Macbook display

also, is the arrangement true?

Does the mouse actually move seamlessly from the right side of the Built-in to the left side of the external display?

and if all that is correct, can you move from the lower right of the built-in, DOWN into hyperspace, then RIGHT to the lowest extend of the external display? (perhaps the graphics are swapped).

<< When I drag the built in display, the menu bar followed. >>

the menubar is separable from the display. I was hoping you would drag the white MenuBar, and see the menubar move to the other display. Then see if that is now [erroneously] designated "built-in".

<< And when I slide the mouse towards the built in screen (from the external monitor lower end), it does not go thru -

which is correct as per arrangement pane. >>

That is not the experiment I was suggesting.

From the arrangement you posted, move the mouse DOWN, below the lower limits of the shorter left display. that space is a VOID in the extended desktop.

then move from that VOID toward the taller display.

¿does the mouse cursor appear out of the void in the lower portion of the taller display, on the correct side?

Wait. which display has the MenuBar subtracted from the height of the picture area when you do this experiment?

Half-inch tall menubar at 220 pixels/inch would take away around 110-ish pixels from the 2880 picture area, leaving 2770. No, that is not enough difference to explain this.

It sounds like you are converging on, "my built-in is not showing as large as it says it should be and the specs say it should be." And displays preferences supports the assertion that the built-in is WAY smaller by showing a graphic way smaller than expected.

I have never seen anything like this before.

The resolution of the built-in is not changeable by mere mortals, unless you are using advanced tools like SwitchResX or similar. The resolution of the built-in depends on a resolution stored internally in the Operating System -- unlike regular external displays, the resolution for the built-in is not derived on-the-fly from the display.

But your complaint is even more subtle -- the stated resolution from About this Mac matches the spec, but the displayable area appears to be far smaller. And Scaling is supposed to apply ONLY to Text, not to graphics, so your test document using .PNG should be at 1:1.

I think this may be a job for an Apple support -- and a display specialist at that. They make you work through a script with a First Responder. You can reference anything posted in this discussion (so no need to upload if already here) but their process is different and more rigorous, so they never take our conclusions at face value.

Be polite and professional, but if not solved, ask for a specialist. The specialist will likely have to call back, as there may be some work-from-home going on, and they are not likely to be standing around.

Those are the numbers your Mac SAYS it is using for those displays, but the Arrangement tab (and possibly the displays in action) are not reflecting those settings.

That sounds like a reproducible bug to me.

Running the latest version? (you don't want to spend the time and energy finding something that has already been found and fixed.)

The Arrangement pane has undergone re-construction for Ventura. it may have a bug.

If you drag the menubar to the other display, does the designation as "built-in display" follow the menubar?