Rumor: New iMac in October with "Retina" display

By Rick · 17 replies
Jul 3, 2012
Post New Reply
  1. Will the next generation iMac hit shelves in October? Even more intriguingly, will it sport a Retina display? This is what Digitimes, purveyor of rumors peddled by global supply chain factories, is suggesting. Digitimes' sources -- mostly Chinese companies involved in Apple's……

    Read more
  2. Technochicken

    Technochicken TechSpot Paladin Posts: 729

    Laptops are one thing, but I really don't understand the need for higher pixel density displays on desktops. I actually did a test, and, at the distance I sit away from my primary monitor, which is 21.5", 1920x1080, the effective pixel density is about the same as a retina macbook pro would be if it was sitting on my lap. Sitting at a comfortable distance from my desktop monitor, I cannot distinguish between pixels, and I have fairly good vision. What's the point of pixels my eyes won't even be able to pick up?
  3. Camikazi

    Camikazi TS Evangelist Posts: 925   +284

    More desktop real estate, more open programs and windows without having to tile them.
  4. Technochicken seriously needs to have his eyes checked if he can't tell the difference between a retina display and a regular monitor and I mean SERIOUSLY needs to have his eyes checked. It also boggles my mind how he can't see the benefits.
  5. Guest, I think he's sitting 20 feet away from the monitor instead of the common distance of 2 feet and less. :D I agree, everyone with normal eye sight can clearly(!) see the individual pixels, especially when you look at text and even more if it's in italic. If he's happy with the outdated low pixel density, fine with me, but when I switch from my retina display to my regular desktop monitor, I'm shocked by the poor quality pixel density.
  6. lol every time I see "the new ipad" in a store, I go up to it and get really close, hopping I can see the pixels, no luck yet =P
  7. Coodu

    Coodu TS Booster Posts: 173

    No need for all the bashing on techno just to start.. everyone's entitled to an opinion.

    I personally think you don't realize the difference in clarity until like Guest said, you switch from a regular device to a high-res.

    I haven't had a chance to play with the new high res MacBook Pro's we have at work but I noticed a huge difference when I upgraded from iPhone 3G to the 4S.
  8. Technochicken

    Technochicken TechSpot Paladin Posts: 729

    If you've looked at the retina macbook pro, you'll see that that's not apple's goal with the retina display. They don't even let you set the desktop real estate to the panel's native 2880 x 1800. Using Windows on it would give you the extra screen space though.

    Clearly you did not read what I wrote properly. At the same distance away from you, yes, there will be a huge difference. However, if you are using a laptop, I don't know, maybe on your lap, then the screen is more like 1-2' away from your face, compared with 2.75' for my desktop monitor.

    Okay, math time. Say you had a desktop monitor that had the same resolution as the retina macbook pro - 2880 x 1800. If that monitor had the same physical pixel density as a standard 1080p 21.5" monitor, it would be 28.1 inches wide (horizontally, not diagonally)(the 21.5" monitor is 18.74 inches wide: (18.74in x 2880px)/1920px = 28.1in.).

    Now, the macbook pro retina's screen is 13.2 in (1.1 ft) wide - (15.6/sqrt(16^2 + 10^2)) x 16 = 13.2. For a screen 13.2 inches wide to fill the same amount of your field of view as a screen 18.1 inches (2.34 feet) wide would at 2.75 feet away from you, the 13.2 inch screen would have to be 1.25 feet away from you. The ratio of distance away from you to screen width is constant, so the distance of the 13.2 inch screen must be 1.1/2.34 x 2.75, which equals 1.25 feet.

    Therefore, if one uses the retina macbook pro with the screen 1.25 feet away from you, which is a completely reasonable distance, the effective pixel density would be exactly the same as the effective pixel density of a 21.5" 1080p monitor at 2.75 feet. According to Apple, retina just means that at a normal usage distance, pixels are indistinguishable. If the screen on a retina macbook pro meets this criteria at 1.25 feet, than any old 21.5" 1080p monitor would meet the same criteria at 2.75 feet. Which is exactly what I said the first time around, but with way more words. Plus a diagram.

  9. Burty117

    Burty117 TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 3,148   +915

    Technochicken, that is the greatest Diagram I have ever seen :)
  10. More pixels eh? Yawn!
  11. It all depends on the size of the pixels - they aren't an SI unit of area, they are an abbreviation of picture elements, can be any size (smaller than the screen would be good of course).
  12. Miguel

    Miguel TS Rookie

    I wish more people would understand this, sigh
  13. slh28

    slh28 TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,706   +172

    Great diagram Technochicken, nothing like showing up the guests with a bit of geometry eh ;)

    I seriously hope this brings down the cost of monitors with higher than 1080p resolution, there's been pretty much no competition to force down prices of the Dell U3011, Apple 30in Cinema, etc.
  14. Camikazi

    Camikazi TS Evangelist Posts: 925   +284

    Never said the Mac would have more desktop space, you said you don't see the use of higher pixel density displays in desktops and I told you what the use is. I haven't used the new Mac Pro but I do know what a high-res display is useful for since I have used those.
  15. Uvindu

    Uvindu TS Booster Posts: 120

    You forgot about the iPod Touch 4th Generation. I just Happen to have one, that's why I noticed :)
  16. RetinaMath

    RetinaMath TS Rookie

    Please look into "angular resolution", limits of human vision related to angular resolution. What you're saying is not true.
  17. Technochicken

    Technochicken TechSpot Paladin Posts: 729

    Angular pixel size on an LCD would be measured in minutes of arc per pixel.


    In my example, both the raw horizontal and vertical resolutions of the two compared displays are the same, and both the horizontal fields of view are the same. The angular pixel densities, therefore are the same as well. I don't see how my previous post was wrong. Actually, reading about angular resolution simply seems to corroborate what I said before.
  18. RetinaMath

    RetinaMath TS Rookie

    Have you read any studies about limits of human vision / acuity related to angular resolution of image being viewed?

    Limit for average guy is ~200 pixels per degree. Apple classifies its "Retina" display as: apparent size of pixel at normal viewing distance = 1 arcminute. That translates to angular resolution of 60 pixels per degree.

    60 vs 200.
    Sorry if I'm being brief. I've spend hours typing about same things on other websites, it gets boring typing it all over every time.

Similar Topics

Add your comment to this article

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...