View Single Post
  #50 (permalink)  
Old October 21, 2012, 02:06 PM
Desiato Desiato is online now
MVP
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 445
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BeaverBender View Post
So, you seem to have contradictory points there. If you prefer function over form you should like more pixels... Form would suggest that you would want something just for its aesthetics. More pixels IS higher function btw.
Function over form: For me, in this context, this means the hardware and the OS. Some examples: iFixit called the Retina MBP the least repairable notebook they've disassembled; I tend to replace the battery at least once and may perform multiple upgrades and/or cleanings on each notebook I own. I do not like Apple keyboards. Apple notebooks have long sacrificed standard functions such as these, as well as thermal performance, for--IMO--aesthetics.

Personally: I prefer Windows 7 and Thinkpads.

With that said, I do not anticipate a pixel density of 220PPI would increase my productivity in any way. On the contrary, I've read of display related performance issues on Retina MBP. For example:

Quote:
With the integrated Intel HD 4000 and discrete NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M graphics units responsible for driving 2880x1800 pixels in standard Retina mode and as many as 3840x2400 pixels before downscaling to display 1920x1200 at its highest non-Retina resolution, Apple is clearly pushing the limits of the machine's graphics capabilities.At the default setting, either Intel’s HD 4000 or NVIDIA’s GeForce GT 650M already have to render and display far more pixels than either GPU was ever intended to. At the 1680 and 1920 settings however the GPUs are doing more work than even their high-end desktop counterparts are used to.
AnandTech goes on to assess this graphics performance, noting that the Retina MacBook Pro at times struggles to maintain a "consistently smooth experience".At 2880 x 1800 most interactions are smooth but things like zooming windows or scrolling on certain web pages is clearly sub-30fps. At the higher scaled resolutions, since the GPU has to render as much as 9.2MP, even UI performance can be sluggish. There’s simply nothing that can be done at this point - Apple is pushing the limits of the hardware we have available today, far beyond what any other OEM has done.
Focusing on browser scrolling behavior, which also involves substantial CPU load, AnandTech notes that the resource-intensive Facebook news feed pages can display at over 50 frames per second on a 2011 MacBook Pro, but that the new Retina MacBook Pro struggles to hit 20 frames per second as it pushes so many more pixels.
Retina MacBook Pro Pushes the Limits of its Graphics Capabilities - Mac Rumors
AnandTech - The next-gen MacBook Pro with Retina Display Review

So no, I wouldn't consider the Retina display an example of function over form for my purposes. Perhaps to others, it's worth the drawbacks. Off the top of my head, the pixel density would be useful for smartphone and ipad 3 development, exceedingly small text for a small percentage of coders/spreadsheet users and some content developers; many content developers will not benefit from this pixel density because it is so different than most design targets. For example, if you're developing web or PC/Console gaming content, this pixel density probably doesn't help.

To each their own. Whatever works best for you.

Last edited by Desiato; October 21, 2012 at 07:47 PM.
Reply With Quote