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.
rMBP Resolution
- Thread starter Squilly
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I have a 13-inch model and run in a scaled 1650x1050 resolution.
I just cant get by with the 'Best for Retina' real estate.
Of course, it's a crappy 1280*800.
I wish apple would made it smarter. Like, run at 2560*1600/2880*1800 and scale UI by 1.5 instead.
If it is true retina, real-estate shouldn't be resolution dependent.
when I use a laptop screen only, it's the scaled resolution, eq. of 1680x1080, if with external display, I use the optimal for retina setting, to avoid having differences in gui elements size.
I switched to full hd resolution on retina few times, but gui elements are way too small for my eyes It is fantastic that on 1 screen you can have 3 resolutions, that all look great in terms of sharpness etc.
I switched to full hd resolution on retina few times, but gui elements are way too small for my eyes
It is fantastic that on 1 screen you can have 3 resolutions, that all look great in terms of sharpness etc.Not sure how OSX handles UI scaling, but what you're saying makes sense on the operating system side, making everything 1.5x. However if it's anything like Windows, you'll get programs that are horribly scaled (i.e. font will be 1.5x but rest will be 1.0x).
1920x1200. After the first couple of days getting used to the size of things, even 1680x1050 feels cramped.
I used 1920 x 1200 for a few months, but after switching back to the default retina resolution, 1920 x 1200 seems blurry. I did enjoy the extra real estate, but the native res is so much crisper.
Sometimes 1920x1200 HiDPI, or if I'm using Photoshop/Lightroom or similar I go to 2880x1800. My external monitor is 2560x1600 and has been for a decade or so, and anything smaller than 1920x1200 is just too little real estate to do anything at all.
I alternate with quickres from 1440 best for retina to 2880x1800 native.
Yeah yeah i know I am nuts using that 2880 resolution. But I use it because I want the real estate sometimes in certain situations when using multiple apps. (plus its so nerdy looking at that insane resolution lolol)
But most of the time i stick with best for retina.
Yeah yeah i know I am nuts using that 2880 resolution. But I use it because I want the real estate sometimes in certain situations when using multiple apps. (plus its so nerdy looking at that insane resolution lolol)
But most of the time i stick with best for retina.
1920 mostly, 2880 for full screen flash videos (hulu/youtube), 1440 sometimes when I get tired of small fonts/everything.
I don't get it, the standard "best for retina" is a measly 1280x800 ?? and then the maximum resolution we can use is 1920x1200 , but why does it say looks like it? and why can't we use the ultra advertised 2880x1800 ? and also if the "best for retina" is 1280x800 why does it look miles better than a screen with that same resolution?
and then the maximum resolution we can use is 1920x1200 , but why does it say looks like it? and why can't we use the ultra advertised 2880x1800 ? and also if the "best for retina" is 1280x800 why does it look miles better than a screen with that same resolution? 
I don't get it, the standard "best for retina" is a measly 1280x800 ??
"Best for retina" isn't 1280x800. It's 2560x1600 (on the 13"), which is the native screen resolution.
Since the "retina" (aka HiDPI) mode uses double the number of pixels to draw the same things (buttons, text, windows, etc.) then the resulting image makes things the same physical size as a 1280x800 screen.
If you compare text at the same font size on the retina and non-retina MBPs, the text will be the same physical size on both but will be drawn with four times as many pixels on the retina model, giving it more detail.
That's why it says "Looks like 1280x800" in system preferences. Physical proportions are the same as 1280x800, but it is using all 2560x1600 pixels for detail.
On the 15" the native resolution is 2880x1800 and the "best for retina" resolution "looks like" 1440x900, but again it's really using all 2880x1800 pixels for detail.
If you've ever compared a retina and non-retina iPhone or iPad it's the same thing. More pixels, more detail, but things stay the same physical size. The Macbooks are a bit more complicated because you can choose other resolutions that let you fit more things on screen while sacrificing a bit of that super detail.
Thank you, that was a really good explanation , i have a 15" inch model, now i switched to "looks like 1680x1050" because the "retina setting which looks like 14400x900" looks a little too big for my taste, the icons, websites look bigger than i like , gonna keep using the computer like this and maybe switch to "looks like 1920x1200 " which i tried for a couple of hours but things a bit too small
By selecting the setting on the far right under scaled resolutions in the display preferences:
I use the best for retina setting, and if i need to adjust my work space, i have "hyper dock" so i can snap windows to the left or right of the screen.
If anyone is wondering how the ui scaling works for the retina, anandtech explains it perfectly for idiots like me on his video review of the retina macbook pro. Click here to watch it
If anyone is wondering how the ui scaling works for the retina, anandtech explains it perfectly for idiots like me on his video review of the retina macbook pro. Click here to watch it