Screen resolution is bound to increase as screen technology improves. Until Apple went Retina, the higher the screen resolution, the smaller the details on the screen. The interesting step here is instead of making details smaller, Apple made the dots per inch double.
The same evolution happened earlier with printers. Color printers commonly offer 300 dpi , often 600 dpi and some are at 1200 dpi. Compared to that, the usual 72/75 dpi or standard screens is kind of indigent, especially for phones screens. 144 dpi is only a step forward in an evolution that has no reason to stop there.
Now, not everybody will see the difference with a naked eye. But on small details for someone who has got good eyes, it will be noticeable.
At this time, only small screens benefit from high dpi, and we still have the choice. But soon, 144 dpi will become the norm, and nobody will think of it. Remember when screens where 800x600 ?
When I was a kid there wasn’t computer monitors, the operator typed in a “console”, like a typewriter, with commands being printed in paper. So, I’ve saw all this coming up. I do remember my first PC with color graphics card! ( CGA, 4 COLORS! Black/White/Magenta/Cian) with fantastic 320x200 pixels.
Its almost smoke and mirrors. You can see the difference between a retina and non-retina app if you look hard.
But the non-retina app only looks poorer because its been scaled by the retina machine.
It looks fine on a non-retina machine.
As a developer, you’re better off with a 15 or 17inch non-retina MBP than a 13 inch retina one, IMO
(taking only the screen into consideration).
Simply because you get more effective pixels and therefore layout area.
Switching the retina machine to non-scaled mode gets a lot of screen estate, but very small text.
[quote=118565:@Jeff Tullin]As a developer, you’re better off with a 15 or 17inch non-retina MBP than a 13 inch retina one, IMO
(taking only the screen into consideration).
Simply because you get more effective pixels and therefore layout area.
Switching the retina machine to non-scaled mode gets a lot of screen estate, but very small text.[/quote]
I use a 21.5 " iMac for development. It is the right size for a comfortable use, and a proper ergonomic sitting posture. If I was to use even a 17 inches screen, that would be a real pain. So until the iMac comes in Retina, the most important thing for me is to be able to work hours on a screen without having to bend over a miniscule screen with stronger glasses to enjoy the wondrous crisp.
I have a Retina iPad, but have to admit I do not see much difference with the non-Retina one I used to own before.
As I wrote before, there are still bragging rights attached to Retina screens, so let fresh owners parad all they want about how “horrid” regular apps look on their newly acquired gizmo. Of course, apps will have to be adapted to the new 144 dpi resolution (and yet support 72 dpi). Which if for the moment geekish and mysterious, but shall become transparent as soon as Xojo will have implemented Retina support. And yet again, in spite of much posturing from boasting Retina users, I have no doubt Xojo will provide more than adequate support for the new generation of screens. At that point bragging vouchers will expire, and things will revert to what is important in development : that apps be designed to fit a purpose. Just as cars are made to be driven, before exhibiting a particular color.
I bought one the day after Apple announced on their June 2012 WWDC keynote that it was discontinued.
I use - have to use - a MacBook Pro 15" retina at work and I hate it. I don’t know what I’m going to do in a year os so, when I will have to replace my 17" MacBook Pro.
To further add insult to injury, I need to restore a backup from my Time Capsule.
Instead of a nice simple USB cable, I have to use an Ethernet cable, or restore wirelessly which will take days (it says here)
The new retina mbp doesn’t do ethernet.
A thunderbolt to ethernet adaptor is another £30
Sad to say it, but I’m really not loving this thing.
No CD burner, no Ethernet, and Retina ‘aint all that’.
[quote=160439:@Emile Schwarz]I just re-read the op text:
For your information: my 13" Retina MacBookPro screen resolution is 1,280 x 800 (@144 dpi).
So, all I can see at retina resolution is 1,280 x 800 pixels !
Apple talks about 2560 x 1600, but its computers are preset to 1,280 x 800 pixels ![/quote]
I will tune up a bit more what I think:
in my 15" MacBook Pro (non retina), in the Finder, I could store 8 icons in each rows (folder window opened at larger size). When I open one now, the last icon on each row is not visible. The 15" Monitor size was 1,440 x 900. And I do not talk about the 800 to 900 - 100 pixels are missing: the window opens with a 900 pixel height - - discrepency.
Note: I do not tried to display the Finder with the native resolution, yet.
