|
There won't be "retina" displays unless you're planning on spending $7000 on your display. Apple is not one of the big manufacturers of screens and the technology for smooshing pixels to be more dense isn't cheap. Apple users Edit: Not only that, any of the big makers are essentially shooting themselves in the foot considering working with another software platform at this time is completely impossible so they're developing new technology for the smallest minority of panel users. flyboi fucked around with this message at 15:17 on Jul 26, 2011 |
# ? Jul 26, 2011 15:14 |
|
|
# ? Mar 29, 2024 11:19 |
|
Bob Morales posted:There's the gig aftermarket adapter. What interface does it use? USB 2.0 and FW800 are both (theoretically) slower than Gigabit Ethernet, and the Airs of course do not sport ExpressCard slots. Or is there a Thunderbolt GigE adapter that costs like $150 out already?
|
# ? Jul 26, 2011 15:18 |
|
echobucket posted:I just thought of something.. If we get "retina" displays on Macs, that's going to make boot camping very difficult as Windows won't know anything about retina display modes and will treat it like a regular very high display. We'll need a magnifying glass to read the text! Not really, Windows has settings to change the size stuff gets rendered. And you can always change text sizes too. Just 'cuz OS X doesn't let you monkey around the display settings a bunch doesn't mean Windows is the same way.
|
# ? Jul 26, 2011 15:28 |
|
One of the Apple engineers in the WWDC videos flat out said "unless you want your apps to look low-res and weird in the near future make sure they work with HiDPI mode," so I'm pretty sure they're at least trying their damnedest to get "retina" displays in Macs.
|
# ? Jul 26, 2011 15:30 |
|
movax posted:What interface does it use? USB 2.0 and FW800 are both (theoretically) slower than Gigabit Ethernet, and the Airs of course do not sport ExpressCard slots. Or is there a Thunderbolt GigE adapter that costs like $150 out already? USB 2.0 It's not going to reach full speeds of gig e but not all networks will anyway. It's still faster than the 100mb version.
|
# ? Jul 26, 2011 15:32 |
|
madprocess posted:Not really, Windows has settings to change the size stuff gets rendered. And you can always change text sizes too. Well yeah, but you'll need your magnifying glass to find those settings so you can change the DPI in Windows 7 to 200%. And You'll need it for the installer
|
# ? Jul 26, 2011 15:34 |
|
echobucket posted:I just thought of something.. If we get "retina" displays on Macs, that's going to make boot camping very difficult as Windows won't know anything about retina display modes and will treat it like a regular very high display. We'll need a magnifying glass to read the text! I don't think people will care that much, and I'm sure you'll be able to just scale the video down to something more usable.
|
# ? Jul 26, 2011 15:35 |
|
Bob Morales posted:USB 2.0 Ah yeah, I'd totally use one of those over my Wi-Fi when flinging large files around. The Apple one is like $50, I'd probably try to find a 3rd party one that uses some Realtek/Broadcom chipset that are found in the Macs. Or, if the Intel kext is anything like the Linux/Windows one, something in the 827xx family. I think the latest refresh of all Macs uses Intel ethernet now (since the chipset has a free MAC)?
|
# ? Jul 26, 2011 15:41 |
|
movax posted:I had a 15.4" laptop from work with a 1920x1200 panel (Dell Precision), and in retrospect, that resolution was only really good when I was coding/debugging on the go; back then () all I had was XP DPI scaling so just surfing the internet or something was somewhat stressful on my eyes. I can see all kinds of cool ideas down the road. Sony had that Vaio with the media dock that got you discrete graphics, optical (Blu-Ray, which Apple evidently will never adopt), SD, USB 3.0, GigE and power that ran through Thunderbolt. Make something like that for the MBA and it'd become a viable solution for a lot of prosumer jerkoffs who think that optical drives are still awesome.
|
# ? Jul 26, 2011 15:52 |
|
microwave casserole posted:One of the Apple engineers in the WWDC videos flat out said "unless you want your apps to look low-res and weird in the near future make sure they work with HiDPI mode," so I'm pretty sure they're at least trying their damnedest to get "retina" displays in Macs. Actually it's basically the reverse. What HiDPI is good for is hooking up your Mac Mini to a nice big TV set across your living room, and still being able to use your apps decent enough without cutting your resolution down to non-native which makes it blurry. echobucket posted:Well yeah, but you'll need your magnifying glass to find those settings so you can change the DPI in Windows 7 to 200%. And You'll need it for the installer Yeah, uh, no guy. The dang installer isn't full screen res, plus you'd have the same problem of needing to change settings "with a magnifying glass" on OS X since OS X does not default to HiDPI mode. Might I also point out that compared to something like 800x600 on a 17 inch CRT like we were mostly using back in the 90s, a stock MacBook Pro 15 inch or iMac 27 inch is already double dpi?
|
# ? Jul 26, 2011 15:59 |
|
Little Rock, AR is getting an Apple Store, Opening on August 20th. https://twitter.com/#!/ifostore/status/94721088600276992 http://www.inarkansas.com/25880/the-apple-store-plans-aug-20-opening-at-promenade-at-chenal
|
# ? Jul 26, 2011 16:08 |
|
madprocess posted:Yeah, uh, no guy. The dang installer isn't full screen res, plus you'd have the same problem of needing to change settings "with a magnifying glass" on OS X since OS X does not default to HiDPI mode. Yes, that's true that 20 year sago I was rocking SVGA on my 13" crt, this doesn't mean retina displays are coming any time soon. The support in Lion is MINIMAL. It's just a starting framework to get things rolling. Who knows if it even comes to fruition - just like resolution independence in OSX the only way to see it is through a hack and 99% of the system isn't even optimized for it. While there's an attempted system in place, it won't be ready for many years to come.
|
# ? Jul 26, 2011 16:17 |
|
flyboi posted:Yes, that's true that 20 year sago I was rocking SVGA on my 13" crt, this doesn't mean retina displays are coming any time soon. The support in Lion is MINIMAL. It's just a starting framework to get things rolling. Who knows if it even comes to fruition - just like resolution independence in OSX the only way to see it is through a hack and 99% of the system isn't even optimized for it. I think you misread my point. What I was saying is, we didn't need any special fancy HiDPI modes to make things continue to work over the last time DPI doubled. Standard resolutions and dpi continued to gradually get higher, it wasn't like in 2004 all of a sudden everyone stopped using 50-70 ish dpi monitors and started using 100-140 ish dpi monitors like today. Neither OS X nor Windows had to do anything special for the last gradual doubling. Retina displays? Maybe in 10 years, in the meantime dpi will just steadily creep upwards!
|
# ? Jul 26, 2011 16:31 |
|
madprocess posted:I think you misread my point. What I was saying is, we didn't need any special fancy HiDPI modes to make things continue to work over the last time DPI doubled. Standard resolutions and dpi continued to gradually get higher, it wasn't like in 2004 all of a sudden everyone stopped using 50-70 ish dpi monitors and started using 100-140 ish dpi monitors like today. Neither OS X nor Windows had to do anything special for the last gradual doubling. Right, text got smaller and smaller, older resolutions are scaled up to blurry rear end. I don't know about you but being forced to use everything else at non-native resolution just to read something because Windows and Linux don't have widgets/proper dpi scaling to properly support a "retina" display would make me stay with a lower-res screen. Not to forget, the internet is pretty much 72dpi or 96dpi so you're going to make 99% of everything you were to ever read/look at blurry rear end since it will be scaled 4-fold.
|
# ? Jul 26, 2011 17:18 |
|
flyboi posted:Right, text got smaller and smaller, older resolutions are scaled up to blurry rear end. I don't know about you but being forced to use everything else at non-native resolution just to read something because Windows and Linux don't have widgets/proper dpi scaling to properly support a "retina" display would make me stay with a lower-res screen. Compared to what we were using 10 or more years ago, stuff now is 4x the size. Our screens of today would pretty much be called "Retina" in 1999 - and that's before taking into account the lack of CRT/VGA analog blur. Why do you assume that in 10 years, which is the realistic advent of what would be "Retina" today, everything will still be designed the same?
|
# ? Jul 26, 2011 22:34 |
|
madprocess posted:Compared to what we were using 10 or more years ago, stuff now is 4x the size. Our screens of today would pretty much be called "Retina" in 1999 - and that's before taking into account the lack of CRT/VGA analog blur.
|
# ? Jul 26, 2011 22:52 |
|
madprocess posted:Compared to what we were using 10 or more years ago, stuff now is 4x the size. Our screens of today would pretty much be called "Retina" in 1999 - and that's before taking into account the lack of CRT/VGA analog blur. First off, yes resolutions quadrupled at some aspects. Second, you're comparing the resolution of what was on a standard 13" display to that on a 27" display. While resolutions quadrupled size has also increased as well as aspect ratios. 10 years ago I was using a monitor capable of 1280x960 at 14" but I ran it at 1024x768 because my mom couldn't read the text. I can promise you she would have the same issues on my 27" iMac or 15" MBP. 20 years ago I was running 800x600 on a 13". I wouldn't really say that every 10 years resolution quadruples because I distinctly remember upgrading to a 1600x1200 19" display in 2002 which compared to other displays aside from the iMac 27" there isn't a quadruple change here. Also the 27" is almost double the screen size of a 19".
|
# ? Jul 26, 2011 23:15 |
|
flyboi posted:20 years ago I was running 800x600 on a 13". I wouldn't really say that every 10 years resolution quadruples because I distinctly remember upgrading to a 1600x1200 19" display in 2002 which compared to other displays aside from the iMac 27" there isn't a quadruple change here. Also the 27" is almost double the screen size of a 19". They're just going to get shorter and wider. So in 2024 you'll be using something like 2560x800
|
# ? Jul 27, 2011 00:04 |
|
DEUCE SLUICE posted:Thunderbolt is going to replace FW and ethernet on all Apple portables at the next refresh, and the optical drive will go as well. The 13" Pro goes away while the 15" and 17" become airs. Book it. That's the rumor today. I think that if I bought another MacBook Pro it would be the 15", just because of the extra screen space. But 1400x900 isn't going to cut it.
|
# ? Jul 27, 2011 00:19 |
|
I've used the optical drive on my 2010 to of the line 15" MBP like, twice. I'm giving serious thought to a maxed out 13" 2011 Air and a TB display to replace my 3008WFP. Only the default 4g ram is holding me back. I'd love to see a lighter weight 15" with standard SSD, no optical but still with discrete graphics.
|
# ? Jul 27, 2011 00:35 |
|
A bunch of 2010 13" Airs and some 2009 13" MBP's hit the for sale forums in the past week. Priced at $1,000+ and $800+ respectively. That's what refurbs from Apple of the same models go for One of the guys here is including a keyboard and trackpad at least.
|
# ? Jul 27, 2011 00:47 |
|
Oh yeah, the 15-17 inch Air Pro rumors.. Sign me up for a 15 inch, but the options better be 4, 8, and 16 GB RAM.. Edit: Want to get a webcam that looks like the old Apple iSight, but works on USB and has a macro mode? http://www.jr.com/ipevo/pe/IPV_P2V/ Only $70.. Binary Badger fucked around with this message at 00:53 on Jul 27, 2011 |
# ? Jul 27, 2011 00:48 |
|
I hope in the next MBA iteration they can reduce the huge bezel around the screens because it makes it look silly. It would force them to reduce the keyboard size though, dang. Shouldn't be a problem on the 15" MBA when they make one. Mu Zeta fucked around with this message at 00:53 on Jul 27, 2011 |
# ? Jul 27, 2011 00:50 |
|
Mu Zeta posted:I hope in the next MBA iteration they can reduce the huge bezel around the screens because it makes it look silly. It would force them to reduce the keyboard size though, dang. I'm convinced they could jam a 14.1" in the 13" Pro. DOOO IIITTT
|
# ? Jul 27, 2011 00:52 |
|
Binary Badger posted:Oh yeah, the 15-17 inch Air Pro rumors.. Not to rumor monger too much, but when the revamped Airs were debuted last year, they were billed as the "next generation of MacBooks", for whatever that's worth.
|
# ? Jul 27, 2011 00:55 |
|
Mu Zeta posted:I hope in the next MBA iteration they can reduce the huge bezel around the screens because it makes it look silly. It would force them to reduce the keyboard size though, dang. The huge bezel is to reduce the apparent edge thickness, I think; the edge of the bezel is less than 2mm deep, but it's about 6 or 7mm behind the panel itself.
|
# ? Jul 27, 2011 00:57 |
|
Bob Morales posted:A bunch of 2010 13" Airs and some 2009 13" MBP's hit the for sale forums in the past week. Priced at $1,000+ and $800+ respectively. That's what refurbs from Apple of the same models go for One of the guys here is including a keyboard and trackpad at least. It's the Apple resale tax. 99% of people reselling their Apple hardware are jerks.
|
# ? Jul 27, 2011 00:57 |
|
Space Racist posted:Not to rumor monger too much, but when the revamped Airs were debuted last year, they were billed as the "next generation of MacBooks", for whatever that's worth. And it came to fruition when they discontinued the Macbooks. I think the Pro will be around for a long time.
|
# ? Jul 27, 2011 00:57 |
|
72-96 dpi has been the desktop standard since the mid-90s or so. before that the video card tended to be the limiting factor so there wasn't really much of a standard. Portables have gone up in DPI, but only a little. Smaller screens have tended to have slightly higher DPI. I think it's pretty clear the Apple intends increase the DPI drastically in the next couple years, even if the current displays aren't an increase and the "HiDPI" modes are pointless. My guess would be that they would make it an (expensive) option on the next major MBP refresh and bring it to the iMacs next and then slowly let it percolate through the line. Adding resolution to LCDs is not nearly as costly as increasing their size.
|
# ? Jul 27, 2011 01:04 |
|
i mean a lot of the people selling their stuff in SA mart are bundling expensive software and have added aftermarket RAM and HDDs to their Macs so really if you take a look people aren't making bad deals at all. Plus what difference does it make to you if Macs retain a lot of value? That's just the way it is.
|
# ? Jul 27, 2011 01:05 |
|
A Duck! posted:I've used the optical drive on my 2010 to of the line 15" MBP like, twice. I was debating getting the TB display just cause 1920x1200 has been feeling small, but I think I'll wait a year in hopes that they'll get upgraded with USB 3.0 ports whenever Ivy Bridge comes around. Then again they'll probably be massively overpriced in a year vs being competitive with other 27-30" screens right now. flyboi posted:It's the Apple resale tax. 99% of people reselling their Apple hardware are jerks.
|
# ? Jul 27, 2011 02:09 |
|
Does anybody use a Mini for their home server? I am thinking about making the leap, but the whole external storage thing is throwing me off a bit. I suppose I could go the hackintosh route so I could build in a more traditional form factor, but I would hate for it to be unstable or a pain to keep updated. Edit: not new to Apples, all of our laptops/phones are Apple. My current home server is running Win7 because I could build out the hardware I wanted but I'm tired of dealing with Windows even as a server OS. On Unicornback fucked around with this message at 02:24 on Jul 27, 2011 |
# ? Jul 27, 2011 02:22 |
|
So regarding the HD problems in some iMacs, how do we tell if a given iMac is affected?madprocess posted:Retina displays? Maybe in 10 years, in the meantime dpi will just steadily creep upwards! Granted, I don't expect to see a retina 27' iMac anytime soon, but I wouldn't be surprised to see the smaller Apple portables get them in the near future. CDOR Gemini posted:a HDD/SDD combo Small White Dragon fucked around with this message at 02:54 on Jul 27, 2011 |
# ? Jul 27, 2011 02:52 |
|
Small White Dragon posted:
If you knew anything about screen tech you'd know it is. Also what dpi are these "retina" displays you're talking about?
|
# ? Jul 27, 2011 02:55 |
|
madprocess posted:If you knew anything about screen tech you'd know it is. Also what dpi are these "retina" displays you're talking about? Yeah Apple has defined "Retina Display" as 300ppi which is a pretty crazy resolution at 13.3" (well above the 2560x1440 of the current 27" displays). Although I guess there is nothing to stop them redefining the ppi required given that you could argue you'd typically be further than 12" away from a laptop.
|
# ? Jul 27, 2011 03:09 |
|
madprocess posted:If you knew anything about screen tech you'd know it is. Also what dpi are these "retina" displays you're talking about? No HiDPI exists in osx it's going to happen at the next refresh!! I just want to point out you need at least 7072x3978 to get 300 ppi on a 27" iMac. On top of that "retina" 300 dpi being so crisp you could lick some boobies and think they were real is based off being 6-12" from your face. The further you get from the screen, the more ppi necessary.
|
# ? Jul 27, 2011 03:18 |
|
flyboi posted:
Isn't it the opposite?
|
# ? Jul 27, 2011 03:20 |
|
jfreder posted:Isn't it the opposite? Yeah it is... I'm tarded
|
# ? Jul 27, 2011 03:26 |
|
madprocess posted:If you knew anything about screen tech you'd know it is. Also what dpi are these "retina" displays you're talking about? EDIT: But seriously, OS X Lion is likely to have a lifespan of 2 years or so. You really don't think they could go from producing a 10' 266dpi display to a 13' 266dpi in the span of a couple years? Small White Dragon fucked around with this message at 03:35 on Jul 27, 2011 |
# ? Jul 27, 2011 03:30 |
|
|
# ? Mar 29, 2024 11:19 |
Not sure if this is against the rules, but if anyone with a 2010 11" Air with 4GB RAM would be interested in trading for a stock 2010 13" Pro, PM me.
|
|
# ? Jul 27, 2011 03:34 |