Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Get ready for resolution bumps across the board

lilcosco08

lilcosco08

macrumors 65816
Original poster
May 27, 2010
1,224
22
Dayton
Since the push for higher pixel density+the air moving to 1440x900

I think we'll be seeing the macbooks follow.
Predicting:
13" 1440x900
15" 1650x1050 default
17" still 1920x1200
 
Even for a designer, will generally find the 1680x1050 on a 15" is very hard to read. I don't think I want some 1920x1080 on a 15"... way too tiny! It's nice but I can't read it unless I have to enlarge or go into... blind people mode... (Universal Access)...

Like not even speaking about future but there are possibility. Right now, there are people prefer the lowest screen resolution. It is easier for them to read.

I knew 1680x1050 will have hard time for me but I need screen space for design works and modelling. I have a external 1080p monitor which is nice at 23" size.

I might be getting old... haha mid-20s.
 
DJ-R said:
Even for a designer, will generally find the 1680x1050 on a 15" is very hard to read. I don't think I want some 1920x1080 on a 15"... way too tiny! It's nice but I can't read it unless I have to enlarge or go into... blind people mode... (Universal Access)...

Like not even speaking about future but there are possibility. Right now, there are people prefer the lowest screen resolution. It is easier for them to read.

I knew 1680x1050 will have hard time for me but I need screen space for design works and modelling. I have a external 1080p monitor which is nice at 23" size.

I might be getting old... haha mid-20s.
Click to expand...


I cannot imagine going so high rez on a laptop screen. Those Vaio Z 13.3in with 1920x1080... my eyes hurt just thinking about it ><

Hopefully Apple introduces higher rez as an option, not as base config
 
nexus14 said:
I cannot imagine going so high rez on a laptop screen. Those Vaio Z 13.3in with 1920x1080... my eyes hurt just thinking about it ><

Hopefully Apple introduces higher rez as an option, not as base config
Click to expand...

Yeah i forgot Sony has it on 13.3in... LOL i saw it... man.

By the end of the work day, I'll be dam to try read anything on the 13.3in screen at 1920x1080... I will just fall asleep right off.
 
I hope so. I'd rather have it sooner than later, especially on the 13". It's meant to be a 'Pro' machine, yet it's resolution is worse than that of a cheaper, 11" laptop.

It's a minor thing though. My guess is it'll be updated with the next big update sometime next year, but I'd love for it to be a stealth update. :D
 
I like the hi res on the 15. I think it's the perfect size honestly, maybe it's because I have above average eyesight.
 
true for some but i find the screen res on my pro just fine for me i am turning 31 next month and i have worn glasses for 24 of those and my eyes are pretty bad so this is perfect for me but if some want it for a option more power ot them
 
It's more likely we will see 16:9 screens, but yes, perhaps a resolution bump. I think the hi-res on the new Airs are pretty awesome.
 
I've moved from 16:10 to 16:9 then to 16:10. I prefer 16:10... great workspace for designs and modelling.

16:9 = movie goer...
 
MAC OSX lacks resolution independence

DJ-R said:
By the end of the work day, I'll be dam to try read anything on the 13.3in screen at 1920x1080... I will just fall asleep right off.
Click to expand...

The problem here is the absence of resolution independece that's a huge drawback of OSX.

Windows 7 is amazing in this and i doens;t matter if you have 1440x900 screen or a 30" display 2560 x 1600. the icons, start menu and text is all readable, and you still have the extra pixels for your work without using binoculars as you would on a MAC.
 
deus ex machina said:
The res would not be an issue if the icon, bars and fonts were fully adjustable.
Click to expand...

If this is the case, pixel won't exist anymore. Design industries will base on DPI. it will be a HUGE problem with other computers.

If the designer designs the elements in non-pixel based. It looks good on Mac but... on PC and other device looks total messed up and splitted pixel.

So call.. noob designer.
 
joecool99 said:
The problem here is the absence of resolution independece that's a huge drawback of OSX.

Windows 7 is amazing in this and i doens;t matter if you have 1440x900 screen or a 30" display 2560 x 1600. the icons, start menu and text is all readable, and you still have the extra pixels for your work without using binoculars as you would on a MAC.
Click to expand...

I agreed, fonts on OSX seems to blurred up. I think I misjudged something earlier post. Looks like the current OSX ignores pixel based DPI compare to Windows uses ClearType fixed the vertical pixel.
 
DJ-R said:
Even for a designer, will generally find the 1680x1050 on a 15" is very hard to read. I don't think I want some 1920x1080 on a 15"... way too tiny! It's nice but I can't read it unless I have to enlarge or go into... blind people mode... (Universal Access)...
Click to expand...

Really? I have the new 11" MBA, with a pixel density way higher than the hi-res 15" and the text is still very readable for me even 4 feet away. I wouldn't mind 1920x1200 on a 15".
 
lilcosco08 said:
Since the push for higher pixel density+the air moving to 1440x900

I think we'll be seeing the macbooks follow.
Predicting:
13" 1440x900
15" 1650x1050 default
17" still 1920x1200
Click to expand...

i'm personally fine w/ the current setup. do they need to go bigger? what's the purpose? :confused:
 
Resolution is not the problem. In fact we want those "Retina" displays for everything, but not before those stupid operating systems can handle it properly. There are still pixelated graphics for about everything and their default sizes (with no alternative mapping) are still made for low-res screens (i.e 96 dpi default on Windows).
 
Epsilon88 said:
i'm personally fine w/ the current setup. do they need to go bigger? what's the purpose? :confused:
Click to expand...

Like fitting more stuff on screen

attatched pics are 1280x800 and 1440x900
 

Attachments

  • 1.png
    1.png
    120.7 KB · Views: 119
  • 2.png
    2.png
    111.7 KB · Views: 118
DJ-R said:
Even for a designer, will generally find the 1680x1050 on a 15" is very hard to read.
Click to expand...

Well. This particular old man is certainly willing to say that he has a hard time with 1680x1050 on his 15" MacBook.

Enough of a hard time that I'm having to think of changing a prescription.

Here's to hoping that OSX Lion implements a Windows-like "large font" (125% and 150%) option for the first time.

If your screen is designed to be optimised at 1680x1050, then reducing the resolution to be able to read it just produces fuzziness. Luckily, they make it easy to swtich back and forth, but the only real, absolute and ultimate solution is to have a large fonts option that is implemented the way that Windows does it.

That's the only way we'll still be able to *read* everything and still enjoy the wonderful high pixel resolution for other things.
 
drjsway said:
I wouldn't mind 1920x1200 on a 15".
Click to expand...

All I can say is you must have corneas a hell of a lot more flexible than mine.

:)

You know what's hilarious?

Steve Jobs has the same problem that I have.

Did you notice at the original iPhone 4 rollout seminars how often he would take his glasses off to look at the phone's display, or move his glasses up onto his head?

He would benefit from a Windows-like large fonts option just as much as I would! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back