Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Software - Troubleshooting and Discussion > GUI Customization > What resolution do you run?

View Poll Results: Your preferred resolution?
Poll Options:
Bigger 11 votes (10.00%)
1680x1050 8 votes (7.27%)
1280x854 36 votes (32.73%)
1154x768 6 votes (5.45%)
1024x768 48 votes (43.64%)
800x600 1 votes (0.91%)
640x480 0 votes (0%)
Smaller 0 votes (0%)
Voters: 110. You may not vote on this poll
What resolution do you run?
Thread Tools
swiz
GUI Punk
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: S.E. Mitten
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 21, 2004, 05:18 PM
 
I am wondering so I know what the best size desktops to include with themes are.

24" AlumiMac 2.4ghz C2D, 4g Ram, 300g HD, 750g USBHD • 80g iPod • 160g ATV • iPhone 3g
     
spiky_dog
Mac Elite
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Plainview, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 21, 2004, 05:24 PM
 
you left out a huge category, 1280x1024. all 17"-19" lcds should be running at that res, including apple's own.
     
cmove
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 21, 2004, 05:29 PM
 
1680x1050 on my iMac 20"
     
Cerbero
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 21, 2004, 05:32 PM
 
1280x960 is what I use on my eMac.
     
d4nth3m4n
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Far above Cayuga's waters.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 21, 2004, 05:33 PM
 
i never understood why there wasnt just a huge one and a huge widescreen one. setting a desktop to scale is not that hard of a thing to do. i run 1600x desks on my ibook (1024x) all the time, i dont lose anything.

am i missing something here?
     
COBRAHQ
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 21, 2004, 05:37 PM
 
I run 1440x900... not in the poll. T_T

Love widescreen, helps with all those damn toolbars.
     
codywalton
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 21, 2004, 05:41 PM
 
Originally posted by spiky_dog:
you left out a huge category, 1280x1024. all 17"-19" lcds should be running at that res, including apple's own.
ditto... mine's a sony though...
     
MetalSnake
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Mar 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 21, 2004, 05:52 PM
 
1600x1200 on a 21" CRT
what should I vote? Its smaller than 1680 but bigger than 1050
     
swiz  (op)
GUI Punk
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: S.E. Mitten
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 21, 2004, 06:08 PM
 
I knew I was gonna miss some major ones.
I just listed the common ones fromy me 20" LCD and my 15" Powerbook.

24" AlumiMac 2.4ghz C2D, 4g Ram, 300g HD, 750g USBHD • 80g iPod • 160g ATV • iPhone 3g
     
mac15
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Sydney, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 21, 2004, 06:18 PM
 
1024x768 here, damn 15" imacs
     
cloudaj
Forum Regular
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 21, 2004, 06:20 PM
 
im running 1280 x 960 on my emac too, though I don't think that resolution is all too common...i haven't seen it on a monitor up until i got this emac, heh.
     
keston
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 21, 2004, 06:44 PM
 
1280x1024 on my 19" Samsung LCD at home.
1280x1024 on my 20" Apple CRT at work.
1280x1024 on my 21" Viewsonic CRT at work.

good res., not too big, not too small .
     
fireside
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Floreeda
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 21, 2004, 06:49 PM
 
1280x854 - dig the 'book
     
Luca Rescigno
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 21, 2004, 06:58 PM
 
Weird options... nothing for any 4:3 ratios higher than 1024x768 (such as 1152x864, 1280x960, or 1600x1200), and yet there are options for 640x480 and smaller, which is basically the realm of people with 13" Performa monitors and Mac Pluses.

Meh, I'll just vote "Bigger" because I run a 17" CRT at 1344x1008. It's a weird resolution, but it's great because it gives you about as much screen area as 1280x1024, but it uses a 4:3 ratio instead of a 5:4 ratio. That way, stuff doesn't get squished out of proportion. Basically, when I get desktops, I look for REALLY BIG ones that are not widescreen.

"That's Mama Luigi to you, Mario!" *wheeze*
     
Catfish_Man
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 21, 2004, 07:04 PM
 
1344x1008
     
digitaljames
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Cupertino
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 21, 2004, 07:20 PM
 
1680x1050 Cinema
1280x854 Powerbook
1280x1024 Viewsonic
1600x1200 Planar

I need em all.....
     
BrianC
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: U.S.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 21, 2004, 07:47 PM
 
1280x854

w i d e r is better
     
bwahahax
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 21, 2004, 07:58 PM
 
1280x1024
     
NetworkShadow
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 21, 2004, 08:10 PM
 
1280x1024
click one
     
HytestA
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: London
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 21, 2004, 08:50 PM
 
1280 x 1024
...ill get my coat
     
Jaos
Forum Regular
Join Date: Oct 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 21, 2004, 08:52 PM
 
1280x1024
     
Angus_D
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: London, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 21, 2004, 09:31 PM
 
1280x1024 on the G4.
1024x768 on this 12" PB.
     
themarvelous3
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: dayton ohio
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 21, 2004, 09:37 PM
 
1280x1024

19" something or other. i dont know what it is anymore. i got it from my roomate and i painted it silver and glued an apple logo (also painted silver) from the casing of an LCII on it so it'd match the computer.
     
zachs
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2002
Location: New York City
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 21, 2004, 09:47 PM
 
PowerBook with 1280 x 854 resolution. My iPod's screen is smaller 640x480, though.
     
Frisbee
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Vermont
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 21, 2004, 10:49 PM
 
Another 1280x1024. Pisses me the hell off that there are so many people with this ratio (5/4) yet there are almost no wallpapers with it. I upgraded to my G4 with this 17" from an old iMac G3 graphite running 800x600. I remember, I felt this screen was so big... now I stare longingly at a 23" apple display... ah, if only...
     
NetworkShadow
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 21, 2004, 11:12 PM
 
I so want an LCD... stupid CRTs.
click one
     
Holigen
Mac Elite
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: In Your Computer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 22, 2004, 12:17 AM
 
1024x768... iMac Flat-Panel

I might get a new iMac or even a G5 this summer however.

.: 15" PowerBook G4 - 1.5 GHz - 512 MB RAM - ATI Mobility Radeon 9700 128 MB VRAM - 80 GB HD @ 5400 rpm :.
     
angelmb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Automatic
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 22, 2004, 07:49 AM
 
1440*900 cinematic PowerBook
     
nanovivid
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Mar 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 22, 2004, 08:09 AM
 
1440x900
     
badidea
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Hamburg
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 22, 2004, 10:33 AM
 
Originally posted by MetalSnake:
1600x1200 on a 21" CRT
what should I vote? Its smaller than 1680 but bigger than 1050
Same here!
***
     
MacDog
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 22, 2004, 10:42 AM
 
Originally posted by swiz:
I am wondering so I know what the best size desktops to include with themes are.
1600x1200 is extremely common for LCDs NOT made by Apple.
     
bOOzo
Addicted to Themes
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 22, 2004, 10:58 AM
 
I bet I have the weirdest resolution - 1344 x 1008!
I used to have 1280x1024, but then in 10.3.x I noticed this new resolution that uses the same Hz (75) and has a correct 4:3 ratio, which 1280x1024 does not. So it's great for me.
I too wish I could afford a widescreen lcd though..

But I would say that the best resolution to make desktops in is 1600x1024, if the desktop does not suffer from having the edges cropped on a 4:3 monitor.

I did a similar poll on my homepage, but focused on the ratio:
     
lenox
Senior User
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: united states empire
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 22, 2004, 11:44 AM
 
1600x1200, and
1440x900.

     
OwlBoy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 22, 2004, 12:59 PM
 
Man, 1024x768, I really want a bigger monitor.

I am drawn like a moth to a light bulb every time I see the 23inch ACD at CompUSA.

-Owl
     
wibs
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Dec 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 22, 2004, 03:42 PM
 
woo, i've got the biggest di... screen!

I alternate between 2048x1600 and 1792x1440. I guess that means I can safely be ignored for this poll.
DigitalRamen sucks.
     
Luca Rescigno
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 22, 2004, 06:10 PM
 
Originally posted by bOOzo:
I bet I have the weirdest resolution - 1344 x 1008!
I used to have 1280x1024, but then in 10.3.x I noticed this new resolution that uses the same Hz (75) and has a correct 4:3 ratio, which 1280x1024 does not. So it's great for me.
I too wish I could afford a widescreen lcd though.
Ah, I got a little shareware program called DisplayConfigX that allows you to change your resolution to nearly anything possible on the monitor. It allowed me to run my Gateway EV700 at a resolution higher than 1024x768 while keeping a usable refresh rate. On my brand new NEC monitor, I'm running it at 1376x1032 at 87 Hz. I have also run it at 1440x1080 @ 84 Hz, and some higher ones, but the text just gets too squinty at those high resolutions.

So, 1376x1032 for me.

"That's Mama Luigi to you, Mario!" *wheeze*
     
phillryu
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Connecticut
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 22, 2004, 06:27 PM
 
Ok, here's stats from MacThemes.net visitor counter:


MacThemes.net Editor in Chief
     
templetalker
Forum Regular
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Pacific Northwest, U.S.A.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 22, 2004, 06:31 PM
 
Why not just creat a really GIGANTIC one in normal and then in wide? I think this was addressed above as well? This way everyboy gets pickles and onions on their buns! Cool Dudes!
     
templetalker
Forum Regular
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Pacific Northwest, U.S.A.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 22, 2004, 06:33 PM
 
double post, sorry fellas
     
testnull
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Oct 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 22, 2004, 09:21 PM
 
Why not just do them in the right aspect ratios? 4:3 for standard resolutions, whatever aspect ratio 1280x1024 is, 16:10 for Cinema / 17" iMac / PowerBook, and 3:2 for 15" PowerBooks. I don't mind using something which is too large if it scales to the right aspect ratio.
     
LBoogie
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 22, 2004, 09:39 PM
 
Originally posted by d4nth3m4n:
i never understood why there wasnt just a huge one and a huge widescreen one. setting a desktop to scale is not that hard of a thing to do. i run 1600x desks on my ibook (1024x) all the time, i dont lose anything.

am i missing something here?
Agreed
Make a few versions with different aspect ratios let us scale them to whatever screen rez we need. Easier to please everybody that way imho
     
OwlBoy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 22, 2004, 10:21 PM
 
Sill question:

To those who say just make the highest res in both aspect ratios:

Won't this use more memory than needed for people on the lower end? Is it not that much of a problem? I know it was a pain in the early days of OS 9, and now I see multi-res downloads all over so I never consider it now.

I think though, that he wants to know from a design aspect.

something in an ber high res might have the logo appear the desired size at that res, but way too small in the lower end due to scaling.

You would lose detail scaling an image down from the high res to the small, and the designer may choose to crop to enhance detail.

Lots of factors Maybe.

-Owl
     
lenox
Senior User
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: united states empire
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 23, 2004, 10:33 AM
 
Originally posted by OwlBoy:
Sill question:

To those who say just make the highest res in both aspect ratios:

Won't this use more memory than needed for people on the lower end?
Nope. You aren't going to be using any more memory than your resolution does. For instance, a .jpg with a resolution of 1600x1200 will scale down nicely on, say, a 800x600 desktop and won't take up any more memory than a 800x600 .jpg.

Good point about the loss of details, though. As a designer, I'd probably want to be meticulous and create a custom desktop for each resolution, just to be sure.
     
NetworkShadow
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 23, 2004, 11:00 AM
 
Originally posted by lenox:
Nope. You aren't going to be using any more memory than your resolution does. For instance, a .jpg with a resolution of 1600x1200 will scale down nicely on, say, a 800x600 desktop and won't take up any more memory than a 800x600 .jpg.

Good point about the loss of details, though. As a designer, I'd probably want to be meticulous and create a custom desktop for each resolution, just to be sure.
Sure is a pain though with the wide range of sizes that people use. A hi-end one and a low-end one for wide and normal might be another idea, instead of making one for each and every res.
click one
     
FB Eye
Senior User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Montréal (Québec)
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 23, 2004, 11:34 AM
 
1152x870 here...

I've never seen the 1154x768 option on any Macs I've used
     
Patcarla
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montpellier
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 23, 2004, 11:57 AM
 
Originally posted by FB Eye:
1152x870 here...

I've never seen the 1154x768 option on any Macs I've used
It has to be a typo.. I have a 1152x768 on my tibook
Powerbook 1.67ghz 15" (100GB HD, 128MB VRAM, 1.5GB RAM)
     
FB Eye
Senior User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Montréal (Québec)
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 23, 2004, 12:11 PM
 
Not a typo:

     
Patcarla
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montpellier
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 23, 2004, 12:37 PM
 
I was talking about the 1154x768..
Powerbook 1.67ghz 15" (100GB HD, 128MB VRAM, 1.5GB RAM)
     
dole
Forum Regular
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 23, 2004, 03:27 PM
 
1024x768
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:27 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,