Internet Content on iMac

[ufguy73]

Hello All,

I am thinking about delving into the mac world for the first time. As I have been doing a bit of on-line research, as well as in person shopping, I have some concerns that I am wondering if you all might be able to provide some comments to.

First, I am looking to use this machine at home and primarily to play internet content, web browse, watch an occasional HD movie, and perhaps do some photo editing.

Here are some things that i have noticed that are making me hesitant about the iMacs, however:

- compared to a PC the default size that web page content is being displayed is noticeably smaller on the iMac. Just going to general sites such as CNN, ESPN, YouTube, etc. the images and text are smaller on the iMac. Yes, I know I can use Command (+) to increase the size of these things but then the crisp resolution of the monitor starts to suffer - it doesn't look horrible but it is noticeable.

Has anyone else noticed this???

I really like the idea of the 27". Having a workspace that big would be great and i have plenty of room to physically fit the monitor in. when comparing the 27" to the 21.5", however, i noticed some things:

- even with 1080p HD content, the full screeen image is much more crisp on the 21.5. Again, the 27" doesn't look 'bad' at all but when you look at them side by side you can immediately see that the 21.5 playback is much more crips. I am VERY confused/disappointed by this because i thought part of the whole value proposition of the 27" is to have a great display that is 'more' than just a computer monitor. What is the point of having such a high resolution if it cant even play true HD content as crisply as its little 21.5" brother???

- the above effect seems to be magnified when viewing less than HD quality content. YouTUbe is a perfect example of this. obviously, when going to full screen the video doesnt look great on either the 21.5 or 27 (or the pc, for that matter), however, again it seems to look noticeably better on the 21.5.

I wonder can anyone relate to these experiences??

what is the purpose of having such high resolution displays if they either display things so small that you have to increase the default size of the browser (thus losing that resolution crispness anyway) or that most of the media content out there looks blurry on it anyway.

Are these just tradeoffs i would need to be willing to accept to have a mac and the great form factor, useability, etc. that comes with having a mac?

i really dont mean these questions/comments in any type of trollish way - im genuinely interested in hearing thoughts because i was all set to go with the 27" imac but then noticed these things that could impact my daily activities with the computer.

thoughts most appreciated!!! thanks!

 

[redshift1]

I went to the Apple Store last night just to compare the two screens and IMO the 27 appeared to be better at displaying HD content than the 21.5. Let's see what others say.

 

[spinnerlys]

Welcome.

...
- compared to a PC the default size that web page content is being displayed is noticeably smaller on the iMac. Just going to general sites such as CNN, ESPN, YouTube, etc. the images and text are smaller on the iMac. Yes, I know I can use Command (+) to increase the size of these things but then the crisp resolution of the monitor starts to suffer - it doesn't look horrible but it is noticeable.

Has anyone else noticed this???

I haven't but that may be due to the higher pixel density and resolution on those iMacs compared to Windows PCs.

- even with 1080p HD content, the full screeen image is much more crisp on the 21.5. Again, the 27" doesn't look 'bad' at all but when you look at them side by side you can immediately see that the 21.5 playback is much more crips. I am VERY confused/disappointed by this because i thought part of the whole value proposition of the 27" is to have a great display that is 'more' than just a computer monitor. What is the point of having such a high resolution if it cant even play true HD content as crisply as its little 21.5" brother???

The 21.5" has 1920 x 1080 pixel, the 27" has 2560 x 1440 pixel, HD content in 1080p/i is normally 1920 x 1080 if it uses the 16:9 aspect ratio.
A 1080p/i movie gets scaled up / blown up on a bigger screen, and what was one pixel before on the 21.5" is now 1.7777 pixel on the 27".

- the above effect seems to be magnified when viewing less than HD quality content. YouTUbe is a perfect example of this. obviously, when going to full screen the video doesnt look great on either the 21.5 or 27 (or the pc, for that matter), however, again it seems to look noticeably better on the 21.5. I wonder can anyone relate to these experiences?

The same as above, just that YT videos are mostly crappy anyways and when blown up / scaled up, they look like s-hit.
They get blown up more on the 27" as on the 21-5" though, due to the different resolutions.

what is the purpose of having such high resolution displays if they either display things so small that you have to increase the default size of the browser (thus losing that resolution crispness anyway) or that most of the media content out there looks blurry on it anyway.

You have to ask the web developers these questions, as such high resolution displays are not the norm any way.

I have two very inactive blogs and this is the statistical data over some years (I don't get any visitors, they just show photos anyway.

Blog 1
Ranking / Resolution / Visitors / Percentage of all visitors

1. 1680x1050 152 24.28%
2. 1280x800 114 18.21%
3. 1024x768 113 18.05%
4. 1280x1024 108 17.25%
5. 1400x1050 34 5.43%
6. 1440x900 32 5.11%
7. 1920x1200 30 4.79%
8. 800x600 9 1.44%
9. 1600x1200 8 1.28%
10. 1152x864 5 0.80%


Blog 2

1. 1440x900 303 28.29%
2. 1280x800 226 21.10%
3. 1920x1200 176 16.43%
4. 1680x1050 102 9.52%
5. 1024x768 175 7.00%
6. 1280x1024 64 5.88%
7. 320x396 32 2.99%
8. 1920x1080 17 1.59%
9. 2560x1440 11 1.03%
10. 1280x768 7 0.65%