MBP 1650x1080 screen upgrade

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by wk127001, Nov 16, 2008.

  1. wk127001 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2008
    #1
    Well I'm frankly frustrated that my 15" MBP doesn't have a 1680x1050 screen resolution when other laptops that cost half the price do. Has anyone ever done or know anything about anyone who may have done a screen upgrade with this resolution? I am a competent engineering student and am just looking for somebody to point me to some prior successful or otherwise attempts at a resolution upgrade. Or, if no one has tried it does anyone know if there are any chipset limitations or other possibilities that prevent this upgrade from working?

    FYI - I have the early 2008 penryn.

    EDIT: Cause I goofed the resolution.
     
  2. QUiKSR20 macrumors member

    QUiKSR20

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2008
    Location:
    Neptune, NJ
    #2
    I think you mean 1680x1050 [​IMG]

    Just bustin, I agree its 2008 15 inchers should have 1680x1050 and the 13.3's should have 1440x900

    1440 on a 15 is def too low and so is 1280 on a 13.3

    I had a Dell 15' a while back with 1680 and a 14' Thinkpad with 1440 much better and not bad on the eyes at all.
     
  3. guitarmaster18 macrumors regular

    guitarmaster18

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    #3
    I would think that 1650x1050 screen at 15.4 inches would have a pretty high pixel density, thus making it pretty difficult to read. Frankly, 1440x900 on the main display is quite adequite for most applications, if I need more screen space, I usually hook up to my ADC. Even without my external display, spaces pretty much solves any realestate problems I might be having.
     
  4. MilesInCO macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2008
    #4
  5. blSwagger macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    #5
    I used to run my old 15" Dell Inspiron 8200 at 1600x1200. It was perfect. Now I feel forced to get a 24" 1920x1200 external monitor. Of course, that monitor will be MATTE so that I won't have to deal with reflections during the day (usually just on weekends when I'm not at work during the day).

    The 1440x900 is okay for web browsing, but it's annoying when I want to surf <i>and</i> talk to people with iChat. There isn't enough resolution to display more than one thing at a time unless you want everythign to be sqeezed.
     
  6. MagicWok macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #6
    HA!.... Try working on an actual low resolution like I do at 1280x854 on my 15" G4 powerbook, with Photoshop, Indesign and Illustrator being switched around, with multiple wireless mounted drives when I'm away from my desk at home :p

    Was even worse that that when I was at university lol with skype running in the background too. Suprised my single-core 1.5ghz G4 handled all that back then! Expose definately helped, would have hated the prospect of using the XP taskbar to handle everything
     
  7. ivan98 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2007
    #7
    Given 1920x1200 was made standard in the 17" where it was optional previously, quite obviously says 15.4" will get 1680x1050. Compare the resolutions @ 13.3", 15.4" and 17" and you'll see.

    Question is why did Apple do it this time round? My take is, as of Q4 2008, there isn't any commercial LCD offerings that satisfy all of the 3 criteria:

    • 15.4"
    • 1680x1050
    • LED backlit

    Maybe 2009 will bring it, in time for Oct 2009....
     
  8. wk127001 thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2008
    #8
    Yeah I guess you're right, no LED panels are available in that resolution. Makes me think I'm going to run into some serious power issues if I try to swap it for a CCFL one.

    Anyone know anything about LED vs CCFL power sources?
     
  9. Firefly2002 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    #9
    Not really. This 3 yo Dell Inspiron 6000 has that resolution and it's perfectly readable. I could even go higher and be pretty happy....
     
  10. Fidgetyrat macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2008
    #10
    I think one concern with a CCFL one would be "Can it fit". Besides the panel itself, you need to wonder if you have enough room within the lid casing to even fit the fluorescent bulb. What about the power inverters to run the bulb, etc.

    Hell, do the LED model machines even output enough power to the display to power one of the CCFLs. LED would just need a constant DC current. the CCFL would require some circuitry.
     
  11. Red-red macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2007
    #11
    For the size of the screen the resolution is fine for me. Any smaller and I would be straining my eyes. As for replacing it I doubt you can because of the way it's connected to the glass.
     
  12. wk127001 thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2008
    #12
    Yeah dimensions wise, I agree. I'm not sure a CCFL one would fit either. And as far as I know about CCFL power, they need inverters so yeah it's definitely going to be more complex that an LED. I do know that CCFL screens consume less power however.

    As I've learned about this more I'm probably going to scrap this idea as a fantasy. I think if I had unlimited coin I would definitely pursue this further, but my college budget isn't going to quite going to cut it. I'll just hope that they have a higher resolution LED for the MBPs when it comes time to upgrade in a year or two.

    Meanwhile, I'll settle for my dual 24" monitor setup at home. ;)
     

Share This Page