Waiting for Haswell MBP Mega Thread

[Quu]

Did I not say the costs increase when displays increase?

To be honest I stopped reading after this:

It's the only comparison you can make, because that's the smallest 4K display on the market at the moment.

Because it's just such a ridiculous comparison to make. And you know I'm not even going into a costings situation here my argument is 4K is better and they would do good to add 4K to the notebook so we can have an effective 1920x1200 desktop area while maintaining gorgeous resolution independant software.

To me it doesn't matter how much it costs or when it comes (it will eventually) what I'm debating is other people in this thread saying they don't want / need or see the point of 4K and that the laptop is already perfection which is plainly false, it can always get better and the display is one point where it could improve.

Heck I would love it if Apple brought out a 4K 17" notebook let alone 15" but that is so unlikely got a better chance of me turning water to wine at this point.

----------

I've said before that it's more likely for there to be a 4K display in the rmbp next year rather than this year, and that article just proves my point.

Yeah but my point has never been about when or how much it costs my point has been 4K is superior against people in this thread saying it isn't. You're just arguing with yourself about when and pricing.

 

[The Leafs Fan]

To be honest I stopped reading after this:



Because it's just such a ridiculous comparison to make. And you know I'm not even going into a costings situation here my argument is 4K is better and they would do good to add 4K to the notebook so we can have an effective 1920x1200 desktop area while maintaining gorgeous resolution independant software.

To me it doesn't matter how much it costs or when it comes (it will eventually) what I'm debating is other people in this thread saying they don't want need or see the point of 4K and that the laptop is already perfection which is plainly false, it can always get better and the display is one point where it could improve.

Heck I would love it if Apple brought out a 4K 17" notebook let alone 15" but that is so unlikely got a better chance of me turning water to wine at this point.

----------



Yeah but my point has never been about when or how much it costs my point has been 4K is superior against people in this thread saying it isn't. You're just arguing with yourself about when and pricing.

Well you've also been saying that Apple will put it into the Haswell rmbps. Did you read it in full now? Of course it can better, it just doesn't seem to be viable at the moment, in my opinion.

----------

You're just arguing with yourself about when and pricing.

Well it wouldn't be the first time, and probably won't be the last.

 

[Quu]

Well you've also been saying that Apple will put it into the Haswell rmbps. Did you read it in full now? Of course it can better, it just doesn't seem to be viable at the moment, in my opinion.

Well first of all we don't know when the Retina MacBook Pro's are coming. Apple doesn't currently use Sharp for display manufacturing of the Retina MacBook Pro and Sharp is hardly the world leader on display technology and we don't know Apples plans. Not to mention we don't know when Broadwell is shipping and next year we could see Haswell Take Two.

At the moment all we have is conjecture and I never said Apple will do anything I've always maintained that I hope they put a 4K display in. Everything is a possibility until they actually ship.

We should not forget that no one announced a 2880x1800 display ahead of the Retina MacBook Pro release. It just happened.

 

[Vanilla35]

this is incorrect. Using any kind of scaling that is not doubling results in a blur created by bilinear filtering. A 24mp photo on a 5mp screen may indeed lose sharpness because you cannot control how the filtering impacts detail, whereas you know that the 5mp image will be displayed pixel-perfect. Subjective you might prefer the 24mp photo scaled, but you are degrading the image technically.

Obviously the 24mp image is supperior, but when viewed scaled to 5mp it is losing detail and being blurred. The easiest way to see this in practice is to make a test pattern image: Alternating black/white lines, for example, 1 pixel in width. Make a version that's the exact size of your display and show it full screen. Now make a version that's significantly larger than your display and do the same thing. The detail is destroyed.

In practice i agree that the scaled resolutions look very good, and the reason is simple: The display is extremely high resolution and pixel density, so the results of the filtering when scaling down to those high resolutions is still very good. They are definitely losing detail however.

+1

 

[PDFierro]

It is quite ridiculous to compare a 30-inch 4K monitor to something like the 15-inch rMBP. They are not similar in any aspect other than the fact that they are high-resolution displays.

 

[mcarling]

The current 15" rMBP is .71" thick.
The current 13" rMBP is .75" thick.

It was rumored the 13" was going to slim dons to match the 15". Do we still believe this? Does it sound likely ?

I don't believe the rumors that Apple will reduce the thickness of the 13" rMBP from 0.75" to 0.71". Is it possible? Yes, of course. Is it likely? It doesn't seem likely. I think Apple would rather get the extra bit of battery life than make it fractionally thinner. Apple have the MBA for people who care primarily about thin.

 

[PDFierro]

I don't believe the rumors that Apple will reduce the thickness of the 13" rMBP from 0.75" to 0.71". Is it possible? Yes, of course. Is it likely? It doesn't seem likely. I think Apple would rather get the extra bit of battery life than make it fractionally thinner. Apple have the MBA for people who care primarily about thin.

I think it's very likely, I'd actually be shocked if it didn't happen.

 

[KUguardgrl13]

I don't believe the rumors that Apple will reduce the thickness of the 13" rMBP from 0.75" to 0.71". Is it possible? Yes, of course. Is it likely? It doesn't seem likely. I think Apple would rather get the extra bit of battery life than make it fractionally thinner. Apple have the MBA for people who care primarily about thin.

It'd be awkward for those of us coming from cMBPs. I have an iPhone 5, but thin makes sense yhere. The components are small and they gained an inch in length compared to the 4/4S. They can't make the rMBP any longer or wider before it gets awkward. Any thinner and it starts to get flimsy. I've heard of MBAs breaking in a backpack with books and other items. As a student that's a concern of mine. My 2009 MBP has held up pretty well (despite some internal hardware failures; the exterior unibody looks pretty good).

 

[JohnDoe98]

At the moment all we have is conjecture and I never said Apple will do anything I've always maintained that I hope they put a 4K display in. Everything is a possibility until they actually ship.

I agree with you for the most part here. As far as lag is concerned on rmbps, it's a non-issue in my experience (I'm running a base 15" rmbp in Mavericks DPs and any sign of lag is completely resolved across the UI and scrolling, so with Haswell it'll be even a bigger non-issue). And given your points about how scaling just taxes the system even more, and the fact that the scaled resolutions look like crap compared to the native ones, I'm really hopping Apple will bump the resolution for the 13" to 1440x900 and bump the 15" to 1680x1050. The current settings are a little too big, and the 1080p for the 15" or 1680x1050 for the 13" is far too small. I can only imagine its even worse for older people starting to have problems resolving small lettering without glasses. In a perfect world we'd have a BTO selection of resolutions, but for now let's just hope Apple at least gives us a HI-RES model that is one step beyond last's years choices.

 

[The Leafs Fan]

Well first of all we don't know when the Retina MacBook Pro's are coming. Apple doesn't currently use Sharp for display manufacturing of the Retina MacBook Pro and Sharp is hardly the world leader on display technology and we don't know Apples plans. Not to mention we don't know when Broadwell is shipping and next year we could see Haswell Take Two.

At the moment all we have is conjecture and I never said Apple will do anything I've always maintained that I hope they put a 4K display in. Everything is a possibility until they actually ship.

We should not forget that no one announced a 2880x1800 display ahead of the Retina MacBook Pro release. It just happened.

Well, you've also made it clear that you think Apple is likely to put a 4K display into the rmbp. Regardless of price, availability, etc, wouldn't be a bit weird for Apple to just introduce a new resolution for the rmbp, which developers would have to support, and many programs and parts of the internet aren't even retina-optimized yet.

----------

It is quite ridiculous to compare a 30-inch 4K monitor to something like the 15-inch rMBP. They are not similar in any aspect other than the fact that they are high-resolution displays.

I only did it as it's the only point of reference I could find on pricing for 4K displays that are even remotely close to the rmbps display.

 

[mortee]

I'm sorry but again you cannot compare a 31" display to a 15" one. I'm in the consumer electronics business and as the physical size of the displays increase so do the costs. 30-31" are especially expensive because it's an abnormal size most people who go high resolution now purchase 27" displays which are half the price of the 30" versions in retail but have almost identical resolutions (2560x1600 on 30" vs 2560x1440 on 27").

It is totally viable for Apple to get a 4K 15" display under $500 and maybe even under $400.

And sharp is making it already so obviously they see a market for it. http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/monito...ample_4K_Display_Panels_for_15_6_Laptops.html Although this is for production in Feb 2014.

If you read that article again, you can see that delivery started September 2013, its only the second plant that will start producing in Feb '14. So Apple could have been receiving screens for almost a month now..

 

[FrozenDarkness]

it's ridiculous. Apple was hardpress to introduce 1080p into their original 15" macbook pros. Their chances of introducing a 4K monitor this year, or even next is probably close to nil

 

[The Leafs Fan]

Ok, it was a bad comparison, but I only used it to get a feel for what prices are for 4K displays. Let's say whomever made your displays enjoys a 25% profit margin, so that 's 400 dollars per monitor. 1200$ goes to manufacturing, advertising, R&D, etc. Perhaps 60% of that goes to manufacturing, so 720. The display will be the bulk of that cost, so around 500-600$. If the Asus display enjoys the same kind of margins, so 875$ per monitor, 2625$ goes to again manufacturing advertising, R&D, etc. And let's say again that 60% of that goes to manufacturing, that's 1575$. The bulk again will be the display, so maybe 1000-1200$. Since Apple's rmbp displays cost them 350$ per, and that's around 70% of what your display might have cost to manufacture, so 70% of 1000-1200$ is 700-840. 700-840$ per display is waayyyyyy to expensive to implement into the rmbp. Things may change in a year, but for now, I just don't think it's a viable option.

See, this is why I made the comparison. It's a rough estimate, but it still gives what I think would be close to the price Apple would have to pay for 4K displays in the 13" and 15" form factors.

----------

If you read that article again, you can see that delivery started September 2013, its only the second plant that will start producing in Feb '14. So Apple could have been receiving screens for almost a month now..

Well, it only said sample shipments, probably not in a large enough scale for Apple to use them in the rmbps.

----------

it's ridiculous. Apple was hardpress to introduce 1080p into their original 15" macbook pros. Their chances of introducing a 4K monitor this year, or even next is probably close to nil

Yeah, they were, but display resolutions are moving at a rapid pace towards 4K and even 8K, so computer manufacturers are now taking turns at claiming their laptop has the highest resolution screen out there. I would say that 8K screens are the ultimate goal for screen manufacturers, with 4K being the intermediary goal.

 

[B...]

given that the 5000 doesn't perform as well as the 4600, or that the 4400 performs as well as the 4000....

What are you talking about? The 5100 will perform in between the 5000 and 5200, regardless of how the 4600 and 4400 perform relative to the 4000.

 

[Mattsasa]

See, this is why I made the comparison. It's a rough estimate, but it still gives what I think would be close to the price Apple would have to pay for 4K displays in the 13" and 15" form factors.

----------



Well, it only said sample shipments, probably not in a large enough scale for Apple to use them in the rmbps.

----------



Yeah, they were, but display resolutions are moving at a rapid pace towards 4K and even 8K, so computer manufacturers are now taking turns at claiming their laptop has the highest resolution screen out there. I would say that 8K screens are the ultimate goal for screen manufacturers, with 4K being the intermediary goal.

What the ****? 8k? Even 4k is way more than a consumer needs? Someone explain this to me

 

[Quu]

Well, you've also made it clear that you think Apple is likely to put a 4K display into the rmbp. Regardless of price, availability, etc, wouldn't be a bit weird for Apple to just introduce a new resolution for the rmbp, which developers would have to support, and many programs and parts of the internet aren't even retina-optimized yet.

There is no extra work for developers to do, that is the beauty of resolution independence. By the way I am a software developer

 

[PDFierro]

I honestly don't think we even need 4K on a laptop right now. The rMBP is perfectly clear at the resolution we have now. Of course I'm not against it, but I can't imagine what someone would need 4K on the rMBP for, other than bigger screen space.

If it comes, it comes. Otherwise, Apple should focus on refining the screens/costs with IGZO, etc. I'm pretty sure Apple has this mindset and that we won't see 4K anytime soon.

 

[JohnDoe98]

Yeah, they were, but display resolutions are moving at a rapid pace towards 4K and even 8K, so computer manufacturers are now taking turns at claiming their laptop has the highest resolution screen out there. I would say that 8K screens are the ultimate goal for screen manufacturers, with 4K being the intermediary goal.

Typically computers are primarily for work, which means people will be sitting fairly close to the screens, but won't have their noses right up against them. WTF would the point be in having a 8k monitor when they would look identical to the 4k monitors from any reasonable working distance and beyond? Greater color quality and lower energy consumption are the new primary goals of screen manufacturers for the computer market. 4k screens have already hit the ideal/desired resolution performance.

 

[johnnylarue]

I do think the previous "high res" options should be the target eventually. Unless they can do something about UI scaling 1920x1200 is too small for 15" though. I think most users would agree.

I'm a bit of a broken record on this topic, but I spent a half hour fooling around with Logic Pro X in 1920x1200 mode on a 15" rMBP at the Apple Store and found it totally usable and arguably easier on the eyes than my old MBP17 at the same resolution. Enough so that I decided to go with the retina rather than buy another refurb/used 17".

That said, I would probably leave it in the 'Best for Retina' mode for most applications and save the 1920x1200 resolution for applications that require more screen real estate.

I can certainly see the industry pushing for even higher resolution displays in the coming years which is perfectly fine by me, but the current retina resolution is already approaching the limits of what my eyes can discern so next-gen resolutions might well be lost on me by the time they've saturated the market.

 

[FrozenDarkness]

What the ****? 8k? Even 4k is way more than a consumer needs? Someone explain this to me

he's probably being sarcastic. Apple has never, and will never, release a product for no reason. there's no chip out there that can handle 4K resolution in a retina formatc both in terms of mobile chips and battery (remember retina is software AND hardware)

i would give it a couple more years before 4K resolution become even reasonable. What would happen is probably better scaling by Apple and/or a resolution based off of the 1680x1050 in a retina format.

 

[johnnylarue]

If you read that article again, you can see that delivery started September 2013, its only the second plant that will start producing in Feb '14. So Apple could have been receiving screens for almost a month now..

I believe that article states delivery of the SAMPLE displays started in September, with production beginning in earnest in Feb 2014.

 

[Quu]

I honestly don't think we even need 4K on a laptop right now. The rMBP is perfectly clear at the resolution we have now. Of course I'm not against it, but I can't imagine what someone would need 4K on the rMBP for, other than bigger screen space.

If it comes, it comes. Otherwise, Apple should focus on refining the screens/costs with IGZO, etc. I'm pretty sure Apple has this mindset and that we won't see 4K anytime soon.

The part I've bolded is pretty much the whole point and reason as to why we want 4K. To maintain the retina crispness of the display without any scaling while having the larger working desktop area of 1920x1200.

 

[JohnDoe98]

he's probably being sarcastic. Apple has never, and will never, release a product for no reason. there's no chip out there that can handle 4K resolution in a retina formatc both in terms of mobile chips and battery (remember retina is software AND hardware)

What are you talking about? My current rmbp already handles a 4k resolution just fine when it is scaled to a working resolution of 1080p. In fact, it not only handles the 4k resolution just fine, it adds an extra step of GPU processing by scaling that 4k resolution down to a 3k one to display on my screen.

But in any case, your main point is spot on, Apple doesn't do anything for nothing, so we probably will never see anything beyond 4k.

 

[FrozenDarkness]

What are you talking about? My current rmbp already handles a 4k resolution just fine when it is scaled to a working resolution of 1080p. In fact, it not only handles the 4k resolution just fine, it adds an extra step of GPU processing by scaling that 4k resolution down to a 3k one to display on my screen.

But in any case, your main point is spot on, Apple doesn't do anything for nothing, so we probably will never see anything beyond 4k.

to each our own. considering the amount of people complaining about slow safari scrolling for facebook on their 15" rmbp, i doubt we went from that to smooth everything in one gen of intel chips.

 

[JohnDoe98]

The part I've bolded is pretty much the whole point and reason as to why we want 4K. To maintain the retina crispness of the display without any scaling while having the larger working desktop area of 1920x1200.

My worry is Apple will hold back due to the power consumption of bumping the screen res up. They seem to want to prolong battery life right now. The choice will come down to something like

(a) keeping battery life where it is now and bumping the screen res up
(b) increasing battery life while maintaining current screen res.

If I had to guess, I think they will go with (b) since it will please more consumers. Right now we have 7 hours of battery life, if they could advertise it at 10 hours, that's a huge gain in terms of their marketing, where announcing a slight bump in screen res would be unnoticeable to the masses.