Does the current 13" MBP have the clarity similar to the iPhone's retina display? Which screen is better? Thanks.
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.
How is the current 13" MBP compared to retina display?
- Thread starter calvinc
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Alvi
macrumors 65816
there is no "Retina" Technology, It's just Almost-desktop resolution on a phone, in that case All Displays, HD TV's, MacBook Pros are way worse because their DPI is way lower, but the screen is bigger, Don't worry about it, Mac Screens are great, You won't see 300DPI Displays on MacBooks in many years, that means a resolution of like 3000x2000
Besides, DPI that high on a computer would mean really, really small text and icons. It wouldn't work, as things are right now.
It's a weird comparison anyway.
It's a weird comparison anyway.
Alvi
macrumors 65816
If you're not writing this posts from your iPhone 4 or a Mac I could almost assure you that the screen of any Mac is better than yours
I have a Dell Inspiron 1520. Is the screen the same as current MBP? Their resolutions are identical.
Alvi
macrumors 65816
Better colour accuracy, brighter colours, you name it. If you've seen a Mac screen you know what we're talking about. 🙂
Well, your Inspiron may actually be much closer to Retina than MacBook Pro. Inspiron 1520 has many display options, one of them is "UltraSharp Wide Screen SXGA+ (1680x1050) display with TrueLife" which is much better than MacBook's 1280 x 800.
Keep in mind that "retina display" is just a marketing gimmick. Just hold your notebook farther from your eyes and its screen will qualify as "retina" too.
Mine just says "Glossy, widescreen 15.4 inch display (1280 X 800)". Will the current MBP look significantly better? I want to see if it's worth an upgrade.
Both are good displays. The retina display is great for a handheld mobile phone application and has a fantastic pixel density. It really is impressive.
The mac screens are also great in ways mentioned by others, namely colour accuracy, brightness, etc. Some complain because the resolution isn't higher and well, that would be nice, but you would be hard pressed to find a better 1280x800 display.
The mac screens are also great in ways mentioned by others, namely colour accuracy, brightness, etc. Some complain because the resolution isn't higher and well, that would be nice, but you would be hard pressed to find a better 1280x800 display.
iggypod
macrumors 6502a
GamecockMac
macrumors 6502a
Sure...and if you put some of Dell's "entry level" laptops on a table across the room, they'll look great as well. Too bad you can't use them very easily that way.
Are you saying that MBP screens suck because they are not "retina" displays? OR you are saying that Dell entry level laptops are not as good as their advanced models?
Is your current Dell display LED? The Macbook displays are all LED.
LED's provide much better colors and blacks than LCD.
LED's provide much better colors and blacks than LCD.
GamecockMac
macrumors 6502a
I'm not saying either of those things, I'm saying that you are having to reach even more than usual in your desperate attempts to diminish Apple's superior technology.
"Hey...want your Dell laptop's screen to look more like Apple's Retina Display? Easy...just hold it at arm's length!"
Are you serious with crap like this?
he is saying that it is infeasible to hold it far away to make it look like a retina and still use it.
he also said that you are a troll
There is no such thing as "Apple Retina Display". The panels are not produced by Apple. It's not Apple's technology (even if it were superior). iPhone screen is not the screen with the highest density either. Nobody calls those other displays "retina". "Retina" is a term used by Apple PR to describe it's "magical devices". I just wanted the OP understood this because s/he could feel inferior just because he owned Dell even though his laptop may have a better display than MacBook Pro. One has to keep in mind that on some laptops Dell offers superior RGB LED backlit displays (not available from Apple).
OK, but is it possible to hold iPhone so close to your eyes that its display stops being a "retina display"?
Narse77
macrumors regular
LED is just the backlight, it's still a LCD. The LED backlight makes it so colors do not wash out as easily as they do with traditional backlights and LED backlights use far less power, however LED is just the backlight the screens are still LCDs.
It's not that simple. Dell offers CCFL, LED (as in white LED) and RGB LED displays (whereas Apple only offers white LED backlit displays). CCFL backlit actually has some advantages. For example, Dell's 27" display uses the same LCD panel as 27" iMac. AnandTech has an article about it that says: "For one, Apple uses LED backlighting whereas the U2711 sticks with CCFL technology. But isn't CCFL worse? That depends on what you're after; the iMac 27 offers a 72% color gamut while the U2711 has a 102% color gamut (based on the CIE 1931 standard). Using RGB LEDs, it would be possible to get a similarly high color gamut, but our experience with RGB LEDs to date is that they cost more and consume more power than regular LEDs, so we can understand Dell's interest in sticking with the "older" technology. (We've only seen RGB LEDs in a few laptops so far, and as one example it's a $175 upgrade on the Dell Studio XPS 16 compared to a regular white LED display.)"
GamecockMac
macrumors 6502a
The FUD never stops from this one.
No one cares if Apple builds the freaking display, it's currently only available on one of their devices, so they earned the right to give the tech a name, and for all intents and purposes it is their technology since it's being used solely by them. No other company that I'm aware of currently offers a mass-market display anywhere close to this resolution, but you're welcome to provide links demonstrating those that you claim actually exceed the Retina Display in pixel density. Please don't bother digging up some one-off prototype that is either not commercially available to the general public, or something that costs so much that only Mexican drug lords and Saudi princes can afford it.
You are always welcome. As you know iPhone panels are manufactured by LG. LG started using displays with this high (and even higher) density on its own devices back in 2008. The first device was their mobile phone LU1400:
It had pixel density 333 (compared to 326 for iPhone 4).
Here are some other examples of devices with high pixel density:
Sony Ericsson X1 - 312 (released in 2008)
Toshiba Portege G900 - 313 (released in 2007)
For more info, check this Wikipedia article.
I hope you'll find this information useful.
GamecockMac
macrumors 6502a
Yep, I found the same Wikipedia article you did, and already saw that outdated device. I knew you'd try to pull that dinosaur out as an example, which is why I qualified my question. Can you read with comprehension? Or are you that blinded by Apple hatred?
What currently available device has a display with pixel density to match Apple's Retina Display? I'll save you the trouble of digging up some more FUD... None.