As long as the screen’s the same width as it would have already been it’s no worse. Wouldn’t it actually be better for editing to have the video at “full” size and still be able to fit useful controls?
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.
Upcoming 14-Inch and 16-Inch MacBook Pro Display Resolutions Likely Revealed in Latest macOS Monterey Beta
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's approximately a 3:2 aspect ratio. Just like MS Surface Products.
I also will be coming from a 2016 15” MBP, and I’m just looking forward to my text not looking like t hi ss when I type.
The phones have a higher dpi because you hold them closer to your eyes.
Laptops have a medium dpi because they are further from your eyes.
Televisions have a really low dpi because you are sitting across the room from them.
And don’t even get me started about stadium scoreboards.
Finally, the scaled resolutions were an embarrassment.
No, forgetting to put on pants is an embarassment.
People around here seem to use words weirdly.
The iPhone 13 6.7" to 6" are all ~460 PPI. The only odd one out is at 476 PPI. That is still a relatively minor difference of 3.5%. You could even argue they are the same.
All these OLED display also have ~326 PPI if you exclude the Green colour. 6.7" and 6.1 has ~324 PPI while the Mini gets ~328. Arguably speaking in terms of "real" PPI Apple has been sticking to 326 on iPhone.
So it is interesting on the Mac they are changing PPI. My guess is that they are preparing for an OLED era where you need higher PPI compared to an Mini LED screen. Even though I dont want an OLED Mac.
May also have simply been a supplier issue. Looking forward to it though.
“If these new resolutions are indeed for the upcoming MacBook Pro models, they would represent an increase in pixel density to around 250 pixels per inch, which notably would allow for native 2x Retina as the default setting for these new machines for the sharpest possible image.”
What does this mean?
What does this mean?
better new 2x native resolutions and mini-led than just promotion
Probably promotion will come eventually when they will have enough gpu power
The simple answer is they diversified manufacturing and screen technology. They spec'd the screens to have a particular PPI for years and had custom manufacturing to accomplish that, but when they started to add more device sizes they also started to realize that scaling the interface to a non-integer point/pixel ratio works fine for most use cases. They started to add such interface scaling even outside accessibility as a user-controlled option.
When they started having models switch to entirely new technologies like OLED, manufacturing to an exact PPI became a much larger headache.
yeah. Such an aspect ratio does not make sense.
maybe they've moved the touch bar to the screen
The physical resolution of the display is exactly 2x (in each direction, 4x overall) the scaled resolution (‘looks like’). The first retina machines had a 2880x1800 physical resolution, and defaulted to 1440x900 (so the each interface pixel can be displayed across a grid of exactly 4 physical pixels), but 1440x900 wastes quite a lot of space on a 15” display, so they moved to a default scale of 1680x1050 for the 2016- machines, but kept the screen’s physical resolution at 2880x1800, rather than upping it to 3360x2100. The trade off for a non integer scale is that it doesn’t look as sharp, which is a shame when the retina displays are a key selling point of these machines.
would give the engineers/designers enough space to place the touchbar above the function-key-row. :x
You've got to be hecking kidding me! Still no 4K!
For years already, 4K is the de facto standard in all other notebooks in that size with HiDPI displays. Except Apple.
And don't try to tell me you wouldn't really need true 4K resolution, because macOS could scale the display. If you really believe that, you have never seen the artifacts resulting from such scaling.
A 4K physical resolution would just be a byproduct of making the scaled resolution 1920x1200 - which would probably be a bit on the small side for a 16”. If they bring back a 17-18” model that’s when you’re more likely to see that sort of resolution.
If they did make it 4K, they’d have to either scale it way down (which kind of makes going with a higher res moot?) or up to 3x.
macOS doesn’t have fractional scale factors.
That's the interesting bit! This is much closer to 3:2 resolution, which is frankly the only good thing about Surface laptops
Effectively, it does. Fractional scales are achieved by rendering at double the logical resolution and then downsampling to the native resolution. Works really well and avoids sampling artifacts as long as the backing buffer (at twice the logical resolution) is significantly larger than native. That's what all the "looks like" scaled modes do.
Why can't they do just 4K, the resolution is already close to that and 4K is an industry standard... also with M1 chips I'm sure there won't be any issues with the battery
I'd rather be able to see watch true 4K content on my display, not this sub 4K weird resolution...
I'd rather be able to see watch true 4K content on my display, not this sub 4K weird resolution...