Apple's OS X 10.10 Yosemite beta hints at Retina display iMacs

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited June 2014
Rumors of Retina iMacs have been floating since the iPhone 4 with Retina display launched in 2010, but newly discovered code in Apple's latest OS X 10.10 Yosemite beta suggests the anticipated all-in-ones may be close to market.

iMac


Rooting around in the recently released Yosemite developer preview's system library, a member of French forum MacBidouille uncovered a string of code pointing to scaled display resolutions of what could be a Retina-toting iMac.

A file covering display device scaling settings shows a number of high-resolution options for an unknown computer that go far beyond Apple's current offerings. The highest resolution is shown as 6,400-by-3,600 pixels, which would likely be scaled down to 3,200-by-1,800 pixels for a Retina panel. Product identifiers associated with the file were previously referenced in a recent beta build of OS X 10.9.4 Mavericks and tied to an as-yet-unannounced iMac model.
The first of these resolutions indicates hexa "00001900 00000e10" is therefore a resolution scaling of ... 6400 x 3600 (probably 3200x1800 HiDPI).
Continues and is 5760x3240 (2880x1620 HiDPI) 4096x2304 (2048x1152 HiDPI), etc..
(There are other resolutions, just make the conversion from hex)
While scaled resolutions can be deduced from the code string, the forum user notes a native display resolution is more difficult to pin down. It can be speculated that Apple will treat the Retina iMac much the same as it does the MacBook Pro with Retina display, meaning system graphics are generated at high resolutions then scaled down to sharpen the image.

Apple has long been rumored to field a Retina display iMac, but the company has only deployed the high-resolution hardware in products up to the MacBook Pro. In April, KGI Securities analyst Ming-Chi Kuo predicted Apple would release a low-cost iMac as well as a Retina MacBook Air by the end of 2014.
«134

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 77
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member

    Leave it to Apple not to pussyfoot around. Only increasing the resolution to 4k? Fugeddabadit!

  • Reply 2 of 77
    lemon bon bon.lemon bon bon. Posts: 2,173member
    Be still my beating heart...

    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 3 of 77
    suddenly newtonsuddenly newton Posts: 13,803member
    That blows 4K out of the water, if it refers to a real unreleased product.
  • Reply 4 of 77
    dacloodacloo Posts: 890member
    Bet they have plans for a kickass GPU to power that.
  • Reply 5 of 77
    So 4k resolution is really 4000 x something and this is hinting at 6400 ?
  • Reply 6 of 77
    suddenly newtonsuddenly newton Posts: 13,803member
    23 megapixels. I hope it is true. It won't stop the trolls who will post cheap shots about FUD: [I]Fear, Uncertainty,[/I] and [I]Dre.[/I]
  • Reply 7 of 77
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    Originally Posted by tkrunner1738 View Post

    So 4k resolution is really 4000 x something and this is hinting at 6400 ?

     

    4K is 3840 x 2160.

  • Reply 8 of 77
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

     
    The first of these resolutions indicates hexa "00001900 00000e10" is therefore a resolution scaling of ... 6400 x 3600 (probably 3200x1800 HiDPI).

    I don't understand this reference to HiDPI. I thought the scaling only applied to the icons and user interface items which are double their normal pixel dimensions to account for the Retina resolution. I'm thinking that it really is 6400 x 3600 in terms of the total number of pixels on the screen being 24,040,000. 3200 x 1800 isn't even 4K.

  • Reply 9 of 77
    redhotfuzzredhotfuzz Posts: 306member
    Please hurry Apple. I'm in desperate need of an iMac upgrade. But I won't do it until the refresh. I was hoping for an announcement this week. :(
  • Reply 10 of 77
    mj webmj web Posts: 918member

    Count me in. My Late 2009 iMac with 20 GB RAM is showing its age in CS6.

  • Reply 11 of 77
    boltsfan17boltsfan17 Posts: 2,279member

    I hope this will become reality. I've been holding off upgrading my iMac for a better display (not that I think the current display is bad by any means). 

  • Reply 12 of 77
    dimmokdimmok Posts: 359member
    I need
  • Reply 13 of 77
    winterwinter Posts: 1,238member
    After what I felt was a disappointing WWDC, I am giddy about this. :smokey:
  • Reply 14 of 77
    curtis hannahcurtis hannah Posts: 1,805member
    So 4k resolution is really 4000 x something and this is hinting at 6400 ?
    Yes, 4k is around 4000 by 2000(usually) and ultra HD 4k is 3840 by 2160, and this is showing even a 6 1/2 k display.
  • Reply 15 of 77
    curtis hannahcurtis hannah Posts: 1,805member
    Easily see a $1500 4k IMac and $1000 4k thunderbolt 2 display this year.
  • Reply 16 of 77

    Any sign of ID's for updated Mac Mini's? We want Haswell Mini's with stonking performance. Please, Apple, feed us.

  • Reply 17 of 77
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,617moderator
    Leave it to Apple not to pussyfoot around. Only increasing the resolution to 4k? Fugeddabadit!

    They only needed to go to 4K. This is just showing off. ;)

    Nobody's even going to run these displays at 3200, the UI would be far too small on 27".
  • Reply 18 of 77
    sennensennen Posts: 1,468member

    Interesting. Retina Thunderbolt Displays must be getting closer as well then.

     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Winter View Post



    After what I felt was a disappointing WWDC, I am giddy about this. image

     

    I'm not a developer, however I'm quite giddy over what was presented in the WWDC keynote. Extremely exciting times ahead for both Mac and the iOS platforms.

  • Reply 19 of 77
    boredumbboredumb Posts: 1,418member

    Presumably this would also lead to the same specs on an upgraded stand-alone Thunderbolt display?

  • Reply 20 of 77

    Is it clear if this is for an internal or external display?

Sign In or Register to comment.