Huh? In my understanding, sub-pixel rendering is not particularly useful for non-text content. Think about this: how do you sub-pixel render an image or video?jasperv said:
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.
Higher Definition Powerbook?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
wrldwzrd89 said:
I guess I should elaborate. Sub-pixel rendering would not be useful in displaying images or video that is being displayed in its native resolution. However, if that image needed to be scaled up or down to a non-integer value, then scaling to a sub-pixel display would provide better quality scaling than to a fixed pixel display, as you have "3" times the horizontal resolution to compensate for the pixel discrepancy. Quartz rendering of lines, circles, and other bezier curves would be improved with sub-pixel rendering in the same way that text currently is. With respect to resolution-independent displays, it would be more likely that images and video would also need to be scaled according to the final display resolution.
Technically, the 15-inch PowerBook isn't truly widescreen, like the 17-inch PB is. So it would need a widerscreen panel too.Platform said:YES you are so right
If the PB 12" became a 13" widescreen it would not really increase the cost of it and the widescreens are so much nice then the 4:3 once, please do it apple
Resolution Independence...
In case anyone didn't notice, there are two things this movie says that indicate to me that it won't be a User option in Tiger. 1) When he introduced the technology he specifically said "Getting READY for Resolution Independence". 2) His demo was in Quarz Debug, a developers app, and the new setting only affected newly launched apps. If it were a user option I would expect the setting to become system wide when it changes. I also would expect a more user friendly interface, something like Standard (72 dpi), Larger (100 dpi), Largest (120 dpi), Custom. And knowing Apple, probably not even the custom.
The reality is that if it does ship in Tiger, a lot of apps are gonna look ugly with it.
In case anyone didn't notice, there are two things this movie says that indicate to me that it won't be a User option in Tiger. 1) When he introduced the technology he specifically said "Getting READY for Resolution Independence". 2) His demo was in Quarz Debug, a developers app, and the new setting only affected newly launched apps. If it were a user option I would expect the setting to become system wide when it changes. I also would expect a more user friendly interface, something like Standard (72 dpi), Larger (100 dpi), Largest (120 dpi), Custom. And knowing Apple, probably not even the custom
.The reality is that if it does ship in Tiger, a lot of apps are gonna look ugly with it.
Doesn't Preview do something similar to what you describe when scaling JPEG and similar images? When I view an image in Preview at a non-native size, Preview "enhances" it to make it less blocky. This only works up to a certain point though - beyond that, the "enhancing" algorithm must not either work very well or produce inconsistent results.jasperv said:
jayscheuerle
macrumors 68020
wrldwzrd89 said:
I'd hope so. Saw my first 30"er today and being a cursor on the desktop was the equivalent of shopping in a big-box store. I needed a bike to get from the Apple Menu to the trashcan. Wrist movement barely sufficed for the mouse. I had to use my elbow! I'm all for the clarity of higher resolution displays, but I don't want to have to turn my head to look from one corner to the other. Gorgeous picture though...
jayscheuerle
macrumors 68020
Rincewind42 said:In case anyone didn't notice, there are two things this movie says that indicate to me that it won't be a User option in Tiger. 1) When he introduced the technology he specifically said "Getting READY for Resolution Independence". 2) His demo was in Quarz Debug, a developers app, and the new setting only affected newly launched apps. If it were a user option I would expect the setting to become system wide when it changes. I also would expect a more user friendly interface, something like Standard (72 dpi), Larger (100 dpi), Largest (120 dpi), Custom. And knowing Apple, probably not even the custom
The reality is that if it does ship in Tiger, a lot of apps are gonna look ugly with it.
Real resolution independence would offer a slider to go from inherent resolution to an apparent resolution of 800x600 (the lowest OSX supports I think)...
I read somewhere else in these forums that the resolution independence thing may not be user-accessible. This prediction was made based on the fact that (in the WWDC graphics presentation on Apple's QuickTime page) the resolution independence only worked on newly launched applications, and it could only be changed from Quartz Debug, an application meant for developers' use only. This may change come release time though...jayscheuerle said:
HD Displays... A good thing.
To tell you the truth, it was this sole rumor that almost stopped me from going ahead and buying my new 17" PowerBook. I did eventually order it, and am using it to write this post, in fact, but I was sorely tempted by the prospect of a high definition-capable display.
I had to seriously analyze the benefits, both immediate and not-so-apparent... even though I use FCP HD, wouldn't I just as readily have a second, HD-capable external monitor to view footage on if I were serious about editing HD content? Screen real estate is nice, but doesn't the current 1440x900 offer enough to accomodate most of the windows FCPHD/Photoshop CS/Illustrator would like to show? Certainly, I'd love to be able to watch HD-DVDs or Blue Ray discs on my PowerBook in native resolution and not scaled down, but... erm... wouldn't that also require an HD-DVD or Blue Ray drive?
The pieces just weren't fitting together for me to wait.
I do believe, though, that with the introduction of Tiger (I agree: Apple won't release any such Powerbook with HD-native display untiil they've released Tiger as well) there will be plenty of more subtle, not-so-apparent uses for having a HD display. Resolution independence, for instance, and whatever the confounded deal with H264 will be, too.
A lot to look forward to, that's for sure though. I wonder... here's a question: what are the chances of replacing just the display on my current 17" PowerBook with this rumored higher density/HD display when it comes out? Surely that wouldn't be that hard, would it?
(And just for the record, the manual for the 17" does indeed include the reference to 1920x1200. "Depending on how your PowerBook was configured, it may have a wide-screen display that has a 'native' resolution of 1920 x 1200 or 1440 x 900. For either of these native resolutions, other standard resolutions, such as 1024 x 768, are supported.")
To tell you the truth, it was this sole rumor that almost stopped me from going ahead and buying my new 17" PowerBook. I did eventually order it, and am using it to write this post, in fact, but I was sorely tempted by the prospect of a high definition-capable display.
I had to seriously analyze the benefits, both immediate and not-so-apparent... even though I use FCP HD, wouldn't I just as readily have a second, HD-capable external monitor to view footage on if I were serious about editing HD content? Screen real estate is nice, but doesn't the current 1440x900 offer enough to accomodate most of the windows FCPHD/Photoshop CS/Illustrator would like to show? Certainly, I'd love to be able to watch HD-DVDs or Blue Ray discs on my PowerBook in native resolution and not scaled down, but... erm... wouldn't that also require an HD-DVD or Blue Ray drive?
The pieces just weren't fitting together for me to wait.
I do believe, though, that with the introduction of Tiger (I agree: Apple won't release any such Powerbook with HD-native display untiil they've released Tiger as well) there will be plenty of more subtle, not-so-apparent uses for having a HD display. Resolution independence, for instance, and whatever the confounded deal with H264 will be, too.
A lot to look forward to, that's for sure though. I wonder... here's a question: what are the chances of replacing just the display on my current 17" PowerBook with this rumored higher density/HD display when it comes out? Surely that wouldn't be that hard, would it?
(And just for the record, the manual for the 17" does indeed include the reference to 1920x1200. "Depending on how your PowerBook was configured, it may have a wide-screen display that has a 'native' resolution of 1920 x 1200 or 1440 x 900. For either of these native resolutions, other standard resolutions, such as 1024 x 768, are supported.")
How about a hi-def imac in the next revision. I think the 20" imac should be hi-def, and the 20" cinema display should def. be hi-def. I understand the powerbook is a pro machine but it is always about the same featurewise as the imac, excpet for the standard 512 MB ram, bluetooth, airport card. Explain to me why apple releases a Hi-def imovie for consumers and doesn't even have a consumer priced high def computer? I think Hi-def won't be useful until the average joe has a high def tv, camcorder, and computer, hi-def dvd superdrive dual layer, hi-def dvd player. I say screw the high-def imovie until this all happens. Nothing is true hi-def with apple as far as the consumer line goes. What next? Is apple going to put a dual layer hi-def dvd burner in an imac without a hi-def screen. How many $500 camcorders record in high def (none). Leave hi-def to the pros until the average consumers have a high def tv and dvd player. It's good to make leaps forward to push new technologies. But how many average consumers want to buy a camera that is twice as much money as their computer? I think imovie hi def is very misleading to the average consumer. "does this make my movies hi def if I use my $500 JVC camcorder, It would be great to make a shaky shot soccer video in high def for my non hi def tv and my non hi def life." Why doesn't apple make itunes dvd audio compatible? Because nobody cares at this point, apple is too far ahead of the pack to make this happen in the next year or so. It's good to lead, but don't run laps around the followers. How about we all go parachuting wihtout a parachute? Put a VHS in a DvD player? Makes a lot of sense?
You're right that high definition recording hasn't penetrated the true consumer market yet. Trust me (and Steve Jobs) - it will, and it'll happen this year; hence the release of iMovie HD. Also coming this year will be Tiger (and its resolution-independent user interface), as well as Macs with higher-resolution displays (every one will be at least 150 ppi by the end of 2005; we'll see 200 ppi and 250 ppi displays from Apple too, thanks to Tiger).corywoolf said:How about a hi-def imac in the next revision. I think the 20" imac should be hi-def, and the 20" cinema display should def. be hi-def. I understand the powerbook is a pro machine but it is always about the same featurewise as the imac, excpet for the standard 512 MB ram, bluetooth, airport card. Explain to me why apple releases a Hi-def imovie for consumers and doesn't even have a consumer priced high def computer? I think Hi-def won't be useful until the average joe has a high def tv, camcorder, and computer, hi-def dvd superdrive dual layer, hi-def dvd player. I say screw the high-def imovie until this all happens. Nothing is true hi-def with apple as far as the consumer line goes. What next? Is apple going to put a dual layer hi-def dvd burner in an imac without a hi-def screen. How many $500 camcorders record in high def (none). Leave hi-def to the pros until the average consumers have a high def tv and dvd player. It's good to make leaps forward to push new technologies. But how many average consumers want to buy a camera that is twice as much money as their computer? I think imovie hi def is very misleading to the average consumer. "does this make my movies hi def if I use my $500 JVC camcorder, It would be great to make a shaky shot soccer video in high def for my non hi def tv and my non hi def life." Why doesn't apple make itunes dvd audio compatible? Because nobody cares at this point, apple is too far ahead of the pack to make this happen in the next year or so. It's good to lead, but don't run laps around the followers. How about we all go parachuting wihtout a parachute? Put a VHS in a DvD player? Makes a lot of sense?
DISCLAIMER: I don't have any more inside information than the typical ADC Online member, so take these as my "educated" predictions.
wrldwzrd89 said:
I hate to burst any bubbles, but there is no evidence that Tiger's resolution independent UI will be a user feature -- and frankly if it were then Apple would be screaming it on their Tiger preview page. As far as I can tell from the WWDC video, this is meant to be a feature for developers to test their software on Tiger for resolution independence so that their applications don't look like crap when some user decides they want their interface scaled to 137% of normal (and if said developer is still using Quickdraw then this would more than likely be the case).
Yes, resolution independence will almost certainly be available, but as long as their isn't a user control for it, it doesn't exist to 90% of the users out there. I suspect that the fact that the scaling can actually be toggled in 10.4 simply is sent as a message to developers that it is coming and to rev your applications to deal with it.
corywoolf said:Explain to me why apple releases a Hi-def imovie for consumers and doesn't even have a consumer priced high def computer? I think Hi-def won't be useful until the average joe has a high def tv, camcorder, and computer, hi-def dvd superdrive dual layer, hi-def dvd player. I say screw the high-def imovie until this all happens. Nothing is true hi-def with apple as far as the consumer line goes. What next? Is apple going to put a dual layer hi-def dvd burner in an imac without a hi-def screen. How many $500 camcorders record in high def (none). Leave hi-def to the pros until the average consumers have a high def tv and dvd player. It's good to make leaps forward to push new technologies. But how many average consumers want to buy a camera that is twice as much money as their computer? I think imovie hi def is very misleading to the average consumer. "does this make my movies hi def if I use my $500 JVC camcorder, It would be great to make a shaky shot soccer video in high def for my non hi def tv and my non hi def life." Why doesn't apple make itunes dvd audio compatible? Because nobody cares at this point, apple is too far ahead of the pack to make this happen in the next year or so. It's good to lead, but don't run laps around the followers. How about we all go parachuting wihtout a parachute? Put a VHS in a DvD player? Makes a lot of sense?
Your Right but your also wrong. HD is the next big thing and it is coming, that's why Apple is doing what there doing. Apple at WWDC last year said a lot of things about HD, it is obvious they want to take a leaders share of HD. Right now JVC and Sony have Pro consumer HD camcorders that are just a little more expensive than the high end Apple computers. As was said already on this thread things will happen in HD this year and if not this year, next year prices on these kinds of HD products will start to come down, just like all products do after the introduction faze has worn off and competition builds. At first it will cost, and pros will buy it, because they need it, and then things will start to happen. Just wait it will happen.
Brian
I'll counter that argument with this - there's a distinct possibility that Apple may have added user-accessible controls since the WWDC 2004 builds of Tiger that the presentation where this was mentioned was based on. The truth of the matter is that we simply don't know - Apple might be hiding it from us and reveal it only when they announce an official release date for Tiger. I'm not sure if Apple did this for Panther's release (announced additional features more than once before the official release but after the unveiling) or for previous releases of Mac OS X.Rincewind42 said:
jayscheuerle
macrumors 68020
wrldwzrd89 said:
The most glaring problem is that resolution independence has NEVER been mentioned at a consumer gathering where Tiger was demo'd and is not mentioned at ALL on Apple's Tiger Preview site. The only time it has been mentioned as been at a developers only conference. This appears to be such an impressive and distinctive feature that one would think it would have been listed at the top along with Spotlight.
jayscheuerle said:
Exactly. Apple rarely adds new user features after the introduction of a new OS rev (it is slightly less rare for Apple to add new developer features, but that is also usually less labor intensive). All the signs point at this as a developer feature and not a user feature.
And when you think about it, to be truly impressive there is still one developer that has a lot of work to do on all of it's graphics to make sure they look good when scaled arbitrarily -- Apple. In Panther they store almost all UI widgets as images and not necessarily very high resolution images either. Apple's gonna be mighty embarrassed if everything but the window widgets looks good on some users screen because they were the last ones to the party with resolution independence.
jayscheuerle
macrumors 68020
wrldwzrd89 said:
I'd think there'd have to be some sort of limits placed on this. Inexperienced users could really screw up their user experience if they didn't completely understand what they were doing...
What a feature like this could do is keep Photoshop palettes the same physical size, regardless of the resolution. Same with the Finder. The Finder on Apple's 30" flatscreen looks really tiny. This type of continuity could really enhance the user experience.
It would be nice to set your Finder size the way you do type point size in Preferences, scaling everything and not just the type. If it's part of the OS, I'm sure there will be some sort of hack to access it! - j
High-res screen is the one thing the 12" is missing
A higher resolution screen on my 12" PB is one feature that would have me upgrading without hesitation. I love my 12" PB for it's size and portability over the 15", but the lack of screen real estate is a big drawback for the type of work I do.
This is a PB, not an iBook... the professionals series should reflect the needs of a professional user. Hope someone at Apple is listening!
A higher resolution screen on my 12" PB is one feature that would have me upgrading without hesitation. I love my 12" PB for it's size and portability over the 15", but the lack of screen real estate is a big drawback for the type of work I do.
This is a PB, not an iBook... the professionals series should reflect the needs of a professional user. Hope someone at Apple is listening!
09872738 said:I agree, a high-resolution PB 17" is is what i´m waiting for.
The PB of my desires: 1920x1200 resolution, 2 GHz Freescale 7448, GeForce 6600 Go. Design unchanged.
Would be hard not to buy
Ditto. But I'd also buy a 15.4" PB with same specs.
nph said:
My centrino laptop (with an ATI MOBILITY RADEON 9000 64MB) plays game almost flawlessly--not Far Cry, but the MOH series (new and old games), BattleField (new and old games), COD, CounterStrike (Regular, Condition Zero, and Source) etc with no lag.
I don't think I have ever gotten 4-5 hours of battery life though
, at least not with only one battery in.I probably could, with the screen at the lowest setting, but then working is so dull...I would have to work on the lowest setting for a week at least until I could finally get used to it.
So far, the only notebook that I have used with accurate battery life measuring capabilities is the iBook. I have gotten 8 hours with one before on middle-high brightness.
jayscheuerle
macrumors 68020
Wrong on resolution
I have a Toshiba M200 (tablet) for work - it has a smaller screen than my 12" Powerbook, yet can do 1400X1050 pixels, and it's easy to read.
Do customers want it? I'd even refrain from buying a G5 Powerbook if they don't increase the resolution.
raggedjimmi said:
I have a Toshiba M200 (tablet) for work - it has a smaller screen than my 12" Powerbook, yet can do 1400X1050 pixels, and it's easy to read.
Do customers want it? I'd even refrain from buying a G5 Powerbook if they don't increase the resolution.
OLED!
No one here is talking about OLED (organic LED) which can be run on existing LCD production lines at a fraction of the cost. They are out and viable this year in production run quantities. Apple will likely jump to this form for higher res and lower costs, plus self-illumination removes the mercury filled backlighting... all adding up to more battery run time. check OLED out on a google search or at supervideo.com/2005b.htm
No one here is talking about OLED (organic LED) which can be run on existing LCD production lines at a fraction of the cost. They are out and viable this year in production run quantities. Apple will likely jump to this form for higher res and lower costs, plus self-illumination removes the mercury filled backlighting... all adding up to more battery run time. check OLED out on a google search or at supervideo.com/2005b.htm