Blu-ray would have been nice, keeping matte screens as an option would have been nicer still. But the biggest disappointment for me with the new 15" Macbook Pro is that it continues to have a 1440x900 screen resolution. It would have been great to see the screen move up to a 1680×1050 resolution, as some other notebooks have. Increased resolution would have had the biggest positive impact on usability. The 1920x1200 resolution of the 17" is great but the notebook is too big for my taste; a 15" is a nice size and having more pixels and usable screen real estate would clinched it. Thoughts?
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.
Biggest Disappointment with 15" Macbook Pro: No Bump In Screen Resolution
- Thread starter ddarko
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
+1!!! Since upgrading my older MBP to 1920x1200 I just can't go back to 1440x900. Even my company provided HP 6710 has 1680x1050 15" display.
Cheers,
Agreed as well. Though that said, coming from a MBA even the 1440x900 feels like a step up. I also had the HD 17" previously, and it was definitely too big for portable use on a daily basis. The 15" at 1680x1050 would have been ideal!
Completely agree.
I've managed to get over the glossy screen and the loss of one FW port. But I am sure that 1440 x 900 is just not enough screen real estate for apps like Logic Pro and Sibelius. Hence I will probably get the 17", with 1920 x 1200, and look to upgrade to a unibody 17" sometime in 2009.
I've managed to get over the glossy screen and the loss of one FW port. But I am sure that 1440 x 900 is just not enough screen real estate for apps like Logic Pro and Sibelius. Hence I will probably get the 17", with 1920 x 1200, and look to upgrade to a unibody 17" sometime in 2009.
If the MBP resolution gets any finer I think I might go blind. I think the current resolution is a good compromise between text readability and HD graphic image and video. The glossy screen is what really hurts so much.
This is why hi-res OPTIONS should be available. Not everyone wants the same thing. 1920x1200 is not a waste to me. Look at the lengths I went to in order to have a higher resolution MBP. Not only do I have a hi-res screen but no nVidia 8600 time bomb, since the pre-Santa Rosa C2D MBPs have the ATI x1600 which is working just fine for me.
We need options Apple!! One size does not fit all!!
Cheers,
Disappointment indeed. Makes me feels Apple is pulling a Microsoft with the whole Vista downgrade to XP, except its hardware.
The new MBP definitely isn't a downgrade like Vista, it just isn't as big of an upgrade as most people expected. As this is my first MBP and having no other preconditions, I am sure I will be happy.
Which is exactly who I think this upgrade is targeting. No real compelling reason for existing MBP owners to jump (unless you just want the latest (not even the greatest)). I believe many new Mac users or desktop Mac owners looking for their first laptop will probably be just fine with one of the new MBPs.
Cheers,
I would have loved to see this too, but I will put up with the 1440x900 resolution because the screen has a good color/black level to it overall.
I was really hoping for a higher screen resolution, but it's time for me to upgrade my old PowerBook 12" and waiting longer just on the hope that Apple might one day offer a higher screen resolution just doesn't make sense in my case right now. Hence, 15" MBP ordered and on the way.
My young eyes crave the insane resolutions thou, so if there ever is a screen replacement hack, well... I just might be up for it.
My young eyes crave the insane resolutions thou, so if there ever is a screen replacement hack, well... I just might be up for it.
Ah, if you had found a used or refurb 2.16 or 2.33 MBP (anything before the SR LED screens) you could have availed yourself of the 1920x1200 LCD upgrade hack that a few of us have performed.
Cheers,
Sure, if you sit 10' from the screen. Who sits 10' from their laptop?
Your angular resolution is about 1/60 of a degree. From a 12" viewing distance, you can resolve ~0.080 mm (0.003") spot. This is roughly the size of a human hair, so you can test for yourself. On a 15" diagonal screen, you could resolve about 4000 pixels. This assumes foveal viewing, high contrast, perfect vision.
Still, even 1920x1080 could be resolved on a 15" screen under normal computer use by young, healthy eyes.
Even though I've found that 1440x900 is a good resolution in my laptop -- I no go for the 1600x1200 on a 17" monitor like I used to -- I wish Apple would offer a 1680x1050 option. And if resolution independence shows up in a future OS X, 1680x1050 or higher will be very desirable in a 15" laptop.
I don't think anyone wants or expects a 1920x1200 resolution on a 15" screen, for one, I don't even think such an LCD panel exists and two, even if someone does manufacture it, it's probably too many pixels into too small a space. But 1680x1050 for 15" definitely does exist, is being used by some notebook makers and it helps not only with video but with something as basic as viewing documents and spreadsheets.
Actually it does exist; if you search you will find people doing the mod.
Also it's not too many pixels, but of course it would take away from people would have otherwise have gotten a 17" MacBook Pro.
for me im glad for no bump because i can run games at native rez wihtout loosing fps.. but it would be nice for some more realestate
i see in the future when they add Blue Ray as a BTO option they will probably offer 1920 x 1200 or something so they can say, "it is a true 1080p HD..."
i see in the future when they add Blue Ray as a BTO option they will probably offer 1920 x 1200 or something so they can say, "it is a true 1080p HD..."
I don't know why everyone's so upset...
Just picked up my MBP today, and despite the low resolution screen, the picture is just gorgeous. Definitely fine with me. If I need more real estate, I'll just pick up a cinema display when they come out. But, I probably won't. The LED display is definitely one of the nicest screens I have seen on a laptop.
Just picked up my MBP today, and despite the low resolution screen, the picture is just gorgeous. Definitely fine with me. If I need more real estate, I'll just pick up a cinema display when they come out. But, I probably won't. The LED display is definitely one of the nicest screens I have seen on a laptop.
That's true... of a TV, not a computer. Try to sit two feet in front of a TV and let me know how crisp it is. At any rate, Apple hasn't really pushed the limits of display tech since it intro'ed the 17" PB (super wow at the time) and the 30" ACD.
Yeah I have to definitely agree with this. 1440x990 is old school now. Its funny how my crappy Dell from 2005 with a 15" screen has a better resolution then the current MBP. We NEED a bump in resolution, we need it badly right now.
And we shouldn't have to hack 2 year old models to get there! It should be a factory option on the next update!
I totally agree with you. I mean it's stupid how Apple is sorta making people (well not forcing) like you into moding their computer just to get a better resolution. I dont think it should be a factory option, it should be base on the 15"s.
1680x1050 on the 15" should at least be an option. I won't upgrade to another 15" mbp until then. The 1440x900 I currently have is just not enough real estate for apps, especially final cut, photoshop, etc. It's just too cramped.
Maybe the next one will be a quad core, 1050p screen with bluray, firewire 400, esata, full size hdcp displayport, matte screen option, and mobile gtx 260 to boot... at the same price point.
if only
Maybe the next one will be a quad core, 1050p screen with bluray, firewire 400, esata, full size hdcp displayport, matte screen option, and mobile gtx 260 to boot... at the same price point.
if only