17" high-resolution display vs. standard resolution

Hi,
I'm looking to buy a refurbished MacBook Pro 17" and I'm trying to decide between the 17" high-resolution display and the 17" standard resolution display.
The laptop will be connected to a Studio Display 90% of the time and I'll use the laptop display as a second monitor. Battery life isn't a big concern. I like that a 7200rpm drive comes with the high-resolution display.
I'll be using the computer mostly for text and HTML editing, e-mail, web-based reading, and a small amount of simple photo editing, such as resizing and cropping. I'm replacing a Powerbook G4 17" 1Ghz.
I saw the high-resolution display and I thought the text looked small. It was very sharp and readable, but still small. Unfortunately, stepping down to the next resolution isn't as sharp and clear as the native resolution.
I'm wondering if I will get tired of the small text. Not all applications work well and look as good when bumping up the text sizes. And zooming is kind of a kludge.
Maybe the high-resolution display is better for photo and video editing?
The $200 difference isn't that big of a deal to me, especially since the computer is $2000+.
I'm trying to decide if I should go with the high-resolution display, and I'd appreciate your thoughts if you've had to make a similar decision. Do you find the text large enough? If you like your high-resolution display, what do you use your computer for primarily?
Please let me know if you've read any helpful reviews or comments about the high-resolution screen (other than recent 90-day posts in this forum, which I've already read). Thanks to hiking4ever for your helpful post in the other recent thread.
Thanks!
-- Ed

I have the high resolution display, and I just set the fonts bigger for the applications I use in that application's preferences. Foe example, you can go to Safari>Preferences>Advanced and check the Universal Access box. That will allow you to set the fonts at any size up to 24 pt. I set them at 18 pt., and every Safari Application will open in that size. Same for Mail. That way you don't have to change the resolution. I primarily do Safari and Mail and documents now, although I got the high resolution display for photo editing. But I really do like it, and am glad I got it.
Hope this helps!

Similar Messages

17inch widescreen display VS 17inch high resolution display

Whats the major difference between the 17 inch matte widescreen display and the 17 inch matte high resolution display?

The standard 17 inch display is of a resolution of 1680x1050 and uses a fluorescent backlight. The high resolution display has a resolution of 1920x1200 and uses LEDs for the backlight. From a practical perspective, the high resolution display holds more on it (granted, it is all a little smaller), is slightly crisper, and has the LEDs, which will make the display a bit less power hungry, giving you better battery life.
Personally, I love having the 15 inch LED screen and would go for it on the 17 inch as well.

Are There Any Advantages To High Resolution Displays?

I am looking to buy a new 17 inch MacBook Pro at the end of this month and seeking practical advice on configuration options I should choose.
I am curious about what other people think of the advantages and disadvantages of the high resolution displays. Perhaps it is just a personal preference on the part of different users but non-graphics users I have talked to who have used the high res screens say they don't like them and why but I have yet to talk to any artists who have used them and whether artists find real advantages. My feeling is that it would be good to be able to fit a larger (more pixels) image on the screen or is it better to just leave high res screens to those who work with high definition video/animation?
My usage of the computer is largely in Photoshop and other graphics programs like Painter, and web design.

Just to be clear, though, reducing the resolution of an LCD can have a negative effect on image quality. LCDs have an optimal "native" resolution and setting the resolution below that native level results in a poorer quality image.
Leopard claims "resolution independence" - I have not tried it yet, but if you read the description of this feature, you will note that it applies to the user interface elements. Granted, that's often what you notice the most (i.e. the problem with reducing the resolution below native for an LCD is that the text in Finder, all of the menu bar items, etc., looks "fuzzy"). By appropriately scaling the UI elements, Leopard overcomes the limitation. But the "fuzzyness" will still apply to non-UI things that are displayed - i.e. images. Since based on your posts you will be working with images primarily, high-res vs. standard is still a choice I'd recommend considering carefully, and ideally by trying them both side-by-side.
Ps. Thanks for awarding points!

Upgrade from standard resolution to high resolution

Hi there. I'm new to the mac world... I just bought a 17" macbook pro with the standard resolution. I wanted the high resolution screen, but I got way to good of a deal on the one I got.
How would I go about upgrading to the high resolution display? I've found the hi-res LCD panels selling on the internet, but I'm told I can't install the hi-res display in a MBP that was originally equiped with the standard resolution screen.
The computer is still in the sealed box... Would apple allow me to send in my machine and have it replaced with one with a hi-res screen, assuming I would pay the difference?
Thanks in advance!

The best thing to do is to call 1-800-MY-APPLE and see what they say. Good luck!

High Resolution Display for MBP 13"?

Hope Apple is listening from this board ... Am I the only one who want the powerful MBP 13" w/ fine high-res display of MBA 13"?

I believe that 133 ppi (pixels per inch) is actually quite high for a Mac desktop, considering that all other Mac OS X releases before it have made the blanket assumption that its drawing canvas is at 72 dpi, and that resolution independence hasn't really taken hold in the Mac world like it has in iOS (and iOS gets away with it by representing displays in a multiple of 2x by 2x).
The current MacBook Pro 13" and MacBook Air computers have a 133 ppi display, which I find impressive already. If Apple does end up doubling that to 266 ppi, I'd really love to see it, but then again, having such a display paired up with an external 27" Thunderbolt Display is going to make me think twice.
—tonza

Opinions About New High Resolution Displays

Does anyone have an opinion about the MacBook Pro's new high resolution display option. The price doesn't seem to be that big of a deal. My concern is that the higher number of pixels for the same screen area will mean smaller text display. Am I correct about this?

Yes, you're correct about the text getting smaller, however that may not be the case for much longer. What I'm speaking of is the resolution independent ui in Leopard - where your ui can still remain the "regular" size that you're used to, but everything is still at a higher resolution...
ummm don't really know how to explain it any better - take a look at this wiki article - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resolution_independence
So I personally wont even think about upgrading till Leopard comes out - I used 1920x1200 displays on some laptops in the past, and everything is WAY too small for comfortable use.

?: Will a high resolution display work in PSCC (Windows)

Hello everyone,
I am going to be purchasing a windows laptop 15" that has 2 screen resolution choices. I can choose a 1920x1080 or a 2880x1080. I would rather purchase the 2880x1620 display but i am confused as to whether or not it will work properly with Photoshop CC in a Windows environment.
Here are my 3 questions for you:
1. Will a 2880x1620 display be workable with PSCC or should i opt for the 1920x1080 option?
2. If there is no solution currently for the higher resolution option do you think there may be one soon?
3. If i purchase the 2880x1620 display can i run it at a lower resolution until the problem is fixed or will not running it at the native resolution create other problems?
Thank you so much for helping me with this. I need to order the laptop soon and im at a loss as to which display to select.
Best to you and thanks again,
rick

Yes Trevor thats me! I thought that was you! How are you doing?? Great to hear from you :-)
A couple of things as i stayed up late last night looking around.....
I have looked at the Dell Precision M4700 and because its got the older processors & its not as expensive as the M4800 but would seem to work well for me. Im looking for something that is not too high a resolution like 1920x1080 (and even that is pushing it on a 15.6" screen im sure), good viewing angles, lots of RAM, decent NITS, decent sRGB coverage and that wont break the bank. Easy chore huh?
I think with this purchase im going to have to make some compromises and by getting this machine i think i will be ok. Im sure they will probably come out with a high resolution fix the day i get my lower resolution display but hey, thats the way it goes huh?
Im using a very old MacBook Pro right now that is 1200x800 and it is excellent so im sure i'll be fine with a 1920x1080 display.
One thing that has me confused is when i look at Dell's website it states that all of their machines are approved for Photoshop CS6. Kind of funny they would say that if that includes the high rez version no?
Also, they have something called an "optimizer" which i beleive is software that works with your computer to optimize it for certain applications on the fly. It lists it as working well with Photoshop. That would in no way be a solution to the high rez display issues would it?
I even saw a video that had the highest resolution display with Photoshop on it and it looked fine! Did they Photoshop that??
Any insight you can give me before i pull the trigger would be most appreciated. I am getting a Windows machine because i have to run QuickBooks for Windows on it and i dont want to use Parallels or Boot Camp. Just me but i dont like the idea of doing that (i know im wierd!)
Hope to hear from you all soon!
Thank you so much for the great help!
best to you,
rick

Make Skype work properly with Windows DPI scaling for high resolution displays

Hello, As of now, Skype does not work well with Windows DPI scaling. Everything looks fuzzy (fonts, icons, etc).Microsoft's recommendation is to turn off the DPI scaling ( http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2900023 ) but in this case, the text is too tiny to be read. Basically everyone with a high resolution display is stuck with either tiny of fuzzy fonts, making Skype unusable. It's really a pity because other Microsoft programs such as Office work perfectly with Windows DPI scaling, and Skype also looks great on Mac with Retina display. With high DPI displays becoming more and more common, this is a must have feature. Thanks for reading!

pokegwa wrote:
Hello, As of now, Skype does not work well with Windows DPI scaling. Everything looks fuzzy (fonts, icons, etc).Microsoft's recommendation is to turn off the DPI scaling ( http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2900023 ) but in this case, the text is too tiny to be read. Basically everyone with a high resolution display is stuck with either tiny of fuzzy fonts, making Skype unusable. It's really a pity because other Microsoft programs such as Office work perfectly with Windows DPI scaling, and Skype also looks great on Mac with Retina display. With high DPI displays becoming more and more common, this is a must have feature. Thanks for reading!It's been two years actually. As you can see Skype is really broken on HDPI displays and the issue is still being ignored/unacknowledged by Skype devs.

I have a high resolution display (3200x1800) and a 13" laptop, but my CC-applications have microscopic icons at the point of being useless.

The text based menus are ok, and is the only option that can be configured to a larger size.
But the icons in the CC applications are so tiny that they are practically useless.
Even extended on a separate 24" LCD display the interface icons are too small.
So, having searched a lot on the topic of high resolution displays, the OS will scale an application appropriately if it is designed correctly.
I am running Windows 8.1, and i.e. the applications in the Office pack scale perfectly. Not so strange, perhaps, being MS.
When will CC get this upgrade?
Kind regards,
Thomas

Please take a look at: Photoshop CC / Windows 8.1 HiDPI / Retina scaling support at the moment Adobe works with Microsoft to work on scaling for HiDPI devices. See reaply from Chris Cox
"Again, we're continuing to work with Microsoft on the scaling problems in Windows.
We, and they, recognize that the existing attempts to offer scalable UI have serious issues.
And no, we can't commit to a timeframe for a long list of reasons."
So you need some patience as HiDPI is getting more and more popular i assume it will be anytime soon.

Is high resolution display for macbook pro 15 available in india?

i was planing to buy a macbook pro 15 in in india but i really want a high resolution display.

There is no Apple Store in India yet, may be soon.
But there are stores that sell Apple products.
Contact them and find out about the products they carry.
Below find the link.
http://www.techpluto.com/apple-store-india/

Library Preview displays at lower resolution than Develop Preview

I recently bought a Nikon D7100.
I took some test shots and imported the images to Lightroom 4.4, then generated 1:1 previews for all the images.
Previews zoomed to 1:1 in Library Mode are noticeably soft. The image below is a screen shot of the Library preview:
Moving to Develop View produces a higher-resolution 1:1 preview. The image below is a screen shot of the Develop preview:
Look at the bricks and window screens to see the difference.
This difference occurs immediately after import (with a User Preset applied during import). Once any Develop work is done, the Library preview updates and displays at full resolution.
This problem makes doing initial editing/selection of images time consuming, because I can't determine the sharpness/quality of imported images until I've done some kind of Develop adjustment on each image.
If anyone has a circumvention or solution to this problem I will appreciate receiving it.
Thanks,
Brett Rowett
Sacramento CA

BRSac wrote:
I recently bought a Nikon D7100.
I took some test shots and imported the images to Lightroom 4.4, then generated 1:1 previews for all the images.
Previews zoomed to 1:1 in Library Mode are noticeably soft.
This difference occurs immediately after import (with a User Preset applied during import). Once any Develop work is done, the Library preview updates and displays at full resolution.
You said "then generated 1:1 previews for all the images," so I assume you manually selected Library> Previews> Render 1:1 Previews from inside the Libray module. Selecting 'Render Previews : 1:1' in the LR Import module under 'File Handling' will automatically render the previews on import.
There are two possibilites why you are seeing low-res 1:1 Library previews:
1) The Previews were still being created in the background after import, and you are trying to edit images that do not yet have a 1:1 preview.
2) You inadvertently cancelled the 1:1 preview rendering process by a) closing the progress bar in the upper lefthand, or b) closing LR before completion of 1:1 Preview Rendering.
I would NOT reccomend discarding 1:1 Previews since that will create the very situation you are complaing about in this post. If you are low on hard drive free space then this recommendation would be helpful.

Macbook pro "hi-resolution" display?

i have a 15" macbook pro with "high resolution" display (1440 x 900).   note this is NOT a retina macbook pro - it is older.
i'm used to working at "native" resolution - it makes the menu bar rather small, but i prefer it this way.   upon installing yosemite on this machine, it seems my "effective" screen resolution is reduced - the menubar appares to be scaled-up in size, default fonts for all apps are larger, etc.
it appears that the "displays" preferences pane in yosemite offers few options - "best for display" or "scaled", however nothing i can choose here (as far as i can tell) brings things back to what i want which is to use the display in native full resolution mode with no scale-up of any kind.   even if i select "scaled" and choose 1440x900, the UI elements (and the menubar in particular) still appear to be significantly scaled up.
on my other machine (a retina machine running mavericks), i see a slightly a slightly different version of displays preference pane.   i get what i want there by choosing the "more space" option.
anyone have an idea how i can get the effect of the "more space" option (what i would call "native resolution") on my older macbook pro under yosemite?

Looking at the specs, this MB Pro comes under late 2007 spec, but checking supported resolutions, it more than covers native resolutions for both main display and the NEC simultaneously.
Can anyone shed some light on this, or have I got this wrong? Is it down to DVI or could I use VGA with an adaptor - would this give me better resolution?
Cheers.

Ideal resolution (dpi) for standard 24"x36" posters?

There has long been debate at the various studios I worked for regarding ideal poster size resolutions.
For 24"x36" posters, some studios work in full 300dpi. Others find that resolution too demanding on the computer, and work at half-size (150dpi). Then I was told printers will print movie posters at 72dpi so anything above that is wasted anyway.
So I come to the experts... what resolution are most 24"x36" Hollywood posters done in?
Thanks!

If it goes to a sheet fed press, probably never. Most color printing is done in China now, and though they do remarkable work in the high resolution area, I suspect 175 would be a fair working resolution. I say this as one previous poster here stated 150 was fine for him. But he did not state if that was as a designer or if it was as printing company. At 175, this may be the line count the poster is printed at, and a possibly good match for both party's needs. And if the poster prints at a lower resolution, then both parties have a higher quality file than can be lowered for printing. Thus, you have a very good chance of a win-win situation at this point, and everyone is happy.
If I remember right, at 8 bit, 2' x 3' in 300 ppi is around 150 mgb. So the lower resolution makes the file a lot more managable before the CMYK separations are done.
I hope all goes well with the poster design.
CHEERS...Mathew
Date: Sun, 16 May 2010 21:45:36 -0600
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Ideal resolution (dpi) for standard 24"x36" posters?
Sorry, my bad for not being clearer with my question.
What I wanted to know, essentially, was if there was any point working in a document that was 24"x36" @ 300dpi? In other words, is it likely that I will EVER be printing the poster at that size and resolution? Because PSD's can get ridiculously big very fast at those settings.
Without knowing what the printing method will be in the end... heck, the client may want to handle the printing himself... my question pertains more to the working file and how much resolution is considered overkill.
Has a movie studio ever printed a 24"x36" poster @ 300 dpi?
>

Display mirroring and resolution

Hi,
I'm trying to set up my macbook for presentations using an apple vga adaptor. When I plug into an external monitor, everything behaves as I expect until I switch ON mirroring. When I do this the macbook screen becomes square (even though the resolution is set to 1280 x 800), with large black edges.
Any thoughts?

Hi stu19,
taken from the Video Developer Note found here: http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Hardware/Conceptual/HWTechVideo/Articles/Video_implementation.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40003994-SW741200331181
*External Display Modes*
The computer supports two external display modes: video mirroring and extended desktop. The default is extended desktop mode. To toggle between the two modes, use the Displays pane in System Preferences.
*Extended Desktop Mode*
In extended desktop mode, the resolution of the two displays can be set independently. In this mode, the maximum external display resolution supported by the MacBook is 2048 x 1536 at 60 Hz for analog displays and 1920 x 1200 at 60 Hz for digital displays.
*Video Mirroring Mode*
In mirroring mode, a single resolution is used for both displays. The highest resolution possible is the native resolution of the internal display (1280 x 800). If the external display can support a higher resolution than the internal display, that higher resolution is unused in mirroring mode.
*If the external display cannot support the full resolution of the internal display, the lower resolution is used for both displays.* A suitable resolution for both displays should be chosen in the Displays pane of System Preferences.
*Scaling and Black Borders*
In either extended desktop or video mirroring mode, choosing a lower resolution than a display supports results in scaling up the image, if possible. Depending on the supported resolutions, aspect ratios, and refresh rates of the two displays, the scaled image may not fill the screen of one display, in which case the image on that display has black borders. This black border typically occurs when the resolution chosen has a different aspect ratio than the display. It does not occur on CRT displays.
Hope it helps
Stefan

How can I run iTunes in a sharp resolution display?

My iTunes app is showing up in low resolution.
I use a 27 inch Dell monitor running in 2560X1440 resolution.
How can I get a crisp image of this app. I'm using Win8 running in desktop mode.

I uninstalled iTunes, Bonjour and even Quicktime. Next I updated my Nvidia driver, then reinstalled latest iTunes app. In preference, the highest video version is set at 1080p which didn't help.
So now iTunes is still looking in standard resolution (not sharp enough).
Any other ideas?

17" high-resolution display vs. standard resolution

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for