←back to thread

The new and upgraded Framework Laptop

(community.frame.work)
1680 points etbusch | 3 comments | 19 May 22 12:19 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
petilon ◴[19 May 22 14:57 UTC] No.31435505[source]▶
Still no retina display option. Steve Jobs made the right call over a decade ago... the only scaling that looks good after 100% is 200%. Any in-between scaling will have display artifacts.

This laptop has 150% scaling. What sort of display artifacts can you expect because of this? Go to a web page with a grid, with 1-pixel horizontal grid lines. Even though all lines are set to 1-pixel, some lines will appear thicker than others.

I blame Microsoft for this mess. Windows supports in-between resolutions (with display artifacts), and hardware manufacturers therefore manufacture in-between resolutions. Framework laptop is limited to what the display manufacturers put out.

replies(9): >>31435534 #>>31435544 #>>31435704 #>>31435840 #>>31435937 #>>31436188 #>>31436195 #>>31436260 #>>31436741 #
cowtools ◴[19 May 22 14:59 UTC] No.31435534[source]▶
besides the fact that "retina display" is a marketing term invented by Apple, I don't really see what the big deal is. I have pretty good vision and I don't notice individual pixels on my 1080p screen. More pixels means more load on the GPU.
replies(7): >>31435670 #>>31435730 #>>31435757 #>>31435778 #>>31435870 #>>31435901 #>>31438995 #
arinlen ◴[19 May 22 15:15 UTC] No.31435778[source]▶
> I have pretty good vision and I don't notice individual pixels on my 1080p screen.

1080p doesn't mean much if you leave out the screen's pixel density. There's a world of difference between a smartphone with a 5' 1080p screen and a 24' monitor with a 1080p screen.

replies(2): >>31436259 #>>31436314 #
cowtools ◴[19 May 22 15:56 UTC] No.31436314[source]▶
That's a good point. But distance also plays a factor. Perhaps we should be measuring in pixels per degree at the viewing distance.
replies(1): >>31440836 #
1. dntrkv ◴[19 May 22 22:14 UTC] No.31440836[source]▶
That's actually what the term "retina" means (in Apple marketing lingo). It's the required pixel density, at different viewing distances, where you no longer see the pixels. Retina PPI for Macbooks is different compared to iPhones.
replies(1): >>31441664 #
2. cowtools ◴[19 May 22 23:43 UTC] No.31441664[source]▶
Sure, but the threshold between "Retina" vs Non-"Retina" is somewhat arbitrarily decided by Apple, and it's also a registered trademark that only Apple owns.

It's like arguing whether or not macbooks are "ultrabooks". Choosing to discuss using these terms is ultimately just allowing these companies to arbitrarily control discussions. I think we should try to resist corporate capture of language when possible.

Consider the context of the parent comment. If I can barely notice individual pixels on my 1080p monitor with good vision at a normal viewing distance, then surely the difference between a 4K screen and a 2K screen can't be that noticeable, even to a professional artist (who probably has more ideal viewing conditions, a more trained eye, and lower viewing distance).

Looking at apple's website, their MacBook Air (which I assume is their main model?) has a "retina" resolution of 2560x1600 with a 13.3' display, whereas the framework has a resolution of 2256x1504 with a 13.5' display. So they are about the same, except that one is marketed as "Retina" and one is not.

replies(1): >>31444910 #
3. arinlen ◴[20 May 22 08:57 UTC] No.31444910[source]▶
> Looking at apple's website, their MacBook Air (which I assume is their main model?) has a "retina" resolution of 2560x1600 with a 13.3' display, whereas the framework has a resolution of 2256x1504 with a 13.5' display. So they are about the same, except that one is marketed as "Retina" and one is not.

From your claim, the MacBook Air has simultaneously a smaller display and a significanly higher pixel count: over 20% more pixels than Framework's display in a smaller area.

You might try to argue that the difference is not meaningful or important to you personaly, but they are far from "being the same".