I don't understand..

Discussion in 'iMac' started by leadfeather89, Jun 10, 2012.

  1. leadfeather89 macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2012
  2. Cinematographer, Jun 10, 2012
    Last edited: Jun 10, 2012

    Cinematographer macrumors 6502a

    Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Location:
    far away
    #2
    I do. :)

    Have been considering replacing my 2007 iMac with an new machine for some time now. Retina and my order will be placed by Monday evening.
     
  3. leadfeather89 thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2012
    #3
    Do pictures not look flush and smooth on iMacs and Apple Laptops without the retina display?

    I guess my perspective is narrow since I don't do any editing.. but..

    I can see the difference like an inch away from my screen, but from a foot, it looks the same.

    so much hype..
     
  4. Scrapula macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 1, 2012
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    #4
    Because they just want the latest and greatest, never mind that you won't be able to tell the difference on a 27" display compared to the current model. I won't pay extra money for it.
     
  5. New Apple macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2012
    Location:
    Kristinestad
    #5
    i guess it's a mix of reasons

    there is people using CURRENT apple products with a resolution of
    1440 by 900 , there is a little group of people who might need it for eyes-graphics reasons (someone will reply), there is a lot more looking for the greatest possible

    Apple knows that putting Retina on an iMac 2011 27'' is just cool than a real need (like for example an SSD, needed)
    if i had a macbookpro, i would 'almost' require it
    with a new iMac 27 i am fine as it is (more than hd)
     
  6. leadfeather89 thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2012
    #6
    If the new iMacs come with retina display without a price increase, that's wonderful. I am totally all for it (I'll forget it's retina display after about 5 seconds).

    If the new iMacs come without retina display without a price increase, that's wonderful. I am totally all for it (I won't be butthurt that it's not retina display).

    ----------

    This.
     
  7. iMcLovin macrumors 68000

    iMcLovin

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    #7
    retina display on small monitors I dont understand. If I could get a 32" iMac with retina display (or larger), then that´s one step further to my dream machine. It would be a huge display right in front of my eyes, and even if I would only use a small part of the screen for a program such photoshop it would still be sharp and big enough - that´s one step closer to a minority report computer, were you have a large display in front of your eyes and you can just shuffle things around as you please and have multiple stuff running at once. ....that would a perfect iMac :)
     
  8. forty2j macrumors 68030

    forty2j

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    NJ
    #8
    The typical viewing distance for a 32" screen would be... (calculating...) 48" away. At that distance for this screen, I believe 1080p is Retina.

    Now if you enjoy looking at only part of a screen at a time, well, I can't help you there. :p
     

Share This Page