Korean Job Discussion Forums

[tatertot]

The other day Apple announced and started selling an updated Macbook Pro with a 2880 x 1800 pixel 15.4" screen. It's pretty cool that they were able to cram such a high resolution into that screen size, but I think it's just a bit gimmicky. The OS doesn't actually behave as if it has such a high resolution screen attached, but instead sets the size of elements based on a screen resolution of 1440 x 900 (similar to how the "retina" iPad and iPhone displays work). For me, a higher resolution screen is good when it gives you more usable space. In this case, there isn't any more usable space, instead images and text will just be sharper. There is an option to set the "resolution" to 1920 x 1200 and then scale that to the actual panel resolution of 2880 x 1800, but I can't imagine that that would look better than an actual 1920 x 1200 pixel panel. On the other hand, interpolating/scaling from 1920 x 1200 to 2880 x 1800 would be pretty easy because it is just 1.5x more pixels in each direction.

What do you guys think?

[Underwaterbob]

Sounds gimmicky alright. Who needs 2880X1800 on a 15 inch screen? I can't imagine the price.

[crescent]

Yep, gimmicky is the word for it. That's the direction that Apple is going now.

[six]

wake me up when Apple spends more time on real mobile graphics solutions... a $2199 computer with a 1 gig RAM video card is ridiculous. I loved the macbook back in 2006-7 but they've stopped trying as far as I can see.

[jacksthirty]

'In this case, there isn't any more usable space, instead images and text will just be sharper.'

And that's the whole point, isn't it? Images, and video will look that much better thatn the previous MacBook Pro to some people, that's whats important. I'd like it (I like photography), but can't justify the expense, but can imagine a whole host of 'professionals' eager to buy such a machine!

[god of English]

I'm getting one (for work).

Would I pay for it out of pocket? Probably not. It's bleeding edge and I always prefer to wait a few revisions.

Wouldn't call retina "gimmicky" though. Marketing buzzword? Absolutely. But like it or not, this is the direction laptops are going. The difference is that Apple is way ahead of the competition.

[cj1976]

I have always thought that Mac computers are often ridiculously overpowered for the average user. Unless you play games, there won't be any opportunities to put the hardware to the test.
It is similar to PC users who have the latest CPU and video cards, and the current games don't require anywhere near that horsepower. Some people are overly concerned with tech specs rather than actual practical usage.
I actually have a Macbook Air, but I never use the native OS. I run Win 7 via Bootcamp instead. That might seem strange but I find OS X to be impractical sometimes. Minor things like adjusting printer settings are a pain in the balls on OS X sometimes, and Microsoft Office seems to run better on Windows.
Credit where it is due though - this machine runs Windows 7 extremely well.

[MJLfoto]

The new macbook's were also rated a 1 out of 10 in repairability by ifixit.org because everything is glued or soldered in place, including RAM and battery.

http://ifixit.org/2753/macbook-pro-with-retina-display-teardown/#more-2753

[phatrick]

[methdxman]

Apple earnings and stock price continue to rise and rise while Internet 'experts' debate the 'merits' of their products.

Apple has an obligation to one group of people: shareholders.

And everything they touch continues to turn into gold.

[shostahoosier]

I'm a Mac user but I don't see the point of a retina display laptop either...how close do people sit to the screen these days? I

It also looks like they removed the Ethernet port. I know wi-fi continues to grow, but I still prefer the convenience, dependability and speed of a cable.

My Macbook Pro is about 5 years old. It's still pretty good so I think I'll pass on this upgrade.