Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

shabbasuraj · Oct 17, 2003, 04:05 AM

Anyone think/feel that Apple should increase the resolution on this machine...?

I am young and still have good eyes, and most of all I would simply adore the potential increase in desktop I could get with a bump in native screen resolution...

Why won't Apple bump up the 'rez' on its top of the line 17" is beyond me..

Cost issues?

Supplier Issues?

Both?

or is it because Steve really hates me...

I think it is the latter...

lates....

PS: Maybe it is in the pipes for RevC...to be released in Oct. 2004...

buddy1065 · Oct 17, 2003, 04:26 AM

I am totally pleased with the resolution on my 17". I have had two 15" PC laptops and two Ti laptops and the 17" is superb. I have never seen laptops other than these with higher resolution so I am not disappointed at all in the quality. Watching a movie on that 17" screen with headphones can put me in another world more effectively than all my other laptops.

nagromme · Oct 17, 2003, 11:29 AM

Absolutely not!

Actually, it would be great if Apple could/would offer different OPTIONS of higher DPI. A few people would find that practical.

But for most people, higher res "sounds good on paper" and then hurts your eyes terribly when you use it for hours at a time. My eyes are great too--and yet I'd prefer even LOWER DPI than PowerBooks now have. Except I wouldn't want to give up the workspace--so I find the current balance (around 100 DPI) to be just right.

Also with Mac OS X--and especially Panther's Expos�--you use your workspace much more efficiently than other OS's. The need to shrink everything down and cram more in just isn't there as much. Gesture to the Expos� corner and you can achieve that when needed.

Of course certain specific apps would benefit from a bigger SINGLE window--like big print layouts and long music timelines. But at a cost to your poor eyes! So for MOST people, an external display is the way to go if you need ultra-high res. (Brighter too.)

tritonus · Oct 17, 2003, 11:41 AM

Originally posted by nagromme:
Absolutely not!

Actually, it would be great if Apple could/would offer different OPTIONS of higher DPI. A few people would find that practical.

But for most people, higher res "sounds good on paper" and then hurts your eyes terribly when you use it for hours at a time. My eyes are great too--and yet I'd prefer even LOWER DPI than PowerBooks now have. Except I wouldn't want to give up the workspace--so I find the current balance (around 100 DPI) to be just right.

Also with Mac OS X--and especially Panther's Expos�--you use your workspace much more efficiently than other OS's. The need to shrink everything down and cram more in just isn't there as much. Gesture to the Expos� corner and you can achieve that when needed.

Of course certain specific apps would benefit from a bigger SINGLE window--like big print layouts and long music timelines. But at a cost to your poor eyes! So for MOST people, an external display is the way to go if you need ultra-high res. (Brighter too.)

I agree. I support Windows users with their 15" notebooks at 1600 x 1200 and 1400 x 1050 resolutions. They are begging to go back to 1024 x 768, even though this resolution is super-blurry!

djjava · Oct 17, 2003, 11:49 AM

Don't like the res.. buy something else...

let's complain about something more important....

shabbasuraj · Oct 17, 2003, 03:14 PM

it is important to me...

lates...

SEkker · Oct 17, 2003, 08:16 PM

I like this resolution, and I have fully corrected vision. Higher resolution would make reading text impossible.

If you really need more, then go for a nice Apple Cinema external display.

mike one · Oct 17, 2003, 10:17 PM

Originally posted by SEkker:
I like this resolution, and I have fully corrected vision. Higher resolution would make reading text impossible.

If you really need more, then go for a nice Apple Cinema external display.

seriously, this is balogna.... if you have a TRUE scalable GUI windowing environment, any and all resolutions above 1024 should look great.
take linux for example. or go to compusa and sit down in front of a windows XP 15" 1600X1400 display. i bet half of you never have! or use one for a day or two. the amount of information you can display is so so much more than on an apple laptop. and it is readable and useful! myself and colleagues are always cramped for space on our powerbooks and ibooks, it is pathetic that PCs have options, apples don't.

apple laptops are overpriced for the feature set. simillarly equipped high end pcs with the latest, greatest components have higher resolution screens than apple laptops due.

apple has been selling 2 year old LCD technology to us at a premium, which IMHO is B$. higher profit margins for apple selling us cheap shoddy LCDs.

*end rant here* (for the 1000th time on this subject.

i think my treo phone has a higher dpi than my ibook, what can i say about that, nothing.

shabbasuraj · Oct 17, 2003, 10:35 PM

Originally posted by mike one:
seriously, this is balogna.... if you have a TRUE scalable GUI windowing environment, any and all resolutions above 1024 should look great.
take linux for example. or go to compusa and sit down in front of a windows XP 15" 1600X1400 display. i bet half of you never have! or use one for a day or two. the amount of information you can display is so so much more than on an apple laptop. and it is readable and useful! myself and colleagues are always cramped for space on our powerbooks and ibooks, it is pathetic that PCs have options, apples don't.

apple laptops are overpriced for the feature set. simillarly equipped high end pcs with the latest, greatest components have higher resolution screens than apple laptops due.

apple has been selling 2 year old LCD technology to us at a premium, which IMHO is B$. higher profit margins for apple selling us cheap shoddy LCDs.
*end rant here* (for the 1000th time on this subject.

i think my treo phone has a higher dpi than my ibook, what can i say about that, nothing.

thanks man for the backup...

I already own a Cinema display, and love it...

but it is true that our PBs are really lacking on the rez scale when compared to other PC portables...

just aside has anyone seen the DPI of the new Sony UX-50 PDA? really nice.. a little small, but it is cutting edge... and I just wish that our PBs had 'up to date' resolutions for the LCDs...

low resolutions, espcially for the 15" and 17" models, lack lustre nit brightness, slim viewing angles, low contrst ratios and now these white spots, etc... we all live with it...

I love my 12" PB and I wish to make the jump to a 17" but the relatively low screen rez on this model is somewhat bothering...

(...said as I quickly put on my trusty asbestos jump suit.)..

lates...

Luca Rescigno · Oct 17, 2003, 11:23 PM

Originally posted by mike one:
seriously, this is balogna.... if you have a TRUE scalable GUI windowing environment, any and all resolutions above 1024 should look great.

Yep, that's absolutely correct. Except for the major flaw that we don't actually have a true scalable GUI windowing environment.

shabbasuraj · Oct 17, 2003, 11:59 PM

I can go for a BTO ...

lowers the price for those who are happy, and those who wish a higher rez should be given the option to upgrade...

my 0.02...

lates...

(this will never happen,,,, I know..)

C-Bear · Oct 18, 2003, 12:13 AM

Originally posted by djjava:
Don't like the res.. buy something else...

let's complain about something more important....

Don't like the subject.. click on something else...

let's complain about something more important....

nagromme · Oct 18, 2003, 01:07 AM

A true scalable UI--and I mean EVERYTHING--is certainly the way of the future, and would be great. Higher DPI would be excellent then. BUT if you scale the UI up to compensate for the higher DPI--you wouldn't gain any workspace, just sharpness. Workspace vs. the size/readability of text and other elements will ALWAYS be trade-offs with one another. (A more scalable UI would just let you set the balance in a more custom way.) And I personally like the current balance.

(For the record, I think this thread is very valid--if users want another res option, then why not discuss it? And pass the feedback onto Apple, hopefully, too! I personally don't want higher res--in fact, it would stop me from buying. But if enough people DO want it, Apple could economically add a second option... why not? I don't think very many people WOULD find it practical in person--but a few do. Maybe enough to be worth building a PowerBook for them? Who knows--may as well discuss it!)

mike one · Oct 18, 2003, 12:01 PM

Originally posted by nagromme:
A true scalable UI--and I mean EVERYTHING--is certainly the way of the future, and would be great. Higher DPI would be excellent then. BUT if you scale the UI up to compensate for the higher DPI--you wouldn't gain any workspace, just sharpness. Workspace vs. the size/readability of text and other elements will ALWAYS be trade-offs with one another. (A more scalable UI would just let you set the balance in a more custom way.) And I personally like the current balance.

lots and lots of good points in this thread of messages....
there is always a trade off, indeed, but personnally i like 1280 (or higher) better on a 17" screen CRT than 1024, same holds for my preference on an lcd. options, all any of us want is options, and all too often we have NONE

yes, we don't have a good scalable GUI with os X, yet. inexcusable. instead of eye candy, apple should be focused on speed and useability. the lag of the GUI alone turns off so many windows users to OS X, not to mention the linux users. and it sure pisses a lot of us off. ok tangential rant ends here.

edit, i would pay hundreds more for a better screen even though it would be further apple-gouge-ware�