This week's book giveaway is in the Kotlin forum.
We're giving away four copies of Kotlin Cookbook and have Ken Kousen on-line!
See this thread for details.
Win a copy of Kotlin Cookbook this week in the Kotlin forum!
  • Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic
programming forums Java Mobile Certification Databases Caching Books Engineering Micro Controllers OS Languages Paradigms IDEs Build Tools Frameworks Application Servers Open Source This Site Careers Other all forums
this forum made possible by our volunteer staff, including ...
Marshals:
  • Campbell Ritchie
  • Liutauras Vilda
  • Bear Bibeault
  • Paul Clapham
  • Jeanne Boyarsky
Sheriffs:
  • Junilu Lacar
  • Knute Snortum
  • Henry Wong
Saloon Keepers:
  • Ron McLeod
  • Tim Moores
  • Stephan van Hulst
  • Tim Holloway
  • Carey Brown
Bartenders:
  • Frits Walraven
  • Joe Ess
  • salvin francis

Retina and other high resolution displays - worth it?

 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 354
Eclipse IDE Oracle Java
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
So I was reading about the MBPr and its unmatched resolution. One question comes to mind, as more pixels are crammed into say a 14" display, the size of any object would reduce.
A 1080p frame from a video would have the resolution of 1920 × 1080 as opposed to 2560x1600 of MBP.
To make full use of the real estate on the display, one would have to upscale. Would the quality (theoritically) suffer as a result of upscaling? Which display would fare better - 1920x1080 or 2560x1600?
 
Marshal
Posts: 67336
171
Mac Mac OS X IntelliJ IDE jQuery Java
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
That's not quite the way it works. The system takes care of scaling things up (not sure of the exact details) and with so many fine pixels to work with, there's no blockiness. So things tend to look sharper, not always smaller. You can also change the apparent resolution.

If you have someplace you can go to see one in action, do so. The clarity is very very nice.
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 859
IBM DB2 Chrome Java
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
That all depends on the quality of the upscaler.

If you take a native say 32x32 icon and show in natively on say a 23" 2560x1600 monitor,
it will be tiny! As for HD video, 1080p that would be up to player I would think and not the OS.

WP
 
Bear Bibeault
Marshal
Posts: 67336
171
Mac Mac OS X IntelliJ IDE jQuery Java
  • Likes 1
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

William P O'Sullivan wrote:That all depends on the quality of the upscaler.


The OS X and iOS upscalers are excellent.

If you take a native say 32x32 icon and show in natively


The point is, unless specifically set up that way (which is not the default), it's not shown natively.

As for HD video, 1080p that would be up to player I would think and not the OS.


Incorrect. It's application independent.
 
author
Posts: 8998
19
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I'm still stuck on the original question...

Which display would fare better - 1920x1080 or 2560x1600?



Fare better in what way?

Crispness? photo quality? number of "usable" characters on a screen?...
 
Rancher
Posts: 4686
7
Mac OS X VI Editor Linux
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Bert Bates wrote:Fare better in what way?



One thing we can know for sure, the performance of the graphics will be better at lower resolution. Assuming its the same graphics processor. More pixels means more data to process by the GPU.

I find it interesting that HDTV is now fairly low resolution for modern computers.
 
My pie came with a little toothpic holding up this tiny ad:
Java file APIs (DOC, XLS, PDF, and many more)
https://products.aspose.com/total/java
  • Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic
Boost this thread!