The new Macbook Pro has a 15.4" screen compared to the old Powerbook. And yet the powerbook has a resolution of 1440*960 as opposed to the new 1440*900 Macbook. What gives? I understand that the new display is some 60% brighter, which is overall more important for the quality of the display than the resolution, but I don't understand why a size increase should come with a decrease in resolution. Is Apple getting the display from a new supplier or something? Until they add a 17" model, this is definitely weird.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Macbook Pro resolution decrease
- Thread starter supergod
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I know nothing about resolution and displays, but remember that this is a revision "A" machine, and its just the start of a new line. I'm sure they already have a newly designed case, a better res screen, and many little and bigger tricks to pull out of the hat and revamp when the first wave of euphoria fades away and sales start to slow.
Something new every 6 months keeps our gadget hungry hearts pumping hard.
Something new every 6 months keeps our gadget hungry hearts pumping hard.
tribe3 said:
I highly doubt that. There's really not much further they can take the powerbook design. It's just perfect. All that they can work on is making it rock solid technically. Apple will have their work cut out for them improving the iBook line, not to mention the Powermacs, so why fix something that not only isn't broke, but rocks?
Plus, if as they say there will be many hardware releases over the next few months, there's no way there will be an update to Macbook in that period.
Actually I think the decrease is Apple admission that the previous hi-res screen is fecked.
The 1440x960 screens all seem to exhibit the scanline problem. I think this is why they've sneeked in the 1440x900 res on the new macbookpro..
This is great news for new macbookpro owners, but bad for existing hi-res PB users because it looks like Apple aren't going to fix the problem in existing PB's.....
The 1440x960 screens all seem to exhibit the scanline problem. I think this is why they've sneeked in the 1440x900 res on the new macbookpro..
This is great news for new macbookpro owners, but bad for existing hi-res PB users because it looks like Apple aren't going to fix the problem in existing PB's.....
I think Apple should've offered higher resolution LCD on the $2499 model. That $500 premium adds 0.16 GHz faster CPU clock speed, 512 MB extra RAM ($100 upgrade), 128 MB extra VRAM (not offered but $75 upgrade for iMac), and 20 GB extra disk space ($100 upgrade). In other words, $500 equals to $275 worth of built-to-order options plus 0.16 GHz faster CPU. Apple should've made it more enticing by offering 1680x1050 LCD, although I have a feeling Apple won't have much trouble selling both $1999 and $2499 MacBook Pros.
bodeh6 said:
I looked at HP, Sony, Averatec, and Dell and the standard resolution was 1280x800 for 15.4 inch displays. When I outfitted the Dell Inspiron with specs closer to the MBP (though graphics hardware was a Radeon x300 with 128 MB RAM) the machine was nearly as much as the MBP, but the performance would be much less still, it had a higher resolution.
I guess people should be happier that the resolution wasn't lower than it is.
the new display is a 16:10 ratio screen. the old one was 3:2
1440/900=1.6 (16/10)
1440/960=1.5 (3/2)
1440/900=1.6 (16/10)
1440/960=1.5 (3/2)
They changed for a couple reasons: The 15.4" standard is much, much more common than the 15.2" one. It's becoming increasingly harder to find 15.2" displays. And If you had a 1440x960 on a 15.4" display when it was designed to fit on a 15.2", it would simply look funny. They sacrificed 60 vertical (arguably less important than horizontal) pixels for better quality displays, and a more common standard. No brainer.
supergod said:
You've never wanted a PowerBook that was lighter, didn't get dented and scratched so easily, had better 802.11g reception or had more than 2 USB ports?
Yes, the PowerBook design is pretty good. But it can be improved in a number of areas.
homerjward said:
Correct. In addition, the iMacs and Cinema Displays are also 16:10. It's easier for developers if there are only two aspects (4:3 and 16:10) to worry about.
Morn said:
Especially if they are streaky white ones ruining an already desaturated PB screen....
I'd settle for a brighter, crisper, vibrant display over 60 lines anyday
supergod said:
I have to disagree. While I think that in terms of style, the aluminum books are beautiful, I think Apple could do a much better job on ergonomics. For example:
- a mouse button that doesn't require so much pressure. I mean, how difficult is that? Look at the pismo, thinkpads for good resistance. This clicker is just too hard for frequent use - that is if you don't want tendinitis in your thumb.
- A wireless detachable keyboard AND an LCD that is adjustable in height - perhaps some kind of slide mechanism? Then this would truly be a desktop replacement.
- I think the keyboard is excellent, but the Thinkpad T-series keyboards are still better, feel more substantial and have slightly more depth. And they are 1" thick so that's the problem either.
There are many things that can be improved, the above are just a few of them.
It might have something with adding the iSight to the top to the screen. If you notice, the bezel above the screen is taller then the PowerBook. I ran my 20" Dell monitor at 1600x1000 (50 pixels shorter then the native resolution) and it is about 1/2 inch shorter at the bottom. This is a little more then what the new bezel takes up, but could account for it.
Morn said:
What maths did you use to work that out? It's more like 86,400 pixels. homerjward and Nermal are correct though, it's a lot easier for developers to just have two aspects to deal with.
I dont see no fookin lines...
I do see however, a revision A product that reminds me of mine... so it wont be too many months before the low voltage dual core is in the revision B along with whatver else Apple sees users whining about the most.
Remember pci/pci-x... and the first two batches of G5?
Similar prophecy...
$
I do see however, a revision A product that reminds me of mine... so it wont be too many months before the low voltage dual core is in the revision B along with whatver else Apple sees users whining about the most.
Remember pci/pci-x... and the first two batches of G5?
Similar prophecy...
$
PDE said:
But they're not backlit (and backlit is waaaaaaaaay better than the thinklight). I do lots of long-haul travel (Australia-USA mostly) and the backlit keyboard is fantastic (and I used Thinkpad T series for many years prior to the powerbook).
oingoboingo said:
How often does a mobile user need more than 2 USB ports?? Many USB devices have a second port in the back to chain USB devices. And how hard is it, if you do need more than 2 computer plug-ins, to pull out a $20 mobile USB hub and plug it in.