Retina iMacs

Will the new iMacs incorporate retinal technology?


  • Total voters
    62
  • Poll closed .

mattg3

macrumors 6502
Dec 8, 2010
397
4
ma.
I voted no because its too early but I will not upgrade till it does show up.It will be amazing.
 

DopeZilla

macrumors member
Apr 30, 2012
38
0
Based on the price leaks, I'm going to say no. The high-end 15 inch MBP saw a significant price raise (can't be assed pulling up the spreadsheet, but wasn't it by $500?). I can see that being retina. But the high-end iMac only saw a raise of $200. For a bigger screen I'd expect the raise to be higher than that of a retina MBP. I'm hoping for a slight res bump, but nothing like the 2x res jump some people have been touting.

All speculation of course, but I'm on the negative.

(please prove me wrong Apple)
 

Mr Rogers

macrumors regular
Oct 24, 2003
225
3
Hong Kong
I vote no

FWIW,

Higher Rez LCD's are one thing, posters keeping referring to 'RETINA", a marketing ploy by Apple that just means higher resolution LCD panels - be these 4in, 8in, 10in, 11in, 13in on 15in - could Apple actually state clearly how many Pixels per square inch, regardless of how far away you are from the screen, constitutes RETINA - basically its all over the show.

Hence could we refer to higher pixel density per square inch or square centimetre, which effectively means that for this incarnation of the iMac given price associated with higher pixel count density means RENINA is a no go - of course unless its a BTO option for an additional say US$800, in which case its a maybe for those mad enough to pay for marketing hype at this stage in the game.
 

Randomoneh

macrumors regular
Nov 28, 2011
142
0
FWIW,

Higher Rez LCD's are one thing, posters keeping referring to 'RETINA", a marketing ploy by Apple that just means higher resolution LCD panels - be these 4in, 8in, 10in, 11in, 13in on 15in - could Apple actually state clearly how many Pixels per square inch, regardless of how far away you are from the screen, constitutes RETINA - basically its all over the show
Basically, for Apple it's angular resolution of 60 pixels per degree at normal viewing distance. Farther you are, angular resolution of display is higher. For iPhone at 12'', angular resolution is 69 pixels per degree.

At normal contrast levels, humans have angular resolution of anywhere up to 120 pixels per degree. However, it's worth to note that according to Japanese NHK study, average people were able to detect difference in quality of images up to even 310 pixels per degree!

Will the new iMacs incorporate retinal technology?
It's not really "retinal technology".
 
Last edited:

thisperson

macrumors newbie
May 30, 2012
8
0
Leeds, UK
I think it all depends on what you class as retina, a lot constitutes, but i doubt i if you mean 2x the resolution, I don't think it's practical, or necessary, but i think that it could be a BTO option, but at a high cost.
 

Sue De Nimes

macrumors 6502a
Apr 10, 2012
541
7
I think it all depends on what you class as retina, a lot constitutes, but i doubt i if you mean 2x the resolution, I don't think it's practical, or necessary, but i think that it could be a BTO option, but at a high cost.
I class the current iMac screens as "retina".
 

LaWally

macrumors 6502a
Feb 24, 2012
530
0
Has anyone thought about how "inconvenient" it would be to have dead pixel issues on a 27" retina iMac?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.