Resolution of the final hardware will be 1080x1200 per eye (2160x1200 total) over a 90* field of view.
I'm not quite sure how to translate that into pixel density properly given the resolution is spread between your eyes, but I'd guess at least as good as a 1080p screen that fills a 90* angle of view?
The user experience would be quite different, as you could simply rotate+tilt the viewport to see sections of a larger virtual monitor screen. So it wouldn't necessarily be as restricting as low resolution on a fixed screen.
1080p that fills a 90* angle of view would be like looking at a 40" 1080p TV from ~28 inches away. Certainly not the same experience that you're used to with a retina display, unfortunately.
That's if you're looking at the full screen. Imagine walking closer, and having the resolution "increase" as you get closer (because you have the same number of pixels, looking at less "stuff" per pixel).
I'm not sure people would see the benefit of using it if you had to peer so close that each character took up a third of your displays just so it was at a comfortable resolution.
I'm not quite sure how to translate that into pixel density properly given the resolution is spread between your eyes, but I'd guess at least as good as a 1080p screen that fills a 90* angle of view?
The user experience would be quite different, as you could simply rotate+tilt the viewport to see sections of a larger virtual monitor screen. So it wouldn't necessarily be as restricting as low resolution on a fixed screen.