The Worst Thing Ever: Retina Display

[philnotfil]

pcmag.com

Time magazine ran the headline, "What If Apple's New MacBook Pros Don't Have Retina Displays?"—implying that it would be a disaster and could be a gigantic letdown. Puh-leeze.

The reason for the super-high resolution screen is so you can get some detail on a 3.5-inch cell phone screen or on a smaller display in a cameras viewfinder. Ever since the introduction of the so-called Retina display, all we hear about is Retina this and Retina that.

The Worst Thing Ever: Retina Display
People are wild about Retina display but, in actuality, it doesn't make a big difference.

John Dvorak By John C. Dvorak
June 6, 2012 03:16pm EST
62 Comments

Share102 inShare2 0digg
Retina display magnified

Everyone seems abuzz about the possibility of a new MacBook Pro, likely to be announced next week at Apple's Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC).

Many fret that the world as we know it may end it if the new MacBooks don't have a Retina display. Cripes.

Time magazine ran the headline, "What If Apple's New MacBook Pros Don't Have Retina Displays?"—implying that it would be a disaster and could be a gigantic letdown. Puh-leeze.

The reason for the super-high resolution screen is so you can get some detail on a 3.5-inch cell phone screen or on a smaller display in a cameras viewfinder. Ever since the introduction of the so-called Retina display, all we hear about is Retina this and Retina that.

I put my AMOLED Android screen next to Apple's Retina display all the time and my display looks better. Nobody denies it. So what's the fuss and why does everyone now want this Retina display on a larger format?

I sure don't. For one thing, it would be a disaster for performance. Those extra pixels have to be addressed, you know, and since you do not want text that appears to be one pica high, a lot of effort would go into the scaling of everything. In a side-by-side comparison at a three-foot distance, it is doubtful that the Retina display on a 15-inch screen would look much different than 1920x1080.

Panasonic once asserted that at any normal viewing distance from a flat panel TV, nobody could tell the difference between 720p and 1080p unless the display was bigger than 50-inches. I'm certain, though, that all the iPhone mavens would want a Retina display TV because I hear a loud buzz demanding 4K TVs. These are sets that would typically be anywhere from 4096x1714 to 3996x2160 to 4096x3112. Really? You want that? "Yeah, man!"

[orangeblueorangeblue]

The thing is John Dvorak is the biggest negative nelly in the world. I don't think there's ever been a new piece of technology he hasn't dismissed out of hand.

[philnotfil]

Yes he is But I agree with hi in this case. Part of the problem is that operating systems outside of mobile devices don't handle changed resolutions intelligently. I want images and videos to display as clearly as possible, but I don't want icons or text to get any smaller when I switch to a higher resolution.

When I get a new work computer I always have to lower the resolution before I can do any work on it. My current screen can show 1680x1050, but anything past 1440x900 and I have trouble seeing what things are with my arms at a comfortable extension to reach the keyboard. My last work laptop had a 1920x1200 monitor, almost worthless for doing actual work, but great for making pictures and movies look good.

I had a coworker who didn't know that he could change the resolution on his laptop, and he had one of the 1920 machines. He would work with his face about 12 inches from the monitor when working in anything other than Word or Excel (where he knew how to zoom easily).

Sometimes more is not better. Now if they could teach the OS to keep things viewable, but with greater clarity and focus, that would be great, but that isn't how it currently works (outside of mobile devices).

[orangeblueorangeblue]

You're talking about screen resolution and OS presentation, though.

You can have an insanely hi-res screen and present things in a way that are visible 2 feet away or more and they will look better in most cases.

[philnotfil]

Originally Posted by orangeblueorangeblue

You're talking about screen resolution and OS presentation, though.

You can have an insanely hi-res screen and present things in a way that are visible 2 feet away or more and they will look better in most cases.

Sure, we can, but we don't. Which is my biggest problem with higher resolution monitors. Until we change the OS to deal with them in a functional way, they aren't really worth it.