3 ms·
What does "proper resolution for MacOS" mean in this case? There are tons of 27" 4k that work fine in macOS in Retina mode and matches the medium tier iMac (the
by em500 6y ago
What does "proper resolution for MacOS" mean in this case? There are tons of 27" 4k that work fine in macOS in Retina mode and matches the medium tier iMac (their low end today is still 21.5" 1080p). Unless you declare everything below 5k subpar, I don't see where you're coming from.
- ascagnel_ 6y agoI don't have the exact numbers in front of me at the moment, but a 27" 4K monitor will not match the pixel pitch of every other Mac -- screen elements appear larger when both are set at the same scaled resolution.
- ptoomey3 6y agoYeah, to match the dot pitch apple is designing for, the 4K monitor would have to be more like 22 inches instead of 27. We know this since the 4K iMac is a 21.5 inch screen.
- Joeri 6y agoThis article from 2016 explains the problem: https://bjango.com/articles/macexternaldisplays/ https://bjango.com/articles/macexternaldisplays/ Basically, the ideal PPI of mac displays is a multiple of 110 PPI. So, for retina quality you need a display of roughly 220 PPI, which is what you get from 5K at 27 inch. A 27 inch 4K display is around 160 PPI. If you use that in 2x mode, things will appear too large. If you set it to scaled mode to make things appear the proper size, there are display artifacts (like shimmering when scrolling). In fairness, it's not super obvious unless you know what to look for. But if you're already spending money on a high end screen, why should you have to compromise?
- em500 6y agoThat seems pretty outdated information, given that the OOTH default Retina scaling in MacBooks have been non-2x fractional since 2016 (1400x900 for the 13-inch's 2560×1600, 1680×1050 for the 15-inch 2800x1800).