 pixels!)
In other words, any resolution above 1440x900, even though it's not native would look as good or better than any old fashion CRT at the same resolutions (because CRTs have a fixed shadow mask and phosphors that don't line up anyway).
That would be fantastic, although everything on the desktop would look very small, even at non-native resolutions, it would still look better than lower (higher than 1440x900) fixed resolution monitors at native resolutions! (Again, with anti-aliasing using all the pixels.)
(Actually this would be sort of like pseudo resolution independence.)
I'm surprised I hadn't thought of this before now. This must be true, any errors in this thinking?
----------
Actually I read some where else, that the integrated graphics on the Ivy Bridge CPU can support 4096x4096 pixels.
I did think this to be a strange shape, but it allows for rotation of 4K monitors too? Or it's just simply more flexible to apply any display (taller, 16:10 or 4:3 ratio), you may need. Or perhaps to support up to 16.8 MegaPixels like a retina 27 inch iMac display at 5120x2880 (which would be 14.7 MP).
----------
Of course any future MacBook Pro that would have an optical drive would support CD and DVD read/write capability. But I would hope that they get rid of the optical drive like the MacBook Air has. If you really need an optical drive once a while (annually?), hook up a $49 Apple Super Drive, or FireWire Target Disk Mode to an older MacBook with an optical drive for the rare moment you need an optical drive.
As for the Blu-ray capability, Mac OS X supports it, I have it on my iMac now, (since 2010, and I haven't used it since then). But Apple will never put one in internally at this point. (If they were, Apple would have done it at least 4 years ago.)