My personal crusade against 768p resolution

Edited post.

 

This is not a question of who's right and who's wrong but of personal preference and opinion.

 

OMG, so many points there are SO wrong! Just too wrong to even address without writing a book, you litterally could do a chapter for each point................

Edit; I should say too though it counts on your vision. Since laptops and even desktops are used at reading distance it counts on your reading vision primarilly. If you have 20/20, the later 20 for reading, or even better 20/10 than you definately bennifit from high res screens. with bad reading vision, even with corrective lenses, you may need to 15" 768P or even worse resolution/scaling to use the system.......

 

I disagree with (3) since I can easily tell the difference between 1080p and 768p on a 15.6" laptop and on my 22" 1080p TV (using it as a monitor). For the 15.6" display, the difference between 141PPI and 100PPI is hard to miss.

(5)'s not really true... just see the Thinkpad T420 owners that complain about the "screen door effect" on their displays (768p or 900p). And if I lean into my 22" TV, I can clearly see individual pixels (with my eyewear or not... -4.5 strength).

Doubtful about (9), since playing with the resolutions on my 22", text looks blurry at 768p compared to native 1080p (DPI remains a constant 100%).

Rest of the numbered points don't make any sense, and I see no basis for those opinions. Higher pixel density means less contrast? Give me a break the only *semi-valid* point I might see is the 4" 1080p screen being bad, not because of the resolution, but because of the power draw compared to a lower-res display (less pixels, less power draw, longer batter life).

So far, however, I don't see the point in 1800p in the rMBP since OSX doesn't run at native resolution and Windows currently looks like crap on it. 1200p/1080p is a good option for now until software developers better optimize their programs to run at these "super-high" resolutions.

 

Edited post.

 

You can definitely see the difference between 1080p and 768p regardless of physical size. That said, without DPI scaling, everything will be smaller, too small for some. DPI scaling isn't perfect either.

The resolution of the source material is what defines how crisp a picture will look (mostly). That said, there is nothing more annoying than seeing an image with a higher resolution than your monitor and having to scroll.

You may not be able to see individual pixels, but you can certainly tell the difference between the resolutions.

Say what, show him an excel spreadsheet on 1080p vs 768p. If that doesn't convince him that the difference in screen real estate can be seen regardless of whether you see the pixels or not then i don't know what will.

Again, you may not see the pixels, but you can see difference on how "crisp" the image looks. It's not something you may notice without a side by side comparison though.

Again, it's not a matter of whether you see the pixels or not, but of how much pixels you can display on screen. You can display much more on screen with a higher resolution. Refer to my Excel spreadsheet example.

Yes and no, i do believe that at some point, pixel density doesn't matter much, but again, you can still perceive the difference, but for me 1080p is enough. Again, it's not a matter of whether you can distinguish the pixels or not, but the image does look like it's better defined on a retina display. Not enough for me to care, as I said, 1080p on 17" is plenty for me, but give me anything below that on 17" and i'll go on a rampage. Give me anything lower than 1600x900 or 1440x900 on 14" and i'll start rampaging again.

Nope, it can be a bit subtle, but definitely noticeable.

That one is complete BS, i'll take DPI scaling rather than lowering the resolution, scaling isn't perfect, but to me it's better than the pixel interpolation you get across the board when you lower the resolution. With DPI scaling, some things don't scale so well, with lowering the resolution everything is fuzzy.

No no no and NO. You can get 1080p 100% aRGB displays so no. The higher the resolution, the more you can display on screen or the more toolbars you can have without having to scroll to see the whole image you're working on for example. People want higher resolutions because things look more crisp and you can display more things on screen.

Really, just really? 1600x900 isn't damaging at all on my eyes on a 14" screen. 1920x1080 might be a tad too much though, but i'll take a high quality 13" 1080p display over any 1366x768 crap a lot of laptops have and that just for the better overall display quality.

Excel at 1080p, anyone working with large spreadsheet will enjoy 1080p and want to shoot himself out of despair at 768p: