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.
Would you pay EXTRA for Retina? (Both Money and Battery Life)
- Thread starter KittyKatta
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I am undecided about the retina display but I get your point about something that you use a lot. I don't have the new iPad, but going from an iPhone 3GS to an iPhone 4 was a tremendous difference and the display makes reading so much easier with less eyestrain.
Totally off topic, but how do people on this forum get their employers to buy them expensive office chairs, or do they buy the chairs themselves? My company won't pay over s certain (relatively small) amount for a chair.
I haven't picked up the new iPad yet either. I probably won't unless I need to order one for someone at work, then I'll give them my work iPad2 and order an iPad3 for myself (work owned of course).
I work for the cheapest company on the planet. We buy $50 chairs, we'd buy $10 chairs if we could find them. Even our conference rooms where we bring in customers have cheap chairs.
When I started here 9 years ago though, there were 4 Aeron chairs at the corporate office. Where they came from, I have no idea. But when someone with one left the company about 7 years ago, I grabbed that chair after hours and swapped it with mine.
If for whatever reason I didn't have one (company takes it for a C-level or whatever), I would go out and buy one using personal money. I've sat in some of the other chairs and none of the compare. I just couldn't see myself using anything else for 8+ hour days.
Now if my I.T. vendor would sell these chairs, I could just sneak one in an order if mine was revoked.
No. If Apple can increase the battery to handle a retna display, I'd rather just take the battery life and run.
No on both
MBAs are very expensive now. I wouldn't pay more for a retina display and not at the cost battery life.
The high battery drain for writing alone was the reason why I returned mine (after I got over the wrist issues). So while I'd like to see my work as clearly as possible, there's no way I'd get an MBA with less battery life.
If the iPad 3 and iPhone 4s have retina displays and the same battery life, I think Apple's engineers can pull of the same feat for the MBAs.
MBAs are very expensive now. I wouldn't pay more for a retina display and not at the cost battery life.
The high battery drain for writing alone was the reason why I returned mine (after I got over the wrist issues). So while I'd like to see my work as clearly as possible, there's no way I'd get an MBA with less battery life.
If the iPad 3 and iPhone 4s have retina displays and the same battery life, I think Apple's engineers can pull of the same feat for the MBAs.
I would definitely pick one up if the improvement is anywhere near iPad 2 --> iPad 3.
Yeah, I don't why companies are so shorted sighted. A comfortable office chair makes a huge difference, and I'm sure in productivity. I had a Steelcase, and I would definitely buy one with my own money or use my bonus check.
Yeah, I don't why companies are so shorted sighted. A comfortable office chair makes a huge difference, and I'm sure in productivity. I had a Steelcase, and I would definitely buy one with my own money or use my bonus check.
Clever marketing term or not, I'll bite when its released on the Air. Have the iPad 3rd generation and it looks far better than my desktop monitor and expect it to be better than a notebook as well.
Heck, I would even like to have the iPad dictation button as well on the air
Heck, I would even like to have the iPad dictation button as well on the air
Since at least 99.9% of my time is spent with the laptop hooked to a large monitor then no, I would not pay extra for a retina display.
Wow bro...
Since when has there been a 2048 x 1536 display at 264 dpi ??? I think something is state of the art if nobody else has anything like it on the market.
Since when has there been a 2048 x 1536 display at 264 dpi ??? I think something is state of the art if nobody else has anything like it on the market.
This...
+1
People forget (IMHO) that the reason the retina display on the iphone and the ipad were such a big deal is that both predecessors had relatively low res displays. Like low compared to the competition at the time and so low that text really was more difficult to read.
The macbook airs do not have this problem. Going retina will provide absolutely no functional benefit to 99.9% of users (I think it might be functionally relevant for those that edit photos/video).
I have the lower res Macbook Pro (13inch). Sometimes I wish I could fit more stuff onto my screen but I certainly never feel like I can't read text because it isn't clear enough...
I would MUCH MUCH rather have a reasonable non-retina display resolution bump and more battery life.
Think about it. If apple provided the ipad3 battery with the ipad2 display we would probably have an ipad that lasts 20hrs...Don't get me wrong I think Apple made the right choice with the ipad, but imagine a Macbook air that had double the battery life. I would vastly prefer that over bragging rights to an unnecessarily super sharp screen.
+1
People forget (IMHO) that the reason the retina display on the iphone and the ipad were such a big deal is that both predecessors had relatively low res displays. Like low compared to the competition at the time and so low that text really was more difficult to read.
The macbook airs do not have this problem. Going retina will provide absolutely no functional benefit to 99.9% of users (I think it might be functionally relevant for those that edit photos/video).
I have the lower res Macbook Pro (13inch). Sometimes I wish I could fit more stuff onto my screen but I certainly never feel like I can't read text because it isn't clear enough...
I would MUCH MUCH rather have a reasonable non-retina display resolution bump and more battery life.
Think about it. If apple provided the ipad3 battery with the ipad2 display we would probably have an ipad that lasts 20hrs...Don't get me wrong I think Apple made the right choice with the ipad, but imagine a Macbook air that had double the battery life. I would vastly prefer that over bragging rights to an unnecessarily super sharp screen.
I completely agree with this. While a retina screen on iPad and MacBook may be the most visually appealing upgrade, the device where a higher pixel density increases functionality the most is the iPhone because the Retina addressed an actual problem. 3.5" screens were okay in 2007 but as iPhone apps made the product more diverse then the screen started feeling cramped or more difficult to read for prolonged sessions. So the Retina Display made the iPhone more usable without having to increase the screen size.
IMO, the iPad and MacBook are different and with my new iPad then I'm impressed but the new screen isn't necessarily changing my life. No offense to anyone but based on the boards then the most obvious difference between the iPad users and MB users is that iPad users seem to spend more time showing off than actually working. So while picking Retina over non-retina is easy for new iPad purchases, it may not be such a simple choice with our next MacBook where a retina screen may cost us several hours of battery life.
Last edited:
Cost isn't an issue. Apple likes to hold prices of notebooks (and ipads) steady upon each refresh.
Retina would be nice for MBA, but I place a much higher priority on battery life, slimness of chassis, and minimal heat generation. As we see with the new iPad, all of these could be adversely affected by adoption of a higher PPI screen. (Larger battery yet no significant time gain, thicker, hotter.)
As it stands, 11/13" MBAs aren't performing too poorly when it comes to PPI: http://www.anandtech.com/show/5689/the-new-ipad-retina-display-analysis#
Retina would be nice for MBA, but I place a much higher priority on battery life, slimness of chassis, and minimal heat generation. As we see with the new iPad, all of these could be adversely affected by adoption of a higher PPI screen. (Larger battery yet no significant time gain, thicker, hotter.)
As it stands, 11/13" MBAs aren't performing too poorly when it comes to PPI: http://www.anandtech.com/show/5689/the-new-ipad-retina-display-analysis#
no point in 300dpi on a laptop (as proven on a previous thread), so no, I wouldn't see any benefit in it, i'd take extra battery any day.
No, it's really not "just a marketing term used by Apple to dupe people into" anything. Yes, it's a marketing term, but it's an incredibly well-defined marketing term, and the definition has been consistent throughout its use. According to the definition, *any* display with a high-enough DPI that, at normal viewing distance for that display, a person with 20/20 vision cannot resolve individual pixels.
For the iPhone, that limit was around 300ppi, For the iPad, that limit is lower due to the longer typical viewing distance. In comparison, a good number of HDTVs are *already* 'retina displays' because of their incredibly long typical viewing distances of 6-8'.
If run in native mode, yes. However, like the iPad they would double the size of everything. In the end, you'd have a smoother looking picture of the same size if they simply doubled the pixels in both dimensions like they did with the iPad.
would doubling the size of everything make it look pixelated on a screen bigger than the iPad?
Retina Display simply means "2-pixels-per-point" so no, everything would look the same size just clearer
You can enable 1280x720 HiDPI mode if you have the 27" display and Xxcode installed to see what it looks like now, it's rather interesting to see what gets scaled up and what remains pixelated.
see:
http://cl.ly/1e2M2Y130F3o3X0E1x3X
I agree completely. The iPad has never really interested me so I don't have one. But as others have said, the retina display was a great improvement on the iPhone 4 since little text that was just blobs on the old phone suddenly became readable.
However, I don't mind holding my phone right up to my face if I need to see a small detail. With a laptop at a normal viewing distance, I don't think the retina display would make much difference. And for any serious graphics work, I use an external Cinema Display with my MBA anyway.