This makes me wonder what happens if your using a powerbook with an external CRT monitor (with the laptop LCD monitor turned off)?
The way an external CRT will behave regarding on-the-fly resolution changes vs. the way LCD displays behave doesn't depend on whether the two kinds are connected to the same computer or not.
LCDs have one fixed "native" resolution because the display is composed of discrete individual pixel units.
A CRT, on the other hand, doesn't rigidly map any particular areas of its phosphor-coated display into predetermined pixels. Among the advantages of the CRT approach are very flexible resolution. Among the disadvantages are fuzzier pixels at any resolution, static and dynamic geometric instabilities (pincushioning, tilt, bloom, etc.), and color convergence problems.
Thanks Matsu. One more question: When you run the external CRT at a different resolution (one where it doesn't look good on the LCD), does it look okay on the CRT?
I tried to answer your question before, but didn't get that maybe you're thinking specifically of mirroring?
If this is what you're concerned about, no, the fuzzy antialiasing your LCD might use to show a non-native resolution won't be reflected in how the same image appears on an external CRT.
I would never buy a laptop with a 16:10 aspect ratio. Now, I would definitely purchase a laptop with an 8:5 aspect ratio.
I mean it sounds like the marketing people got ahold of the specs and said "8:5 sounds too small. Let's market it as 16:10!".
you don't dtp and photoshop regulary on your powerbook do you? it's very usefull with all those toolbars and windows on the right site of youre screen and keep a little screen real estate to work on. it's also great watching dvdees that way. so next mac on my lap is a pb15"970
even though it doesn't show up before september 2003 and i have to wait till mwsf2004 and pay clive his 10 euro i will be happy as a child,
i can wait...
Oowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwssssshit, damn, stupid me, worked to long today and didn't have a drink yet (man i need a shower and a beer). i thought you ment 4:3 aspect ratio your right definitly marketing
it's my calvinistic dutch nature. that's why we are able to smoke hash in public and commit active euthanasy on our selfs if we feel to. because we are too damn serious about anything.
And about the person above wondering about widescreens and all...personally, I've come to believe it's the way to go.
Graphics people, using palette-heavy apps like Photoshop and Illustrator would love that extra room on the sides to hold that stuff. I know I would!
But even non-graphics people: the ability to smartly arrange your desktop to show a browser, your e-mail, iChat buddy list, perhaps a minimized iTunes controller, Address Book, etc. would probably appeal to a lot appeal. Again, I know it would for me!
This is from something I mocked up a month ago, but it shows what I'm talking about (BTW, the following are modifications I made a while back to a widescreen iBook idea that seemed well-received. The models shown below are actually a tad ridiculous, in that they're 16:9 displays. But close enough to illustrate what I'm talking about):
hey, paul...also (love your designs) i think that if people had a widescreen iBook they just might put the dock on the right or left...that would add a little real estate up and down wise
I tried to answer your question before, but didn't get that maybe you're thinking specifically of mirroring?
If this is what you're concerned about, no, the fuzzy antialiasing your LCD might use to show a non-native resolution won't be reflected in how the same image appears on an external CRT.
Shetline,
Thanks. You (and the others) answered all my questions.
Just a heads up: the 15.4" widescreen laptop has a number of displays you can choose for it: 1280x800, 1680x1050, and 1920x1200. So you don't have to squint quite that badly.
I don't think that Apple will go with 1680x1050 without giving an increase to the resolution of the 17" model, for obvious reasons. I wouldn't be surprised if they had a nonstandard resolution like 1360x850, or maybe even matched the 1440x900 resolution.
Why can't they just simply keep the 854 vertical they've got and let the horizontal be whatever the math dictates?
No, I REALLY don't want a 1600 pixel 15" screen...laptop or otherwise. That would be ridiculous to try and read.Those of you currently owning/using the 15" Titanium...do you dig the 1280x854? I do.
I don't think I'd want it going any smaller than 854, as the screen itself (if my calculationing is right) is actually going to be a tad smaller (height-wise) than the current model.
I don't know...here I am talking as through it's a done deal.
But I hope it is. A 15.4" screen at the same ratio (16:11) as the current PowerBook is certainly nice, but I hope that's not all it is.
Can you seriously not simply change the size of the text up a bit and be able to read a higher res font? For CAD work and whatnot, more resolution is always helpful. Is the interface that fixed that it cannot be adapted to a higher res?
Can you seriously not simply change the size of the text up a bit and be able to read a higher res font?
You can, but setting defaults that are unfriendly to the majority of your customers is a bad move. Almost everyone who wants the text bigger changes the resolution, and non-native resolutions on LCDs suck (not to mention that the majority of purchasers of a product should not have to fiddle with the settings to make it useful).
Windows has a "large fonts" option to increase the size of the system font in some areas (which some of our people use on 15" LCDs running at 1024x768!) but OS X has no such option yet. Even if it did, window controls and icons will continue to shrink into little blurs if the native resolution gets too high. The only comprehensive answer is a resolution independent GUI, and that's a ways off yet.
A bit of a pet peeve for me, web designers who make damn small unscalable text an integral part of their pages, and other forms of bad UI. UI is still too far from being standardized around a few common sizes/conventions that everyone applies across platforms.
That said, 1280x800 seems a touch low to me, and something like 1360x850 would probably be aces at 15.4. If choosing between 1280x800 and 1440x900, maybe the lower resolution is better, you can always plug in an external display when/if you really need a lot of real-estate.
Do you think that we will be seeing this at WWDC? the article said second half of this year, which we are in now. I'd imagine Apple will want to release upgraded 15" PBs for college bound kids and stuff.
June - month number 6. We won't be "in the second half" until July 1.
Not being a smart-ass at all...just didn't want you pinning expectations/hopes on an inaccurate time frame or reference!
Steve could ANNOUNCE them next week at WWDC and do the usual "announcing today...you can order from the Apple store. And shipping on..." whatever he says.
Wouldn't be the first time they announced something with a big splash, only to inform us that it'll actually be available in another month or so.
That's a possible scenario. In that case, the article is accurate. We might KNOW about them next week, but can't get our hands on them until July or August?
Comments
Originally posted by sc_markt
This makes me wonder what happens if your using a powerbook with an external CRT monitor (with the laptop LCD monitor turned off)?
The way an external CRT will behave regarding on-the-fly resolution changes vs. the way LCD displays behave doesn't depend on whether the two kinds are connected to the same computer or not.
LCDs have one fixed "native" resolution because the display is composed of discrete individual pixel units.
A CRT, on the other hand, doesn't rigidly map any particular areas of its phosphor-coated display into predetermined pixels. Among the advantages of the CRT approach are very flexible resolution. Among the disadvantages are fuzzier pixels at any resolution, static and dynamic geometric instabilities (pincushioning, tilt, bloom, etc.), and color convergence problems.
Originally posted by sc_markt
Thanks Matsu. One more question: When you run the external CRT at a different resolution (one where it doesn't look good on the LCD), does it look okay on the CRT?
I tried to answer your question before, but didn't get that maybe you're thinking specifically of mirroring?
If this is what you're concerned about, no, the fuzzy antialiasing your LCD might use to show a non-native resolution won't be reflected in how the same image appears on an external CRT.
Originally posted by Gizzmonic
No offense, but could we please have a more descriptive title for this thread?
Can I change it, or does it need a Mod?
If I can, tell me what you would prefer...
Peace,
Marc
Originally posted by Yevgeny
I would never buy a laptop with a 16:10 aspect ratio. Now, I would definitely purchase a laptop with an 8:5 aspect ratio.
I mean it sounds like the marketing people got ahold of the specs and said "8:5 sounds too small. Let's market it as 16:10!".
you don't dtp and photoshop regulary on your powerbook do you? it's very usefull with all those toolbars and windows on the right site of youre screen and keep a little screen real estate to work on. it's also great watching dvdees that way. so next mac on my lap is a pb15"970
even though it doesn't show up before september 2003 and i have to wait till mwsf2004 and pay clive his 10 euro i will be happy as a child,
i can wait...
Oowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwssssshit, damn, stupid me, worked to long today and didn't have a drink yet (man i need a shower and a beer). i thought you ment 4:3 aspect ratio
it's my calvinistic dutch nature. that's why we are able to smoke hash in public and commit active euthanasy on our selfs if we feel to. because we are too damn serious about anything.
And about the person above wondering about widescreens and all...personally, I've come to believe it's the way to go.
Graphics people, using palette-heavy apps like Photoshop and Illustrator would love that extra room on the sides to hold that stuff. I know I would!
But even non-graphics people: the ability to smartly arrange your desktop to show a browser, your e-mail, iChat buddy list, perhaps a minimized iTunes controller, Address Book, etc. would probably appeal to a lot appeal. Again, I know it would for me!
This is from something I mocked up a month ago, but it shows what I'm talking about (BTW, the following are modifications I made a while back to a widescreen iBook idea that seemed well-received. The models shown below are actually a tad ridiculous, in that they're 16:9 displays. But close enough to illustrate what I'm talking about):
Day-to-day
Design/creative users
And of course...
I'd take a 14-15" 16:10 screen over a 4:3 20" one ANY day. But that's just me. YMMV.
g
Originally posted by shetline
I tried to answer your question before, but didn't get that maybe you're thinking specifically of mirroring?
If this is what you're concerned about, no, the fuzzy antialiasing your LCD might use to show a non-native resolution won't be reflected in how the same image appears on an external CRT.
Shetline,
Thanks. You (and the others) answered all my questions.
I don't think that Apple will go with 1680x1050 without giving an increase to the resolution of the 17" model, for obvious reasons. I wouldn't be surprised if they had a nonstandard resolution like 1360x850, or maybe even matched the 1440x900 resolution.
No, I REALLY don't want a 1600 pixel 15" screen...laptop or otherwise. That would be ridiculous to try and read.Those of you currently owning/using the 15" Titanium...do you dig the 1280x854? I do.
I don't think I'd want it going any smaller than 854, as the screen itself (if my calculationing is right) is actually going to be a tad smaller (height-wise) than the current model.
I don't know...here I am talking as through it's a done deal.
But I hope it is. A 15.4" screen at the same ratio (16:11) as the current PowerBook is certainly nice, but I hope that's not all it is.
changing the rez on a LCD results in what can best be described as craptacular.
Originally posted by Stecs
Can you seriously not simply change the size of the text up a bit and be able to read a higher res font?
You can, but setting defaults that are unfriendly to the majority of your customers is a bad move. Almost everyone who wants the text bigger changes the resolution, and non-native resolutions on LCDs suck (not to mention that the majority of purchasers of a product should not have to fiddle with the settings to make it useful).
Windows has a "large fonts" option to increase the size of the system font in some areas (which some of our people use on 15" LCDs running at 1024x768!) but OS X has no such option yet. Even if it did, window controls and icons will continue to shrink into little blurs if the native resolution gets too high. The only comprehensive answer is a resolution independent GUI, and that's a ways off yet.
That said, 1280x800 seems a touch low to me, and something like 1360x850 would probably be aces at 15.4. If choosing between 1280x800 and 1440x900, maybe the lower resolution is better, you can always plug in an external display when/if you really need a lot of real-estate.
Again, how about the current 854 and whatever the horizontal comes out to be, which, I think, would be about 1366.
Almost 100 pixels wider than the current 15".
However, that is bumping pretty close on the door to the 17" of 1440x900.
Hell, I don't know.
I'd be happy as a clam with a 16:10 PowerBook, with the vertical resolution in the low-mid 800 range. That's reasonable and still quite readable.
825x1320 gets my vote!
Not being a smart-ass at all...just didn't want you pinning expectations/hopes on an inaccurate time frame or reference!
Steve could ANNOUNCE them next week at WWDC and do the usual "announcing today...you can order from the Apple store. And shipping on..." whatever he says.
Wouldn't be the first time they announced something with a big splash, only to inform us that it'll actually be available in another month or so.
That's a possible scenario. In that case, the article is accurate. We might KNOW about them next week, but can't get our hands on them until July or August?
Maddening, I know.