4 ms·

Maybe its just me, but I have no issue with the size and weight of the 15" MBP (again, this could be because I came from previous larger 15" laptops). But I wou

Maybe its just me, but I have no issue with the size and weight of the 15" MBP (again, this could be because I came from previous larger 15" laptops). But I would love to see the optical drive dropped in place of more battery life.... Oh, and 1920x1080 would be nice. But I doubt that'll happen...

Synaesthesia 16y ago
Considering the pixel density improvement in the Macbook Air's, they should at least make 1680x1050 standard on the 15".
Samuel_Michon 16y ago
"1920x1080 would be nice. But I doubt that'll happen..." Actually, I think that is a real possibility. With the last MacBook Air refresh, screen resolution went up from 1280x800 to 1440x900. The current MacBook Pro 15" has a resolution of 1440x900, based on past refreshes I think it's safe to assume that the new MBP 15" will have a higher resolution than the current MBA. Most likely 1680x1050 but 1920x1080 isn't impossible. "I would love to see the optical drive dropped in place of more battery life" If Apple drops the optical drive in the next MBP 15", they'll likely reduce the thickness of the notebook, as well as increase the battery life.
- qq66 16y ago
  Dell has been selling 1920x1080 15" screens for close to 2 years.
  - Samuel_Michon 16y ago
    Right, the panels exist, that's why I said it wouldn't be impossible for Apple to use them in a new MacBook Pro. However, the DELL notebook in question is a monstrosity in comparison with Apple's MacBook Pro. The DELL XPS 15 is all plastic, while it's half an inch thicker and a pound heavier. http://www.dell.com/us/p/xps-15/pd http://www.dell.com/us/p/xps-15/pd
- silversmith 16y ago
  The current generation 15" MBPs have 1680x1050 as high-res option. That could maybe become standard. But 1920x1080 seems a bit excessive on a 15" screen, at least without some sort of UI scaling, as even 1680 occasionally has me leaning forward a bit to easier make out some details.
- ugh 16y ago
  You already can get the 15" MBP with a resolution of 1680x1050. If they make that the standard I would bet that you can also get it with some higher resolution. (I hope that it’s not going to be 1920x1080 because that’s 16:9. I don’t know what the 16:10 equivalent is.) The problem is that resolution independence is nowhere near finished and the new MBPs will likely arrive before OS X Lion (which could conceivably have resolution independence). Seeing as resolution independence has seen no improvements with Snow Leopard it wouldn’t surprise me if Apple just gave up on it.
  - jackvalentine 16y ago
    The 16:10 equivalent is 1920x1200. The one thing I dislike about this 15" Vaio I am on is the 1920x1080 screen, as opposed to a x1200 screen. For most work a taller screen is infinately more useful I find.
  - Samuel_Michon 16y ago
    The 16:10 equivalent would be 1920x1200. The current MacBook Air has a PPI of 135. The BTO 1680x1050 MacBook Pro has a PPI of 128. 1920x1200 on a 15" is probably overkill, even on a 17" screen that's a PPI of 132. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_displays_by_pixel_density#Apple_Inc http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_displays_by_pixel_densi....
- masklinn 16y ago
  As a rule, Apple usually doesn't sell two different laptop sizes with the same resolution. Next gen, the 15" will get 1680x1050 standard (instead of option) and the 13" MB/MBP should default to 1440x900, or at least get it as an option. But the 15" won't see 1920x1200 before the 17" is bumped. Furthermore, OSX is hardly resolution-independent, a 1920x1200 15" would make for some small targets.
  - Zev 16y ago
    As a rule, or what Apple has historically done? Because those are two different things. And are there any laptops with a resolution higher than 1920x1200?
    - masklinn 16y ago
      > As a rule, Apple usually doesn't means it's a rule inferred from Apple's previous behavior… > And are there any laptops with a resolution higher than 1920x1200? I've yet to see one, but I don't think there's anything preventing it technically: there were WUXGA 15" laptops 5+ years ago, so why not a WQXGA 17" now (a WXQGA 17" would yield ~177DPI versus 151 on a WUXGA 15", nothing to sneeze at but still very much feasible, IBM's T220 was above 200DPI in 2001)
hrktb 16y ago
Same here. Using it mostly as a tabletop machine, compromising ethernet or firewire performance for a few mm of thickness would be a no-no. Apart from the screen resolution, though the actual model is already nice, an increased trackpad area or basic layout improvement would be great.
- chrisbolt 16y ago
  New, on the new 15" MacBook ProAir: Micro-Ethernet! All of the speed of GigE with 100% more dongles.

Synaesthesia 16y ago

Considering the pixel density improvement in the Macbook Air's, they should at least make 1680x1050 standard on the 15".

Samuel_Michon 16y ago

"1920x1080 would be nice. But I doubt that'll happen..." Actually, I think that is a real possibility. With the last MacBook Air refresh, screen resolution went up from 1280x800 to 1440x900. The current MacBook Pro 15" has a resolution of 1440x900, based on past refreshes I think it's safe to assume that the new MBP 15" will have a higher resolution than the current MBA. Most likely 1680x1050 but 1920x1080 isn't impossible. "I would love to see the optical drive dropped in place of more battery life" If Apple drops the optical drive in the next MBP 15", they'll likely reduce the thickness of the notebook, as well as increase the battery life.

qq66 16y ago
Dell has been selling 1920x1080 15" screens for close to 2 years.
- Samuel_Michon 16y ago
  Right, the panels exist, that's why I said it wouldn't be impossible for Apple to use them in a new MacBook Pro. However, the DELL notebook in question is a monstrosity in comparison with Apple's MacBook Pro. The DELL XPS 15 is all plastic, while it's half an inch thicker and a pound heavier. http://www.dell.com/us/p/xps-15/pd http://www.dell.com/us/p/xps-15/pd
silversmith 16y ago
The current generation 15" MBPs have 1680x1050 as high-res option. That could maybe become standard. But 1920x1080 seems a bit excessive on a 15" screen, at least without some sort of UI scaling, as even 1680 occasionally has me leaning forward a bit to easier make out some details.
ugh 16y ago
You already can get the 15" MBP with a resolution of 1680x1050. If they make that the standard I would bet that you can also get it with some higher resolution. (I hope that it’s not going to be 1920x1080 because that’s 16:9. I don’t know what the 16:10 equivalent is.) The problem is that resolution independence is nowhere near finished and the new MBPs will likely arrive before OS X Lion (which could conceivably have resolution independence). Seeing as resolution independence has seen no improvements with Snow Leopard it wouldn’t surprise me if Apple just gave up on it.
- jackvalentine 16y ago
  The 16:10 equivalent is 1920x1200. The one thing I dislike about this 15" Vaio I am on is the 1920x1080 screen, as opposed to a x1200 screen. For most work a taller screen is infinately more useful I find.
- Samuel_Michon 16y ago
  The 16:10 equivalent would be 1920x1200. The current MacBook Air has a PPI of 135. The BTO 1680x1050 MacBook Pro has a PPI of 128. 1920x1200 on a 15" is probably overkill, even on a 17" screen that's a PPI of 132. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_displays_by_pixel_density#Apple_Inc http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_displays_by_pixel_densi....
masklinn 16y ago
As a rule, Apple usually doesn't sell two different laptop sizes with the same resolution. Next gen, the 15" will get 1680x1050 standard (instead of option) and the 13" MB/MBP should default to 1440x900, or at least get it as an option. But the 15" won't see 1920x1200 before the 17" is bumped. Furthermore, OSX is hardly resolution-independent, a 1920x1200 15" would make for some small targets.
- Zev 16y ago
  As a rule, or what Apple has historically done? Because those are two different things. And are there any laptops with a resolution higher than 1920x1200?
  - masklinn 16y ago
    > As a rule, Apple usually doesn't means it's a rule inferred from Apple's previous behavior… > And are there any laptops with a resolution higher than 1920x1200? I've yet to see one, but I don't think there's anything preventing it technically: there were WUXGA 15" laptops 5+ years ago, so why not a WQXGA 17" now (a WXQGA 17" would yield ~177DPI versus 151 on a WUXGA 15", nothing to sneeze at but still very much feasible, IBM's T220 was above 200DPI in 2001)

hrktb 16y ago

Same here. Using it mostly as a tabletop machine, compromising ethernet or firewire performance for a few mm of thickness would be a no-no. Apart from the screen resolution, though the actual model is already nice, an increased trackpad area or basic layout improvement would be great.

chrisbolt 16y ago
New, on the new 15" MacBook ProAir: Micro-Ethernet! All of the speed of GigE with 100% more dongles.