Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Why do you want a retina display?

It makes the image better even in lower resolutions.

Going from my new imac at work to my 2 year mbpro at home is painful.


but then again it is all relative.. Like the ipad 2's screen did not look bad to me until I got an ipad3.
 
"I can't understand why anyone would want to question a radical new improvement?"

Because, for some of us, it may -not- be "an improvement".

I'm speaking about folks (like myself) who are older and have declining vision, or even younger folks with impaired vision.

In this case, it doesn't matter how "sharp" text is, if it's simply too small too be able to see in the first place.

The only recourse will be to "manually reduce" the screen resolution to make everything larger, so that text can again become readable without straining to see it (or even readable, at all). And that will have the effect of "canceling out" the benefits of a higher resolution.

I'll guess that you are younger and vision isn't yet "a problem" for you. To which I'll say, "just wait". In time you may understand. I really don't expect young folk to comprehend this -- I myself didn't when I was younger. Now I know....
 
No.. even in lower resolutions everything will look better. It is a better screen with more pixels. In lower resolutions it is still a better screen with more pixels.

So even if you set your resolution lower it is still going to look better.
 
Don't really care for a retina display. Right now the graphics cards in macs are not the best, and throwing retina displays in the MacBooks are only going to make the performance worse then it already is. I mean desktop cards struggle at 2560 by 1440 already so throwing a higher resolution with crappy mobile gpus will just make the laptops even worse graphically then they are today.
 
At the end of the day, and since a retina display has to power up 4 times more pixels, it all depends on the following questions:

1) Will retina decrease battery life?

2) Will retina compromise GPU performance?

3) Will retina increase heat outputs?​

I think those are fair questions, and until we have solid benchmark tests we cannot really decide on whether retina is a beneficial upgrade or not. I LOVE retina in the iPad3, but I wouldn't want it in my laptop if, for example, heat output was increased or battery life decreased.
 
rpmor said:
theres no such thing as 'normal' for a pc game. games can be rendered in whatever resolution we choose to set it. upscaling doesn't apply to PC titles in the same way; we would need to implement an internal scaler (which is gpu independent) to do that but it then defeats the purpose of selecting your resolution. PC games and console games are designed very differently in terms of how resolution is done. console games are designed in 1 resolution (can never ever for the love of god be defined by the user) and then upscaled (if needed). PC games are designed to be scalable and user-defined by default therefore the notion of rendering in 'normal' resolution and upscaled doesn't apply...

also the replies of 'well then you can just tone down the graphics' is laughable at best. you dont buy X graphic card to then play at low specs. either you provide a laptop capable of handling the outputs without having to manually gimp the performance so it runs 'well' or you hold back on releasing retina display and simply place 1920x1080 screens on your 15inch as an upgrade option (with the 1600x1050 as the new default) similarly do the asme for the 13inch (while offering a 1600x900 as the new default).

this counter argument is as stupid as saying buy a quad core than set it to disable 2 cores in bios so you can save on your energy bill and reduce the heat being produced in your computer. you might as well just have bought a dual core to start with and have gotten better performance that way than gimping a quad core set up....

edit: now if lowering the resolution to 1920x1080 and the game performs well and it doesnt look like its running in lower than native resolution. then fine ill accept lowering the resolution to compensate. the problem is whether or not the game will look horribly playing at such a lower than native resolution....if it does look bad you're really neglecting a market that until recently the Macs were failing behind with. neglecting that market again will be a foolish move...
Click to expand...

When I said "normal" I was specifically referring to the stock MBP's resolution as an example.

My post was over here
....x.........

Your post was here
..................x......

:confused:
 
Thanks for all your different view guys (and girls)

I can see why some people would want retina but my 27" 1920 x 1200 is more than enough for me.
 
theSeb said:
When I said "normal" I was specifically referring to the stock MBP's resolution as an example.

My post was over here
....x.........

Your post was here
..................x......

:confused:
Click to expand...

you never say that at all though. the way you make it sound than correlate it to how the consoles do their rendering and how you suggested upscaling it all didnt sound like you were merely referring to a stock MBP's resolution...if you leave it ambiguous & vague you cant blame me for taking it the wrong way

but forgive me.
 
Fishrrman said:
"I can't understand why anyone would want to question a radical new improvement?"

Because, for some of us, it may -not- be "an improvement".

I'm speaking about folks (like myself) who are older and have declining vision, or even younger folks with impaired vision.

In this case, it doesn't matter how "sharp" text is, if it's simply too small too be able to see in the first place.

The only recourse will be to "manually reduce" the screen resolution to make everything larger, so that text can again become readable without straining to see it (or even readable, at all). And that will have the effect of "canceling out" the benefits of a higher resolution.

I'll guess that you are younger and vision isn't yet "a problem" for you. To which I'll say, "just wait". In time you may understand. I really don't expect young folk to comprehend this -- I myself didn't when I was younger. Now I know....
Click to expand...

I'm guessing you don't really understand then how Apple does "retina" displays.

With both the iPhone and iPad, when they went from the original resolution to the high resolution "Retina" displays, no UI elements or text got any smaller at all. The sizes of every element were increased exactly as much as the resolution increased. The only thing that changed was that text was rendered more sharply (while at the same size) and UI elements that were "retina ready" were shaper.

Nothing got smaller, nothing got harder to read.

If Apple brings retina displays to the Mac line, the same thing will happen. In fact, there is already a special mode for developers in Lion called "HiDPI" mode that increases the size of everything on screen for use with a high density display.
 
Why not? Haven't that high res of a display on a laptop would be incredible. It would both benefit us but Apple would also get a lot of positive feedback. Just look at what the iPad did.

I don't mind if it doesn't get the Retina display, but now that most of their other devices have them, and if putting them in an iPad is possible, I don't see why they couldn't. Sure it would drain the battery quicker but they could level everything out.
 
i want screen real-estate not sharpness so i hope if it does come it doesnt scale everything and defeats the purpose of a highres screen. then again i recently got my mbp so ill just be upgrading in two years or more
 
Fishrrman said:
Because, for some of us, it may -not- be "an improvement".

I'm speaking about folks (like myself) who are older and have declining vision, or even younger folks with impaired vision.

In this case, it doesn't matter how "sharp" text is, if it's simply too small too be able to see in the first place.

The only recourse will be to "manually reduce" the screen resolution to make everything larger, so that text can again become readable without straining to see it (or even readable, at all). And that will have the effect of "canceling out" the benefits of a higher resolution.
Click to expand...

Wrong on all counts. First, a retina display doesn't make anything smaller. It simply makes them sharper. If you can see them now, you will see them on retina--except of course, they will be sharper and therefore easier to see and read. In fact, even if you have trouble now, it may be better with retina because it will be the same size, but clearer.

Second, your only recourse (even if your first point wasn't wrong) is to put on your glasses. Everyone gets older, when they do, they gradually lose the ability to focus on things that are close to the eyes. It's happened for thousands of years, it's called Presbyopia and it happens to everyone. Why should the rest of us not get an innovative new feature just because you're too stubborn to put on your glasses?

I love this "Feature "X" isn't important to me because I can't or won't use it, so nobody else should be able to use it either" logic.

Ha Ha. It's a very myopic way of thinking.
 
rpmor said:
i want screen real-estate not sharpness so i hope if it does come it doesnt scale everything and defeats the purpose of a highres screen. then again i recently got my mbp so ill just be upgrading in two years or more
Click to expand...

That's what probably going to happen, because (realistically speaking) probably no one is willing to use current Mac OS interface at 2x ppi. You still have your real estate for media, but text and interface elements must be scaled up.
 
maratus said:
That's what probably going to happen, because (realistically speaking) probably no one is willing to use current Mac OS interface at 2x ppi. You still have your real estate for media, but text and interface elements must be scaled up.
Click to expand...

i hope you'll be able to scale it up to your liking cause i do wonder how scaled up interface elements+screen real estate would look. it would be an odd feel of a mix of magnified elements in a high ppi environment...

personally though i do hope the GPU and the battery life doesnt take a significant hit with its supposed inclusion. maybe they figured a way of allowing both the intel gpu and dedicated to run simultaneously each focusing on different aspects. the intel for resolution purposes. the dedicated card handling any 3d rendering processes.
 
Space

After playing with retina displays I must admit they look beautiful, however I am likely going to be using it for the extra space. I am a games developer using a 17" Toshiba that has been dying for a while now so am eagerly awaiting the new MBP and one thing I have always wanted is more screen space.

My current setup offers enough, but there's always those fiddly little bits and bobs where I would feel more comfortable with an extra 500 pixels or so, so the retina display will more than meet my needs, even if it means making everything small and slightly less-sharp.
 
I don't think you really need to worry that much about GPU power consumption. GPUs could drive much more pixels for years and never had serious problems and the speed as increased a lot since then.
In 2D it won't be a big problem I think. No need for using both GPU which won't work well anyway and just suck more power.

The only problem I see is that a retina panel itself will most likely suck more power than the current TN Panels. How much is the question.
Especially in Idle or close to idle workload the Display is the biggest single juice sucker. An increase by 30 or more % would have a significant impact.
I wouldn't want a display that makes any brightness tradeoffs. I like the 400 nits of my matte 15". It is great outdoors.
 
i have slight myopia so i see everything in an impressionist haze, everything is painted by monet almost

so for me, a retina display is just a gimmick like lion and "mountain lion", it isn't really useful like, say, the glass trackpad with multitouch gestures, or the aluminium unibody which reduces space and increases durability.

they should stick them into consumer laptops (along with an ios/os x hybrid) and leave the macbook pros for the pros.


joewillmott said:
My current setup offers enough, but there's always those fiddly little bits and bobs where I would feel more comfortable with an extra 500 pixels or so, so the retina display will more than meet my needs, even if it means making everything small and slightly less-sharp.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if you have the right concept in mind? The point of a "retina" display is that it makes everything more focused and sharp because pixels are squeezed together. Mountain Lion is supposed to be resolution independent which will help with this.

For instance, they might make a 2400 by 2400 display and force it to be 1440 by 900 thereby increasing the dpi dramatically (I'm not being precise here, I don't know what resolution the display would be).

There would hopefully be an option to increase the resolution but it might make things look wonky.
 
Fishrrman said:
In this case, it doesn't matter how "sharp" text is, if it's simply too small too be able to see in the first place.

The only recourse will be to "manually reduce" the screen resolution to make everything larger, so that text can again become readable without straining to see it (or even readable, at all). And that will have the effect of "canceling out" the benefits of a higher resolution.
Click to expand...


Text didn't get smaller on the iPad 3 or the iPhone 4, so why would you think it will get smaller on the Macbook Pro?

Text isn't getting any smaller. Sharper, yes. Smaller, no.
 
Lynn Belvedere said:
Text didn't get smaller on the iPad 3 or the iPhone 4, so why would you think it will get smaller on the Macbook Pro?

Text isn't getting any smaller. Sharper, yes. Smaller, no.
Click to expand...

Sadly I run into this misconception often with coworkers when we get into tech talk. Quickest way to squash it, is to have a webpage open on my MacBook pro, and the same page open on my iPad next to it.

Suddenly people understand what I am on about when they can see the added clarity between the screens. Granted, part of this is because we are comparing a TN panel with an IPS, however the pixels do add a level of sharpness to the picture.
 
840quadra said:
Sadly I run into this misconception often with coworkers when we get into tech talk. Quickest way to squash it, is to have a webpage open on my MacBook pro, and the same page open on my iPad next to it.

Suddenly people understand what I am on about when they can see the added clarity between the screens. Granted, part of this is because we are comparing a TN panel with an IPS, however the pixels do add a level of sharpness to the picture.
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but where is the misconception? Compare an ipad 2 to an ipad 3. Text, icons, web pages, etc. are all identical in size.

Retina displays do not make anything smaller, just sharper.
 
Lynn Belvedere said:
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but where is the misconception? Compare an ipad 2 to an ipad 3. Text, icons, web pages, etc. are all identical in size.

Retina displays do not make anything smaller, just sharper.
Click to expand...

that's the misconception, that retina displays make things smaller because the displays sport a high resolution. however the software then condenses everything so that the OS is resolution independent.

lol....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back