Considering Returning my Retina MacBook Pro

[optics261]

You are missing the point of this thread.

For everyone who is still confused, here's a great post that articulates the problem better than I have - https://forums.macrumors.com/showpost...3&postcount=75

...
The point isn't that old apps look bad. Icons and fonts look pixelated -- I can live with that. Again, this is about UI designers who need pixel perfect renderings of their designs for non retina displays. This has been repeated so many times throughout this thread but the point is still being misunderstood.

Yeah, I dont get the concern, especially after reading that. Seems like there is no interpolation going on in old apps. That is great.

From what I understand in that post, old apps simply are pixel doubled, which would not impact myself as a graphics/web designer in any way. The same pixels are being shown, all that is happening is 4 physical pixels are being used to represent 1 'image pixel', and the result is the 1 'image pixel' appears really sharp.

"But when you actually zoom into the screebshot really close then you can see that Apple did exactly what I proposed it should do: It puts 1 pixel into 4 retina pixels, so that in the zoomed in version you will always see groups of 4 pixels in the same color. (Attachment 03)

In theory graphics and old apps should then look exactly the same as they did on old MBPs.


So, why do old apps still look terrible?
Well, it has to be - as some people in this thread already said - the display itself which is sharper and more detailed and therefore seems to pronounce the pixels of the antialiased graphics of the old apps more. I could find no other explanation."
​

The fact that it is pronouncing the effect of a pixel, because now each 'image pixel' is comprised of four distinct physical pixels, shouldnt really impact us. An image pixel within in a doubled app is still a image pixel.

The 'sharpness' or 'blur' of a pixel on a low-res screen is something that shouldnt be counted on when doing web design or UI work anyway. Thats the kind of blur or sharpness differences you'd see going from DVI to VGA at the same resolutions on a LCD, its hard to quantify, but its there.

The only fear should be, frankly for us, actual 'retina enabled apps' like Safari which add interpolated scaling to images or other techniques to attempt to use the higher quality display and make the 'experience' better. If those apps dont let us go back to this pixel doubled mode, then we are in trouble. Otherwise this screen can easily act just as well a preview for low-res / non-retina work.

 

[mawdsley]

just looking at buying one of the new rmbp myself, and came across this thread, interesting views on current problems that myself and designers face really. currently looking for a machine that will last me a good few years and need for travelling my issue was id like something with a large resolution like the new macbook pro to use as a main computer for the next 2 years at least while i go travelling..

just wondering what are peoples conclusions to these problems that designers are now facing with the retina screen, would you guys recommend it to get ahead and plan for early adoption of this technology if it takes off or recommend the old more 'standard' resolutions that the previous (i suppose and current) resolutions MacBooks have?

 

[mrmarts]

I find it annoying how everyone is bitching about the display as it is new device those who invest in it are early adopters, if you wait websites and programs will in the latter be supported for this emerging resolution much like the iPhone and iPad.

I hate to see when the iMac retina everyone will order it and than complain about the limited support of sites.

 

[NiVanc]

just looking at buying one of the new rmbp myself, and came across this thread, interesting views on current problems that myself and designers face really. currently looking for a machine that will last me a good few years and need for travelling my issue was id like something with a large resolution like the new macbook pro to use as a main computer for the next 2 years at least while i go travelling..

just wondering what are peoples conclusions to these problems that designers are now facing with the retina screen, would you guys recommend it to get ahead and plan for early adoption of this technology if it takes off or recommend the old more 'standard' resolutions that the previous (i suppose and current) resolutions MacBooks have?

I'm in the same boat as you. The way I see it is that certain apps aren't retina ready for now but will be in the short future (Most important being Adobe CS6). The advantage however is that you can develop and test for retina displays. That's something a MacBook Air or non-retina MacBook Pro won't be able to do.

That's why I'm more and more leaning towards the RMBP.

 

[dreamtenstudios]

Yeah, I dont get the concern, especially after reading that. Seems like there is no interpolation going on in old apps. That is great.

From what I understand in that post, old apps simply are pixel doubled, which would not impact myself as a graphics/web designer in any way. The same pixels are being shown, all that is happening is 4 physical pixels are being used to represent 1 'image pixel', and the result is the 1 'image pixel' appears really sharp.

"But when you actually zoom into the screebshot really close then you can see that Apple did exactly what I proposed it should do: It puts 1 pixel into 4 retina pixels, so that in the zoomed in version you will always see groups of 4 pixels in the same color. (Attachment 03)

In theory graphics and old apps should then look exactly the same as they did on old MBPs.


So, why do old apps still look terrible?
Well, it has to be - as some people in this thread already said - the display itself which is sharper and more detailed and therefore seems to pronounce the pixels of the antialiased graphics of the old apps more. I could find no other explanation."
​

The fact that it is pronouncing the effect of a pixel, because now each 'image pixel' is comprised of four distinct physical pixels, shouldnt really impact us. An image pixel within in a doubled app is still a image pixel.

The 'sharpness' or 'blur' of a pixel on a low-res screen is something that shouldnt be counted on when doing web design or UI work anyway. Thats the kind of blur or sharpness differences you'd see going from DVI to VGA at the same resolutions on a LCD, its hard to quantify, but its there.

The only fear should be, frankly for us, actual 'retina enabled apps' like Safari which add interpolated scaling to images or other techniques to attempt to use the higher quality display and make the 'experience' better. If those apps dont let us go back to this pixel doubled mode, then we are in trouble. Otherwise this screen can easily act just as well a preview for low-res / non-retina work.

I understand that on paper it doesn't seem like it would affect things, since pixels are doubled, not interpolated. But you have to test it in person to understand the issue. It's very pronounced and will have a significant impact on your work.

just wondering what are peoples conclusions to these problems that designers are now facing with the retina screen, would you guys recommend it to get ahead and plan for early adoption of this technology if it takes off or recommend the old more 'standard' resolutions that the previous (i suppose and current) resolutions MacBooks have?

Here are the best workarounds for web designers who want to keep their retina mbps:

• Use an external display to design and test
• Resort to CSS3 and icon fonts when possible. Avoid using graphics/images if you can.
• Use retina.js to load retina resolution images on your live sites

----------

I find it annoying how everyone is bitching about the display as it is new device those who invest in it are early adopters, if you wait websites and programs will in the latter be supported for this emerging resolution much like the iPhone and iPad.

I hate to see when the iMac retina everyone will order it and than complain about the limited support of sites.

You think it's annoying because you don't understand the complaint. It has been reiterated over and over in this thread, please read through it first.

 

[optics261]

I understand that on paper it doesn't seem like it would affect things, since pixels are doubled, not interpolated. But you have to test it in person to understand the issue. It's very pronounced and will have a significant impact on your work.

I have.. just in a limited time frame in-store. That'll change soon.

I've noticed the fact that old apps are very clearly pixelated, but as the post you linked to stated I also understood what was happening here.

I also know that a very cleanly cut well-defined rectangular pixel is actually better for me when doing pixel perfect work than an amorphous and possibly circular dot on a non-retina screen.

So, for me, as long as I can keep interpolation out of the picture, this is better and more accurate. Fuzziness that comes from the shapes of pixels and clarity and how light stops around them within when using various inputs such as VGA, the thickness of the lcd 'grill', the apparent shape of a pixel from different subpixel manufacturing techniques are not really my problem. (i.e. pentile ... http://images.anandtech.com/doci/5310/CES2012-6910_575px.jpg)

For example, when I zoom into Photoshop I see very clearly defined sets of rectangular pixels next to each other, I expect when I zoom out they stay that way. However, we have gotten used to the fact that when we zoom out, the quality of that one pixel is up-in-the-air as being defined by three colors subpixels in various arrangements, falloff, gradation and blur. Granted its all at a minute level, but it adds up.

My goal is to make an image or UI which is pixel perfect and this screen lets me do this better.

 

[DeeEss]

Good. Can you hurry up and return it already so the stock replenishes?

 

[Poochi]

You should keep your MBPR And start leading the way in designing websites that are Retina friendly.

Maybe non-retina users are 99% right now but with the way Apple is gaining momentum that number is going to drop sooner rather than later.

You don't want your website to look like !@$# when people visit it using retina devices.

Adopt it now or you'll do more work update it later.

PS. as a web designer you should have a separate screen to see how it looks to non-retina users. the unfortunate truth is that you need to cater to both worlds if that's your profession during this transition period (which can last for years.)

 

[fig]

I find it annoying how everyone is bitching about the display as it is new device those who invest in it are early adopters, if you wait websites and programs will in the latter be supported for this emerging resolution much like the iPhone and iPad.

I hate to see when the iMac retina everyone will order it and than complain about the limited support of sites.

If you're planning to wait for most websites to be designed for a retina display you're going to be waiting a verrrrrrry long time.

 

[thomaskc]

If you're planning to wait for most websites to be designed for a retina display you're going to be waiting a verrrrrrry long time.

Oh yes, I think the most common resolution to date is still somewhere around 1280x1024 or 1366x768 as much as people think the world has AT LEAST fullHD by now, this is just not true. Having websites made for the retina display at the moment is a complete waste of production time for most companies.

Doing ipad specific apps is different, but websites as a general thing, won't happen for a loooooong time. There is a reason why web developers STILL has to take IE6 and IE8 into account when ever they do anything, as painful as it is. It's a reality.

 

[fig]

Doing ipad specific apps is different, but websites as a general thing, won't happen for a loooooong time. There is a reason why web developers STILL has to take IE6 and IE8 into account when ever they do anything, as painful as it is. It's a reality.

I just reworked a really cool HTML5 piece I did in Flash so it could be viewed on IE 8. Yay Microsoft.

 

[ranviper]

The fact that the RAM is soldered in, the battery glued on, and it not being compatible with aftermarket ssd's, is ridiculous. If you want to upgrade ANYTHING now, you literally have to BUY a NEW one. Come on Apple, don't start this crap.

If this keeps up my next laptop will not be an apple, I don't care how high the resolution is on these retina books.

 

[mrmarts]

If you're planning to wait for most websites to be designed for a retina display you're going to be waiting a verrrrrrry long time.

The net on the MacBook pro retina looks great to me, just the software needs updating.

 

[azentropy]

Sounds like the affect is very similar to when people complained about SD programing on HD TV's or even why some 720p content looks better on my 720p HDTV vs. my 1080p HDTV. I can definitely see that when doing non-native, but I guess I'm confused a bit more to why it would then when just doubled pixels but the same physical size.

 

[kazmac]

again thanks for the great posts

As someone who will be getting back into the design swing of things (print/web and hopefully mobile), I really appreciate all the detailed posts about pixels and resolution.

Financially I am not in the market for a Retina MBP, but the posts from working designers are insightful.

 

[Radiating]

I have thought A LOT on this topics and come to the realization that this is a HUGE issue that Apple never addressed.

i don't understand why are there more people on this forum complaining about the "lack of matte screen reduce image fidelity" when they completely ignore the fact that, retina screen actually shows you a very different picture than your users will see.

Most time, your images will look like crap in applications that are not optimized, such as Photoshop.

If they do optimized the application, then you will not be able to see what 99.99% of the people actually see anymore, because in Photoshop, even thought your Mac might have a 1440x900 resolution setting, the pictures themselves are actually displayed in 2880x1800 native resolution. There will be NO SCALING at all for images in an updated Photoshop. This is why iPhoto looks so much better on Retina screen.

But when that day comes, you have to understand, your 200x200 images will look 100x100 on your screen. You can't really tell what your customers will see, unless you blow that up to 200% size, then you can see roughly the same physical size as your customer. But then, if you do that, the image will be scaled, and again lose fidelity.

This is a huge dilemma for anyone who cares about graphic design, web design, and especially at pixel level. I personally plan to give it a try after receiving mine on Tuesday. I will see if I can do these editing in Boot Camp using full native resolution. Luckily I don't do design work every day, so hopefully I don't have to return mine.

I have written extensively on this topic from several forum posts too:

Problem with Photoshop in rMBP:
https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=15052564#post15052564

What happened when you take a screenshot on your Mac and paste into Photoshop:
https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=15059334#post15059334

----------



exactly. Graphic design is not just about making a beautiful art work, but making a beautiful art work your customers can see. If on your machine, you can't see what your customers actually will see, how can anyone know what we are actually delivering to them?

Is Retina MacBook too ahead of its time? But if the developers don't start developing in Retina, there won't be content to drive adoption. So we really have a chicken and egg problem! I think we probably have to design on two computers: Retina for retina graphics and regular for regular graphics.

By the way, all these problems don't really affect video and photography artists since they are dealing with works on a larger scale. It really impacts the web/graphic designers where each pixel counts (really, each pixel does count).

This is a valid consideration. As a graphic designer myself I had to consider this as the first issue when dealing with the rMBP

There are two workarounds for it. The first is to set to set the screen to full 2880x1800 resolution using the hack that was posted earlier. The problem with this though is that it's about twice as large as 1920x1080 which is too much. The solution I came up with is to simply hack the resolution to 1920x1200. This reduces the pixelation artifacts to almost zero. It's a very good solution really.

It's also worth keeping in mind also that there is a 99.9% chance of apple adding better aliasing rendering to the computer's graphics drivers which will fix the issue. .

 

[fig]

Those of you suggesting starting to design two sites for both retina and non-retina displays now apparently have much more time on your hands than I do.

 

[bryne]

I just think it's funny that anyone who considers themselves a web development/design professional would be so ignorant as to how a hidpi display works. You actually expected it just to make your photos and images sharper, automagically?

You're an early adopter of a new technology and it will be bumpy. On the other hand - you now have the chance to include consideration for 2x images in your content creation pipeline. Figure it out now, and you'll be ahead of the game, instead of scrabbling to catch up later.

 

[rudyrudell]

I'm an audio guy so a lot of this discussion is foreign to me, but I am very curious as to why something created on a retina screen wouldn't look amazing on a regular screen?
Does it have to do with losing pixels blurs together what you've created in multiple pixels into one?
Pardon my visual-ignorance here as I said I live in the sound design world.

 

[JasonR]

Those of you suggesting starting to design two sites for both retina and non-retina displays now apparently have much more time on your hands than I do.

+1. Why in the hell would you design for a 0.000001% Market Share? Complete waste of time...

 

[bryne]

Pardon my visual-ignorance here as I said I live in the sound design world.

It's much easier to explain if you've used the new iPad, for example.

Basically, the way the retina display works is by cramming more pixels into the same visual unit. Something that's normally 1 pixel is now a 2x2 square of pixels, for 4 total. The pixel is a unit of measurement rather than an actual mechanical screen object.

This looks great for text, because text is a vector and the computer can just draw vectors using more pixels. You can't do that with a bitmap image, because the extra pixels don't exist. 200x200 is exactly 200 pixels by 200 pixels. The image isn't any worse or different, it just looks blurry next to crisp text and UI. You have to build a 400x400 image and force the browser/computer to shrink it down in order for it to look as crisp.

When you use a retina display for the first time, you'll be amazed at how you've literally been staring at pixel blocks for so many years. Once the individual pixels are too small for your eye to see, it makes a big difference to how clear everything on a display looks.

+1. Why in the hell would you design for a 0.000001% Market Share? Complete waste of time...

If you're talking web design, the new iPad is also hidpi and suffers the same problems, and millions of them are already in use, browsing your websites. This isn't something that's going away. Smart designers are already beginning to solve this problem in their workflow.

 

[Ccrew]

The fact that the RAM is soldered in, the battery glued on, and it not being compatible with aftermarket ssd's, is ridiculous. If you want to upgrade ANYTHING now, you literally have to BUY a NEW one. Come on Apple, don't start this crap.

If this keeps up my next laptop will not be an apple, I don't care how high the resolution is on these retina books.

Thing is, people said the same thing about the MBA when it was released, and we all know how mainstream that is. Heck, the original MBA had a battery rated at like 300(?) cycles. Unless folks vote with their wallets and don't buy them Apple will continue to make them. That said, I fully expect that the sheeple will continue to buy them only for the status of having the latest and greatest.

Since I personally unplug from a 27" monitor at home and carry the laptop to work where I replug to a 27" monitor it's not the choice for me, but each and every person's mileage varies.

 

[JasonR]

If you're talking web design, the new iPad is also hidpi and suffers the same problems, and millions of them are already in use, browsing your websites. This isn't something that's going away. Smart designers are already beginning to solve this problem in their workflow.

How are they doing this? Please explain this to me.

I've browsed plenty of websites on the new iPad, and they all look perfectly acceptable to me. You are also forgetting about the increased download time and bandwidth it would to serve super hi-res images of everything (which is a big deal).

 

[mackry]

+1. Why in the hell would you design for a 0.000001% Market Share? Complete waste of time...

Same reason Apple has come out with Retina – to improve the experience of using these devices and to move technology and innovation forward.

If you don't care about your work and who will use your designs, don't bother with 2x images. Having a scalable (CSS3/vectors) website is something you should be doing anyways – if not you're doing it wrong.

 

[Vctr]

+1. Why in the hell would you design for a 0.000001% Market Share? Complete waste of time...

Sure it might be a very small market share right now, but its only a matter of time until PC manufacturers start coming out with laptops with HiDPI displays as well.