Apple please offer 15" MBP w/ HD display option

[1Life]

I've read in some of the threads that Apple employees might be lurking in this forum so I thought I would throw out this suggestion.

I've been chomping at the bit to make the switch over to a Mac but I refuse to do so with the current LED displays they are using for the 15" MBP. I think an HD option would accomplish three things:

(1) Allow Apple to maintain their profit margin by charging $100 more (like 17" MBP) for a CCFL HD display that would fit the bill. Several posters here have claimed that no LED display currently exists that would give us better quality than the ones Apple is using.

(2) The CCFL HD option could be advertised as a legitimate necessity for graphic design professionals who require the smaller 15" MBP size for portability. This might help alleviate a possible backlash from environmental groups who want CCFL screens gone.

(3) Possibly eliminate the multiple return issue. Several people here have written that they've returned their 15" MBP multiple times until they found a satisfactory screen. I would imagine that if a HD CCFL option was available they would gladly pay the extra $100 to avoid having to play Russian roulette with the return process.

I believe this can be an economical cost-benefit solution to the 15" MBP LED display issue some of us have. Thoughts?

 

[JFreak]

LCD panel resolution has very little to do with the type of backlight packed to the module. There is absolutely zero reason why the 15" backlight could not have higher resolution panel in front of it, so now that they're selling 15" LED-backlighted laptops they will not be using CCFL backlight for the higher resolution screen possibly used in the next revision.

LED is here to stay, so no more new CCFL models.

 

[miniConvert]

I don't know whether other manufacturers already offer this, but wouldn't everything be super-tiny on a high-resolution 15.4" panel? Surely we'd need a resolution-independent OS first, really, to make it all worth while.

I mean, choice is always good, it's nice to be able to configure a product to ones personal requirements, but Apple doesn't always see it that way (perhaps rightly, focussing on a relatively limited range and not spreading itself too thinly) so I guess what I'm trying to say is: don't get your hopes up.

 

[feelthefire]

I don't know whether other manufacturers already offer this, but wouldn't everything be super-tiny on a high-resolution 15.4" panel? Surely we'd need a resolution-independent OS first, really, to make it all worth while.

I mean, choice is always good, it's nice to be able to configure a product to ones personal requirements, but Apple doesn't always see it that way (perhaps rightly, focussing on a relatively limited range and not spreading itself too thinly) so I guess what I'm trying to say is: don't get your hopes up.

Not really. My laptop is 1620x1050 on a 15.4" panel and it looks great. Things get a little small sometimes but I'm thankful for it when i am watching a movie, or working on a huge 12mp image.

However, I don't know what the OP means by an "HD" display. Hi Def is something completely different than high res. I took a look at the MBP and I don't think it could do one more step up in the resolution, the way the OS is set up makes some things really small to use.

 

[Lone Deranger]

He probably means panels that res up to 1920x1080 pixels.

However, I don't know what the OP means by an "HD" display.

 

[Tom B.]

I'm sure Apple will at least offer a 1680x1050 15.4" MacBook Pro by the end of the year, to go with Leopard's resolution independence. But I think 1920x1080 will take a while longer. I would love to see a 1440x900 13.3" MacBook, but I know 13.3" screens are currently only made at 1280x800. Maybe one day...

 

[feelthefire]

He probably means panels that res up to 1920x1080 pixels.

That would be really, really irritating to look at. Everything would be miniscule, even with a resolution independent OS. Very few people need that kind of resolution enough to justify putting it on a 15" screen.

 

[rclAlaric]

I think that 1920 x 1080 is a bit much for a 15.4" display. Would you even be able to see the text?

My last laptop was a Dell 15.4" with a 1680 x 1050 resolution. That was manufactured almost 4 years ago. I am kind of suprised that the MBP only has 1440 x 900 available. But I don't mind it at all. My MBP is awesome!

Remember, the higher the resolution, the more work your video card has to do to render all those pixels!

If you want to get technical, a 1280 x 720 display would be considered "HD" because that is the resolution of 720p, one of the HD standard resolutions.

 

[Tom B.]

That would be really, really irritating to look at. Everything would be miniscule, even with a resolution independent OS.

No, with resolution independence, you could make everything the same size that it is on a 1440x900, but sharper. It would be the opposite of irritating to look at.

 

[Zel]

Arent standard DVD's something like 500 pixels tall? as in, it doesnt matter what resolution you view them at, they will be scaled and blurred regardless.

I've got a 1900x1200 at home, and the pixels are very small, but it is a 24" screen! I cant imagine what sort of microscope this guy uses to need that on a 15.

 

[rclAlaric]

Yes, standard DVD resolution has 480 lines of resolution. If it is HD-DVD or Blu-Ray, then the resolution bumps up to 1080 lines of resolution.

 

[rufhausen]

While I love my new 15" MBP, the one thing I do miss is the 1680x1050 display of my 15" Asus Z70va PC laptop.
That was and still is my single reservation about the MBP - and it hastened my purchase of an external monitor.

 

[1Life]

High Resolution not HD

Great comments! I'm sorry to have caused the confusion. I was suggesting that Apple should offer a high resolution option for the 15" MBP like the 17" MBP has.

My primary motive for the suggestion is to get an alternative to the LED displays that are currently in the 15" MBP. Several posters in this forum have suggested that the current LED display is the best we can get at the price point Apple is selling the laptop for. In that case, I would gladly trade the benefits LED displays offer for a CCFL display like the ones in the 17" high resolution MBP.

I agree with the posters who think the 1680x1050 resolution would be very useful on a 15" MBP. However, I do think that 1920x1080 would be too small for most people.

 

[Rydther]

having used 1920x1200 (Current panel in my Dell, its 6th panel btw, dont ask) as well as 1680x1050 and now the MBPs res, I would say that 1680x1050 is the sweet spot for a 15" display, and that is my only "complaint" about my MBP.

I also suspect after Leopard launches, 1680x1050 will become a BTO option.

 

[iBunny]

I would also like this option. I dont know why Apple always uses these low res displays. I may be the only one here, but Color accuracy is not as important as screen realestate and response time.

15'' should be 1680x1050 with no more than 8ms response...

 

[Cali_Man]

Great comments! I'm sorry to have caused the confusion. I was suggesting that Apple should offer a high resolution option for the 15" MBP like the 17" MBP has.

My primary motive for the suggestion is to get an alternative to the LED displays that are currently in the 15" MBP. Several posters in this forum have suggested that the current LED display is the best we can get at the price point Apple is selling the laptop for. In that case, I would gladly trade the benefits LED displays offer for a CCFL display like the ones in the 17" high resolution MBP.

I agree with the posters who think the 1680x1050 resolution would be very useful on a 15" MBP. However, I do think that 1920x1080 would be too small for most people.

As someone pointed out, the screen using LED backlighting has nothing to do with the resolution. CCFL and LED are backlighting technologies, while the resolution has to do with the screen itself. LED's offer several advantages over CCFL lighting, which is why Apple has moved to that tech. Higher resolution is an independent design question.

I think you're confusing yourself because of the 17" offering the hi-def resolution but not LED backlighting.

 

[benxx11]

I would also like this option. I dont know why Apple always uses these low res displays. I may be the only one here, but Color accuracy is not as important as screen realestate and response time.

15'' should be 1680x1050 with no more than 8ms response...

Apple does this so you'll buy extrenal monitors (Cinema Displays, perhaps)...

 

[Zel]

I would also like this option. I dont know why Apple always uses these low res displays. I may be the only one here, but Color accuracy is not as important as screen realestate and response time.

Uh.. Low res?? My laptop is 1024x768 and it works fine. 1024 has been standard on 17" CRT's for about ten years.

 

[1Life]

As someone pointed out, the screen using LED backlighting has nothing to do with the resolution. CCFL and LED are backlighting technologies, while the resolution has to do with the screen itself. LED's offer several advantages over CCFL lighting, which is why Apple has moved to that tech. Higher resolution is an independent design question.

I think you're confusing yourself because of the 17" offering the hi-def resolution but not LED backlighting.

I'm a bit confused now. Are you saying that the high res CCFL display in the 17" MBP is the exact same display in the non-hi res one (with some other modification in the laptop that allows the higher resolution)?

What I'm getting at is I don't like the LED display in the 15" MBP. My understanding from other posters is that the LED display they are using is the best display they have to offer right now (at that price point). If that is the case, I am hoping they can offer a high-res CCFL display instead that would give me a better screen than the previous generation CCFL display and not have the issues associated with the new generation LED display. I hope I've cleared that up.

 

[Krevnik]

I'm a bit confused now. Are you saying that the high res CCFL display in the 17" MBP is the exact same display in the non-hi res one (with some other modification in the laptop that allows the higher resolution)?

No, he is saying that the CCFL/LED backlight is a separate piece of equipment from the screen itself.

What I'm getting at is I don't like the LED display in the 15" MBP. My understanding from other posters is that the LED display they are using is the best display they have to offer right now (at that price point). If that is the case, I am hoping they can offer a high-res CCFL display instead that would give me a better screen than the previous generation CCFL display and not have the issues associated with the new generation LED display. I hope I've cleared that up.

At 15", they don't /need/ to offer a high-res CCFL display, they can offer a high-res LED display. This is because the screen itself (the LCD panel that makes all the pretty pixels), is lit from a panel behind it (CCFL or LED backlighting).

The reason why the 17" is still using a CCFL backlight, is that LED backlights are still rather expensive. Apple is willing to take the cost hit on the 15" model to get that moved over to the mercury-free backlight, but not the 17" (yet).

While it might be nice to offer CCFL and LED backlights, Apple is doing the switch for environmental reasons, and likely has discontinued their supply chain of the 15" CCFL backlight. Considering that Jobs himself likes moving in more environmentally friendly directions, I doubt you can convince him to take a step back after taking a step forward.