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

stevelam

macrumors 65816
Nov 4, 2010
1,215
3
That's your opinion, so please don't state it like it's a factual correction.

I find the full resolution at normal DPI to be perfectly usable, but maybe my eyesight is better than yours.

nevermind the miniscule UI,that has nothing to do with the fact that the actual file/image you're working on is now also relatively tiny to work with.

of course this is solved once apps actually update so that the UI is scaled while the actual work viewport utilizes the full 2880.

----------

Stevelam has been trolling these forums since the retina's release, just ignore him.

just because i'm not a 100% fanboy means i'm trolling? please. i like my RMBP but it definitely has its downsides. not my fault other people refuse to see them because they feel the need to justify their purchase in any way possible.
 

Cassadian

macrumors regular
Sep 4, 2012
140
0
thats not 'extra workspace'. thats just working in a completely unusable environment.

sometimes i actually set mine at 2048 x 1280 NON-hidpi. looks not great but OK, doesn't get bogged down by retina mode and at least still feels speedy.

theres such a huge difference in performance between retina mode and non-retina and i'm kind of disappointed by how unoptimized the whole thing seems.

God what's with the superlatives, hyperboles and exaggerations. Honestly there's quite a difference between justifying a purchase and just being annoying and complaining to the point where someone wants to whack you on the head.

Yes, it's still not completely refined. But even with scaling I have complete smoothness and yes this is comparing to other 2012 and a 2010 model of other Macbook Pro's on a majority of applications besides Facebook but that is just ridiculous on my PC also, a disaster of sorts. And from what I know there's been news of fixes coming in 10.8.2
 

Stetrain

macrumors 68040
Feb 6, 2009
3,550
20
These screenshots show the resolution the Retina MacBook Pro is rendering i.e. 3360×2100 (1680×1050@2×) and 3840×2400 (1920×1200@2×) rather than the image that actually appears on the Retina display. (scaled down to 2880×1800)

Even if it did show the scaled image, you cannot compare that on a non-retina display. Things that look bad on a non-retina display may be invisible on a retina display due to the pixel density.


Correct. I posted them because the OP seemed mostly interested in the relative sizes of text and UI elements at the different resolutions.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.