Double-resolution icons in OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion hint at Retina Macs

Posted:
in Mac Software edited January 2014


More evidence that high-resolution Retina display Macs are in Apple's near future has been discovered in an early developer build of OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion.



Double-resolution icons were found in "unexpected places" of Mountain Lion by a source who spoke with Ars Technica. Their inclusion was interpreted to suggest Apple could release Retina display MacBooks as soon as this summer.



One double-resolution icon was found in the new Messages application. In the second developer preview of Mountain Lion, released a week ago, some icons are incorrectly displaying at twice their normal size.



Their appearance in the latest build of Mountain Lion led the source to suggest that new MacBooks equipped with Retina displays could appear as soon as this summer, to coincide with the release of OS X 10.8.



Evidence of Retina display Macs cropped up in February when Apple released OS X 10.7.3 with new high-DPI user interface elements. Specifically, a number of cursors in the operating system were updated to scale to larger sizes on higher resolution screens.



Apple added HiDPI modes to OS X Lion last year, but they were previously only accessible by installing Xcode. HiDPI is modeled after the UI resolution doubling that Apple does with its Retina display iPhones, the iPod touch and the new iPad.











Rumors began to crop up late last year that Apple is preparing new versions of its MacBook Pro lineup with double-resolution displays. The resulting display for a 15-inch MacBook Pro would be 2,880 by 1,800 pixels.



Support for higher resolution Macs will come with Intel's next-generation Ivy Bridge processors. Those chips will support up to the 4K resolution, which allows 4,096-by-4,096 pixels per monitor.



[ View article on AppleInsider ]

«13

Comments

  • digitalclipsdigitalclips Posts: 15,717member
    Wait for the "Not for me unless they come with matte option" comments
  • Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    Wait for the "Not for me unless they come with matte option" comments



    Waiting for the "The current screen is pretty much perfect in every way" comments.
  • andysolandysol Posts: 2,506member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post


    Waiting for the "The current screen is pretty much perfect in every way" comments.



    In all honesty- as I sit in front of my 27" iMac- I don't know how it could be any better or how colors and print could be any higher quality. But- I'm happy to find out.



    But as the article doesn't mention iMacs- I would be inclined to say they agree. But ya- MacBooks could easily see a bump.
  • fulldecentfulldecent Posts: 108member
    ... and let me guess, they halve the size of the fonts on the screen again!
  • Quote:
    Originally Posted by Andysol View Post


    In all honesty- as I sit in front of my 27" iMac- I don't know how it could be any better or how colors and print could be any higher quality.




    Thank you!
  • gamringamrin Posts: 114member
    I'm trying to wrap my brain around how this would play out for someone with a second monitor. If the new MacBooks actually come with "retina" displays, what happens if you drag, say, a Finder window from your MacBook's monitor to the second monitor? Wouldn't the window become huge because of the resolution difference between the two monitors? Would the OS somehow know to use the old "low-res" UI objects that are displayed on a "non-retina" monitor? Or is that even something that would be desirable?
  • secular investorsecular investor Posts: 205member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Andysol View Post


    In all honesty- as I sit in front of my 27" iMac- I don't know how it could be any better or how colors and print could be any higher quality. But- I'm happy to find out.



    But as the article doesn't mention iMacs- I would be inclined to say they agree. But ya- MacBooks could easily see a bump.



    I think there is a good possibility that when it comes out the Apple TV (can they call it iTV? - I don't think so because of copyright issues) will have an Ultra-High-Definiton screen with over 3 million pixels like the new iPad, rather than everybody else's boring 2 million pixel HDTV.



    That way we can project wirelessly Ultra-Hight-Definition movies, videos and games to our Apple TV from our new iPads. Although the Apple TV will also have internet connection, we can download and store media to our iPads if the internet connection is not good enough to stream.

    .
  • ggfggf Posts: 41member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gamrin View Post


    I'm trying to wrap my brain around how this would play out for someone with a second monitor. If the new MacBooks actually come with "retina" displays, what happens if you drag, say, a Finder window from your MacBook's monitor to the second monitor? Wouldn't the window become huge because of the resolution difference between the two monitors? Would the OS somehow know to use the old "low-res" UI objects that are displayed on a "non-retina" monitor? Or is that even something that would be desirable?



    It strikes me that a macbook air or mac pro with a retina display that could project its screen to a full hd tv using an apple tv using mountain lion would be the objective. The idea is that you have the advantages of portablility of a air or macbook when on the road but the ability to put the display on a full hd screen when at home. Using the laptop with a second monitor is not the main game.

    Given the cost of large sreen full hd TVs is plumeting but the cost of monitors is not falling as fast this is not a bad option. Mount the TV on the wall, use apple TV to project on to the big screen and when you get home you have all the screen real estate you want without having to squint to read the small screen.

    I am 53 and my eyes are not what they used to be. I like my 11 inch macbook air but have to wear specs to read the screen. At home i use a mac mini plugged into a 50 inch plasma because i can put the screen far enough away that i can focus without specs. With a retina screen and mountain lion the air would solve both problems withoutt the need for extra cables etc
  • ivladivlad Posts: 732member
    So i guess this is how Apple wants to differentiate themselves from PC world. I really don't understand the retina on a mac, though. You're sitting far away that you don't see pixels. Isn't it retina already?
  • anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 17,398member
    Cool, man, cool.



    Credit card ready.
  • tailstails Posts: 35member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Andysol View Post


    In all honesty- as I sit in front of my 27" iMac- I don't know how it could be any better or how colors and print could be any higher quality. But- I'm happy to find out.



    But as the article doesn't mention iMacs- I would be inclined to say they agree. But ya- MacBooks could easily see a bump.



    We have calculated the average PPI for an 27" iMac screen to be considered retina, and it's along the lines of 160 ppi if you are sitting approximately 20 inches away from the screen.



    The current iMac screen is 109 ppi. Hence if the iMac screen was made retina, then it'd have approximately 2k vertical resolution instead of 1.6k.



    High res laptop screens Apple ships are 130 ppi. So they are closer to retina than desktop screens atm if they are being used at the same distance.



    But that's as much as they can go. So they can't ever produce a 27" display which has 4k vertical resolution. Because at that point if the viewer stands exactly at the retina limit, he/she cannot see the entire screen due to the limits of the vision. So 2k seems to be around what we can ever hope to see on a desktop screen.



    Oh but, they'll go 4k when they want to give 2k 3D.
  • goodgriefgoodgrief Posts: 137member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gamrin View Post


    I'm trying to wrap my brain around how this would play out for someone with a second monitor. If the new MacBooks actually come with "retina" displays, what happens if you drag, say, a Finder window from your MacBook's monitor to the second monitor? Wouldn't the window become huge because of the resolution difference between the two monitors? Would the OS somehow know to use the old "low-res" UI objects that are displayed on a "non-retina" monitor? Or is that even something that would be desirable?



    They've already worked that out. It'll work the same way as "AirDisplay" for the new iPad:



    http://www.macrumors.com/2012/03/21/...-for-your-mac/
  • tailstails Posts: 35member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iVlad View Post


    So i guess this is how Apple wants to differentiate themselves from PC world. I really don't understand the retina on a mac, though. You're sitting far away that you don't see pixels. Isn't it retina already?



    You are seeing the pixels unless you are sitting quite far away from your screen.
  • andysolandysol Posts: 2,506member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post


    Thank you!



    You're welcome



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tails View Post


    We have calculated the average PPI for an 27" iMac screen to be considered retina, and it's along the lines of 160 ppi if you are sitting approximately 20 inches away from the screen.



    The current iMac screen is 109 ppi. Hence if the iMac screen was made retina, then it'd have approximately 2k vertical resolution instead of 1.6k.



    High res laptop screens Apple ships are 130 ppi. So they are closer to retina than desktop screens atm if they are being used at the same distance.



    But that's as much as they can go. So they can't ever produce a 27" display which has 4k vertical resolution. Because at that point if the viewer stands exactly at the retina limit, he/she cannot see the entire screen due to the limits of the vision. So 2k seems to be around what we can ever hope to see on a desktop screen.



    Oh but, they'll go 4k when they want to give 2k 3D.



    Sounds good to me. Thanks for the info. I will absolutely look forward to it.
  • shadowxprshadowxpr Posts: 162member
    Win 8, iPad, macs are going retina which means HD content. With 4g being now faster than wired connections the cap issue has to be resolve. All content is about to get huge, streaming/web pages/apps/programs and caps on mobile need to represent that reality with real monthly plans that will last a month not days like the current 2-5g ones...
  • c4rlobc4rlob Posts: 277member
    I'm starting to think a Retina display is how Apple plans to 'resolutionize' the TV market.

    Although I'm not sure how they would get the jump on Sharp and LG with that, since those companies are also Apple's screen suppliers.
  • jeffreytgilbertjeffreytgilbert Posts: 324member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Andysol View Post


    In all honesty- as I sit in front of my 27" iMac- I don't know how it could be any better or how colors and print could be any higher quality. But- I'm happy to find out.



    But as the article doesn't mention iMacs- I would be inclined to say they agree. But ya- MacBooks could easily see a bump.



    Thats because the Macbook Pros 13 & 15 stock displays are terrible awful
  • gamringamrin Posts: 114member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GoodGrief View Post


    They've already worked that out. It'll work the same way as "AirDisplay" for the new iPad:



    http://www.macrumors.com/2012/03/21/...-for-your-mac/



    Yeah, I saw that article the other day, too. We'll see if Apple can make it work out as magically as that article implies.
  • gmhutgmhut Posts: 242member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Secular Investor View Post


    I think there is a good possibility that when it comes out the Apple TV (can they call it iTV? - I don't think so because of copyright issues) will have an Ultra-High-Definiton screen with over 3 million pixels like the new iPad, rather than everybody else's boring 2 million pixel HDTV...



    As I recall, there was some difficulty with the ability to manufacture the retina display as "large" as the ipad screen. That's probably why iPad 2 didn't have it, even after all the speculation that it would. I can imagine that high a resolution built by replicating that small a pixel perfectly over a large area is difficult to extrapolate to the format of, say, an iMac and maintain the necessary uniformity and quality control across the entire screen.



    Now imagine if perfecting a mass manufacturing process to move the retina screen from the iPhone to the size of an iPad was difficult, how much more difficult it will be to duplicate that process for a 24"-27" screen of an iMac.



    Then imagine the leap of difficulty in creating a mass manufacturing process to create a 42 or 50 inch retina display for a typically sized large screen TV that people are now use to. I can imagine that would make for a TV with a whopping big price-tag until the process is perfected.
  • timmydaxtimmydax Posts: 284member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gamrin View Post


    Yeah, I saw that article the other day, too. We'll see if Apple can make it work out as magically as that article implies.



    Little doubt there; for me the question is whether Adobe, Microsoft, can produce quality software for the mac anymore When does the mac app store & Xcode kill £100+ apps?
Sign In or Register to comment.