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.
MacBook Pro Display With Notch Shown in Alleged Photo Leak
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yep but when i said this, I was told by someone here to do some research and find the many devices that exist that already do this. Continuing the great tradition of making a claim and then telling someone else to do the research.
It'll be embarrassing if Apple goes through all this trouble but doesn't include Face ID. Mac cameras aren't used as often as iPhone cameras, so you'd have this big black spot on your screen all day for no reason.
Actually, they CAN minimize (but not eliminate) the bezel and still have a good sensor array. Taking the sensor array of the iPhone you can see just how slim the bezel could be on the Macbook Pro without a notch. No one would complain about that... well, there could be complaints but they wouldn't be intellectually honest about it.
less than 48 hours to find out if the notch is going to get in the way of my full screen porn Parmesan cheese photos
It's no big deal as long as it means a nicer bigger screen, with very thin bezels, and it fits well in the center of menu bar (usually an unused area of screen). And hopefully it includes FaceID.
I prefer Swiss cheese pics for porn but whatever floats your boat.
TheYayAreaLiving 🎗️
Suspended
You're generalizing.
Amazon isn't Apple. An iPhone doesn't have your biometric data. An iPhone's secure enclave does; iOS cannot access that.
You are indeed. Trust me, you’re not as important or interesting as you think you are.
It’s not bad at all, it‘s a necessary compromise on the phone to have FaceID, and it even gives the phome a recognizable look. Certainly nicer than a punch hole or the whole top part being cut off. All the other alternatives are worse.
As for MacBooks, we’ll have to see. But if they put the notch there, it must be for good reason, just like with the iPhone.
I think it bears repeating:
The rumoured resolutions of the new MacBook Pros:
14": 3024 x 1964 - 257.56 ppi
16": 3456 x 2234 - 257.2 ppi
As others have suggested, this is a bit of an odd choice of resolution, because it deviates from the usual MacBook Pro 16:10 aspect ratio. However, the deviation is the same number of vertical pixels between both the 14" and 16" models, and not a ratio between the two, despite the fact they are different sizes.
If we were take to the screen sizes at face value, the 14" would be 15.4:10, and the 16" would be 15.5:10, slightly different from each other, and both off from the usual 16:10 aspect ratio.
OTOH, again as others have indicated, if we subtract 74 pixels from the above vertical resolutions for both models, we get the exact 16:10 aspect ratios:
14": 3024 x 1890
16": 3456 x 2160
So, from a math perspective, the idea of the notch has support, with the height of that notch being 74 pixels. The dot pitches are 0.0986 mm and 0.0988 mm respectively, meaning that 74 pixels would be a height of 7.3 mm. The only thing strange here though would be that 7.3 mm is too tall for a menu bar, unless they increase the size for these models in Monterey.
BTW, if you exclude the top 74 pixels, then the screen sizes are:
14" --> 13.9"
16" --> 15.8"
As for the pixel density, I think the differences here are not real. It's more likely that the 14" and 16" pixel densities are exactly the same, and those screen sizes are close approximations. eg. The 16" is actually 16", but the 14" is slightly larger than 14".
tl;dr:
I don't know if the notch rumour is real or not, but the math certainly supports the idea. However, the math also suggests a notch height of 7.3 mm, which seems tall for a menu bar, unless something has changed in Monterey.
The rumoured resolutions of the new MacBook Pros:
14": 3024 x 1964 - 257.56 ppi
16": 3456 x 2234 - 257.2 ppi
As others have suggested, this is a bit of an odd choice of resolution, because it deviates from the usual MacBook Pro 16:10 aspect ratio. However, the deviation is the same number of vertical pixels between both the 14" and 16" models, and not a ratio between the two, despite the fact they are different sizes.
If we were take to the screen sizes at face value, the 14" would be 15.4:10, and the 16" would be 15.5:10, slightly different from each other, and both off from the usual 16:10 aspect ratio.
OTOH, again as others have indicated, if we subtract 74 pixels from the above vertical resolutions for both models, we get the exact 16:10 aspect ratios:
14": 3024 x 1890
16": 3456 x 2160
So, from a math perspective, the idea of the notch has support, with the height of that notch being 74 pixels. The dot pitches are 0.0986 mm and 0.0988 mm respectively, meaning that 74 pixels would be a height of 7.3 mm. The only thing strange here though would be that 7.3 mm is too tall for a menu bar, unless they increase the size for these models in Monterey.
BTW, if you exclude the top 74 pixels, then the screen sizes are:
14" --> 13.9"
16" --> 15.8"
As for the pixel density, I think the differences here are not real. It's more likely that the 14" and 16" pixel densities are exactly the same, and those screen sizes are close approximations. eg. The 16" is actually 16", but the 14" is slightly larger than 14".
tl;dr:
I don't know if the notch rumour is real or not, but the math certainly supports the idea. However, the math also suggests a notch height of 7.3 mm, which seems tall for a menu bar, unless something has changed in Monterey.
So you can either have a notch-depth black bar across the top of the display, or turn 90% of that bar into active screen area, why not the latter?
You can, but having active and clickable screen above the menubar is bad for the menu bar's usability.
i might have said ‘is it too much to wait two more days?’ but this is MacRUMORS lol
.
.
they should make the notch go all the way around the screen… kinda like a bezel.
The idea would be that this cuts into the center of the menu bar — which is what Mac OS X Public Beta also already did.
I assume the menu bar will be pushed up into that area, freeing up more of the 16:10 screen area to be worked with.
Erm, with an iPad, that’s about the screen to body ratio you want. You still need to have place for your thumbs to be able to hold the thing.
Imagine holding your iPad and it just randomly starts flip-flopping between apps because you’re holding it.
So yeah, not pathetic at all when it’s functional.