5-7 days shipping for online.
And I want the anti-glare which is only available in high-res (I want high-res anyway).
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.
Just picked up a 15" HR with anti glare
- Thread starter alphaod
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
5-7 days shipping for online.
And I want the anti-glare which is only available in high-res (I want high-res anyway).
i picked my 15" high res i7 up today. i love it. i think the PPI is 127 vs 133 in the 17". the iphone has 165 ppi, many windows laptops now have 145ppi.
when you look at a 17" then it is basically the same PPI as the 15" so you can see if you like it.
no heat problems whatsoever. it runs quite cool with using flash video HD.
the screen is awesome for a notebook screen.
This is my concern too, I had a hi-res 17 and everything was WAY to small... I was enlarging everything. I am concerned the Hi Res 15 will be the same...
In the store it looked a bit bigger then the hi res 17, but since I use my MBP for leisure it was not worth it to go hi res.
I actually got my computer exchanged at the Apple Store because the battery indicator didn't work. My replacement looks like it has better off-axis reproduction, but it as the has same panel as before so I do not know why there was a difference.
So right now it looks pretty good; about the same as my previous machine. As with off-axis glossy, other than a dark room, the problem is off-axis you're looking at a mirror.
@Alphaod
Could you make a fullscreen screenshot (cmd+shift+3) of the screen of the hi-res MBP on a website and a word document? I'm really curious on "how small" it is...
Thanks a lot
Webpage:
Word document (100% zoom, 12pt Times New Roman):
No idea; it's Safari 4 with the latest updates.
In regular use, the temperatures are about the same; I did notice however that on this newer machine that the fans kick in at lower temperatures; before it would be maybe 85ºC before the fans spun up to 4500RPM; now they spin up when the temperature is at around 70ºC; more noise, but my lap isn't being cooked. And yes I do use my laptop on my lap.
The 15" is 128 ppi and the 17" is 133 ppi (I did the calculation for the 15", so I may be a bit off; but the idea is the 17" has smaller pixels still).
I actually got my computer exchanged at the Apple Store because the battery indicator didn't work. My replacement looks like it has better off-axis reproduction, but it as the has same panel as before so I do not know why there was a difference.
So right now it looks pretty good; about the same as my previous machine. As with off-axis glossy, other than a dark room, the problem is off-axis you're looking at a mirror.
Webpage:
Word document (100% zoom, 12pt Times New Roman):
No idea; it's Safari 4 with the latest updates.
In regular use, the temperatures are about the same; I did notice however that on this newer machine that the fans kick in at lower temperatures; before it would be maybe 85ºC before the fans spun up to 4500RPM; now they spin up when the temperature is at around 70ºC; more noise, but my lap isn't being cooked. And yes I do use my laptop on my lap.
The 15" is 128 ppi and the 17" is 133 ppi (I did the calculation for the 15", so I may be a bit off; but the idea is the 17" has smaller pixels still).
The 15" MBP is really 15.4". This means that you get the same 133ppi or 0.19 dot pitch.
Any further comments on this? I'm stuck in the same debate - 15" hires or 17". My eyes are fairly poor and get tired. Struggling to find time to visit the store.
@Alphaod
Thanks for the screenshot!
So now I think the HR 15" is very nice. Nothing is too small on my side (but of course this is not a fair opinion. I don't wear glasses). I use Excel & SPSS a lot, so the (proportionate) higher resolution would be helpful.
Oh btw, the font size at the Word's toolbar is 14, not 12.
Thanks for the screenshot!
So now I think the HR 15" is very nice. Nothing is too small on my side (but of course this is not a fair opinion. I don't wear glasses). I use Excel & SPSS a lot, so the (proportionate) higher resolution would be helpful.
Oh btw, the font size at the Word's toolbar is 14, not 12.
Well I measured my screen with a ruler and did the calculation anyways that's not important; the point is my calculations are inaccurate, but the pixels almost as small as the ones on the 17".
Well my vision is -7.75, so my glasses make things even smaller. I'm fine staring at the display all the time.
No. You measure the width of the screen which is 13.125 inches. Divided by 1680 pixels = 128 ppi
The 17" is 1920 / 14.4375 = 133 ppi
I've been using this to calculate pixel density:
http://thirdculture.com/joel/shumi/computer/hardware/ppicalc.html This resource gave me 133 ppi.
Actually you're right. I recalculated it again using the same website and I got a ppi of 128.65. Don't know why it gave me 133 earlier... But the dot pitch remains at 0.19.
In any event, if anyone's worried about the pixel density of the hi-res MBP, you should take things in proper perspective. The upcoming iPhone has a display resolution of 960 X 640 on a 3.5" screen. This gives you a density of 329 ppi or a dot pitch of 0.07. Now, that my friends, really boggles the mind.
Shoot, I work in the industry too... Didn't get the hi-res, though. I didn't think about the extra room in Il, Ps, Ae, etc!
I have good eyesight up close, too, but I'm sure it's somewhat straining to have such small... everything, really. Plus, do you really use your machine for Ae and Motion anyway?
Problem is the left machine Hi Res is showing Safari with No Tab Bar and no Status bar, while the low res machine on the right is showing the Tab Bar and the Status bar so it's difficult to accurately see how much more page content is shown on the Hi Res machine.
Can you sort this out (disable the Tab bar on the right machine an enable the status bar on the left machine) an take the pics again?
Could you set the old and new machines side by side again and take a nice close up of the top inner corners of each machine, where they meet? Like a picture that shows the left machine's top right corner and the right machine's top left corner nice and close so we can get a feel for how much smaller the menu bar is by comparison between the two?
TIA.
TIA.
alphaod,
I too would like to see a photo of the menu bar.
Thanks for all the photos you have posted since I ordered mine a week ago and didn't have the chance to see one in person before ordering. I'm in Canada and the store I went too didn't even have them in stock (the manager hadn't even seen one).
Are you buying a hardshell case for it? If so what one are you planning on buying?
I too would like to see a photo of the menu bar.
Thanks for all the photos you have posted since I ordered mine a week ago and didn't have the chance to see one in person before ordering. I'm in Canada and the store I went too didn't even have them in stock (the manager hadn't even seen one).
Are you buying a hardshell case for it? If so what one are you planning on buying?
Sorry I returned the old computer (as per my original post), but I do have the original resolution pictures (if I can find them) and I'll see if I crop and enhance what I can.
I doubled the RAM to 8GB, replaced the optical drive with an Intel X25-M 160GB (SSD) and replaced the stock HDD with a WD 1TB (HDD); I have a fast boot volume coupled with plenty of storage space (not to mention I have a backup of my boot drive via Time Machine—though I use it mainly for the on-the-fly restore from previous date functionality).
The RAM upgrades will not benefit everyone; they benefit me because use VMs a lot (since I don't use Boot Camp) and I edit vidoes in Final Cut and high resolution pictures in Photoshop and Lightroom.
The SSD benefits me in the faster access and increased speeds when opening and saving files. I don't restart my machine unless I have to, so I can't say the SSD really matters for that [for me]. The random access of an SSD is leaps and bounds ahead of any HDD right now. The only drawback is the lack of storage capacity unless you want to fork over a kidney. This drawback is counter by my 1TD HDD, which isn't super fast; the capacity is good however and works great to complement with SSD boot-volume.
An external USB-powered DVD burner takes care of any optical drive duties as needed.
Overall these upgrades will increase you ownership costs to well over 150% [of the original price]. And don't forget to add AppleCare to protect the rest of the components.
No I am not; if I wanted a computer I could throw around I'd use my Thinkpad (that thing is built like a tank). I have yet to see the real benefit in using a hardshell against drops to a hard floor for the increase in bulk. I've tried the Invisible Shield (and like) solutions in the past and these did protect against scratches without adding bulk, but it did make the computer look and feel cheap. So now I just use a Moshi Palmguard to protect my palmrest area (as I do wear a metal watch) and nothing more. On the go, I use a neoprene sleeve, but otherwise I like it bare.
I've been using my high-res antiglare i7 for nearly a week now.
I'm slowly adjusting to the resolution, but do wish we could change the DPI.. maybe sooner rather than later Apple will implement resolution independence.
I do find stuff a bit piercingly small on the eyes - it is great to have so many windows open and have so much space.
I wish Apple offered high and standard res on the 15" and 17". 1680x1050 is great, and I wish the 17" still had that resolution (as well as the higher resolution).
Hopefully my eyes will adjust more.. but I'd rather go back to 1440x900! Just a shame antiglare is only available in higher res.
I'm slowly adjusting to the resolution, but do wish we could change the DPI.. maybe sooner rather than later Apple will implement resolution independence.
I do find stuff a bit piercingly small on the eyes - it is great to have so many windows open and have so much space.
I wish Apple offered high and standard res on the 15" and 17". 1680x1050 is great, and I wish the 17" still had that resolution (as well as the higher resolution).
Hopefully my eyes will adjust more.. but I'd rather go back to 1440x900! Just a shame antiglare is only available in higher res.
Why would you want poorer resolution than the 1920px screen the 17" comes with?
The used to offer it. The 1920x1200 was an option.
I suspect it's because they didn't have a 17" LED back-lit version of the 1680x1050 (but that's pure speculation).
Why would you want poorer resolution than the 1920px screen the 17" comes with?
Well, until Apple offers resolution independence some people will find the user interface a bit too small.
So 1680x1050 on the 17" screen would be similar PPI to 1440x900 on the 15" - bit more comfortable on the eyes.
Don't get me wrong, higher resolution is great, but some people like me, find things just a bit too small, and it would be nice if Apple provided a way to change the DPI.