A warning: Do not buy a Mac Mini unless you have a high resolution (4K+) display.

[reallynotnick]

Text sizing on both the 27" iMacs, Retina and non-Retina, is exactly the same, but it's small enough that it becomes harder to make out at my preferred seating distance. On the non-Retina 27", it's just annoying overall. It's noticeably better on the Retina 27", but the default text size is small enough that it's still an annoyance. To make it feel larger, I need to sit closer, but this is a problem since it becomes harder to focus with my progressive lenses if I sit so close, and I find it tiring over time. A solution to this is to get dedicated computer glasses, but they are not suited for other uses, so I'd have to be swapping glasses all the time, which is even more annoying, and which also makes me nauseated.

OTOH, for the 30" non-Retina display, the default text size is large enough that I can sit at a reasonable distance that makes it less tiring to focus upon.

Thus my holy grail screen would be a Retina screen but with a LOWER pixel density than the 27" 5K iMac or 27" 5K Studio Display. My holy grail screen would be a 5K 5120x2880 29-30" screen, which would provide a pixel density of 196-203 ppi.

However, in the meantime, I will continue to use my 101 ppi 30" Cinema Display. And in fact, when the Mac mini gets updated with M1 Pro or M2, I will buy one to use with that same 30" non-Retina display.

What about a 4K 27" screen? Nah. I don't really like those. The font sizes are even larger but the screen real estate is not wide enough. I want at least 2.5/5K wide, not 2K/4K wide.

I just picked up a Dell UP3017, which is the same size and pixel density for this exact reason. Sure if I moved the screen closer I could deal with 27" 1440p, but I lose desk real estate that way and I like to recline at times.

I had a 24" 1920x1200 monitor before this which was an even lower PPI of 94ppi which I also enjoyed.

I'm also waiting for a 5K 29-30", heck I could go as big as 31.5" if I had too, but the 30" size would be just about perfect as it would be in between my two monitors. (And while the added height of 1600 vs 1440 is nice I don't think I'll miss it much and would gladly trade it for HiDPI)

 

[BeatCrazy]

I'm running Monterey on a non-Retina iMac (2560 by 1440) and it looks perfect!

 

[fhv]

Using a M1 Mac Mini with an 34inch iiyama ultrawide at 3440x1440 via HDMI.
I dont have any issue with the text.

 

[staypuftforums]

Using a M1 Mac Mini with an 34inch iiyama ultrawide at 3440x1440 via HDMI.
I dont have any issue with the text.

Yes you do. You are accustomed to the blurry and pixelated text.

 

[entropi]

my Dell 24" (92 ppi) with my m1 mba looks like it always have done on any computer I have, no problem!

 

[empersance]

M1 mini with 1920 x 1200 on a pretty old 24" LG monitor with HDMI to DVI cable and it's perfectly fine. Of course is not as smooth as the MBP 16 retina display but it's exactly the same as my old Windows PC connected to the same monitor and the text is the same as all other not retina displays that I have seen.

 

[fhv]

Yes you do. You are accustomed to the blurry and pixelated text.

Ok well atleast I dont have eyesight problems.

 

[MBAir2010]

my screen issue is
Macmini 2012, Mojave HDMI to a samsung TV 720dpi
i get fuzzy tabs with safari and an occasion slight picture scroll while watching an MP4 movie.
tabs are good using waterfox tho?
i just deal with this

 

[TiggrToo]

I’m sorry but that is just comical. Video? Sure. Text? Absolutely not.

Why are you so insistent that everyone must have problems?

I just plugged my M1 Air into a monitor we purchased in the mid to late 2000's - works a treat.

Ever considered that this issue is far from black and white?

 

[EdwardC]

I have a Dell P2419H that I have a HP Z2 and an M1 Mini connected to. The Mini looks OK on it but the PC is definitely and noticeably crisper.

 

[brucewayne]

My M1 mini is hooked up to a Late 2009 iMac 27 in Target Display Mode at QHD resolution and it looks gorgeous.

My guess is that the OP is talking about scaled mode. If you're using HD at 24 inches, you're probably using native resolution. Same with WUXGA (1,920 x 1,200).

How did you get that to work? My understanding was that M1 macs would not support output via target display

 

[MajorFubar]

OP are you wanting a debate on the subject, and in the process perhaps identify why some users seem to be affected more than others, or are you just out to rubbish anyone whose experience does not mirror yours? Seems to be the latter. Why is that?

 

[EugW]

How did you get that to work? My understanding was that M1 macs would not support output via target display

The 2009 27” iMac functions as a regular monitor for any computer that supports DisplayPort. Same with my 2010 27”. That’s because it does not use (or have) Thunderbolt.

 

[Boyd01]

my screen issue is
Macmini 2012, Mojave HDMI to a samsung TV 720dpi

Do you mean 720p? "Dpi" means "dots per inch" and I doubt your TV is that high resolution. 720p means a screen resolution of 1280x720 pixels (the "p" indicates progressive scan as opposed to the old interlaced scan method).

Anyway, 720p is pretty low resolution by today's standards, however I am using a 24" 720p Samsung TV myself on a 2014 Mini that is a media server. Everything looks fine on that screen, however I am using it at its native resolution (see screenshot). If you have chosen the "scaled" option with a 1080p setting, then that will look horrible, because you're trying to display more pixels than your screen actually has.

For my specialized use, I prefer a 720p monitor. This Mini is primarily a media server, but I also watch iTunes videos on it when I'm in the room. 720p makes the text and menus larger, so they are easier to read when viewing from across the room. But I would not want such a low resolution screen for "everyday" computer usage while sitting at a desk.

 

[Macative]

With the removal of subpixel antialising, it’s clear that MacOS is now built to be used with Apple displays. Full stop. I learned the hard way.

If you are running MacOS on an Apple laptop or an iMac, you’ll have a great experience. Run it on anything less than a 4K monitor and you will be in for a world of pain.

Text is so blurry. Even the desktop wallpapers look terrible. Video is mostly fine, about the same as Windows. But man, the text. Just incredibly blurry and pixelated.

Of course. This is well known. No one should be using a Mac with ANY display unless it is rendering at 2x. Full stop.

 

[brucewayne]

The 2009 27” iMac functions as a regular monitor for any computer that supports DisplayPort. Same with my 2010 27”. That’s because it does not use (or have) Thunderbolt.

gotcha - i forgot that they made the switch from DP to thunderbolt.

 

[orionquest]

This is a software issue not a hardware problem. I notice when I boot into either my Big Sur or Monterey partitions I don't like how the details look. I'm on non retina or non 4K screens. Going back to Mojave it's much better. That is with default settings I haven't fooled around with any terminal settings etc. Also mouse sensitivity is much different in the newer OS's. So I'm guessing those newer OS's are designed for retina displays only, which I guess makes some sense as Apple doesn't offer anything with none retina screens.

Meh I am good with Mojave, suits my purposes for now.

 

[turbineseaplane]

This is a software issue not a hardware problem. I notice when I boot into either my Big Sur or Monterey partitions I don't like how the details look. I'm on non retina or non 4K screens. Going back to Mojave it's much better.

Totally agree

I also notice how much better things look when I boot over into Windows on the same monitor I use on macOS (30" 1600p)

 

[MarkC426]

Yes you do. You are accustomed to the blurry and pixelated text.

It is not blurry and pixelated, it is just how it looks for the specific resolution.......?‍?
Everybody doesn't NEED retina displays.

 

[entropi]

It's interesting how some just can't seem to get that it actually isn't "blurry and pixelated" on all systems even if it is below 220ppi...

 

[turbineseaplane]

It's interesting how some just can't seem to get that it actually isn't "blurry and pixelated" on all systems even if it is below 220ppi...

I give macOS users a pass if they haven't seen a sub 4k panel on Windows lately.

macOS scaling and handling of sub 4k panels is really pretty bad (compared to Windows).

Text is crisp and sharp and wonderful on Windows with most all displays, 4k+ or not.

 

[staypuftforums]

Why are you so insistent that everyone must have problems?

I just plugged my M1 Air into a monitor we purchased in the mid to late 2000's - works a treat.

Ever considered that this issue is far from black and white?

It’s simple math. The pixel density of these monitors being listed is simply too low (far too low) to render text properly, especially without subpixel antialiasing.

So no, this isn’t a matter of opinion.

“The text is clear on my 75” 480p monitor!” is a false statement. No different from claiming “1 + 1 = 14”.

If you want to say “I’m OK with the blurry and fuzzy text on my low resolution monitor.” then I have no issue with that. But those are 2 very different statement. Don’t claim it isn’t heavily pixelated and blurry, because it is.

 

[staypuftforums]

It's interesting how some just can't seem to get that it actually isn't "blurry and pixelated" on all systems even if it is below 220ppi...

There are people in this thread claiming clear text on sub 100 ppi monitors above 24”. That is literally impossible, unless you are redefining the word “clear”. There’s no way around that. Nothing to “understand”. It’s a math issue.

 

[staypuftforums]

It is not blurry and pixelated, it is just how it looks for the specific resolution.......?‍?
Everybody doesn't NEED retina displays.

“How it looks for the specific resolution” is blurry and pixelated.

Again, I’ve got no issue if you find that acceptable. But it is what it is.

 

[ader42]

When I run my thunderbolt 1440p monitor from my M1 Mini (originally Big Sur and now Monterey) it looks exactly the same as when I attach it to my 2014 5k Retina iMac- which is most of the time.

The iMac is currently running Catalina but the same with Mojave and High Sierra - I have external boot drives so can and sometimes do boot into whichever I need at the time. Text looks the same on all the different versions of OSX to me.

The 5k iMac display is a lot nicer as it is retina - and I would personally recommend 5k for OSX - I think even 4k is rubbish compared to 5k, but the 1440p Thunderbolt is actually as expected and exactly as it has always been even when attached to my M1 Max MacBook Pro or my M1 Mini.

OSX seems quite simply optimised for 1440p and 2880p.

To be honest, anyone using a monitor lower than 5k likely doesn’t know what they are missing or don’t care. I know what I am missing and I do care (about the 1440p display) and wouldn’t use it for coding etc. when I can primarily use the 5k for that (when doing XCode stuff I can run the simulators on the 1440p for example, or when doing ZBrush I can put reference images on it).