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 likely for new MBP to get Retina Display?
- Thread starter washburn
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Really... a 'retina' display is just branding.
However i would say, with the macbook air 13" having a 1400x900 display, that the pixel density of screens will take a jump.
Not dramatic, but the 13" will see the same screen as the Air, and the 15" will have 1650x1050 as the new default size, not really sure if we'd seen an improvement on the 17" model
However i would say, with the macbook air 13" having a 1400x900 display, that the pixel density of screens will take a jump.
Not dramatic, but the 13" will see the same screen as the Air, and the 15" will have 1650x1050 as the new default size, not really sure if we'd seen an improvement on the 17" model
I expect the 13" will have the same as the new MBA (which is higher than the current MBP), or maybe a bit higher. So yes, there will be an upgrade to the screens.
No chance of retina - it's too high, to expensive for larger screens, and you wont' be able to read - the writing would be too small.
No chance of retina - it's too high, to expensive for larger screens, and you wont' be able to read - the writing would be too small.
The current MBP screen is already awesome, I think the next MBP 13" will get the same screen as the MBA. Would like to see an option to get an anti-glare screen on the 13" model.
"Retina" display in a laptop does not mean +300PPI. You need to take viewing distance into the equation as well. While iPhone will be viewed at very close to your eyes (~1 foot), a laptop is usually viewed from a longer distance (maybe ~2 feet). Thus +150PPI would already give you a "retina" display when viewed from 2 feet.
1680x1050 in 13.3", 1920x1200 in 15.4" and 2048x1280 in 17" would give you a PPI which is very close to 150. We won't see those resolutions in MBPs in the next update but in a year or two it's not that unlikely.
Thanks to sammich for the graph.
1680x1050 in 13.3", 1920x1200 in 15.4" and 2048x1280 in 17" would give you a PPI which is very close to 150. We won't see those resolutions in MBPs in the next update but in a year or two it's not that unlikely.
Thanks to sammich for the graph.
Yes, because running a high resolution display with an Intel IGP would work so well in a laptop...
Say good bye to battery life. You would need to run the discrete card all of the time to even have acceptable performance at really high resolutions that offer "retina" quality. 150+ PPI isn't necessary for a laptop. Have you seen a 13" Vaio Z with the 1920 x 1080 resolution? It's miserable. Many programs aren't written with resolution independence so they're painful to use with such small fonts. Just because the OS has resolution independence doesn't mean the programs you'll run on it do.
"Retina" display in a laptop does not mean +300PPI. You need to take viewing distance into the equation as well. While iPhone will be viewed at very close to your eyes (~1 foot), a laptop is usually viewed from a longer distance (maybe ~2 feet). Thus +150PPI would already give you a "retina" display when viewed from 2 feet.
1680x1050 in 13.3", 1920x1200 in 15.4" and 2048x1280 in 17" would give you a PPI which is very close to 150. We won't see those resolutions in MBPs in the next update but in a year or two it's not that unlikely.
Thanks to sammich for the graph.
^ This. People have no idea what they are asking for when they "want" a "retina" display. It's based on your distance to the screen.
Also it's quite possible to implement. The sony Z series has a 1600x900 13.1 inch with optional 1920x1080. But again until they change resolution dependance in OSX, which should actually be coming it will work well. Also the Z has decent battery life also.
The main problem is cost. Apple takes a completely reverse approach to laptops as most manufacturers.
ie most PC makers make 15.6 inch their cheapeast junk model, ie 400-500$, and you pay more to get either a larger (17 inch) or smaller (13 inch model)
So companies like sony make small machines but make it much more expensive for the same specs (given the costs of implementing the high res display on a small laptop, weight, power, cpu/gpu config etc.)
Apple on the other hand prices it's laptops on a bigger is better perspective, so the 15 inch is always better than the 13 inch, and therefore the 13 inch will be cheaper.
I actually would prefer that apple kept the macbook 13 inch their low cost laptop, and actually made the 13 inch pro "macbook pro" spec matching the rest of pros. Now it would have to cost alot more than the current price and be near the 17 inch in terms of cost, but it would be far more capable than the current 13 inch.
