[PCWorld]

Post your comments for Apple Readies OS X for Retina Display Macs here

[HankRearden]

Would love a Retina Diaplay Mac. Hope it is in the next MBA.

[MichaelMullins]

I'm wondering if the iMac line will get such a display, since I have no interest in laptops. It'd be a nice thing to have for gaming, assuming Windows can even recognize the resolution after I install it on a separate partition.

[carlosteran]

I hope the new iMacs will also get the new Retina display.

[LiveBrianD]

Now if only Windows had better high dpi support and the ability to use a different dpi per monitor.

[userwloo]

Their's nothing gorgeous about a retina display, Seriously, it doesn't look any better then a AMOLED Or OLED Display, It just simply looks like a very high contrast glossy LCD Display. Never the less it is gorgeous, i can still get a much cheaper laptop with just as gorgeous screen.

[KLanD]

MichaelMullins, on 12 May 2012 - 12:08 PM, said:

I'm wondering if the iMac line will get such a display, since I have no interest in laptops. It'd be a nice thing to have for gaming, assuming Windows can even recognize the resolution after I install it on a separate partition.

Windows has supported high dpi monitors since win XP, I believe. So it shouldn't be an issue.

[MleB]

"...The file size of the icon also grew from 209 kilobytes in OS X 10.7.3 to 1.7 megabytes in 10.7.4..."

Yikes! And then there's the programs coping with that, too. If the iPad (3) is anything to go by, Apple will not be supplying any additional storage to cover this - and certainly not for free.

This'll become more than a little problematic on a 'real' computer like the MBA - already offering extremely limited storage at a premium price. In fact, I'm having a PowerBook flashback...

[Evildave]

The 27" iMac has a 2560x1440 display. It's very, very nice.

I might be tempted to 'upgrade' early if the 13" MBA gets a substantially higher resolution display.

But I think the timeline for that is a little longer than any 'regular' macbook refreshes.

[HankRearden]

Evildave, on 13 May 2012 - 04:35 PM, said:

The 27" iMac has a 2560x1440 display. It's very, very nice.

I might be tempted to 'upgrade' early if the 13" MBA gets a substantially higher resolution display.

But I think the timeline for that is a little longer than any 'regular' macbook refreshes.

I'm thinking the MBA might actually be the first to get this Retina display. If Apple can push 15 million of these panels out for a $499 iPad, surely they can pump just 1.5 million more in the MBA. The iPad outsells their entire computer line by more than a factor of 3x. So adding these panels can sure be done and helps lower the cost overall while setting Apple further apart from their competitors. Perhaps wishful thinking on my part, but I'm running out of reasons this won't show up on MBAs. I'm actually thinking that since the 11" is closest in physical size to the iPad that it might be the easiest Mac to get the panel first. It is likely the iMac, being a 21" and 27" display could be the most difficult to get the panel. Apple also loves to say how their mobile computers outsell their desktops. Yet another reason those should benefit first.

[Evildave]

True. But I don't know what they're planning behind their walls. They don't often update everything all at once.

It's just as possible there won't be an update this summer.

I doubt anything new will come rolling out for any line of products before 'Mountain Lion' is ready, and they're still offering up developer test versions every week or two. But I haven't really been paying attention.

[Bryce]

"been increased to 1024-by-1024 pixels, double that of the previous 512-by-512 pixels"
That would be 4x not 2x the number of pixels.

[Richierein]

I think it's time for the PC manufacturers to consider this retina display for their products in order to remain competitive.

[CalHolfeld]

Richierein, on 17 May 2012 - 04:46 AM, said:

I think it's time for the PC manufacturers to consider this retina display for their products in order to remain competitive.

I'm not sure how necessary that actually is. On a tablet or phone where everything's bigger to be usable for touch I can understand the high resolution, but on a normal computer, having everything more clear but smaller and smaller means you just end up zooming in more with a browser to actually see and read the text.

In the business environment in my area there are very rarely people using max resolution. Sadly, most people are still using 1024x768 cause that's the only way they can see it.

It may be cool to have 2500+ resolutions...is it necessary to be competitive? Maybe one day when everyone has great eyes.

[Evildave]

Another issue is that Apple built the whole supply chain to make these displays exclusively for themselves. Similar to the way the milling equipment for the solid aluminum Macbook chassis are hard to come by.

It would take a very, very big manufacturer, like Sony, and a BIG investment to mass produce displays that compete for both performance AND price... and Sony doesn't do you any favors on pricing, especially on their 'high end' products.

Higher resolution is a very important thing for mobile displays. The more readable text and details you can get on them, the more useful they are for 'higher end' applications.

Though as a programmer, getting more text on the screen at the same time, in a way that doesn't irritate my eyeballs is usually the most important thing. Then the #&*( keyboard.

If you want the PC manufacturers of the world to make a better machine on the cheap, how about taking a 'normal' keyboard and just chopping off the numeric keypad for the gigantic 17" machines? Don't shift anything else. Maintain THAT layout. That would be a big improvement over 1001 different keyboard layouts. Sell a bluetooth numpad ala-carte for the whiners.