Thanks for the prompt response Nick, > Your boss's logic seems flawed. He says that apple would install a > 1900x1200 screen if one was available. Obviously, one is available > because Dell is using one. Ah, but I failed to say that he's had the 17" Powerbook for 6 or more months now. > I think Apple rightly used a somewhat lower resolution screen on > thier 17" PowerBook to maintain usability for the widest gamut of > users. I have seen those 1900x1200 resolution on 17" screens also, > and they can be dificult to view. It's really bad on the 15" Dells and of course switching to a lower-res results in an unacceptable degree of blurring. > Same goes for their 15" screens > that use 1680x1050. I think our new Dell 15" laptops do have a 1900 by something res screen, but the Dell website refuses, at least initially, to supply such details. I'll have to check when I'm next at work. > Generally Apple uses a 106 PPI resolution on their panels. It seems a > good balance between usability and resolution Agreed, I like the 1280x854 resolution just fine. My problem is that I'm not going to persuade him that this is a deliberate decision by Apple without proof - any URLs in this regard from anybody would be much appreciated. > Just because one 'can' do something doesn't make that a good reason > 'to' do it. Agreed. Cheers, Colin.