What's new
  • Please do not post any links until you have 3 posts as they will automatically be rejected to prevent SPAM. Many words are also blocked due to being used in SPAM Messages. Thanks!

Retina MacBook Pro

AkG

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2007
Messages
5,274
edit: meh I dont care anymore. Enjoy your apple flavored Kolaid.

Oh and I got chuckle out of the top comment on Anads "preview" (I guess you would call it)

"The problem is that you won't be able to get a screenshot of that, because screenshotting takes place before the GPU's output scaling.

I scaled the AnandTech screenshots (using IrfanView, using the Lanczos filter), and the "1024x600" and "1280x800" modes will look a bit fuzzy to someone with good vision sitting very close, but it's quite serviceable...."

Yeah serviceable aint the same as "revolutionary" :p
 
Last edited:

Mars

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
492
Location
Calgary
edit: meh I dont care anymore. Enjoy your apple flavored Kolaid.

Oh and I got chuckle out of the top comment on Anads "preview" (I guess you would call it)

"The problem is that you won't be able to get a screenshot of that, because screenshotting takes place before the GPU's output scaling.

I scaled the AnandTech screenshots (using IrfanView, using the Lanczos filter), and the "1024x600" and "1280x800" modes will look a bit fuzzy to someone with good vision sitting very close, but it's quite serviceable...."

Yeah serviceable aint the same as "revolutionary" :p


I don't own any Apple products (I do own Windows and Linux PCs, and Android and Windows Phone devices), nor do I plan to purchase any Apple products in the foreseeable future, so I'm not sure how apple flavored Kolaid would be useful to me.

That commentor on Anandtech is misunderstanding how the scaling works - of course every image is 2880x1800; that's the only resolution that the screen runs at. Output scaling is done at the OS level, and the screengrabbed images are exactly what are shown on the screen; resizing screenshots shows nothing useful.

A blurb from the overall display analysis on Anandtech:

"Even at the non-integer scaled 1680 x 1050 setting, the Retina Display looks a lot better than last year's high-res panel. It looks like Apple actually renders the screen at twice the selected resolution before scaling it to fit the 2880 x 1800 panel (in other words, at 1920 x 1200 Apple is rendering everything at 3840 x 2400 (!) before scaling - this is likely where the perf impact is seen, but I'm trying to find a way to quantify that now). Everything just looks better. I also appreciate how quick it is to switch between resolutions on OS X. When I'm doing a lot of work I prefer the 1920 x 1200 setting, but if I'm in content consumption mode I find myself happier at 1440 x 900 or 1680 x 1050."
 

JJThomp

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2011
Messages
1,392
Location
Ontario
That is an unfair argument as any new technological features or refinement that are introduced is generally not seen as practical at first, but if you don't give it a shot you will never know what it would become. Technology is meant to push practical boundaries if everyone had the same pessimistic mindset we would still be using Nokia 3360's and driving Kia's. I am not defending the Apple specifically but the way technologies advance and put into use, if it was RIM who was doing this I would still be support it for the exact same reason, though I would doubt it still be so negatively received by some people.

Seriously? You're going to drag soldered ram into an argument regarding industry display standards with the retina display? Illusory correlation much?

I'm not saying these screens shouldn't be developed... I'm saying that if you are going to charge people for these screens put some balls into your laptop so it can drive the resolution. I can invent a toilet that will flush upside down and that you can mount on your cieling to save floor space. But until I can reverse gravity in your bathroom so your crap will stay in it, it's pretty useless. Technology isn't about charging people for things they don't need, it is about innovating and pushing boundaries. It's not like these displays are made by Apple and they are the only ones with the technology. Apple is just the only company who will charge people the money for something almost entirely useless.

My issue is not with the screen itself it is with the marketing of the screen. The screen won't make your facebook look nicer and it really isn't going to be doing anything until it is time to buy a new laptop. The marketing is dishonest just like the rest of their business model which consists of pumping out decent products charging premiums and then burying all the competition in litigation until they are the only ones left. Apple does not innovate, they take other peoples stuff, put it in one package and then sue anyone else who tries to make a package that is similar in any way.

The RAM has nothing to do with illusary correlation I just added it in there to show that the newest ideas aren't always the best which is how I also feel about the screen.

Edit: and to go along with what AKG said I would buy it as a standalone monitor as well because my computer would actually be able to drive it in some games (although still my desktop which is much faster than an MBP would not do it justice).
 

SKYMTL

HardwareCanuck Review Editor
Staff member
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
12,857
Location
Montreal
I hate to say it but other than bragging rights, I see no use in such a high resolution display....even on a professional notebook. Call it what you want but I call it marketing fluff which the press are lapping up like eager puppies.
 

Perineum

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 9, 2009
Messages
4,036
Location
Surrey, B.C.
I hate to say it but other than bragging rights, I see no use in such a high resolution display....even on a professional notebook. Call it what you want but I call it marketing fluff which the press are lapping up like eager puppies.

no, NO sky....

no one in their right mind would buy a cellphone without it. :ph34r:

But anyway, if I had a 32 inch monitor at that resolution I'd definitely take it.
 

geoc

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 8, 2011
Messages
179
I'm not saying these screens shouldn't be developed... I'm saying that if you are going to charge people for these screens put some balls into your laptop so it can drive the resolution. I can invent a toilet that will flush upside down and that you can mount on your cieling to save floor space. But until I can reverse gravity in your bathroom so your crap will stay in it, it's pretty useless. Technology isn't about charging people for things they don't need, it is about innovating and pushing boundaries. It's not like these displays are made by Apple and they are the only ones with the technology. Apple is just the only company who will charge people the money for something almost entirely useless.

My issue is not with the screen itself it is with the marketing of the screen. The screen won't make your facebook look nicer and it really isn't going to be doing anything until it is time to buy a new laptop. The marketing is dishonest just like the rest of their business model which consists of pumping out decent products charging premiums and then burying all the competition in litigation until they are the only ones left. Apple does not innovate, they take other peoples stuff, put it in one package and then sue anyone else who tries to make a package that is similar in any way.

The RAM has nothing to do with illusary correlation I just added it in there to show that the newest ideas aren't always the best which is how I also feel about the screen.

Edit: and to go along with what AKG said I would buy it as a standalone monitor as well because my computer would actually be able to drive it in some games (although still my desktop which is much faster than an MBP would not do it justice).

How would it be useless? Those who edit large photos (12gb+ RAW) would definitely find it handy as it allows them to see more detail with less real estate. Architects can use it since it can handle more detail with it's much higher DPI. This is just 2 quick examples where screen real estate is important but doesn't need a rendering powerhouse to use. Regarding 'facebook'ers they are already over spec'd with any laptop right now, a laptop from 2001 can do the same of what they want. But if someone decides to buy a caterpillar to dig a small patch for a flowerbed in their front yard, it's their choice.

The soldered RAM isn't there to 'set a bar' nor is it a new idea (Dell XPS 13 has had soldered ram for a couple years, but no one complained), it's just something the company decided to do (so they can make the laptop thinner, or because they're money grubbing baby eaters). I agree that it is not a good idea, but to share the same sentiment about something that is clearly detrimental to the customer to something that you feel brings trivial benefits to the customer is a little weird.

I think everyone here is too dead set on using gaming as a standard for driving displays. Just because it can't handle games at a certain res doesn't mean it's useless.
 

Perineum

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 9, 2009
Messages
4,036
Location
Surrey, B.C.
How would it be useless? Those who edit large photos (12gb+ RAW) would definitely find it handy as it allows them to see more detail with less real estate. Architects can use it since it can handle more detail with it's much higher DPI. This is just 2 quick examples where screen real estate is important but doesn't need a rendering powerhouse to use.

I would agree with this only if the actual size of the screen was larger.

A wire frame image at full resolution on that monitor is just about not going to be visible. If you zoom into the image then you're completely defeating the point of the extra resolution.

I'm still of the opinion that extra resolution with no increase of screen real estate is a pretty wasted effort.
 

MacJunky

Well-known member
Joined
May 14, 2007
Messages
1,822
Location
Grande Cache, AB
Jake, aside from everything being integrated, that looks pretty easy to take apart.
I still say that the original clamshell iBook was the worst offender as far as servicing goes. (to those not familiar with Macs please note that the PowerBooks of the past were generally not very troublesome to service. The Powerbook 100 series was actually pretty nice imo.)
Installing iBook G3 Clamshell Lower Case - iFixit
Make sure to click the "Paginated" button just above the first image. ;)

Oh, and soldered in RAM is nothing that the MacBook Air did not already do.
 

Perineum

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 9, 2009
Messages
4,036
Location
Surrey, B.C.
Ouch, I find laptops to be a pain in the arse as a fact.... but according to that linked site:


  • MacBook Pro with Retina Display 15" Mid 2012 Repairability Score: 1 out of 10 (10 is easiest to repair).
  • Proprietary pentalobe screws prevent you from gaining access to anything inside.
  • As in the MacBook Air, the RAM is soldered to the logic board. Max out at 16GB now, or forever hold your peace—you can't upgrade.
  • The proprietary SSD isn't upgradeable either (yet), as it is similar but not identical to the one in the Air. It is a separate daughtercard, and we’re hopeful we can offer an upgrade in the near future.
  • The lithium-polymer battery is glued rather than screwed into the case, which increases the chances that it'll break during disassembly. The battery also covers the trackpad cable, which tremendously increases the chance that the user will shear the cable in the battery removal process.
  • The display assembly is completely fused, and there’s no glass protecting it. If anything ever fails inside the display, you will need to replace the entire extremely expensive assembly.
I can't purchase something that expensive and know that I'm held at ransom if anything goes wrong. In fact, the AppleCare warranty should just be included in the price.
 
Top