Retina vs high res antiglare

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by lbhskier37, May 25, 2013.

  1. lbhskier37 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2011
    #1
    I wanted to hear from the people who have had both a hi res antiglare and a retina. I'm likely going to buy a refurb from apple and the high res antiglare is currently priced the same as the base retina. I currently have a 15" 1280x768 windows laptop. My biggest issue with it is desktop space. I was always looking at the antiglare because of the desktop space, but now I'm wondering if I should go with the retina for the same price. The laptop will basically live its live on my coffee table, so weight and thickness isn't a selling point. I've seen the retina and the standard screens but I've never seen a retina. How much of an improvement is the retina over the high res? Can I get the same desktop area with the retina as the high res?
     
  2. thunng8 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2006
    #2
    You can get more desktop space with the retina. You can set the retina at equivalent desktop space of 1440x900, 1680x1050 or 1920x1200.
     
  3. Daniel L macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2009
    #3
    Can even do 2880x1800 if your eyes can handle it.
     
  4. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #4
    I tried running my rMBP in the native resolution 2880×1800 resolution - I found it unusable, as I could barely make anything out, particularly the text
     
  5. ColdCase macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Location:
    NH
    #5
    If you read a lot of text, your eyes will thank you if you get the retina. Desktop space is a wash.
     
  6. Doward macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2013
    #6
    17" 1920x1200 here, anti glare.

    I prefer it to the Retina.
     
  7. saturnotaku macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2013
    #7
    No, no they won't, especially if an app you use is not optimized for a Retina display.

    Only if you run the rMBP at a scaled resolution of 1680x1050. At the Retina's default "best" of 1440x900, antiglare wins for desktop space.
     
  8. wmage macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2012
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #8
    I vote for Retina. It just offers more flexibility - you can choose any resolution you want.

    Of course, if you don't use the native 1440x900, it will have to do some extra work, but in my opinion it can be lived with.
     
  9. cvs macrumors member

    cvs

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    #9
    It is a package.

    cMBP can have anti-glare which makes a LOT of sense if you are living in a nice sunny environment and like to work under natural light. Also, has space for an optibay for a second hard drive and you can upgrade the RAM yourself. And the resolution is great for the 15" display.

    rMBP is a different beast, thinner, super screen, super resolution but not anti-glare (although better than glossy standard displays). Much harder to upgrade, too.

    You may weigh your needs and choose, both are great for what they are supposed to do.

    But, if it is going to be on the desk all the time, and desktop space is what you need, may I suggest you also look at the Mac Mini and a Thunderbolt Display. TB is glossy, though, not anti-glare, but you may also look at other 30" displays like Dell.
     
  10. justperry macrumors 604

    justperry

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2007
    Location:
    In the core of a black hole.
    #10
    Bold:
    Get an iMac, or as the other poster said a mini and a screen.
     
  11. entropi macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 20, 2008
    #11
    yeah, me too - I prefer real screenspace, instead of wasteful eyecandy...
     
  12. jmill155 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 27, 2013
    Location:
    Virginia beach, VA
    #12
    I agree. I use the default resolution for my 15in. rMBP
     

Share This Page