Nice, downloaded the RDM. Love it! I actually found 1920x1200 too small, but 1680x1050 is seemingly the sweet spot for me! Might be an issue for those with bad eyes, thankfully mine are good.
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.
Can someone explain to me how resolution\scaling works?
- Thread starter shenan1982
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Nice, downloaded the RDM. Love it! I actually found 1920x1200 too small, but 1680x1050 is seemingly the sweet spot for me! Might be an issue for those with bad eyes, thankfully mine are good.
I thought the rMB still has the option (but not the default) of 1152x720 which is exactly pixel doubled.
It does have that option.
Default is 1200x800.
Larger Text is 1152x720 or 1024x640.
More Space is 1440x900.
Those are all the HiDPI options.
Interesting. The website only lists 1440x800, 1280x800, 1024x640. Well, I guess it lists them as the "supported scaled resolutions". Technically, correct if they also offer 1152x720 (not scaled), but a bit misleading. My mistake.
So I take it there is a 1152 2X scaling?
Yes, you are correct. Apple only lists "supported scaled resolutions" excluding the 2X scaling default option.
I'm trying to wrap my head around all this. I used 1440 x 900 last night but read in here that using anything scaled it may cause slight performance issues.
When you select default (non-scaled) is the resolution 1152 x 720? Or is it truly 2304 x 1440 just shrunk down?
When you select default (non-scaled) is the resolution 1152 x 720? Or is it truly 2304 x 1440 just shrunk down?
Default is *not* non-scaled.
Default is 1200x800.
----------
Yes, there is 1152x720 option. But it is *not* the default. ALL the supported resolutions are Retina @2X. Default is 1200x800 @ 2X.
What's the difference between default and the scaled option of 1200 x 800? Since it sounds like default is also scaled. My head hurts.
Actually 1280x800 HiDPI is scaled despite being the default. 1152x720 HiDPI is native and therefore 1 rendered pixel = 1 actual pixel on the display, so it is not scaled up or down in any way. 1280x800 HiDPI must be scaled down to fit.
I didn't say it's not scaled. Dude said "the default non-scaled resolution..." and I'm correcting him by pointing out that the fault resolution is *not* actually a non-scaled resolution, but actually is the scaled 1200x800.
----------
Nothing-- the scaled option of 1200x800 *is* the default.
This post from page 1 of this thread might help:
EDIT: Looks like Fineance beat me to it
At the native resolution all the interface elements become really small and for the majority of people the computer isn't usable. Here's a screenshot of my 15" rMBP running at the native 2880x1800: http://i.imgur.com/IZ0c389.png
Notice how text is too small to easily read?
To solve this Apple has traditionally mapped four physical screen pixels to one software pixel (a point). This halves the effective resolution in each dimension (to 1440x900 on my 15" rMBP) but means the on-screen elements such as text, graphics, etc appear very clear and sharp.
As the pixel density is so high on retina displays you don't have to map four physical screen pixels to one software pixel in order to improve the picture quality over standard displays. Doing it this way gives the best picture, but you can sacrifice the quality a little and use software scaling to allow larger effective resolutions (1680x1050 and 1920x1200 on my 15" rMBP).
This works by rendering the on screen image at double the effective resolution and then scaling it down to fit on the retina screen. For example, if I run my 15" rMBP at 1680x1050 the OS will actually ask the graphics processor to render the screen at double that in each direction, so 3360x2100. It will then scale that down using software to the 2880x1800.
The retina MacBook does the same thing as my rMBP. The best resolution would be 1152x720 as standard. The problem is that doesn't provide a lot of usable screen space, so instead Apple uses the software scaling to run at 1280x800 by default.
The 1440x900 you've seen is another supported scaled resolution and works in the same way. It won't be as crisp as 1152x720 would be but it's still much, much better than the old displays and the on screen elements aren't too small to be usable.
AnandTech has a good explanation in the original rMBP review: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6023/the-nextgen-macbook-pro-with-retina-display-review/6
Thanks, I get it now. I think. So 1152 x 720 would be the sharpest and give the best clarity however it offers less usable space? So Apple decided to default to 1280 x 800 to offer more space with slightly less clarity and possibly a bit lower performance?
Do I pass yet?
Do I pass yet?
Last edited:
You nailed it. However I will add that the "loss of clarity" is practically imperceptible. I personally cannot tell the difference at all. None. Zero. However some claim they can. I'm not going to say they're lying, but I'm picky, I have perfect vision, and I can't tell.
....and vs MBA running at 1440 x 900?
Just trying to work out how this is going to compare with my last 5 years of working at 1440 x 900 on every generation of Macbook Air!
I do a lot of spreadsheeting and I'm not sure I want to lose any more screen space.
I'm struggling a bit working out whether the rMB running at 1440 x 900 will be the same size text and therefore less screen space (I'll see less of a given spreadsheet vs my current MBA).
If this is the case should I consider a higher scaling? I'm not sure I want the text any smaller, although I've never used a retina screen so not sure how much this would help.
Any thoughts appreciated!
Just trying to work out how this is going to compare with my last 5 years of working at 1440 x 900 on every generation of Macbook Air!
I do a lot of spreadsheeting and I'm not sure I want to lose any more screen space.
I'm struggling a bit working out whether the rMB running at 1440 x 900 will be the same size text and therefore less screen space (I'll see less of a given spreadsheet vs my current MBA).
If this is the case should I consider a higher scaling? I'm not sure I want the text any smaller, although I've never used a retina screen so not sure how much this would help.
Any thoughts appreciated!
You will fit the same amount of your excel spreadsheet on the rMB display as you would on the 13" Air as the resolution is the same (so same number of rows/columns). The rMB's screen is physically smaller though so everything will appear a little smaller.
Can anyone comment on using the 1150x720 resolution? I imagine I'd be using that because I don't want the GPU to render the display at a resolution I don't need, and I don't need a lot of usable space. Are the display elements that much bigger? I can't imagine it would be too different that 1280x800
This is how apple does it on pretty much all of their devices.
2304x1440 / 2 = Best for Retina Resolution. So on the new macbook you're really only seeing a 720p resolution BUT it looks so much better than 720p because of the 226ppi.
The reason it's down scaled is because if you tried to use your iphone or macbook at it's true resolution everyday your eyes would start bleeding from straining so hard.
The 5k imac uses a 1440p scaled resolution (the 12inch macbooks true resolution) and you can see everything clearly because the screen is so big. But the real resolution is double of that and you can just imagine how tiny the icons would get.
Using programs like photoshop, illustrator, etc. would be nice at the true resolution.
2304x1440 / 2 = Best for Retina Resolution. So on the new macbook you're really only seeing a 720p resolution BUT it looks so much better than 720p because of the 226ppi.
The reason it's down scaled is because if you tried to use your iphone or macbook at it's true resolution everyday your eyes would start bleeding from straining so hard.
The 5k imac uses a 1440p scaled resolution (the 12inch macbooks true resolution) and you can see everything clearly because the screen is so big. But the real resolution is double of that and you can just imagine how tiny the icons would get.
Using programs like photoshop, illustrator, etc. would be nice at the true resolution.
No.
1) Apple no longer labels any resolution "Best for Retina." That terminology has been removed from System Preferences. There is only More Space, Default, and Larger Text.
2) The MacBook out of the box does not run at 1152 x 720. The option labeled "Default" in system preferences on the rMB is actually 1200 x 800.