HR vs Regular

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by RiCEADDiCTBOY, Dec 30, 2007.

  1. RiCEADDiCTBOY macrumors 6502a

    RiCEADDiCTBOY

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    #1
    Does anyone have any comparison shots of a mbp high resolution screen vs regular?
     
  2. aethelbert macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2007
    Location:
    Chicago, IL, USA
    #2
  3. RiCEADDiCTBOY thread starter macrumors 6502a

    RiCEADDiCTBOY

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    #3
    WOW! that is a HUGE DIFFERENCE. how could anyone not go with the HR?!?
     
  4. Big-TDI-Guy macrumors 68030

    Big-TDI-Guy

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2007
  5. RiCEADDiCTBOY thread starter macrumors 6502a

    RiCEADDiCTBOY

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    #5
    100 dollars is gonna break the bank?
     
  6. Big-TDI-Guy macrumors 68030

    Big-TDI-Guy

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2007
    #6
    Considering the cost of a MBP in the first place - for some people, yeah.
     
  7. Dybbuk macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    #7
    I agree ... if you're going to buy an MBP, may as well wait a little longer to go high-res.
     
  8. xpovos macrumors 6502a

    xpovos

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2007
    Location:
    Tennessee
    #8
    Maybe, but if buying a standard-res 17" MBP is stretching their budget to the point that an extra $100 is a big deal, then they're already spending more than they can afford.

    I've owned both. The hi-res is the real deal.
     
  9. Big-TDI-Guy macrumors 68030

    Big-TDI-Guy

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2007
    #9
    Don't me wrong, I have a 15.4" laptop with a 1680 x 1050 display - and wouldn't get anything less in the future. (1920 x 1200 would be my next purchase, if anything)

    Just for some people, desktop real estate isn't the cats ass. Also consider the fine folks who use an external LCD a bulk of the time when not on the go.

    Obviously, Apple feels there is a market for a cheaper panel, or they would have made only Glossy vs Matte their only choice.

    Then again, Dell had 1920 x 1200 LCDs on their 15" notebooks 3 years ago (going to be 4 now) - and for some reason, it's a LOT harder to find today as an option.

    Then again - it IS Dell. :rolleyes:
     
  10. RiCEADDiCTBOY thread starter macrumors 6502a

    RiCEADDiCTBOY

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    #10
    now the real question for me is...

    high resolution matte
    or
    high resolution glossy

    i do alot of movie watching...however, i do alot of photography and graphic designing...grrrrrr!!!!

    and with macworld coming soon...ugh...but, i can't imagine apple really drastically changing the mbp THAT much...or are they?
     
  11. mikes63737 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2005
    #11
    Glossy. Get a matte external.
     
  12. PimpDaddy macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 9, 2007
    #12
    MATTE...! :)

    The greater size of a 17'' screen is bound to "catch" more light, and thereby glares on the screen with the glossy option, compare to for example a 13'' screen.

    My GF has a MB with a glossy screen and that doesn't bother me too much.

    One of my friends has a 15'' MBP and I'm almost going crazy when using it.

    But then again... It(large glossy screens) doesn't seem to bother some people :)
     
  13. RiCEADDiCTBOY thread starter macrumors 6502a

    RiCEADDiCTBOY

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    #13
    yo, pimpdaddy do you have a picture of your mbp hr? its matte right? i would love to see some photos of it bro!
     
  14. PimpDaddy macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 9, 2007
    #14
    The pictures I have of it is here: http://www.23hq.com/PimpDaddy/album/2326401

    But none of them really shows how great the screen is.
     
  15. virtualinc macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2007
    Location:
    Carrboro, NC, USA
    #15
    just downgraded

    I used the Hi-Res 17" for several months and just decided to downgrade to the 15.4" (so I can purchase a 23" ACD). The Hi-Res display is only really necessary for running apps that require the resolution on the laptop screen. Text is really small on the screen.
     
  16. shoppy macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    Location:
    Hants
    #16
    Pimpdaddy I have to disagree with you I have the high res glossy on my 17" MBP and the glossy is not noticeable at all. I love it and I have to agree high res is the way forward.
     
  17. heatmiser macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2007
    #17
    Not everyone wants to squint while using their laptops. A lot of people don't have stellar (or corrected) vision, and don't feel like using glasses, etc. just to use their computers. And system-wide fonts aren't nearly as adjustable in OS X as they are in Windows.
     
  18. RiCEADDiCTBOY thread starter macrumors 6502a

    RiCEADDiCTBOY

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    #18
    You have to squint? THATS RIDICULOUS. If anyone is squinting then you really need to wear glasses. The fonts are not small at all. No smaller than the resolution I set mine at on my desktop.
     
  19. heatmiser macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2007
    #19
    I don't, but some people do.

    It's ridiculous that other people could have poorer vision than you do?

    No, people don't "need" to wear glasses because they don't see as well as you do. If a person sees the regular 17" screen well, but would need to squint to see the 17" hr, they might choose the regular over the hr, simply to be able to use their laptop without glasses or squinting. What's wrong with that?

    Lots of folks would disagree. Not everyone has your eyes.

    Good for you. Other people with different vision might prefer larger fonts at the default resolution. These people might choose the regular 17" over the high-res 17". There's nothing wrong with that, and there's no reason to judge these people because of it.

    Some people like a 17" screen at 1920 res. Others prefer it at 1680. Still others do best with 1440, or even lower resolutions. What's the big deal?
     
  20. RiCEADDiCTBOY thread starter macrumors 6502a

    RiCEADDiCTBOY

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    #20
    Exactly, what is the big deal? Just get the resolution that suits you best. If it obviously is too bothersome for them...then they shouldn't be purchasing it now should they? Everyone has opinions I understand. Obviously I speak mine however, its quite amusing when other gripe about something when their are options available to them.

    And yes I do feel that if people are having that much difficulty seeing the text...they probably do need reading glasses. Thats not being mean.
     
  21. heatmiser macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2007
    #21
    Haha, I was just answering the "why would anyone choose the regular screen over the high res?" question. Lots of people said money, but I'm in the camp that suggests once a person could afford a 17" MBP, the extra $100 wouldn't make nearly that much of a difference. To me, user preference would be the determining factor in such a purchase. I'd go with the 1920, since I like high-res screens, but I can imagine plenty of people (especially middle-aged and older folks) would tend toward the regular screen, due to viewing comfort.
     
  22. shoppy macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    Location:
    Hants
    #22

    Funny thing is I wear glasses and am having laser corrective surgery next week, tired of wearing contacts. But I love my high res screen. I totally agree with you when you are looking at the 17" MBP, the extra is not going to be that much of a problem.
     

Share This Page