University claims Apple's glossy screens may cause injury - Page 5

Originally Posted by teckstud

the SONY Hybrid patented screen used in the TT line- hands down the best.

Originally Posted by jglavin

Anyone care to provide an example of a glossy screen that defeats glare more effectively than Apple's line.

Feel free, any time now.

Originally Posted by solipsism

Post #7: They just don't want to admit the issue because many ignorant consumers like the glossy screen.

Post #16: This goes to show that Apple acknowledges the glaring issue of the glossy screen already and does not want to admit it because bunch of ignorant consumers like the glossy screen.


Post #39: A large number of consumers, if not most consumers, are ignorant. Period.
With a perfect dismount into a pesonal attack

Post #40: [At Macxpress] ...then you're obviously ignorant.

Originally Posted by jglavin

Is it a hybrid matte/glossy? Or does the hybrid refer to something else? Could this type of coating be applied to the glass covering style as used in Apple's stuff?

I personally love the fact that I can push in on the screen without any puddling. It is a valuable feature that some portion of the consumer base would likely not want to see go.

I remember back in the days of CRT there were many types of proprietary coatings and treatments designed to reduce glare, on both glossy and matte screens. Part of the process of selecting a monitor was your preference of one style over another, isn't this the same thing?

Of course it is a bit more contentious when it comes to a laptop screen as you are also choosing the hardware and some may be "forced" to compromise on things like the screen.

Originally Posted by Abster2core

Apples' new backlit LED actually reduces glare by emitting light, so that any external light shining directly on it is proportionally lower. That is why the new glossy Macbooks work exceptionally well outdoors, even on a bright sunny day. The matte Macbook Pro 17" wouldn't reduce glare as much because the emitted light is being diffused.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glare_(vision)
http://www.azooptics.com/Details.asp?ArticleID=79

Originally Posted by mechengit

Taking several quotes out from me only goes to show that your understanding of "choosing glossy means being ignorant" is based on your own deduction.

Originally Posted by fltman

Ok, let the whining begin. There are those in favor of glossy screens and there are those in favor of matte screens. Right? Well, how many of those hav actually tried working 8 hours a day with both matte and glossy screens? I have and here are my 2 cents.

I previously had a 17" MBP old style with matte screen and a 23" cinema display. Both worked great. But I updated to a brand new 15" glossy MBP and a 24" glossy cinema display. I worked with those for about a week and then enough was enough. I returned both the new cinema display and the MBP and returned to my old 17" matte MP and my old 23" matte cinema display and it was bliss.

I'm still interested in upgrading so instead I bought a 250GB vortex SSD for my old MBP which was great and now I kind of consider buying a 30" matte cinema display while they are still for sale.

For me, glossy is not an option. Not any more. I have not tried the new 17" MBP with anti glare yet but I'm kind of interested but I guess that I will have to see one first before buying.

Originally Posted by HammerofTruth

I too originally thought that the glossy screens were terrible. Then I had to replace my 1st gen 17" Macbook pro. I saw the matte option at Macworld and it looked cheesy. Like they took an old screen from the last gen and bolted it on the new one, no finesse at all. The issue with the reflection is easily fixed by making sure you're not working in an environment that has a lot of light sources to create glare or reflections that would distract you. Anybody that's been using computers for more than 15 years should remember that in the early 90's glare was a real problem on CRTs.

I also followed some advice on Apple's discussion groups and found out that the glossy screen is better than the matte color-wise. You may disagree if you ever see one at the Applestore since they look terrible there. The reason is that they aren't calibrated. You will have to invest in a calibrator to get the right gamut, but when you do, the results are astounding. It completely blows away my old matte screen and external flat panels with the same calibrator on it. Buy a cheap spyder calibrator, they are easy to use and are fast at calibrating.

Although there are some issues with some people getting defective glossy screens, that shouldn't dissuade you into getting one, just make sure you are happy with it and don't let Apple slide if you think you have a defective one. Most of those people bought early this year, mine is about a month old, so I think they fixed this issue.

Originally Posted by fltman

Ok, let the whining begin. There are those in favor of glossy screens and there are those in favor of matte screens. Right? Well, how many of those hav actually tried working 8 hours a day with both matte and glossy screens? I have and here are my 2 cents.

I previously had a 17" MBP old style with matte screen and a 23" cinema display. Both worked great. But I updated to a brand new 15" glossy MBP and a 24" glossy cinema display. I worked with those for about a week and then enough was enough. I returned both the new cinema display and the MBP and returned to my old 17" matte MP and my old 23" matte cinema display and it was bliss.

I'm still interested in upgrading so instead I bought a 250GB vortex SSD for my old MBP which was great and now I kind of consider buying a 30" matte cinema display while they are still for sale.

For me, glossy is not an option. Not any more. I have not tried the new 17" MBP with anti glare yet but I'm kind of interested but I guess that I will have to see one first before buying.

Originally Posted by Abster2core

Not really. The problem in the stores is due to the relative position of the screens on the display tables and yourself, and equally important, the relative position of the overhead florescent lights onto the screens and/or yourself. In effect, the room is too bright and the table displays too low.

Notice in the SONY Stores, how the all their monitors in the brightly lit front part of the store show some degree of reflection while those at the back in the darkened showrooms are without.

Originally Posted by HammerofTruth

What exactly did you not like about the glossy screens? Did you have a lot of glare or reflections, or was it the colors seemed more purple and out of gamut? Did you calibrate them? Just wondering, since I thought I would have the same outcome as you. I thought I would have wanted the matte option, but seeing it looked muted to me. Although a lot of people who are used to the matte screens think the glossy ones have too much saturation. That may or may not be true if they aren't calibrated.

Originally Posted by Abster2core

Notice in the SONY Stores, how the all their monitors in the brightly lit front part of the store show some degree of reflection while those at the back in the darkened showrooms are without.

Originally Posted by AppleInsider


The advisory, published a few months ago by the Centre for Teckstudian Logic at the Queensland University of Technology on its Health and Safety website, specifically addresses Mac users with Apple 'glass' or high gloss monitor screens and urges them to assess the manner in which those products are positioned and used.

Originally Posted by patroll

Small edit to improve readability.

Originally Posted by mechengit

I already responded earlier and ironically you started this rhetoric topic again by misreading my post yourself. Maybe I'm harsh and there are points that I didn't make clear, but that doesn't justify the misinterpretation that some few people have made, especially the "whoever use glossy screen are ignorant" statement.

I've never said that matte screen is necessarily better than glossy screen. The point of mentioning anti-glare option of the 17" Macbook Pro is to show that Apple acknowledge the glare issue on the glossy screen. This doesn't mean matte screen is better than glossy screen and that is not my point at all. What I'm criticizing is the fact that Apple acknowledge the glare issue but chose not to improve the glossy screen even though they can because many users either don't acknowledge the issue or chose to ignore the issue that can be fixed, which is ignorant. This does not mean that whoever use glossy screen are ignorant AT ALL.

Some people just like to tense up when they hear different opinions from theirs.

Originally Posted by jglavin

You know, I just realized that all the pictures of the Macbooks/iMacs in Apple's store show a bit of glare partially obscuring the picture.

Originally Posted by teckstud

In the Fifth Ave Store they teach classes using the old Matte cinema display. Why- NO GLARE!!!

Originally Posted by teckstud

In the Fifth Ave Store they teach classes using the old Matte cinema display. Why- NO GLARE!!!

Originally Posted by solipsism

You cant think of another reason before making an absolute statement? Cant even word it as conjecture or even begins to try for an objective statement that leads to civil discourse about potential reasons? And you wonder why the troll label so easily gets placed.

Originally Posted by cima113

Pifffft!! So sad... this is what they do at university?! Higher learning my @zz!

Originally Posted by solipsism

You can’t think of another reason before making an absolute statement? Can’t even word it as conjecture or even begins to try for an objective statement that leads to civil discourse about potential reasons? And you wonder why the ‘troll’ label so easily gets placed.

Originally Posted by patroll

How about the financial incentive of making good use of perfectly usable but less desirable, older-generation monitors? This seems more logical to me.

Originally Posted by lamewing

You are an idiot of the highest caliber. This is not something to be taken lightly. Poor posture can have severe long term health effects on a person. I think that does fall into reasonable research and for you to just blow it off is very telling regarding your level of education.

Originally Posted by patroll

How about the financial incentive of making good use of perfectly usable but less desirable, older-generation monitors? This seems more logical to me.

Originally Posted by teckstud

No- the logic is that you simply can't view Glossy en masse.

Originally Posted by MacTripper

WELL WELL WELL!!!

I had a cracked tooth and needed to see the dentist first thing this morning. So I'm very late to this party to say the least.

It's going to take me some time to read through all the posts here, but let me state my position.


1: I'm for CHOICE! If you like glossy, good for you! I can't use a glossy display at all, it seriously hurts my eyes and I'm not alone on the subject. So all I ask is glossy people respect mine and others need for a matte screen option alongside glossy choices. Everyone wins, there is no "what is better debate", it's subject to variable environmental conditions.

2: Many many polls taken, and more people prefer matte screens than glossy. But it's something like 60% matte 40% glossy on average. Even if it was 40% matte and 60% glossy, the large market share being denied is way too much to ignore.

3: Apple is the only legal provider of OS X as it's tied to their hardware. When Apple makes a computer that 60% of people can't use, what are they supposed to do with thousands of dollars of invested software/files etc?

Right now Apple is losing a sale with me, because I need a new 15" matte MacBook Pro and I can't get it, without having to spend an additional $200 and void my AppleCare/warranty by having TechRestore replace the glossy with a matte screen. And then, what about the next versions of Mac's?, will there be a option to switch the screen? Perhaps not.

Multiply my case by 60% of Mac users out there and you see there is a problem.

Peal and stick anti-glare films totally suck. They trap display heat, bubble and peel, collect dirt. Not good for a top of the line computer system. So that's not a solution.

The first PC company to introduce glossy screens was HP, who has had their eye on the consumer market since the cozy HP/Apple iPod breakup.

It costs MORE to make a glossy screen than a matte one. So why do we have to pay more for a matte screen 17" MacBook Pro? And why no matte screen MacBook Air?

When Phil said "Our customers love glossy screens" does he really mean "We only want to have customers who love glossy screens"??

There are tons of poll results, people's opinions and vital information on this subject if you click on the link "glossy bah humbug" in my signature.

Please take the time and review the information and evaluate. I will then welcome any intelligent responses to the subject.

Thank you.

Originally Posted by MTO

Dam people! Stop whining so much. Grow a pair. Only a bunch of pussies will complain about their back hurting because of a shiny computer screen. This school should be putting their resources into more important things then a back ache because someone up there has a vendetta with Apple for not offering matte LCDs.
There are starving children out there, we are destroying our earth..... Nope let's waist money on trying to shame Apple into offering an anti-glair option on their portable computers...
And if you get a back ache that's fine just make one of your girlfriends rub your back.. Thats what their there for.

Originally Posted by Ossian

Such enlightened views around here. What happened to the metrosexual "I'm a Mac" types?

Anyway, I'm at the age where years of pouring over laptops has given me back problems. Using a laptop brings it back. Not using it makes it go. If I was smart I'd get a job that didn't involve computers.

I used to think all this posture stuff was nonsense. I was wrong, painfully wrong. Chronic back pain is something that everyone should avoid. The sleepless nights give you lots of time to reflect on the mistake if you don't take steps to look after yourself.

I guess the University, like my first University, mainly runs Macs. Hence the Apple angle.

Originally Posted by HammerofTruth

Yes really. The salespeople told me that they don't calibrate the screens with colorsync at all, they just use the default profile. The default profile is waay too purple. Mine was out of the box and it scared me until I hooked up my spyder to it and ran the software. You do have a point about it being to low and the lights may affect the reflection and or glare, but if they took the time to setup the machines correctly, they would look a hell of a lot better.

Originally Posted by jeffharris

If you want to run Mac OS X, it's the only choice. I'm not interested in Linux or any flavor of Windows.

When it came time for me to buy a new external display, I bought a ViewSonic VP2650wb. 26", better specs than the new Apple display and a matte display.

The hostility in regard to people's display preference is idiotic.

Originally Posted by Abster2core

My reference to calibration was to your use of Spyder. ColorSync, yes. Spyder, never had much use of it, even though my agency had up to 24 Macs running at one time.

Problem in the stores is that it is not layout to setup the machines. Somebody at headoffice has to reorder the furnishings.

Originally Posted by solipsism

You said that most are ignorant. To backpeddle to state that you not referring to purchase decisions of glossy screens is not going to go well for you. You made the comment numerous times without ever stating any objective stance that many matte screen purchasers are also ignorant.

Originally Posted by solipsism

As for the "anti-glare option of the 17" Macbook Pro is to show that Apple acknowledge the glare issue on the glossy screen” is simply not true. If the glare issue was the issue then why did not they opt for the cheaper matte display on all there machines? Why have the glossy option at all if they are acknowledging that glare is an issue.

Originally Posted by solipsism

They’ve just done a sweeping Mac notebook change and the 17” MBP is still the only one with that option. What you may have meant to say, but didn’t, is that Apple has acknowledged that some customers prefer matter displays over glossy. Like myself and others have stated numerous times, even ones that prefer matte, we’d like to see Apple offer these options to all their displays and that the choosing of glossy in no way signifys that the preference is ill-informed or foolishly derived.

Originally Posted by HammerofTruth

Well, it sounds like your problem is that you didn't setup your work area correctly, but to be fair, there wasn't a lot of info in the early 90's about proper posture, how high the surface you put your laptop/keyboard is, how far and at what angle you should view the screen, and the use of lighting.
Almost twenty years later and STILL there are a lot of people who don't know these things. OSHA finally made some guidlines:

http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/etools/comp...ons/index.html

For a lot of people though, the news is too late, the damage has been done. Kind of like the early days of TV when we sat too close to it and now we have to wear glasses and have weird cases of cancer.

Originally Posted by mechengit

Other people's rationale of choosing matte or glossy is not in my interest at all...

Originally Posted by Ossian

We had the option of "workstation assessments" and I thought that was for softies. I was wrong... we are all more fragile than I realised as a young man. All my fault. I guess the point I'm making is do as I say not as I did, and that I can see where the Uni is coming from even though it sounds to many people like interfering. Sometimes it's good to listen to advice we didn't ask for.

Personally I prefer Matte screens however I've never owned a glossy just used other peoples. More choice would be nice.

Originally Posted by solipsism

You said that most are ignorant. To backpeddle to state that you not referring to purchase decisions of glossy screens is not going to go well for you. You made the comment numerous times without ever stating any objective stance that many matte screen purchasers are also ignorant.

Originally Posted by solipsism

As for the "anti-glare option of the 17" Macbook Pro is to show that Apple acknowledge the glare issue on the glossy screen” is simply not true. If the glare issue was the issue then why did not they opt for the cheaper matte display on all there machines? Why have the glossy option at all if they are acknowledging that glare is an issue.

Originally Posted by solipsism

They’ve just done a sweeping Mac notebook change and the 17” MBP is still the only one with that option. What you may have meant to say, but didn’t, is that Apple has acknowledged that some customers prefer matter displays over glossy. Like myself and others have stated numerous times, even ones that prefer matte, we’d like to see Apple offer these options to all their displays and that the choosing of glossy in no way signifys that the preference is ill-informed or foolishly derived.