Unreleased MacBook Pro screen resolutions discovered in macOS Monterey beta

AppleInsider

Code discovered in the latest macOS Monterey beta hints at two new display resolutions that align with rumored MacBook Pro refreshes due this fall.

According to code spelunker Steve Moser, macOS Monterey includes mention of "3456 x 2234 Retina" and "3024 x 1964 Retina" screen resolutions, specifications that do not correspond to MacBooks in Apple's existing lineup, reports MacRumors.

While not confirmed, the resolutions appear to reveal information about next-generation 14- and 16-inch MacBook Pro models that are rumored to launch later this fall.

As noted in the report, the current 13- and 16-inch MacBook Pro models boast pixel densities of 227 pixels per inch and 226 ppi, respectively. Specifically, the 13-inch variant has a screen resolution of 2560-by-1600 pixels, while the 16-inch version includes a 3072-by-1920 pixel panel.

When applied to display sizes expected to debut with next-generation models, the resolutions referenced in Apple's beta code bump pixel density to about 250ppi. Importantly, that specification would allow for comfortable viewing at 2x Retina scaled resolutions, the report notes.

Current MacBook Pro models are configured at default scaled resolutions that are larger than, but not exactly "2x," the panel's native capabilities. The supposed increase in pixel density could enable "true" doubling of scaled resolutions.

Apple is rumored to launch 14- and 16-inch MacBook Pro models with Apple Silicon chips, Mini LED backlights, upgraded front-facing camera, a nixed Touch Bar and more. Recent rumblings suggest the hardware will debut at a special event potentially set for October.

Read on AppleInsider

rezwits

Good Bye Bezels hello (wanna-be 4K!!) 1728 x 1,117 (close enogh to 1080 for me!!)

Man Can't wait, how much more Budgeting can a person do?!?

F_Kent_D

rezwits said:

Good Bye Bezels hello (wanna-be 4K!!) 1728 x 1,117 (close enogh to 1080 for me!!)

Man Can't wait, how much more Budgeting can a person do?!?

I sense a bit of sarcasm here. WITF needs 4K on a 14 inch screen at an average 3 foot distance? Apple manages motion and animations rather well and is able to dress up screen tech. Take the XR for example, the best selling iPhone in years buy a lot and it has the worse display of every phone in the same price range (On paper). I own one and still use it daily for work, and for what it is there’s not a ton to complain about. My personal phone is the 12 Pro and have the 13 Pro Max coming tomorrow. Looking forward to the new cameras. 

commentzilla

F_Kent_D said:

rezwits said:

Good Bye Bezels hello (wanna-be 4K!!) 1728 x 1,117 (close enogh to 1080 for me!!)

Man Can't wait, how much more Budgeting can a person do?!?

I sense a bit of sarcasm here. WITF needs 4K on a 14 inch screen at an average 3 foot distance? Apple manages motion and animations rather well and is able to dress up screen tech. Take the XR for example, the best selling iPhone in years buy a lot and it has the worse display of every phone in the same price range (On paper). I own one and still use it daily for work, and for what it is there’s not a ton to complain about. My personal phone is the 12 Pro and have the 13 Pro Max coming tomorrow. Looking forward to the new cameras. 

Exactly. That's just stupid. What's the point of paying for something you cannot even see. Oh, right, specs. We see the same on iPhone competitors. they trip and fall over pixels without seeing a change in quality.

9secondkox2

Nice upgrade in resolution for both basically 4K on the 16. Just a little under horizontal and a little over vertical. 

Just keep the white bezels away and we are looking good. 

ivanh

We need the functionality of macOS, but not the fancy new LED. Apple can put new LED tech to the external display. It will keep a robust, powerful M1 based MBP practically affordable to more people, 

bobolicious

...should this be 4k @ 3840 x 2160 @ 16"...?

such appears to be possible:
www.dell.com/en-us/shop/dell-laptops/new-xps-15-laptop/spd/xps-15-9510-laptop/xn9510cto225s
15.6" UHD+ (3840 x 2400) InfinityEdge Touch Anti-Reflecitve 500-Nit Display

and perhaps appropriate
"When watching your 4K screen the ideal place to sit is between 1-1.5 times the screen size of your TV."
www.techradar.com/news/tv-viewing-distance

...offering full frame for Final Cut Pro on the road...?

Eric_WVGG

ivanh said:

We need the functionality of macOS, but not the fancy new LED. Apple can put new LED tech to the external display. It will keep a robust, powerful M1 based MBP practically affordable to more people, 

Hard disagree. Laptops are more likely to be used in mixed-lighting circumstances, where higher-contrast screens help visibility. I use my MBP in the sun all the time. Desktop displays are more likely to be in light-controlled rooms, much less relevant.

(nobody seems to be considering the possibility that Micro LED will be an optional upgrade…)

auxio

F_Kent_D said:

rezwits said:

Good Bye Bezels hello (wanna-be 4K!!) 1728 x 1,117 (close enogh to 1080 for me!!)

Man Can't wait, how much more Budgeting can a person do?!?

I sense a bit of sarcasm here. WITF needs 4K on a 14 inch screen at an average 3 foot distance?

The big benefit of having more pixels is that you can really make small things like text crisp and clear if you know how to take advantage of it, which benefits people with poor eyesight (like my partner).  I remember people panning Apple when they went to retina displays, but when you compared the clarity of text on retina to regular displays, it was such a huge difference.  While this may not have quite the same impact, I have no doubt that it'll be a noticeable difference.

roundaboutnow

Whenever I see these discussions questioning the need for high resolution screens, I like to point out that the most basic laser printers print at 300 dpi and are often 600 dpi, which is generally called out as suitable for plain text. The graphics professionals that frequent this site can probably speak more to this, but resolution for photos and higher quality graphics tends to be 1200 dpi and even 2400 dpi.

So even the crappiest laser printers at 300 dpi are out-performing the best screens. To read an 8.5 x 11 page, we typically don't hold it much closer to our eyes than laptop screens, and yet 300 dpi seems to be the bare minimum for quality text and line work.

Another thing to point out is that even though you might not be able to resolve the individual pixels, the higher resolution screens help avoid aliasing artifacts. Not as noticeable for moving content (video) but definitely noticeable on static images like text, architectural plans, and still images. Also, look up vernier acuity or hyperacuity for more info on visual perception of humans. We can visually detect much more information than many realize.

Now, whether the higher resolution screens are important to any particular individual is another matter. You don't have to have a 220-250 dpi screen if you don't want. But don't say nobody can tell the difference.

tht

Eric_WVGG said:

ivanh said:

We need the functionality of macOS, but not the fancy new LED. Apple can put new LED tech to the external display. It will keep a robust, powerful M1 based MBP practically affordable to more people, 

Hard disagree. Laptops are more likely to be used in mixed-lighting circumstances, where higher-contrast screens help visibility. I use my MBP in the sun all the time. Desktop displays are more likely to be in light-controlled rooms, much less relevant.

(nobody seems to be considering the possibility that Micro LED will be an optional upgrade…)

Yup, hard agree with you. Hopefully both the MBP14 and MBP16 will have miniLED displays, preferably as a standard. I pasted this image from the macstories.net review of the iPad mini, in the iPad mini thread here:



The miniLED on the iPad Pro 12.9, the top image, is totally what I was hoping for. It's 99% of what an OLED gives you in terms of contrast, and will blast out the nits in bright lighting conditions. It will have blooming in totally dark conditions, but it will perform better in sun light conditions. Sounds like the right tradeoff for a laptop until OLEDs can get brighter and more robust or until microLEDs are productized.

Xed

bobolicious said:

...should this be 4k @ 3840 x 2160 @ 16"...?

such appears to be possible:
www.dell.com/en-us/shop/dell-laptops/new-xps-15-laptop/spd/xps-15-9510-laptop/xn9510cto225s
15.6" UHD+ (3840 x 2400) InfinityEdge Touch Anti-Reflecitve 500-Nit Display

and perhaps appropriate
"When watching your 4K screen the ideal place to sit is between 1-1.5 times the screen size of your TV."
www.techradar.com/news/tv-viewing-distance

...offering full frame for Final Cut Pro on the road…?

Of course it's possible, just as its possible for Dell to offer high quality displays that match or beat Apple, and yet Apple's displays are superior. I'd rather have a better display than one that just pushes more pixels at me on a spec sheet.

ikir

F_Kent_D said:

rezwits said:

Good Bye Bezels hello (wanna-be 4K!!) 1728 x 1,117 (close enogh to 1080 for me!!)

Man Can't wait, how much more Budgeting can a person do?!?

I sense a bit of sarcasm here. WITF needs 4K on a 14 inch screen at an average 3 foot distance? Apple manages motion and animations rather well and is able to dress up screen tech. Take the XR for example, the best selling iPhone in years buy a lot and it has the worse display of every phone in the same price range (On paper). I own one and still use it daily for work, and for what it is there’s not a ton to complain about. My personal phone is the 12 Pro and have the 13 Pro Max coming tomorrow. Looking forward to the new cameras. 

The specs paranoia is from Android world. The resolution is higher to have 1:1 pixel for retina resolution instead of scaling. This is huge upgrade. 1:1 is better for image quality, small text, performance too since there is no scaling.