Old fogies, 17" MBP, hi-res, and readability

[Z06jerry]

Im getting the new 17 umbp next week... does the screen look decent if i go into the properties and select 1680*1050 resolution ? or does it become all fuzzy. We've been used to the 1680*1050 on our 20" and 17" MBPs so just wondering how big of a change this will be.

The latest uMBP will be the clearest when used at it's native resolution which is 1920 x 1200. Choosing 1680 x 1050 on this screen won't be as clear and crisp looking as 1920 x 1200 or your older 17" MBP that has a native resolution of 1680 x 1050.

The new screen is 133 ppi vs 116 ppi for your older 17" MBP. Text on the new screen will be 12% smaller.

http://members.ping.de/~sven/dpi.html

 

[tim100]

The latest uMBP will be the clearest when used at it's native resolution which is 1920 x 1200. Choosing 1680 x 1050 on this screen won't be as clear and crisp looking as 1920 x 1200 or your older 17" MBP that has a native resolution of 1680 x 1050.

The new screen is 133 ppi vs 116 ppi for your older 17" MBP. Text on the new screen will be 12% smaller.

http://members.ping.de/~sven/dpi.html

the 17 does not look good outside native res.

 

[burdonrc]

I'm 54 and had laser corrected eyes. My left eye is still not right and I wear 2 x magnifiers so I can use the computer. All in all its better than when I wore tri-focals.
I just upgraded from my early 2008 15" MBP to the mid 09 17" MBP ub and have had it for about a week now. It's great to have the extra real estate but I find that the display readability can be difficult at times, particularly as my eyes become tired. I've done what others have by increasing the font size wherever possible and that works pretty good for most things. If I set the resolution to 1680 x 1050 it is just a bit fuzzy and not as sharp. I think some people may find it ok but I just prefer the native res.
I think if I had the choice, I would still choose the 1920 x 1200 as I really appreciate the extra room on the screen. I also find that if the brightness is to low, my eyes have a harder time as well. I also ordered the matte finish as I felt that the reflection from the Glossy display would be a bother and make it harder on the eyes. All in all, no regrets.

 

[RaceTripper]

I'm 51 with a 2007 17" MBP at 1680 x 1050. I'm about to upgrade to the latest MBP. Unfortunately, Apple doesn't make one I can live with. The 17" comes with an anti-glare option, but has higher resolution at 1920x1200. That makes things too small for me to see (I wear bifocals). I also don't want another 17." OTOH: the 15" is about right size-wise and resolution but has that awful glossy screen that reflects everything.

I just spent about 15 mins. at the Apple Store trying to convince myself the glossy screen would be OK, but that just isn't going to happen. The more time I spend on it the more I hate it. I think my only option is to get the 15" and slap an anti-glare film on it, or get nothing and spend the money on performance upgrades for my car instead.

 

[WilliamG]

Readability on the high-res 17" is BETTER than on other systems. Why? Because you can make text as big or as small as you want, AND you don't have the jagged edges that the 1440x900 15" uMBP suffers from on text etc. I've never, ever understood the argument against 1920x1200 displays. You can always make the text bigger! And it STILL looks better than lower res displays!

 

[RaceTripper]

Readability on the high-res 17" is BETTER than on other systems. Why? Because you can make text as big or as small as you want, AND you don't have the jagged edges that the 1440x900 15" uMBP suffers from on text etc. I've never, ever understood the argument against 1920x1200 displays. You can always make the text bigger! And it STILL looks better than lower res displays!

Really, how do I do that: text in Finder windows and sidebars, menus, icons, labels, buttons, and other widgets, editors, everything? I can do that on Windows but have never seen how to do that on Mac OS X.

I have a 17" Dell laptop with 1920x1200 and it wasn't usable until I set Windows XP to make all text appear bigger system wide.

 

[Bazzy]

Hi.

I got the 17" June 2009 UMBP thinking (because I am an idiot!) that I will be able to read things on the screen easier as it was a bigger screen (I use reading glasses!). To my shock (obviously due to my ignorance) I found the text tiny and difficult to read even with reading glasses - I found it just way to small!

The screen is beautiful though but I often have to make the text bigger just to be able to comfortably read stuff - like all things in life, you get used to it!


Bazzy!

 

[icanboogie]

The Hi-Res Display is great, seriously. The increase in space is unbeatable.

I do have bad eyesight, but I still love the HD-Resolution.


Text is smaller, as figured out in the posts before, true but this can easily be adjusted by increasing the system-fonts, document-fonts as well as browser-based fonts. It really is no big deal at all, I do it all the time. This also works for pictures and alike. (Not for YouTube Videos, but they can be viewed fullscreen anyway)

If I sit back, relaxed, with more distance to the screen, I make the text, while reading, really big (like a telepromter) and when I return to normal position, I adjust the font size again. Works like a charm.

The zooming options mentioned are a good help in some aspects, too. But I would consider those not for an everyday use, but more like using a magnifiying glass. Pretty handy!


Oh, and btw: Reducing the resolution from 1900 to 1680 or so is not a good idea, as this makes everything quite fuzzy.

Snow Leopard, the upcoming OSX, might make this all even easier.

 

[kasakka]

Readability on the high-res 17" is BETTER than on other systems. Why? Because you can make text as big or as small as you want, AND you don't have the jagged edges that the 1440x900 15" uMBP suffers from on text etc. I've never, ever understood the argument against 1920x1200 displays. You can always make the text bigger! And it STILL looks better than lower res displays!

While smaller pixels will make text, especially with the way OSX smooths fonts (more booklike, accurate font shapes whereas Windows smooths them to fit into a pixel grid for better clarity but slightly distorted font shapes), easier to read, the fact that OSX doesn't yet support DPI scaling properly makes it a bad thing.

In Windows Vista and 7 DPI scaling allows you to universally adjust font and window item (like buttons etc) sizes to a larger value. This also works in most programs just fine, allowing higher resolution displays to have better readability from a comfortable distance by enlarging fonts a few notches.

I really hope Snow Leopard will finally support DPI scaling properly so you don't have to sit too close when using a high res screen. I'm not even an old fogie but my eyesight is pretty bad. I can't read anything without glasses unless the letters are the size of a cat.

 

[jjahshik32]

After I saw the 17" anti glare unibody mbp at the apple store last night I just couldnt resist and picked one up. No regrets and the screen is more gorgeous than what I can remember from the previous gen hi res led 17" mbp!

Anyway, one thing that fixed my small font issues is that now safari 4 is able to increase the size of the whole webpage at a time instead of the templates/words that used to be squeezed/messed up together when you try to command + the fonts.

Now I see why they changed the way the font adjustment works on safari 4, its perfect!

Oh and did I mention the screen is absolutely gorgeous!

BTW, I was looking around to see if anyone calibrated the 9CAD screen anti glare but without even calibrating the screen it looks amazing.