Dell Precision M4700 and M6700 - Preliminary Info

Once applications are developed for this system then the advantage that applies to everyone is the ability to scale up/down to suit your eyesight. The OS can talk to the display at native res and the user can pick a simple sliding scale to adjust to their comfort level.

Another specific use that would benefit would be CAD.

I think that projector scaling issues would disappear as well in the corporate environment.

 

What is the EOL on ordering M6600 after M6700 comes out. For corporate customers that rely on being able to order static configs, are the old machines supported/sold for a period after the new model is available? Thanks.

 

You'll most likely find them in the outlet but it's a hit or miss on the quality and configurations available.

 

In addition to what sgogeta4 posted, (judging from what happened with the M6500/M6600) there will be an overlap period when both models are available, but it won't last for very long.

 

Ok, but IMHO, the default DPI on the 1920*1200 (17" screen) is already too small for me for general programming, web browsing, etc. so I use a higher DPI setting. So, if I were to get a 3840*2400 (or, 3840*2160 more likely ) retina screen for my laptop, the only benefit I'd have (as I'm not working with graphics) is that my screen would be somewhat more sharp once I increase the DPI to the same comfortable level? Wouldn't that be a waste of the screen resolution, the money that went into that and the increased processing power needed to drive such a resolution? That would be a nice turn of events - we can't get you back the 16:10 screen, but we can effectively double your already suitable resolution for no obvious benefits other then to have a shiny new feature to make you upgrade and charge you even more money for. I'm going too far with this probably, as it will not hurt to have such screens as standard in the future, but I'd rather have my 17" FHD 16:10 screen back

BTW, from what I've read, currently the retina screen doesn't scale well at all to 1680*1050 or 1920*1200 on the OSX. Perhaps they didn't optimize for those resolutions yet, but then I'd have to wonder what they were doing then for this release as that would be an obvious purpose of having such a screen rather then (if I understood correctly, but probably haven't) practically just be in the 1440*900 mode most of the time and only get occasional benefits in some supported applications.

 

In the default mode, OS X pixel-doubles everything to fit the 2880x1800 display and uses higher-resolution assets when available. So, effectively, you have 1440x900 of working space. If you choose any different scaling mode, it renders your workspace pixel-doubled and then scales it (up or down) to fit the screen. For instance, if you pick the scaling mode that gives you the most space (1920x1200 worth of space), it renders a high-DPI pixel-doubled 3840x2400 image and then scales it down to fit on the 2880x1800 display. So, things won't be as crisp as if you were using the "native resolution" of 1440x900/2880x1800... Just like running any other LCD at a resolution other than its native. Plus the performance overhead to render the large image and scale it down might decrease performance slightly.

Of course the plus side to this approach is that app developers only need two sets of assets --- the standard one and the pixel-doubled one --- and the OS transparently handles scaling to other modes.

 

I saw the scaling in best buy. It had non-numeric names ... something like "more work area" ...

After scaling, the picture looks worse than on my M6500.

This "retina" seems more like a gimmick than serving any real useful purpose to many users. And Anandtech's review was very fanboyish. "Yes the scrolling is slow due to scaling .. the temps probably are worse as well .. but what a beautiful sceen"

 

The scrolling is slow? EFF THAT

 

Well, you can't compare how well Apple has done with the retina to what a PC might look like. Apple has a reputation for designing shiny solutions that do one thing very well.

A high res screen can be an option but ask yourself this, if you could save money by purchasing a 300dpi printer would you do it? No one makes 300dpi printers anymore but they would save money and be just as easy to read as 1200dpi.

The processing power doesn't scale with the number of pixels, some areas require detail but the command to fill a rectangular area with one color doesn't change no matter what the pixel density. So you need more processing power to draw finely detailed text but other areas don't require more power so overall it might not be as big a burden as you would think.

 

The scrolling was smooth and fast when I tried one in the apple store.

I think anandtech managed to get the scrolling to be slow by doing something extreme. I don't think this is a normal situation.