Windows 8 shown running on Retina Display MacBook Pro

Earlier this week, Apple revealed some new MacBook and MacBook Pro notebook models. One of them is the new 15.4-inch MacBook Pro which has a 2800 x 1800 resolution display. So how does Windows 8 look running on a notebook with such a high resolution screen? AnandTech.com decided to find out and installed Windows 8 on their new Retina Display MacBook Pro.

The article contains several screenshots showing Windows 8 running on the new MacBook Pro at the notebook's top resolution. The story states that the trailer for the upcoming James Bond movie, Skyfall, shown on the bottom left of the screenshot above, is running in a full 1920 x 1080 window. It adds that text on the display is very small at that display setting and that raising the DPI scaling makes the text more legible.

The new MacBook Pro has an NVIDIA graphics chip inside. At the time this article was posted, NVIDIA had yet to release any Windows 8 Release Preview drivers for its notebook graphics chips (the company has since released beta versions of those drivers).

It will be interesting to see if any of the PC makers who are currently developing Windows 8-based notebooks and tablets will launch models with a display that has as high of a resolution as the new MacBook Pro and the iPad.

Source: AnandTech | Image via AnandTech

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Forge free-to-play PvP game announced

Next Story

Microsoft releases its first Android-based game

91 Comments

View more comments

Deliciously_Random said,
Shows how far behind Windows 8 is in terms of the new (Retina) standard. But the good news is that with last week's WWDC, Apple's sent all the generic OEMs back to the drawing-board, so eventually the rest of the industry will make improvements to their hardware.

They simply don't have it set to the correct scaling. Duh?

Deliciously_Random said,
Shows how far behind Windows 8 is in terms of the new (Retina) standard. But the good news is that with last week's WWDC, Apple's sent all the generic OEMs back to the drawing-board, so eventually the rest of the industry will make improvements to their hardware.

Ahahaha. Windows fully supports scaling since Vista and has some support for it since XP. These photos are without scaling enabled.

Deliciously_Random said,
Shows how far behind Windows 8 is in terms of the new (Retina) standard. But the good news is that with last week's WWDC, Apple's sent all the generic OEMs back to the drawing-board, so eventually the rest of the industry will make improvements to their hardware.

shows how little you actually know about windows 8, retina is not a standard and just to bring you up to speed with this stuff, windows has higher ppi displays than the retina, so it would be apple that's behind the times and below the standard.

korupt_one said,

shows how little you actually know about windows 8, retina is not a standard and just to bring you up to speed with this stuff, windows has higher ppi displays than the retina, so it would be apple that's behind the times and below the standard.

Obviously you don't know what "the standard" means

Jose_49 said,
Now that I see it clearly... How the focks uses Quicktime to watch videos on Windows ?!

It's a trailer from Apple, so quicktime is the default client. However "full 1920x1080" I think not. 1920 wide, sure, but that is not 1080 pixels tall!

richardsim7 said,

It's a trailer from Apple, so quicktime is the default client. However "full 1920x1080" I think not. 1920 wide, sure, but that is not 1080 pixels tall!


True. It should occupy more than half of the tall of the screen.

Xerino said,
super high resolution + small display = need a magnifying glass to read anything...

This is bugging me a little. I'm assuming (I haven't actually read into Retina) that you need to push the DPI up to get the benefits of Retina display, otherwise it's just a stupidly high resolution.

Xerino said,
super high resolution + small display = need a magnifying glass to read anything...

Precisely why I don't like super high resolutions.

Xerino said,
super high resolution + small display = need a magnifying glass to read anything...

super high resolution + small display + enabling the DPI scaling setting = awesome

laserfloyd said,

Precisely why I don't like super high resolutions.

But Retina isn't about super high resolutions though is it? It's about pushing DPI settings up to take advantage of the extra pixels to make it more crisp and sharp.

Xerino said,
super high resolution + small display = need a magnifying glass to read anything...

Do a little bit more research before posting next time.

When Windows 9 comes out, everyone will be bitching that it doesn't look like 8, which was the best Windows ever.

No, if it looks or at least feels like Windows 7, at least in desktop mode, then I bet that most people, with very few exceptions, will be extremely happy. Out of 10 people I know, 9 don't like Metro on desktop computers. Including myself, and I know what I'm talking about, I'm GUI designer.

Islander said,
No, if it looks or at least feels like Windows 7, at least in desktop mode, then I bet that most people, with very few exceptions, will be extremely happy. Out of 10 people I know, 9 don't like Metro on desktop computers. Including myself, and I know what I'm talking about, I'm GUI designer.

10 people is a very small sample size I know quite a few people who love how the Metro mode looks. I'm not too sure how I feel, myself, as I do love aspects of it, but I just don't know how I feel about it overall, yet.

Calum said,

10 people is a very small sample size I know quite a few people who love how the Metro mode looks. I'm not too sure how I feel, myself, as I do love aspects of it, but I just don't know how I feel about it overall, yet.

If a real survey is done, Metro will lose but no worries, we will be seeing this soon enough in the coming months.

Additionally, if this holds true for OEM, "Windows RT will cost staggering USD$80-95 dollars" then Windows 8 on Tablet will also face problem especially because it's an ARM version which does not have full support x86/x64 programs.

Metro looks ridiculous on that. And since everything metro is full screen... We shouldn't have to change DPI to make Metro fill the screen. Gaw..

SpyderCanopus said,
Metro looks ridiculous on that. And since everything metro is full screen... We shouldn't have to change DPI to make Metro fill the screen. Gaw..

You don't have to change DPI to make Metro (the start screen) fill the screen. This MacBook just has the wrong drivers. Normally, the start screen would be full of tiles... maybe 10 rows deep. This has already been demonstrated on other computers.

I saw a Samsung with 9 rows of tiles. The laptop I'm using right now shows 4 rows. My desktop shows 6 rows. It does scale. It's designed to show you more content.

But why shouldn't you have to change the DPI settings? That's what Apple did (basically). They give you a huge screen resolution, but then scale text 200% and provide 2x larger images. That means that even though you have a huge resolution, you only have 25% of the screen resolution you thought you were getting.

SpyderCanopus said,
Metro looks ridiculous on that. And since everything metro is full screen... We shouldn't have to change DPI to make Metro fill the screen. Gaw..

Soo you are judging windows 8 for the way that behaves on an unsupported non-pc product?? seems legit....

Wow, really?

Since when did we need a Macbook to get access to high resolution displays?

The 'real' world does realize that PC users have had access to 4K displays for around 5 or 6 years now? The arrogance of Apple and the idiots that treat them like they have done something special is mind blowing.

Toshiba has been trying to push out 8K displays since 2007, but with the low adoption of 4K displays, held back. (As in 8,192 and 4,096 resolution displays.)

The HD video and BluRay 'screwing' of the world with the 1920x1080 crap resolutions set the display industry back. Remember that back in 2005, a COMMON 17" monitor resolution was 1920x1200. (Apple also called these 'high resolution' laptop 'silly' and wasted' at the time.)

So explain why again we need a MacBook to see Windows 8 at high resolution, unless it is just easy with Apple dumping free Macbooks to 'test' and swag that gives more people access to things they normally couldn't afford?


If I knew there was this type of curiosity of higher resolution displays, I could have submitted screenshots from both 4K and 2K monitors and projectors. (Also ones from Windows 7 or Windows 8 that have 10bit and 12bit color, something that the Retina display cannot do and something OS X can't do either, as it is 8bit color limited.)

Can someone please tell me strait up and with a bit of solid data, does the new retina display looks like crap when scaled down, like most current LCD and LED screens do? I am asking for both OSX (I realise apple is pulling "magic" to make up for it) but what about win7/win8 ? if you put the 2880x what ever res at 1440x900 ? what happens? If I put my currently native 1920x1080 monitor to 1280x720 it looks exactly like what it is, a massive scale which gives blur and jittering. Retina display? how is it doing? thank you very much!

Commenting is disabled on this article.