What's your screen resolution?
 

Yep, another "What's your [blank]" topic. :P

Mine's 800x600. Dunno why, I've just always used it.

Oh, dear lord... 800x600? Are you serious?

Hurry up and get that iMac. I haven't seen a screen that ran at 800x600 for years.

Before I got my MacBook Pro, I ran at 1280x1024. On my MacBook Pro, I run at 1440x900.

Whoa, I can't imagine anything that small. :P
Right now I'm on 1024x768 just to get used to higher res. What's the lowest res on a Macbook pro?(I'm assuming Macbook pro and iMac screens are in any way similar)

What about that video of Bioshock running on a Mac you showed me? :P

I'm running my main screen (22") at 1600x1200 and my smaller screen (19") at 1152x864.

Here's a screenshot.

They're not really, but here's a tip: never run an LCD at anything lower than its optimum resolution. Everything becomes blurry and pixelated and generally sucktastic (not to mention it being a general pet peeve of mine). LCD screens are designed to run at one (and only one) resolution. They can extrapolate for lower resolutions if you need to, but you should always run at the highest resolution that your monitor supports.

The 15" MacBook Pro is designed to run at 1440x900, and the 17" MacBook Pro is designed to run at 1680x1050 by default. There is also a 17" model that supports 1920x1200. The 20" iMac is designed to run at 1680x1050, and the 24" iMac is designed to run at 1920x1200. You better start getting used to a lot higher than 1024x768. :P

(For the record, you can lower the resolution on the MacBook Pro all the way to 640x480. Not sure about the iMac. But if you run at anything other than the optimum resolution and abuse your Mac like that, I will hate you forever. :P)

I'm not talking about games, I'm talking about general operating resolutions.

I see your computer is running Windows 95.

Also, way to lie about your screen resolution. That screenshot clearly shows that your computer is in fact running at 1280x1024.

Having a decent resolution is arguably more important for a game than your desktop...

We've discussed this before, but I would disagree personally. I think that having higher graphics options is more important than a high resolution. You're welcome to set your games how you like.

Oh GOD. :P This'll be a helluva change... the highest res on mine is 1280 by 1024.
... and I just looked at it and EVERYTHING'S TINY... wow.

I'm running at 1280x1024.

Thats it. :P

I can't work at anything smaller than 1280x1024. Arturia's CS-80V, for example, will not even fit entirely on the screen at 1024x768.

I learned about a zooming feature elsewhere, and I guess with the bigger screen it'll be easier for me to adjust. Right now I'm sticking to 1280x1024 on my current screen, which is only something like a 15 inch.

15 inches??? You sure you're measuring it correctly? My pet worm has a bigger TV screen than that. :P

And to answer your question:

My screen resolution is adequate.

Yep, I'm sure. :P I guess the iMac resolution's gonna look bigger than the equivalent on this screen...

Yeah, I use it all the time on my Macs. Only for emphasis, though, never because I need it or anything. I just think it's nifty, and therefore fun. :P

Definitely.

Same here. At school they expect me to do my Multimedia class on < 1024x768 and Photoshop 6 and then wonder why I don't do anything in class.

And they suspended me for calling them technologically illiterate. Retards.

Yeah, I don't blame you.

Bit touchy, aren't they?

show Danny the letter you wrote, RV :D

Here's something you'll love about them: They recently added this new section to the school which is all fancy and modern and shit, and they have two rooms full of about 12 brand new iMacs each.

Guess what OS they're running.

Haha maybe.

What a strange and difficult question.

BeOS? OS/2?

Yeah, post it, I wanna see. :P

I run on 1248X1048 or something like that. I like me screen crisp and clear.

1280x1024.

Windows XP. :eek::eek::eek:

I'll have a look.

+ YouTube Video

THE HORROR...

Oh yeah and I'm on 1024x768 right now. :P

I just love huge screens and small icons :P

Well, at least they have some hardware sense, I suppose.

Not really...

Now you're just being bitter. Regardless of prices, when you buy a Mac, you're buying an extremely nice computer. You can't possibly argue with that.

And I'm doing just that tomorrow. :P

[/MAC DISCUSSION]

Well, I can, and I have extensively. But we've covered this territory before and neither of us is going to concede to the other, so I'm not going to go on about it.

One day one of us will probably go, "Oh, maybe Danny/RV was right."

How can you possible argue that the hardware is bad? That's just asinine. But I'll leave you alone and let you grasp at straws to use against Macs.

FYI, most of your arguments make really good sense. Price, hardware lock-in, etc. But nowhere in this realm of reality can you possibly argue that you're not buying a really good computer, because you are. Please go fight a battle you can win.

I run at 1440x900.

I'm not really sure what resolution I'm on right now. :P

You're in good company -- that's what I run at. ;)

You're running at 1680x1050. :P

I'm not disputing the quality of Apple's parts, as the parts they source are usually of a high standard.

Additionally, Mac hardware's uniformity is advantageous as the hardware is all seamlessly compatible (in most cases) with the Mac OS, hardware incompatibility is often the major cause of Windows' instability.

However purchasing a Mac with no intention of using Mac OS isn't the brightest idea, as you lose a lot if not most of the advantages of owning a Mac in the first place. In this case, it is better to source your own hardware and build your own computer, as you'll be able to build a computer with higher specs for a better price than Apple's equivalent*.

In my school's case, I believe they must have been gifted the computers and decided to use Windows on them instead for some strange reason.

*I just did a little research and found something interesting; My younger brothers' new computer has a Core 2 quad clocked at 2.6ghz, 8600GS, 4gb of DDR2 RAM. It cost $1400 AUD. The closest equivalent Quad-core Mac Pro costs (quoted directly from their site after using the configuration options) A$ 5,168.00, with only a single 7300GT. There was no option for a better graphics card (for example, a 7600GT like I have which is a mid range last-gen card. However you could double up on graphics cards, which I did not do. If I did, the price would be even higher.)

Previously I had taken your word on that research you did on comparing Mac parts to PC parts, where you said that the end result was remarkably similar. Unless Australia is being charged 4 times more for their Macs, however, I think you either need to recalculate or we must be getting hardware from completely different planets.

Agreed x 3.

Holy crap, RV has a younger brother. :eek:

Your mistake was in the customization. Apple rips you off big time if you do any of the build-to-order options -- I don't deny that. ($750 to upgrade from 2 GB of memory to 4 GB?) I was comparing their base model iMac and Mac Pro to a PC outfitted with the same parts (or as close as I could find).

So how would I ever find a Mac computer equivalent to my brother's? The base model still costs $3999.00 AUD without the customization! Plus, I can't find an iMac that has similar specs to those I outlined above, and in buying an iMac I would additionally lose the ability to upgrade anything other than RAM and the HDD.

Edit: Let's not make this into another argument. Instead:

Say I have $1500AU and want to buy a new computer, convince me why I should get an Mac instead of a PC with vastly higher specs.

Depends on your needs. You pick the model that's right for you based on what you need it to do. If you want to upgrade it, buy the base Mac Pro and stick your own video card in there.

Here it costs $2499.

That's because you're not the intended audience for the iMac.

Why would you want a Mac if you can build a computer leagues better than their $5000+ model for $3500 less?

You wouldn't.

Why do others? Good hardware, good support, and a stellar operating system.

And FYI, Hackintoshes (for the most part) are about as stable as Windows Me Beta 1. If you really want the OS, buy the computer. Or find a torrent for Windows Me Beta 1.

Man. now i remember the days when 800X600 was actually considered big :P