Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Are Retina Displays Worth It?
- Thread starter Felasco
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think they are definitely worth it for what I do. I do a lot of work on my computer, mostly with word-processing and the text is noticeably crisper and easier to read. I'm not exaggerating when I say that text literally looks blurry on older model MBPs.
I'm running 1680x1050 on my 13" rMBP, and apps that aren't designed for retina displays do look slightly fuzzier, however, they don't look any more fuzzy than a regular display does with regular text.
It's basically like going back to a regular mac when you don't have the retina support, but when you do it looks superb
I usually run my 13 rMBP at 1920x1080, it looks great as far a i am concerned, it doesn't seem to be blurry or have any issues. It is a huge improvement over my 2011 MBP at 1280x800
I wanted to come back to the thread, find this post, and thank you for suggesting I research the eyestrain issue.
Wow, did I find a bunch of people complaining about eyestrain, including some who feel the retina display may actually be leading them towards blindness.
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/4417397?start=30&tstart=0
In addition, I found a bunch of people who are really unhappy with the retina, and really mad at Apple, including the launching of a lawsuit in California on this matter. This is a different issue than eyestrain, apparently Apple used two different suppliers, and one of them produced displays with ghosting problems.
http://9to5mac.com/2013/03/14/retin...c-MacAllDay+(9+to+5+Mac+-+Apple+Intelligence)
The suit claims Apple knew some of the displays were subpar, but shipped them anyway. I have no way of knowing how true that might be.
It was especially interesting to read reports from Genius's at the Apple store describing how they had to deal with this issue. They would offer to replace the screen, but couldn't promise the customer this would help, as Apple couldn't tell them which version of the screen (which manufacturer) would be used as a replacement. So folks were forced to have their screens replaced over and over until by the laws of random chance they got a screen from Samsung, the good manufacturer. Again, this report comes from an Apple employee.
It's a strange experience to read this thread where everybody is happy to really happy, and then visit another discussion where so many folks are so unhappy. It almost seems pointless to research these things...
Sure--like I said, it's not that hard to get a little program (f.lux or whatever) to adjust it (you could also permanently calibrate the display in the preferences if you always want it at one setting). You said you hadn't actually seen one, though, so it's worth pointing out if you tend to get eyestrain from computers. If you get a chance to actually look at one before ordering, you'll probably see what I mean. I don't think there's anything about the screen that will inherently make you go blind, but having bright light that is too strong shining in your eyes probably isn't good for them. It seems fine once you tone it down, though.
As for the image retention thing, that issue has been known and talked about for a long time--there some thread on the Apple forums that has thousands and thousands of posts. It seemed like it was a pretty significant issue last year, but my understanding is that it has mostly been fixed with the late 2013 models, though I'm sure there are still some problems. For what it's worth, mine seems fine.
Last edited:
Yes, some users report these adjustments worked for them, while others felt it didn't. I agree it certainly seems worth a try for someone who already has a retina. I downloaded f.lux today, but haven't had a chance to try it yet.
For me personally, the obstacle is not as much this or that issue, as it is a pattern of years of such threads with thousands of posts discussing a seemingly endless list of problems.
In my book, there's a meaningful difference between a problem now and again which gets worked out, and an ongoing parade of problems and unhappy buyers.
Hell YES!!! I remember the very first time when I got my 15" Retina Display MacBook Pro in June 2012, I was blown away lol. I can tell the difference as soon as it starts up, the Apple logo 
Now the 2013 just got even better in term of hardware upgrade, such as much faster flash
However, it frustrated me that some of my friends can't tell the difference between Retina and non-Retina The difference is CLEAR
Now the 2013 just got even better in term of hardware upgrade, such as much faster flash
However, it frustrated me that some of my friends can't tell the difference between Retina and non-Retina
The difference is CLEAR Right...I agree that there are things that Apple (and a lot of other companies) should have dealt with better. Rushing out products that still have problems is an annoying behavior with tech companies in general--one of the reasons I waited to buy a Retina was to see if the problems got fixed.
As for the eyestrain issue, I'm not sure it's actually a "defect". The screen brightness/contrast is presumably desirable for people doing graphic work, watching video, etc. Some people are more sensitive than others, and I personally find that my eyes have gotten worse in middle age. So, in the same way that I can't go to see 3-D movies because they give me a headache, I can't use this particular computer without modifying it a little bit. But I wouldn't say it's a quality control issue. I do miss the matte screen from my Powerbook and wish that Apple made something similar now.
I hear ya.
The word "annoying" may be appropriate in those cases when the vendor doesn't realize they have a problem. The word "fraud" is more accurate when they know about the problem and don't disclose it prior to purchase.
It is of course hard to which it is when one is outside of the company. An ongoing pattern of such problems tends to weaken trust over time, and so some users may start to assume fraud.
I agree. It's an issue to be aware of, and I'm glad you made me aware of it. Eyestrain is an issue for me too, so I should probably sidestep retina.
I don't know much about such things, but I've heard the Kindle has a different lighting system which is less like staring in to a light bulb. If anyone knows more and can explain, that would be welcome and appreciated.
The Kindle uses e-ink, which isn't backlit--it actually rearranges tiny ink particles by altering their charge, so you get something that is more like paper. You actually have to light it in the dark, like you would if you wer reading a book. It's not really suitable for computers (at least yet)--it's not in color, doesn't display video, etc.
And yes, companies should disclose to the public when their products have problems, and they often don't.
As for the Retina...see if you can try one out somewhere for a little while if you're worried. A lot of other modern screens are also really bright, so you might not want to order one you haven't seen (I haven't really used the most recent Air, for example, so I can't compare it). A lot of them are designed for entertainment, so they have that glossy quality, though the Retina isn't exactly that. It definitely has a harsher quality than my wife's Macbook Pro from a couple of years ago, and it's much brighter than my matte Powerbook screen. But there are also advantages with the Retina re: eyestrain--it helps to be able to see things that are sharp and not pixellated, so there's less squinting. You'll have to see for yourself.
Last edited:
Ok, thanks for this, you appear to be quite informed.
I suppose this is unrealistic day dreaming, but it would be nice if you could put a computer in to what might be called "Kindle mode" given that what most of us are doing most of the time is reading.
This has already been done, but not well. Yet
Type: hybrid e ink lcd display
into google to see what has been tried.
It doesn't matter if it's worth it or not. Apple phasing out all non-retina so its all that will be left. Retina screens are crisp and nifty. It's not really needed, but a lot of stuff apples does isn't needed.
So, retina is no different from the generic rule?
Biggest resolution, smaller objects, more difficult to read and see?
Why osx does not allow the maximum resolution?
They sell us a product that can go higher and this is not possible?
What is the maximum/default resolution?
It is both different and not different from the generic rule.
Basically, if you select Best for Retina, the UI will appear with an effective screen estate of 1280x800 (but it's actually at 2560x1600). Screen elements have been scaled 2x in both directions in order to produce an effective retina'ed 1280x800 resolution.
If you increase the scaled resolution (for instance, setting the scaled resolution at 1440x900), items will appear slightly smaller as the effective screen estate has increased (everything is still doubled, but to 2880x1800 and then scaled back down to 2560x1600 but producing an effective screen estate of 1440x900).
Retina is like experiencing 4K television...you can see immense detail. For some people that benefit will not be important, for others it's like getting a new set of eyes.
One reason they are useful is watching HD movies. iTunes won't even let you play them on a non-HD screen.
For me this is important. Not to mention all the other benefits, such as viewing angle, general clarity.
It's really a rather dramatic difference. I REALLY like the 11" MBA but the screen is unbearable after owning this 'retina' stuff.
As a matter of fact, just about every monitor is unbearable.
(this expensive taste thing is going to cost me )
For me this is important. Not to mention all the other benefits, such as viewing angle, general clarity.
It's really a rather dramatic difference. I REALLY like the 11" MBA but the screen is unbearable after owning this 'retina' stuff.
As a matter of fact, just about every monitor is unbearable.
(this expensive taste thing is going to cost me
)
You are OCD about it? what? What does that even mean, you mean you have OCD, you can't "be" OCD about a single thing. OCD is a mental disorder that causes a lot of problems.
Anyways i think retina is worth it.