4 ms·
Per the article, the new MBP actually renders at double the scaled resolution (so 3360x2100 for 1680x1050) and then downscales that to fit 2880x1800. (See the s
by bitrot 14y ago
Per the article, the new MBP actually renders at double the scaled resolution (so 3360x2100 for 1680x1050) and then downscales that to fit 2880x1800. (See the screenshots.) It shouldn't look blurry at all. In fact, it should look considerably better than a MBP with a 1680x1050 display.
- tjoff 14y agoI don't know which screenshots you look at but there sure is blur when not dealing with apps that aware of the retina display, such as chrome (left) vs. safari (right): http://images.anandtech.com/doci/5998/Screen%20Shot%202012-06-11%20at%208.21.29%20PM_575px.png http://images.anandtech.com/doci/5998/Screen%20Shot%202012-0... In other words, it depends but it most certainly will have its share of issues, question is for how long.
- bitrot 14y agoYes, but that's not the kind of blurry at issue here.
- jonhendry 14y agoI would probably look at apps other than Chrome. There's "unaware of the retina display", and there's "we eschewed native APIs to some extent and rolled our own implementations of stuff". I don't know if this is the case, exactly, with Chrome. I'm just saying it might not be wise to generalize from Chrome's appearance to retina-naive 3rd party apps in general.
- lloeki 14y ago> I don't know if this is the case, exactly, with Chrome As part of its security model, Chrome does something akin to rendering everything offscreen in an unprivileged process then passing that to the user-facing process.
- jsvaughan 14y agoBut using a scaled resolution "may affect performance" (understandably, of course, because each refresh now has to draw an enormous desktop and downscale it)