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.
Will retina ever come to a Windows machine?
- Thread starter Tri-stan
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
1080p came to windows long ago. A couple years ago you also had 1920x1200 notebooks, prior to the rMBP. There is no real retina standard as you word it. Just wait for reference implementations of higher resolution panels. I would say next year at the latest. Apple introduced the rMBP mid last year, and you have seen the complaints about things like image persistence. If you're looking at sub 1080p notebooks today, it means you're looking at the cheap end, in which case you may be waiting much longer.
I doubt it's worth it until Windows applications use DPI scaling properly. Basically none do, even preinstalled Windows 8 software have scaling glitches here and there.
Plus with the average selling price of Windows laptops nowadays, it'll take years and years for HiDPI displays to be in even 1% of Windows laptops sold, so don't expect third-party support anytime soon either.
I feel like we won't be out of this vicious circle any time soon. Either Windows laptop buyers will have to buy more expensive laptops, either we'll have to wait until Retina displays become cheap enough to be included in the average $500 laptop. The latter is more likely.
Plus with the average selling price of Windows laptops nowadays, it'll take years and years for HiDPI displays to be in even 1% of Windows laptops sold, so don't expect third-party support anytime soon either.
I feel like we won't be out of this vicious circle any time soon. Either Windows laptop buyers will have to buy more expensive laptops, either we'll have to wait until Retina displays become cheap enough to be included in the average $500 laptop. The latter is more likely.
Actually, windows 8 has rather good support for resolution independence, not nearly as good as good as OS X but still. The thing is - apple planed the hidpi move for years now and the roots for its support were present from the initial version of OS X. This is why it's so easy to make a Mac application retina-aware. It will take some time until windows developers catch up, and let's not even start about Linux... This is a clear case where apple is innovation leader exactly because it designs both the hardware and the software. That said, I did hear about some windows retina machines in works, I think Asus plans to launch one later this year.
Normal Desktop apps on Windows 8 are still more or less on the old DPI standard. The tablet UI does fine with any res but most applications especially those that actually matter don't use that but are normal desktop.
Windows 8 would do just fine even in desktop with any res if the application developers would at least fix the important stuff.
MS doesn't really expect a change either with the notebooks that are used still mostly with desktop applications.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5702/...ion-in-windows-8-suggests-retinaesque-tablets
Tablets are different where the touch UI is actually used.
Windows 8 would do just fine even in desktop with any res if the application developers would at least fix the important stuff.
MS doesn't really expect a change either with the notebooks that are used still mostly with desktop applications.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5702/...ion-in-windows-8-suggests-retinaesque-tablets
Tablets are different where the touch UI is actually used.
The complicating factor isn't "where are they going to buy the screens?" It's "when is Microsoft going to do real OS scaling?"
We've known since the iPhone 4 that simple 2x scaling (in each dimension) is how Apple makes super high-res displays usable, and Google took the same path in ChromeOS for their Chromebook Pixel.
So it's been decided that this is the most efficient way to do it, and Microsoft is not known for their development agility (when was the last time they hit an announced OS launch date?). Cross your fingers for Windows Blue, I guess.
Last edited:
Retina is not a standard.
Retina is Apples marketing label for a very high resolution display.
Apple was one of the last laptop manufacturers to _finally offer_ IPS in a hi-res display. While I was using low resolution PowerBooks at home, Then MacBook Pros with low res displays, I was using gorgeous Hi-Res, Anti-Glare, IPS equipped ThinkPad laptops at work.
Not until 2010, via 15" MBP did they offer hi-res as an option.
Apple's big ego and propensity to exaggerate, using words like "It's Magical & Revolutionary" CONvince the otherwise uneducated buyer that only Apple is capable of excellence.
I give a lot of credit to Apples highly successful marketing. It's about impressing the consumer with words & a good story. Apple is the best at it, and Steve Jobs was their brilliant pitchman. A guy that could sell anything.
What are you even talking about? lol Yes thay are excellent at marketing but your going far off topic on a little jealous rant.
Let me reword the OP question and maybe then you will better understand lol.
"When will a resolution of approximately 2560×1600 or ~230ppi come to Windows Machine."
And the reason apple created the word 'Retina Display' is because there was nothing else to describe a display with a resolution that high. what did you want them to call the displays? Super Hi-Res?
its actually also a software problem, while the dpi settings on windows mostly work, there are some things... that... I cant really describe
The problem is always 3rd party software that is a POS.
Its exactly that.
If you read what I posted you would know that kind of ppi has been reached and breached, although I have to agree that I never understood, WUQXGA or whatever complicated nomenclature that those engineers came up, people still frankenpads these machines to keep that display. One notable problem with some of those is that the display would get dimmer over SOME years of use
I have been looking at Lenovo laptops but in the 14 inch class, 1080p is such a bad resolution for working with. I can see that it would be good for watching movies but for doing actual work on nothing beats 16:10 aspect ratio even if it means getting a reduced resolution.
I can't see for the use of a better word Retina "they should make this a standard btw) laptops coming anytime soon that are not going to be packaged in a glossy piece of crap casings. Acer really don't make good quality laptops worth parting cash for. I would be no better off buying cream carpets for a football locker room floor.
Windows laptops had resolutions higher than 1920x1080 in the past. Look at this thread I created: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1542211/
There will be laptops with resolutions higher than 1920x1080 later this year. They will probably not become mainstream any time soon, but they will at least exist.
Samsung showcased a 13-inch Series 9 with a 2560x1440 resolution in August 2012, and Acer showed a 15-inch laptop with a 2880x1620 resolution in January 2013.
Laptops like these will likely come out after the release of Haswell later this year. Haswell will consume less battery, leaving some power to accomodate higher resolution displays.
It's not a matter of resolution independence. The Surface Pro has a 10.6-inch screen with a 1920x1080 resolution (207 ppi). A 15.6-inch laptop with a 2880x1620 resolution has a 211 ppi, virtually the same pixel density.
There will be laptops with resolutions higher than 1920x1080 later this year. They will probably not become mainstream any time soon, but they will at least exist.
Samsung showcased a 13-inch Series 9 with a 2560x1440 resolution in August 2012, and Acer showed a 15-inch laptop with a 2880x1620 resolution in January 2013.
Laptops like these will likely come out after the release of Haswell later this year. Haswell will consume less battery, leaving some power to accomodate higher resolution displays.
It's not a matter of resolution independence. The Surface Pro has a 10.6-inch screen with a 1920x1080 resolution (207 ppi). A 15.6-inch laptop with a 2880x1620 resolution has a 211 ppi, virtually the same pixel density.
I don't know what you guys are talking about, but Windows 8 tablet applications look great on my rMBP.
The desktop is iffy though. Some applications are scaled well. Others are missing widgets because they get scaled wrongly. Others are raster-stretched, not unlike how non-Retina-ready applications appear in OS X.
But the systemic problem with Windows is that you can't set different HiPPI scales for different monitors. It's a critical problem, because HiPPI scaling should really be applied for each monitor. It means that rMBP on Windows doesn't work nicely on multiple-monitor setup. It can't be easily fixed, because of how different "properly" scaled windows look from 1:1 scaled ones (missing widgets and stuff), and how would they render when moved between monitors. Maybe a desktop add-on might fix this (by restricting you from dragging windows between monitors)?
Also yeah, Surface Pro. Made by Microsoft, it's a small laptop (10.6" I think) with 1920x1080 resolution. Please tell me that its desktop interface uses HiPPI scaling.
The desktop is iffy though. Some applications are scaled well. Others are missing widgets because they get scaled wrongly. Others are raster-stretched, not unlike how non-Retina-ready applications appear in OS X.
But the systemic problem with Windows is that you can't set different HiPPI scales for different monitors. It's a critical problem, because HiPPI scaling should really be applied for each monitor. It means that rMBP on Windows doesn't work nicely on multiple-monitor setup. It can't be easily fixed, because of how different "properly" scaled windows look from 1:1 scaled ones (missing widgets and stuff), and how would they render when moved between monitors. Maybe a desktop add-on might fix this (by restricting you from dragging windows between monitors)?
Also yeah, Surface Pro. Made by Microsoft, it's a small laptop (10.6" I think) with 1920x1080 resolution. Please tell me that its desktop interface uses HiPPI scaling.
Last edited:
Funnily, rMBP is my first Macbook, because with it Apple FINALLY decided to step up to the plate and include a screen as good as the Lenovo or HP Hi-Res IPS screens
Last edited:
Not until they figure out how to scale the old interface properly. For the Metro apps....they already look beautiful as they should on hi-res screens. Since all the OEMs always busy blaming their sales on Windows instead of improving the build quality and support on their hardwares..I don't think they will bother bringing screens > fullHD resolution this year.
As I've said in my previous post, it has nothing to do with scaling. Scaling would be necessary to make screen elements bigger, to fit a high resolution in a small screen. Windows already has scaling, although lots of people think it doesn't work properly.
Well, it doesn't matter. The pixel density of a retina-like display is already used in some models. The Microsoft Surface pro has a display of 10.6" with a resolution of 1920x1080, resulting in a pixel density of 207.8 ppi. The 15" rMBP has a pixel density of 220 ppi, not too far away (only 5% more, in fact).
This kind of pixel density, it's already here. There is a lack of resolutions higher than 1920x1080, but not of high pixel densities. Scaling wouldn't have to be different in a 15" 2880x1800 rMBP as it is in a 10.6" 1920x1080 machine such as the Surface Pro. So, it has nothing to do with scaling. Scaling is not the reason why Windows laptops with high resolution displays are not released. It may be price, or lack of volume of such displays, or maybe even battery life concerns. But it's not scaling.
You didn't mention 16:10 before. I myself prefer 16:10, but displays in general have been on a trend toward 16:9, presumably to sync up with video content. In desktop displays 16:9 is often used to share parts and distribute costs, as it's the ratio used in 1080 television panels. I haven't spent enough time with anything made by Acer to really comment there.
Their standard 13" is still 1280x800 even today. It may be one of their less expensive versions, but I can't imagine they're terribly strained on budget to build one. It's a 13" notebook with integrated graphics that starts at $1200. Even the Air has higher resolution, in spite of being worse when measured by any other metric. Also yeah their marketing is ridiculously good. The thing that annoys me when people call Retina a standard. Other oems won't say something meets the Retina standard, as it's a pending trademark. It isn't a standard at all.