#235173 - 27/09/2004 18:43
Low Res Powerbook Screens
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 12/02/2002
Posts: 2298
Loc: Berkeley, California
|
Perhaps I'm not far enough into the Reality Distortion Field to understand yet, but why can't Apple come out with some high resolution options? I'm considering replacing my Dell 600m and switching to a powerbook, but the screen is the only thing making me hesitate. It's a $50 option on my dell to change the XGA to something more reasonable (1400x1050) when configuring it. The 15" powerbook only comes with a 1280x854 screen. Going that far backwards is going to be hard to stomach, as what I'd really like is a nice UXGA screen.
Matthew
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235174 - 27/09/2004 18:46
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: matthew_k]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 24/01/2002
Posts: 3937
Loc: Providence, RI
|
Presumably some dictated a certain dpi, and that's the one you get, period. Sort of unfortunate.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235175 - 27/09/2004 19:17
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: matthew_k]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
This is the exact reason I bought an Intel-based laptop this time around. I got sick of those low resolutions.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235176 - 28/09/2004 00:04
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: wfaulk]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 12/11/2001
Posts: 7738
Loc: Toronto, CANADA
|
IMO, the screen (15.2" widescreen) is not big enough to warrant a higher resolution. The poblem with some Dell systems is that the resolution becomes unusable for practical purposes. For fonts, you end up having to increase the default size of all text, next are window elements. Mac OS X doesn't have a nice global configuration to adjust the DPI of the desktop elements, so this would be even worse on a Mac.
The hardware features, build and ergonomics put the PowerBook far ahead of any Windows machine I could find. Funny as it is, I found some second tier manufacturers, like Acer, Asus and eMachines, to offer far better machines than Dell or Toshiba. Some of the newer IBM systems aren't bad, but none of the big PC names seem to know anything about physically constructing a portable. Every system looks like it was pieced together in an afternoon by parts delivered from 20 other departments that didn't communicate with each other.
If you plan to use the notebook at a desk station, then your external connection options with the PowerBook are also much better than any PC-based model. DVI-I output (that's digital or analog (with adapter) on a single connector) with support for pretty much any standard panel around (extended desktop, sole desktop or mirrored).
Bruno
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235177 - 28/09/2004 01:21
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: hybrid8]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
Quote:
IMO, the screen (15.2" widescreen) is not big enough to warrant a higher resolution. The poblem with some Dell systems is that the resolution becomes unusable for practical purposes. For fonts, you end up having to increase the default size of all text, next are window elements.
Some of us can see. I'm running 1400x1050 on a 14.1" display, with default font sizes, and I could stand for the resolution to be higher in certain instances, but all in all, it's about right.
Quote:
The hardware features, build and ergonomics put the PowerBook far ahead of any Windows machine I could find.
Apple definitely has this right. I'm reasonably happy with my Sony PCG-Z1WA, but it could use some improvements here and there. And I think that it's probably amongst the best of the Intel laptops as far as this sort of thing goes. The one thing I miss is TV-out built in. Otherwise, I have Firewire, USB, 802.11g, Bluetooth, 10/100 ethernet, and analog VGA out built in. (Plus that stupid MemoryStick thing.) I don't think I'd use DVI out, but it's a feature it doesn't have. It also doesn't have gigabit ethernet, but I never use the wired ethernet anyway. What's the point of a laptop if you've got all these wires coming out of it tying you down?
On the other hand, an equivalent (where equivalent means "had the features I wanted") Apple would have cost a lot more, and still not had good enough resolution for me -- even the 17" Powerbook is only 1440x900, less than the resolution I'm running now.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235178 - 28/09/2004 04:39
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: matthew_k]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 31/08/1999
Posts: 1649
Loc: San Carlos, CA
|
I'd say its a consistency thing. Apple values UI consistency above almost anything else (differences between their annoying metal theme and regular aqua widgets not-withstanding). They want the sizes of icons, text, and images (and even printed output for that matter) to be similar if not the same on all of their systems so they dictate screen resolutions that result in between about 72 and 95 DPI.
I'd like a high res powerbook too (although 1024x768 on my 12inch isn't too bad), but I wouldn't count on apple delivering it unless your willing to hookup an external higher res monitor.
-Mike
Edit: s/rez/res/g to preserve tonyc's sanity 
Edited by mcomb (28/09/2004 04:41)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235179 - 28/09/2004 20:14
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: wfaulk]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 12/02/2002
Posts: 2298
Loc: Berkeley, California
|
Quote:
Some of us can see. I'm running 1400x1050 on a 14.1" display, with default font sizes, and I could stand for the resolution to be higher in certain instances, but all in all, it's about right.
Exactly. 1400x1050 on a 14.1 display is just about right. I don't want to be able to resolve individual pixels, and I really like being able to see windows behind my non full screened firefox window.
I remember years ago a friend of mine telling me how her brother had driven an hour to san jose and back to buy "this thing that let him make the icons really small". How this day in age "making the icons really small" is apple's worry seems to be the exact opposite of what I'd expect.
An interesting usenet post I found said that classic apps don't have any way to change the resolution, which what what was holding Apple back. I don't know the truth of the matter, as Apple rumors are about a dime a dozen.
Perhaps I'll try and wait for the next powerbook revision before making any decisions, otherwise I'll Be Gettin' A Dell.
Matthew
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235180 - 28/09/2004 20:48
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: wfaulk]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 24/01/2002
Posts: 3937
Loc: Providence, RI
|
Quote:
Quote:
IMO, the screen (15.2" widescreen) is not big enough to warrant a higher resolution. The poblem with some Dell systems is that the resolution becomes unusable for practical purposes. For fonts, you end up having to increase the default size of all text, next are window elements.
Some of us can see. I'm running 1400x1050 on a 14.1" display, with default font sizes, and I could stand for the resolution to be higher in certain instances, but all in all, it's about right.
I agree. The only thing I miss about my Dell was the 15.1" 1600x1200 display.
Certainly not the OS.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235181 - 28/09/2004 20:50
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: matthew_k]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 24/01/2002
Posts: 3937
Loc: Providence, RI
|
Quote:
How this day in age "making the icons really small"
That's "In this day and age".
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235182 - 29/09/2004 03:04
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: mcomb]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 17/12/2000
Posts: 2665
Loc: Manteca, California
|
Quote:
I'd say its a consistency thing. Apple values UI consistency above almost anything else
I count that as a plus for Apple.
_________________________
Glenn
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235183 - 29/09/2004 03:07
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: matthew_k]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 29/08/2000
Posts: 14496
Loc: Canada
|
Viewing my digital photos at 100dpi (1600x1200x15") is way better than the crummy 72dpi resolution (1024x768x14") on most laptops. If the O/S cannot cope with the higher density, then it's time to switch to a better O/S!
Cheers
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235184 - 29/09/2004 03:09
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: mlord]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 24/01/2002
Posts: 3937
Loc: Providence, RI
|
Quote:
Viewing my digital photos at 100dpi (1600x1200x15") is way better than the crummy 72dpi resolution (1024x768x14") on most laptops. If the O/S cannot cope with the higher density, then it's time to switch to a better O/S!
Cheers
As far as MacOS goes, it can clearly cope: you can tell it to run at 1600x1200 on an external display which is capable of such. They just won't build one into a laptop they'll sell you.
If PearPC were better...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235185 - 29/09/2004 04:42
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: mlord]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 08/06/1999
Posts: 7868
|
iBook and Powerbook 12 inch: 106 dpi (1024x768)
iBook 14 inch: 91 dpi (1024x768)
Powerbook 15 inch: 101 dpi (1280x854)
Powerbook 17 inch/iMac 17 inch: 100 dpi (1440x900)
Cinema Display 20 inch/iMac 20 inch: 99 dpi (1680x1050)
Cinema Display 23 inch: 98 dpi (1920x1200)
Cinema Display 30 inch: 100dpi (2560x1600)
Very consistant DPI numbers across Apple's LCD lineup except the 14 inch iBook.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235186 - 29/09/2004 12:00
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: drakino]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
That doesn't take into account old Apple laptops, which had similarly sized screens, but lower resolutions. Of course, each iteration may be internally consistent.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235187 - 29/09/2004 14:02
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: wfaulk]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 24/01/2002
Posts: 3937
Loc: Providence, RI
|
Well, here's the real answer: Macs are cheaper, but gayer
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235188 - 29/09/2004 22:02
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: mlord]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 12/11/2001
Posts: 7738
Loc: Toronto, CANADA
|
Mark, that's 133 DPI. I don't think there's any argument that viewing photos is going to be better at higher resolution, I just don't see the current PB resolution to be "too low." I would find 1600 to be extreme overkill on my PB's built-in screen. I don't have too much trouble reading small text, but I don't enjoy it. Most sites and material aren't meant to be viewed crammed into a small window with a miniscule font. I'd have to increase default icon sizes and font sizes. And unfortunately, with Mac OS X you only get to pick between two icon sizes for list views. The next release, Tiger, will bring the foundation for resolution independent graphics - it will still be a while before all applications take advantage of this (there won't be any control panel settings suposedly).
Anyway, if ultra-high resolution is a priority for someone, I can see how it would weigh heavily on their choice.
Bruno
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235189 - 30/09/2004 00:33
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: hybrid8]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 24/01/2002
Posts: 3937
Loc: Providence, RI
|
Quote:
Mark, that's 133 DPI. I don't think there's any argument that viewing photos is going to be better at higher resolution, I just don't see the current PB resolution to be "too low." I would find 1600 to be extreme overkill on my PB's built-in screen.
9 tiled xterms doesn't work on 1280x754 or whatever.
Well, note that by xterm I mean "the right dimensions", e.g. 80x24 in "fixed" font.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235190 - 30/09/2004 01:40
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: matthew_k]
|
pooh-bah
Registered: 12/02/2002
Posts: 2298
Loc: Berkeley, California
|
Ok, next question -
Who misses their seccond mouse button? I don't use my laptop at a desk, and no one makes a bluetooth trackball. I realize the OS is designed for one mouse button, but that's little consolation when using firefox or photoshop, I assume?
Matthew
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235191 - 30/09/2004 01:50
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: matthew_k]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 24/01/2002
Posts: 3937
Loc: Providence, RI
|
In X11, option+button is middle, and command+button is right. Typically Mac apps use control+button as what right click would be in Windows.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235192 - 30/09/2004 06:33
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: matthew_k]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 18/01/2000
Posts: 5683
Loc: London, UK
|
Quote:
Who misses their seccond mouse button?
I don't know about missing the second button when using a Mac, since I've not used one much.
I'll tell you this, though -- I sure as hell miss my scroll wheel when I'm forced to use a mouse without one. So I'm pretty sure that I'd miss the second button, too.
On the other hand, it can go too far the other way -- the mouse I've currently got at work has 6 buttons on it (if you include the wheel-click), and I've not used 3 of them yet.
And, as far as resolution goes, as a developer, I need all of the screen real-estate I can get, regardless of physical size. At home, I have two monitors, one 19" at 1600x1200, and a 15" at 1280x1024. If only LCDs were available in those resolutions at that size.
_________________________
-- roger
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235193 - 30/09/2004 11:52
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: matthew_k]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
I miss my third mouse button on virtually any mouse these days. I fear that my last Logitech MouseMan is about to die. The only appropriate mouse I can find these days is Sun's Crossbow mouse. At least it comes in a USB format -- I may get one of those for home use.
And, yes, I know that you can press the scrollwheel for a third button, but I dislike scrollwheels and it's very hard to press -- too small and too much resistance. In reality, I'd probably dislike scrollwheels less if they didn't supplant the middle button.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235194 - 30/09/2004 12:26
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: wfaulk]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 24/01/2002
Posts: 3937
Loc: Providence, RI
|
Quote:
I miss my third mouse button on virtually any mouse these days. I fear that my last Logitech MouseMan is about to die. The only appropriate mouse I can find these days is Sun's Crossbow mouse. At least it comes in a USB format -- I may get one of those for home use.
And, yes, I know that you can press the scrollwheel for a third button, but I dislike scrollwheels and it's very hard to press -- too small and too much resistance. In reality, I'd probably dislike scrollwheels less if they didn't supplant the middle button.
I could swear I saw a page about modding a microsoft optical 2 button+wheel to be a true 3 button; it's just replacing some plastic.
There's certainly a market for it, at least as a simple kit. Me? I want to retrofit an old DEC VSAAA-XX buck mouse (the 2 wheel kind, not the ball kind).
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235195 - 30/09/2004 12:27
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: Roger]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 24/01/2002
Posts: 3937
Loc: Providence, RI
|
Quote:
And, as far as resolution goes, as a developer, I need all of the screen real-estate I can get, regardless of physical size. At home, I have two monitors, one 19" at 1600x1200, and a 15" at 1280x1024. If only LCDs were available in those resolutions at that size.
You might have to go to 20" to get 1600x1200 but I know on LCDs of "about" that size I've used it. I don't keep up on 15"ers.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235196 - 30/09/2004 12:40
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: wfaulk]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 20/12/1999
Posts: 31602
Loc: Seattle, WA
|
Quote:
And, yes, I know that you can press the scrollwheel for a third button, but I dislike scrollwheels and it's very hard to press -- too small and too much resistance.
I *like* scroll wheels, but I agree that there is too much resistance for the wheel to double as a third button. I'm far too frequently making the wheel roll when I instead intended to simply press the third button. I'd like to see a good solution.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235197 - 30/09/2004 12:52
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: tfabris]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
An obvious solution would be to separate the wheel from the button. Put the wheel more towards the heel of the mouse (away from the cord) or at the tip. Chances are that if you're using the wheel, you're probably not moving the mouse a lot at the same time, so making it slightly harder to reach doesn't seem to be a big deal.
Of course, people make mice for Windows users, where the middle button goes virtually unused. In Unix (or X, really) I use it constantly. It pastes the currently highlighted selection -- swipe with button 1, paste it with button 3.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235198 - 30/09/2004 13:38
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: wfaulk]
|
old hand
Registered: 20/03/2002
Posts: 729
Loc: Palo Alto, CA
|
Hey Bitt, I remember your post about this from before. Have you tried the labtec 3 button mouse?
_________________________
- trs
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235199 - 30/09/2004 15:39
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: trs24]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
I have not, but $5 for a mouse? I'd rather not have to replace it next week.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235200 - 30/09/2004 16:04
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: wfaulk]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 20/12/1999
Posts: 31602
Loc: Seattle, WA
|
On the other hand, it might be merely inexpensive rather than "cheap", and could last you a good long time. And five bucks isn't much to spend to find out.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235201 - 30/09/2004 16:33
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: wfaulk]
|
old hand
Registered: 20/03/2002
Posts: 729
Loc: Palo Alto, CA
|
Well, you could pay $10 for it here if it would make you feel better. 
I haven't tried that mouse myself, so I couldn't speak to it's quality. I'd guess that it's probably not as high quality as your mouseman. It's probably pretty lightweight, but considering the fact that's it's as barebones as one could get with a mouse, I think that the price is probably about right.
EDIT: I just checked Belkin's website and found this 3 button ps/2 mouse for $10. They also have a USB version.
_________________________
- trs
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#235202 - 30/09/2004 16:47
Re: Low Res Powerbook Screens
[Re: trs24]
|
carpal tunnel
Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
|
Hmm. Well, there seem to be more than there used to be. That's heartening.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous Topic
Index