4 ms·

> because there are no Macs with non-HiDPI displays any more That is not true. Apple still sells Macs that don't come with a screen, namely Mac Mini, Mac Studi

> because there are no Macs with non-HiDPI displays any more That is not true. Apple still sells Macs that don't come with a screen, namely Mac Mini, Mac Studio, and Mac Pro. People use these with non-HiDPI monitors they already own all the time.

thyristan 2y ago
Subpixel AA for Macs is useless anyways, the fonts will look blurry no matter what you do on a Mac.
- cosmic_cheese 2y ago
  They’re fine to my eye, at least as good as well tuned freetype (as found on Ubuntu) as long as you’re either using a 2x HiDPI display or are using a “normal” DPI monitor with above average density (e.g. 2560x1440 27”) and have subpixel AA forced on. Where it falls apart is at densities any lower, for example it struggles on those awful 1366x768 15.6” panels that it seemed like every other laptop was built with for a while. Similarly 24” 1080p and 32” 2560x1440 are pretty bad.
da_chicken 2y ago
That's not really the most charitable reading of GP's comment. I think they very clearly mean that Apple does not sell Macs with non-HiDPI displays anymore. It's not a configuration they sell, so they don't need to support those features anymore in their current offerings. You're right that there's nothing stopping someone from hooking up an HDMI-to-VGA adapter for their 22" Trinitron from 2001, but that doesn't mean boat anchors are a meaningful market segment. It's not a consideration for why they should retain a font rendering feature for a modern OS. You're just going to have to suffer with fuzzy fonts for your retrogaming hobby.
- kevin_thibedeau 2y ago
  The Trinitron will blur itself at 1600x1200. The problem is the legions of low PPI 1080p LCDs in business settings.
- grishka 2y ago
  > It's not a configuration they sell So what is the "configuration they sell" for the desktop Macs? The Studio Display that costs way too much for what it is, so to no one's surprise, they're not selling all that many of those? Or the Pro Display XDR for which the stand alone costs more than an entry-level Mac Mini? Sure no one will buy a $1600 monitor to use with their $600 Mac Mini. They'll get a much cheaper third-party 2K one.
  - truncate 2y ago
    Since you are so sure about how Mac Mini's are used, is it 2k on 24" or 27" that these customers use? My impressions based on limited anecdotal data I've is that most people with mac mini are using it as their secondary device (everyone has a Macbooks). Everyone is using 27" 4k monitors. 4k monitors are not that far from 2k monitors, and I think most people who are preferring to buy 2k are gamers that want higher refresh rate that their GPU can support at 2k. But gamers are not using Mac's anyway.
    - p_ing 2y ago
      24"-ish 4K, 27" is 5K, 32" 6K. Outside of that is not HiDPI and will lead to fuzzy fonts (your eyes may vary). PPI needs to be near 220.
      - tatersolid 2y ago
        Viewing distance matters. ppi isn’t the target metric, it’s pixels-per-degree-of-vision that determines if a display setup is “retina”. 60 ppd is equal to 20/20 vision in a human. My 34” monitor is only 4K but is “retina” at the viewing distance in my home office according to this calculator: https://qasimk.io/screen-ppd/ https://qasimk.io/screen-ppd/
  - p_ing 2y ago
    They don't sell it as part of the configuration options. You can separately purchase whatever monitor you wish. There are now plenty of 27" 5K monitors out there. Asus, LG (for now), Viewsonic, Kuycon, others I'm probably forgetting. They're expensive as far as monitors go, but not as expensive as the Studio Display.
cosmic_cheese 2y ago
Sure, but they’re not going to optimize for that case because the bulk of their Mac sales are tied up in their laptops and a significant chunk (I’d hazard a guess over 50%) of people buying Studios/Pros especially but also Minis are pairing them with Studio Displays, Pro Display XDRs, or more recently the various third-party 2x HiDPI display offerings from the likes of Asus, BenQ, Dell, and Samsung.

thyristan 2y ago

Subpixel AA for Macs is useless anyways, the fonts will look blurry no matter what you do on a Mac.

cosmic_cheese 2y ago
They’re fine to my eye, at least as good as well tuned freetype (as found on Ubuntu) as long as you’re either using a 2x HiDPI display or are using a “normal” DPI monitor with above average density (e.g. 2560x1440 27”) and have subpixel AA forced on. Where it falls apart is at densities any lower, for example it struggles on those awful 1366x768 15.6” panels that it seemed like every other laptop was built with for a while. Similarly 24” 1080p and 32” 2560x1440 are pretty bad.

da_chicken 2y ago

That's not really the most charitable reading of GP's comment. I think they very clearly mean that Apple does not sell Macs with non-HiDPI displays anymore. It's not a configuration they sell, so they don't need to support those features anymore in their current offerings. You're right that there's nothing stopping someone from hooking up an HDMI-to-VGA adapter for their 22" Trinitron from 2001, but that doesn't mean boat anchors are a meaningful market segment. It's not a consideration for why they should retain a font rendering feature for a modern OS. You're just going to have to suffer with fuzzy fonts for your retrogaming hobby.

kevin_thibedeau 2y ago
The Trinitron will blur itself at 1600x1200. The problem is the legions of low PPI 1080p LCDs in business settings.
grishka 2y ago
> It's not a configuration they sell So what is the "configuration they sell" for the desktop Macs? The Studio Display that costs way too much for what it is, so to no one's surprise, they're not selling all that many of those? Or the Pro Display XDR for which the stand alone costs more than an entry-level Mac Mini? Sure no one will buy a $1600 monitor to use with their $600 Mac Mini. They'll get a much cheaper third-party 2K one.
- truncate 2y ago
  Since you are so sure about how Mac Mini's are used, is it 2k on 24" or 27" that these customers use? My impressions based on limited anecdotal data I've is that most people with mac mini are using it as their secondary device (everyone has a Macbooks). Everyone is using 27" 4k monitors. 4k monitors are not that far from 2k monitors, and I think most people who are preferring to buy 2k are gamers that want higher refresh rate that their GPU can support at 2k. But gamers are not using Mac's anyway.
  - p_ing 2y ago
    24"-ish 4K, 27" is 5K, 32" 6K. Outside of that is not HiDPI and will lead to fuzzy fonts (your eyes may vary). PPI needs to be near 220.
    - tatersolid 2y ago
      Viewing distance matters. ppi isn’t the target metric, it’s pixels-per-degree-of-vision that determines if a display setup is “retina”. 60 ppd is equal to 20/20 vision in a human. My 34” monitor is only 4K but is “retina” at the viewing distance in my home office according to this calculator: https://qasimk.io/screen-ppd/ https://qasimk.io/screen-ppd/
- p_ing 2y ago
  They don't sell it as part of the configuration options. You can separately purchase whatever monitor you wish. There are now plenty of 27" 5K monitors out there. Asus, LG (for now), Viewsonic, Kuycon, others I'm probably forgetting. They're expensive as far as monitors go, but not as expensive as the Studio Display.

cosmic_cheese 2y ago

Sure, but they’re not going to optimize for that case because the bulk of their Mac sales are tied up in their laptops and a significant chunk (I’d hazard a guess over 50%) of people buying Studios/Pros especially but also Minis are pairing them with Studio Displays, Pro Display XDRs, or more recently the various third-party 2x HiDPI display offerings from the likes of Asus, BenQ, Dell, and Samsung.