How likely for new MBP to get Retina Display?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by washburn, Feb 20, 2011.

  1. washburn macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2010
    #1
    Hey

    I keep reading here and there about the upcoming MBP having some kind of better screen improvements etc.. do you think it will likely have the Retina Display?
     
  2. devilcm3 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2011
    Location:
    South Melbourne, Australia
  3. Adidas Addict macrumors 65816

    Adidas Addict

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2008
    Location:
    England
  4. BubbaMc macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    #4
    If OS X had resolution independence it would be amazing.
     
  5. washburn thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2010
  6. Aegelward macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #6
    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
     
  7. Adidas Addict macrumors 65816

    Adidas Addict

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2008
    Location:
    England
    #7
    But it doesn't. so everything would look like this.
     
  8. wisty macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2009
    #8
    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.
     
  9. Merkava_4 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2010
    Location:
    California
  10. Funkymonk macrumors 6502a

    Funkymonk

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2011
    #10
    About as likely as me becoming the king of england tomorrow.
     
  11. bigjobby macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2010
    Location:
    London, UK
    #11
    ... No chance! There are other much higher priority features to implement.
     
  12. Erasmus macrumors 68030

    Erasmus

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Location:
    Hiding from Omnius in Australia
    #12
    Zero possibility, unless Apple start using extremely hot and large graphics cards in their thin notebooks. Something has to drive all those pixels. Let alone your 30" retina external display.
     
  13. torbjoern macrumors 65816

    torbjoern

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2009
    Location:
    The Black Lodge
    #13
    Even less likely than for the next-next iPad.
     
  14. Fubar1977 macrumors 6502a

    Fubar1977

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2010
    Location:
    North Yorkshire, UK
    #14
    No thanks, don`t fancy squinting at my screen from 3" away.
     
  15. huythanhv2 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2010
    #15
    +1
     
  16. jmpnop macrumors 6502a

    jmpnop

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2010
    #16
    First of all what do you mean by Retina? Its a fancy name used by Apple. If you're talking about 300+ ppi screen, it simply won't happen. Not atleast in another 3 years.
     
  17. DeViAnThans3 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2010
    Location:
    Belgium (Europe)
  18. SerrQ macrumors member

    SerrQ

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2011
    Location:
    Iceland, Reykjavík
    #18
    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.
     
  19. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #19
    "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.

    [​IMG]

    Thanks to sammich for the graph.
     
  20. ThaDoggg macrumors 6502a

    ThaDoggg

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2010
    Location:
    Peterborough, Canada
    #20
    I hope not. I don't want to use a magnifier to start reading text on my MBP.
     
  21. hcho3 macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    May 13, 2010
    #21
    What the hell you talking about... retina display requires to have 300 pixel per inch or higher. You want to start paying 3000-4000 dollars for 13 inch MBP? Get out.
     
  22. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #22
    See my post above, it does not.
     
  23. Wattser93 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2010
    #23
    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.
     
  24. fibrizo macrumors 6502

    fibrizo

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    #24
    ^ 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.
     
  25. gnasher729 macrumors P6

    gnasher729

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    #25
    Not a chance in hell. :D
     

Share This Page