or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › University claims Apple's glossy screens may cause injury
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

University claims Apple's glossy screens may cause injury - Page 3

post #81 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foo2 View Post

But it might take such a team to convince you that a cute little Apple computer might do this to you. You should take heart in the fact that you knew... and help others to know.

Remember kids, keep it safe: buy a Dell.
post #82 of 333
i totally agree with this statement. i never was impressed with the "glossy" display concept. it makes visuals "appear" better to consumers. for professionals, no way! professional hated these glossy displays since day 1. the photo included in this post is a great example of the consequences of glossy vs. matte. seriously apple, what are you doing? there is nothing better than a glossy-free display. especially for long periods of time working.
post #83 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

You wrote: "People who tend to buy the 17" are more likely to be more aware and intelligent about the screen quality”
How else is that be taken. Seriously.

That doesn't mean most 17" Macbook Pro are going to go for matte screen. Like you said, you know many professionals that prefer glossy displays. Seriously, it is more than obvious that your conclusion of what I'm saying is drawn from your own deduction.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


If glare was such an issue then why do all their machine types come with glossy displays. Only one has an option for matte. Oh yeah, consumers are ignorant and 17” MBP owners are more aware and intelligent.

There are pros and cons with each type, but most people prefer glossy. There are plenty of graphics-related professionals that prefer glossy displays. The inclusion of the matte option doesn’t miraculously validate your feelings that glossy is inherently bad and all consumers and professionals that prefer glossy are inherently stupid. Your preference is your preference, and I’m glad that Apple has an option for. I even hope they move that option down to their other MBP sizes, but that doesn’t mean that your preference should be the only option.

I've never said that glossy screen itself is evil or essentially bad. I've used some glossy screens that have minimal glare. What I'm trying to say is that Apple is ignoring the glare issue when there is room for improvement because most users have no problem with the glare, despite that fact that there is a huge room for improvement.
post #84 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by mechengit View Post

Yours as well. People who can't acknowledge a problem doesn't mean there is no problem.

Just because I don't perceive the same item as a problem that you do doesn't mean I'm ignorant, it just means that in your OPINION it's an issue, and in my opinion it's not.

If you are unwilling to accept that it makes you intolerant and obstinate and maybe even a little narcissistic.

It's a preference, not something like a law of physics
post #85 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by mechengit View Post

Apple knows that glossy screen has glaring issues. How do I know? Because they have an anti-glare option for the 17" MacBook Pro. They just don't want to admit the issue because many ignorant consumers like the glossy screen.

What warped logic! The anti-glare option is exactly that: an "OPTION" for people who prefer non glossy.

I've used both and I still don't see what the big deal is, but I guess that just makes me ignorant, right?
post #86 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by physguy View Post

The only question is why focus on Apple. These screens have been around for quite some time, as has the problems identified. It makes no sense not to issue a general comment. Why focus on any particular manufacturer?

Exactly. If they go to the trouble of naming Apple, they should also mention all other manufacturers of computer screens that use glossy screens. Whether intended or not this gives the appearance of a hatchet job against Apple.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

Where was this study when we had glossy CRT monitors and standard TV sets years back? I even remember using glossy monitor filters at that time. Well, I guess it is a university and somehow they need research funding.

My previous employer IT people were going crazy because employees keep scratching their desktop LCD screen with their fingernails and their pens when they try to point out at things on the screen. LOL.

The fact that CRTs are considered glossy is totally irrelevant, LCD screens come in both matte and glossy. And there obviously were concerns about CRT's glare, you could buy aftermarket screen covers, hoods, etc.

Me, I'd prefer matte, but Apple hasn't called me for my advice.
just waiting to be included in one of Apple's target markets.
Don't get me wrong, I like the flat panel iMac, actually own an iMac, and I like the Mac mini, but...........
Reply
just waiting to be included in one of Apple's target markets.
Don't get me wrong, I like the flat panel iMac, actually own an iMac, and I like the Mac mini, but...........
Reply
post #87 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by mechengit View Post

That doesn't mean most 17" Macbook Pro are going to go for matte screen. Like you said, you know many professionals that prefer glossy displays. Seriously, it is more than obvious that your conclusion of what I'm saying is drawn from your own deduction.



I've never said that glossy screen itself is evil or essentially bad. I've used some glossy screens that have minimal glare. What I'm trying to say is that Apple is ignoring the glare issue when there is room for improvement because most users have no problem with the glare, despite that fact that there is a huge room for improvement.

WOW! Do you even proofread your comments to see if they make any sense at all?!
post #88 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by mechengit View Post

That doesn't mean most 17" Macbook Pro are going to go for matte screen. Like you said, you know many professionals that prefer glossy displays. Seriously, it is more than obvious that your conclusion of what I'm saying is drawn from your own deduction.

So the few that go with the 17 matte are not ignorant and the ones that do go with the 17 glossy are ignorant.

Weve had this discussion before, many times in fact. While Ive used both display types I much prefer glossy for the richer, more vibrant colours compared to the more washed out look of matte. Using a glossy display does limit you location choices if you are doing professional work, but that is not difficult to counter, but I wouldnt imagine any such professionals would be working in such a free environment anyway. audio professionals dont master audio with a lot background noise, so why would a visual professional work in an area with a lot of unregulated light sources producing glare.

Were just trying to point out that there are pros and cons for each display type.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #89 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

Apple wins awards and best competitors constantly for profit, supply chain efficiency and top revenue generation per square footage in their stores. So pardon me if I believe them more then a few disgruntled wags on the Internet.


I also believe Apple makes more money by only offering glossy displays, but I (and I believe many other people) would be happier customers if Apple offered matte displays. Let's see the company with the best supply chain management really test itself by offering a broader range of options.

BTW: when trying to support an argument, never appeal to "authority".
post #90 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

Just because I don't perceive the same item as a problem that you do doesn't mean I'm ignorant, it just means that in your OPINION it's an issue, and in my opinion it's not.

If you are unwilling to accept that it makes you intolerant and obstinate and maybe even a little narcissistic.

It's a preference, not something like a law of physics

Well, guess what... I used some other glossy screen that haven't had much glare. Oh... the glare is a preference for you when Apple choose not to improve it even though they can? How about the 6-bit TN screen on the earlier Macbooks? Is that considered a preference for you as well?
post #91 of 333
Attempting to stem bad Ergonomics by the Individual via Apple moving back to a Matte screen are asinine. Bad posture will continue even with Matte screens.
post #92 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffharris View Post

The fact that Apple ONLY offers glossy screens on EVERY Mac they sell (excluding the $50 option of the 17" MBP) says absolutely nothing. If there's no choice, there's no point to be made.

The "choice" is between a Mac with a glossy screen or some POS DOSBox from Dell or HP with a matte screen. NOT being able to run Mac OS X is NOT a choice, OR an option in my book.

The thing I don't get is why some people who prefer glossy displays stoop to insulting those of us who prefer matte? It's ridiculous. That's like calling people idiots for the style or brand of headphones they prefer. I don't care if you like glossy screens, enjoy it, that's really not the issue.

All we're asking of Apple is a choice. If I'm already going to spend upwards of $2500 for a BTO MacBook Pro, then forced to pay an extra $50 to get it with a matte screen, I won't like it, but so be it. I'll pay the $50. For something I'll be using EVERY day for 2 or 3 years, it's worth it to me. But I DO want a matte screen and would prefer not to be forced to dick around with anti-glare films or spend $200 and void my warranty to get the glass replaced.

So, what's your problem?


If it was really a problem people would walk away and go buy something else. Thats my point. Apple isn't twisting everyone's arm to buy a Mac. If it pisses you off that much that Apple only offers a glossy display, then go find something else that suits your needs.

I in now way insulted anyone with my post other than calling the quoted person ignorant for thinking everyone who likes glossy displays ignorant. His post makes no sense and his reply makes no sense. He just refused to acknowledge that just because he doesn't like them that everyone who does is an idiot.


So should Apple offer it? Yeah, no problem. I don't have a problem with them offering the matte screen. There is a little extra engineering involved to get the matte display set in place correctly and steadily since it can't use the glass to keep it strong and steady. This I would assume would be the reason for the extra charge for the matte option.

We also have to realize its not just as simple as just throwing a matte display in the case and calling it good. If it were that the case they would have just done it. Like I just said...there's extra engineering involved to make them work as they've designed their products with the glass cover. I don't think its in Apple's best interest to spend the extra time and money to design a product that will fit both glossy and matte displays when the glossy display would be the primary selection anyways. Like I said in my previous post, there are more people who like glossy displays than people who like matte displays. Just the matte display people are very vocal about the lack of the option which makes them seem like a very large crowd.

I think Apple does acknowledge this issue, especially in the higher end Macs where its more of a problem. I think this is why there isn't a 30" LED Cinema yet. This is why there's the option for matte on the 17" MBP. These are the high end products Apple is concerned with on a professional basis and therefore offer the matte finish.
post #93 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

Where was this study when we had glossy CRT monitors and standard TV sets years back? I even remember using glossy monitor filters at that time.

The reason people used the antireflective filters was because early monitors and cheap monitors lacked antireflective coatings. One reason the AR filters were glossy is because it would be virtually impossible to apply a film smoothly and without wrinkles over the entire surface of a curved CRT. A matte filter that isn't in close contact with the display surface would blur the image to an unacceptable degree.
post #94 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickag View Post

The fact that CRTs are considered glossy is totally irrelevant, LCD screens come in both matte and glossy. And there obviously were concerns about CRT's glare, you could buy aftermarket screen covers, hoods, etc.

There are also similar products for glossy screens. I used anti-glare screen protector for my first iPhone. After few months it had damage and I had to remove it and was shocked how awful the display was with the anti-glare looked. My current iPhone screen protector is not anti-glare. Sure, there are problems with glossy displays but there are also problems with matte screens as well. For example, cleaning matte screens with the wrong cloth can be a disaster.
post #95 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

So the few that go with the 17” matte are not ignorant and the ones that do go with the 17” glossy are ignorant.

Oh gosh... making your own deduction again. What I was trying to say is that since the 17" Macbook Pro buyers have a higher portion of users who are aware of the screen quality. It makes sense for Apple to give a matte screen option to choose from, especially when the fact that the glossy screen on Macbook Pro has the glare issue that is worse than some other glossy screens out there. I know there are good glossy screens that has much less glare than those on Macbook Pro.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

We’ve had this discussion before, many times in fact. While I’ve used both display types I much prefer glossy for the richer, more vibrant colours compared to the more washed out look of matte. Using a glossy display does limit you location choices if you are doing professional work, but that is not difficult to counter, but I wouldn’t imagine any such professionals would be working in such a free environment anyway. audio professionals don’t master audio with a lot background noise, so why would a visual professional work in an area with a lot of unregulated light sources producing glare.

We’re just trying to point out that there are pros and cons for each display type.

Are you trying to prove to me that you have reading problems? I already stated earlier that glossy screen is not in essence evil or bad and you spent another paragraph to prove a point that I have nothing against?
post #96 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by mechengit View Post

Well, guess what... I used some other glossy screen that haven't had much glare. Oh... the glare is a preference for you when Apple choose not to improve it even though they can? How about the 6-bit TN screen on the earlier Macbooks? Is that considered a preference for you as well?

The discussion is about glare v. matte, so why even mention screen type?

MacBooks have been using TN displays for years, like most notebook makers. Id rather have a non-TN display that is glossy than a TN display that matte. You may think differently but that is why its an opinion AND an option for you.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #97 of 333
I have developed Carpal Tunnel from my iPhone's glossy screen cause I've had to tilt it slightly to the side to properly text. We human's have turned into a bunch of whiney pussies. OMG.

People should seriously consider some of the world's real problems and maybe their own and realize how awesome a time it is to live in, and how some people are so spoiled to feel slighted by a stupid computer screen.

Anyone feel the same?
post #98 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE View Post

Where was this study when we had glossy CRT monitors and standard TV sets years back? I even remember using glossy monitor filters at that time.

CRT monitors have a convex face, not flat like an LCD. That made the problem an order of magnitude or two less serious. Even then, many CRT monitors were made with matte surfaces. Anti glare filters were necessary in many cases even though the problem was less serious than with flat panels.

All you have done is drawn attention to, and highlighted, how appalling Apple's use of flat gloss screens is, not justified it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

This comes form a country, where crocks, and sharks can kill and eat you, more people are stung by jellyfish, where a kangaroo could kick your ass, and more people die in cars because of impact with kangaroo, I think there is more to worry about then whether stupid people know how to adjust their screen to reduce glare..

And the gloss screen comes from a country where the populace is heavily armed and over 75K people are killed with them per annum. Why shouldn't we be surprised.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KindredMac View Post

stop the whining already......

If people really hated them that much don't you think the MacBook would be a horrible sales flop?

I've had my glossy MacBook since the first gen was introduced and I have no issues with it whatsoever.

Just because they sell, doesn't mean people like them. I hate mine with a passion. I only bought it because my previous Powerbook died. I would have much preferred to have waited a few years until they bring back matte screens, but I had little choice if I wanted to keep using OSX. I didn't buy the plastic macbook because I didn't think it was structurally strong enough for my purposes. I now think I probably made an error and should have bought one. The Macbook has lousy audio, a lousy audio jack, no firewire and a wretched screen. If I had known about the first two issues prior to purchasing it, I don't think I would have bought it.

I think I wouldn't be the only person to buy an Apple with a gloss screen despite the screen, not because of it.
post #99 of 333
In the early 90s I was running a hostel when a new raft of Health and Safety regulations came in. My favourite was the one where a man had to come and attach a small sign on the wall above every hot tap (faucet to our American friends) in every bathroom (and there were quite a few). The sign, written in red to emphasise the danger, read:

Warning! Water from this tap may be hot!
Believe nothing, no matter where you heard it, not even if I have said it, if it does not agree with your own reason and your own common sense.
Buddha
Reply
Believe nothing, no matter where you heard it, not even if I have said it, if it does not agree with your own reason and your own common sense.
Buddha
Reply
post #100 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by macxpress View Post

If it was really a problem people would walk away and go buy something else.

Or hold off on "upgrading".

Quote:
Apple isn't twisting everyone's arm to buy a Mac. If it pisses you off that much that Apple only offers a glossy display, then go find something else that suits your needs.

Yes, Apple isn't twisting my arm, but they are not making me happy. And I just might just go elsewhere. Thanks for the advice!

Quote:
So should Apple offer it? Yeah, no problem. I don't have a problem with them offering the matte screen. There is a little extra engineering involved...

It's almost certainly not a matter of engineering--Apple has offered matte displays before as an option--but is entirely a matter of overhead, supply chain management and retail space limitations. How else would Apple do so well at supply chain management if it didn't limit customers' options?
post #101 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by mechengit View Post

That's what you said. If you think you're an ignorant that's your problem. I never said that.

Sure you did when you made your broad, sweeping generalization.

Quote:
That is why Apple is going to stick with glossy screen, at least for awhile. Since everyone likes, so why bother?

I don't think it's that at all - I think it has more to do with stocking extra SKU's.

If it was enough of an issue where it was to their monetary benefit to do it, they would. It's not a vast conspiracy or "stubbornness" as some would like to believe
post #102 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foo2 View Post

The reason people used the antireflective filters was because early monitors and cheap monitors lacked antireflective coatings. One reason the AR filters were glossy is because it would be virtually impossible to apply a film smoothly and without wrinkles over the entire surface of a curved CRT. A matte filter that isn't in close contact with the display surface would blur the image to an unacceptable degree.

I remember the main reason for using those filters was to protect against radiation.
post #103 of 333
It's sad for those who can't even read what someone is saying. I've never hailed matte screen as the only best option. I've never said that those whoever use glossy screen is ignorant. I've never said that Apple should get rid of glossy screen forever.

What I have been trying to say is that Apple choose to ignore the glare issue when they can improve it because most users don't think of it as a problem, which is an ignorant act.

Quote:
Originally Posted by macxpress View Post

If it was really a problem people would walk away and go buy something else. Thats my point. Apple isn't twisting everyone's arm to buy a Mac. If it pisses you off that much that Apple only offers a glossy display, then go find something else that suits your needs.

I in now way insulted anyone with my post other than calling the quoted person ignorant for thinking everyone who likes glossy displays ignorant. His post makes no sense and his reply makes no sense. He just refused to acknowledge that just because he doesn't like them that everyone who does is an idiot.


So should Apple offer it? Yeah, no problem. I don't have a problem with them offering the matte screen. There is a little extra engineering involved to get the matte display set in place correctly and steadily since it can't use the glass to keep it strong and steady. This I would assume would be the reason for the extra charge for the matte option.

We also have to realize its not just as simple as just throwing a matte display in the case and calling it good. If it were that the case they would have just done it. Like I just said...there's extra engineering involved to make them work as they've designed their products with the glass cover. I don't think its in Apple's best interest to spend the extra time and money to design a product that will fit both glossy and matte displays when the glossy display would be the primary selection anyways. Like I said in my previous post, there are more people who like glossy displays than people who like matte displays. Just the matte display people are very vocal about the lack of the option which makes them seem like a very large crowd.

I think Apple does acknowledge this issue, especially in the higher end Macs where its more of a problem. I think this is why there isn't a 30" LED Cinema yet. This is why there's the option for matte on the 17" MBP. These are the high end products Apple is concerned with on a professional basis and therefore offer the matte finish.
post #104 of 333
[QUOTE=Gyokuro;
People should seriously consider some of the world's real problems and maybe their own and realize how awesome a time it is to live in, and how some people are so spoiled to feel slighted by a stupid computer screen.

Anyone feel the same?[/QUOTE]

EXACTLY THE REAL POINT!!!!

(but what about Brittany Spear's hair, or Berlusconi's affair, or Chas Bono's sexual lipo, or Michael Jackson's Peter Pan nose? Clearly these are the glairing issues we try to sweep under the matte, when the real issues get glossed over!)
post #105 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

The discussion is about glare v. matte, so why even mention screen type?

MacBooks have been using TN displays for years, like most notebook makers. Id rather have a non-TN display that is glossy than a TN display that matte. You may think differently but that is why its an opinion AND an option for you.

Again, you missed my point. Apple chose to lower the bar to cut down cost when they chose not to use the glossy screen that could have less glare than the one on current Macbook Pro, just like they did with the TN display.
post #106 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by mechengit View Post

Well, guess what... I used some other glossy screen that haven't had much glare.

Good for you. Still doesn't change the fact that for me, the glossy screen on my Mac Book Pro isn't an issue.

Quote:
Oh... the glare is a preference for you when Apple choose not to improve it even though they can?

You can slap a diffuser over the glossy screen and create a matte display if you want - "improve" it yourself!

Quote:
How about the 6-bit TN screen on the earlier Macbooks? Is that considered a preference for you as well?

Well obviously not since I didn't buy one
post #107 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by physguy View Post

The only question is why focus on Apple. These screens have been around for quite some time, as has the problems identified. It makes no sense not to issue a general comment. Why focus on any particular manufacturer?

Because MacBooks are by far the most popular laptop among students.

But really, MOST computers (idiotically) have glossy screens, and I hope the trend reverses.

Anyway, I've always loved Macs but hated the glossy screens (still love the anti-glare screen on my 2006 iMac). I've been holding off getting a 13" unibody MacBook because of the screens, and hopefully this 'study' and the continual complaining by almost everybody about the shiny screens will prompt Apple to offer anti-glare screens on all their products. I mean, maybe a few people prefer the glossy screens, but except under perfect lighting conditions they're pretty much useless.
post #108 of 333
Well after having the experience of the gloss screen and the matt screen I find that the gloss screen
gives me a more complete tanning of the chest and facial features for this summer season.

So There!
post #109 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

All you have done is drawn attention to, and highlighted, how appalling Apple's use of flat gloss screens is, not justified it.

Where did I try to justify it?! Try reading the post again. I did not say Apple's glossy screens are flawless. Glossy and matte screens have their flaws. Apple was not the only nor the first one to use glossy screens and my brother in law bought an HP laptop few years back and that model came with glossy display only. The fact is people like glossy screens and there will always be a minority that will keep complaining about it.
post #110 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foo2 View Post

BTW: when trying to support an argument, never appeal to "authority".

I wasn't appealing to authority, I'm simply stating fact. Apple's in business to make money, not make everyone happy.

If they wanted to really make me happy, they could ship a two slot single socket CPU minitower
post #111 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by mechengit View Post

I’ve never said that those whoever use glossy screen is ignorant.


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.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #112 of 333
I understand personal preference. If someone doesn't like glossy screens, they don't like them, and that's it.

Having said that, I have to say I don't get it. I use two glossy screen laptops (MacBook Pro and ASUS Windows) at work and home. At home, I also have a 24" Apple LED glossy display. At work there are bright overhead fluorescents and windows along one side. At home I have a window to my back and one side. I keep the blinds open during the day. I just don't have any problems. If I stop and think about it, I notice that there are reflections at times, but they don't bother me. I maintain that the mind will tune out all but the most severe reflections, but you have to stop thinking about it, relax, and let your mind do its marvelous work.

People watch glossy screen TVs all the time. Why don't we hear outrage about them?

I prefer glossy screens not just because they don't bother me, but because they are sharper and clearer. Matte screens provide a muddy image and dull contrast. But that's my personal preference.
post #113 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

An Australian University is warning its faculty and students about some potential adverse health effects of using Apple's notebook and other products with high gloss screens, saying prolonged use could lead to injury if precautionary measures aren't adopted.

The advisory, published a few months ago by Brisbane, Australia-based 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.

"Reflections and glare on high gloss monitor screens and their relation to the angle of the monitor screen, could cause the operator to adopt awkward postures when viewing the monitor screen and using related equipment," the advisory says. "These reflections on the screen can be from internal and external sources such as the overhead lighting and/or position of windows."

Queensland recommends that users of such products conduct an assessment of the area in which those products are to be used to ensure the sources of reflections and glare are eliminated or minimised to reduce the potential for injury. It advises users to close their blinds or window shades and place the glossy displays at a 90 degree angle to any overhead lighting to minimise glare and reflection.

The university even goes as far as to recommend that students and faculty consider not purchasing products with glossy displays. Those who must, however, are urged to consult with a "Facilities Management Lighting engineer to determine if overhead lighting can be modified e.g. tube removed and still provide adequate levels of light to enable reading, writing and screen based equipment work tasks to be performed."

Other recommendations for those who must use glossy displays include adjusting the contrast to a 'low brightness' setting, which the school says will increases readability for users of high gloss monitor screens with a glass surface.

Apple began offering glossy displays as an option on its high-end MacBook Pros a few years ago before making them standard on its redesigned aluminum iMac line (review) in the summer of 2007. While introducing its all-new line of unibody MacBooks (review) and MacBook Pros (review) last fall, the company announced that glossy displays would be the new standard for its notebook lines with no build-to-order option available for downgrading to a matte display.

An early generation MacBook Pro compared to one of the latest models sporting a high gloss display.

Apple's new 24-inch LED-lit Cinema Display (review) also sports a glossy screen.








lol

LOLLOLOLOLOLOL
post #114 of 333
Then good for you... so glare is a preference for you after all. So you're telling me that the 6-bit TN screen is a preference for others?

An issue that can be improved on is not a preference matter. As I mentioned over and over again, my point is not to get rid of the glossy screen, but for Apple to get rid most of that glare from the glossy screen, especially when Apple have the ability to do so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

I like my glossy screen so therefore I'm an ignorant consumer? Fascinating...

I really wish Apple would offer the matte finish on all notebooks, if nothing else but to shut the vocal minority up.

And yes, you are in a minority - otherwise Apple would support both across the board. And no, I don't think glossy only notebooks have hurt their sales - just look at the growth rate in the notebook category vs. desktop and the success they had last quarter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

Good for you. Still doesn't change the fact that for me, the glossy screen on my Mac Book Pro isn't an issue.



You can slap a diffuser over the glossy screen and create a matte display if you want - "improve" it yourself!



Well obviously not since I didn't buy one
post #115 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

It seems to me that a company should try to give consumers what they want.

Not anymore- it has to be "Environmentally Friendly".
post #116 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by mechengit View Post

Again, you missed my point. Apple chose to lower the bar to cut down cost when they chose not to use the glossy screen that could have less glare than the one on current Macbook Pro, just like they did with the TN display.

1) Im pretty sure the glass covered display costs more than the plastic coating.

2) MBPs dont have TN displays, even the unibody MB was reportedly without the TN display for a month or two prior to the name change.

3) Youve missed the point that were all saying that choice is great, while you are stating over and over that choosing glossy means youre ignorant. Oh wait, you say most, not all, so I guess that qualifier gives you an out. One of those present company excluded" comments so you can say that you didnt mean anyone here.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #117 of 333
They probably ditched the Matte option because it added additional cost to keep that option in on the 13" and the 15" lines when too few people asked for it.

If I were running a business, and it was costing me money to leave a little used option in a product line, I would 86 that option.

The matte option is more expensive than the glossy to produce. The matte option is simply a plastic coating that goes over the glass, much like the anti-glare coating you get added to your eye glasses.
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
iMac 27" 2.8 Quad i7 / 24" Dual Core 3.06 / 17" Macbook Pro Unibody / Mac Mini HTPC / iPhone 4
Reply
post #118 of 333
This and no Firewire on the MacBook have been among Apple's most controversial issues. Apple listened on the Firewire issue. I hope they will on this.
post #119 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post

If anybody can supply peer-reviewed clinical evidence, please

Now we know a lot of comments about Apples glossy screens are about to flood this site, it wouldn't hurt anybody to look at some of this university's other recommendations before commenting.

They even outline how you should was your hands, how armrests could be harmful and how to find out if the 'seat' pan is suitable for you. http://www.hrd.qut.edu.au/healthsafe...ely/chairs.jsp
\t\t
  • Health and Safety
  • Working Safely at QUT \t\t
  • Chairs and Sitting Well \t\t
  • Children on Campus \t\t
  • Communicable Diseases \t\t
  • Counter Designs \t\t
  • Executive Chairs \t\t
  • First Aid \t\t
  • Health and Safety Induction \t\t
  • Health and Safety Reports \t\t
  • High Gloss Monitors\t\t
  • Legislation \t\t
  • Policy \t\t
  • Reporting an Incident \t\t
  • Roles and Responsibilities \t\t
  • Risk Assessment \t\t
  • Safe Computer Use \t\t
  • Safe Office Checklist \t\t
  • SARS \t\t
  • Sharps Disposal \t\t
  • Smoking\t\t
  • Sun Safety \t\t
  • Template for Health and Safety Roles \t\t
  • Travel Advice \t\t
  • Unauthorised Animals on Campus \t\t
  • WHSOs and WHSRs\t\t
  • Workplace Harassment\t
  • Lab Safety\t
  • Health and Safety Audit System\t
  • Staying Healthy at Work\t
  • Training\t
  • Rehabilitation\t
  • Workers' Compensation

No doubt they concluded that pocket knives can cut your fingers, hot coffee can burn parts of your body, and people die in auto accidents.

Let's all just sit in our rooms quietly on the couch wearing safety gloves, safety glasses, gas masks and hardhats. That way we will be safe!

My poor friend ... he got a horrible back injury twisting to avoid the glare on his computer screen.
post #120 of 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


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



So that means whoever uses glossy screen are ignorant?

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

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.


So that means whoever uses glossy screen are ignorant?

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Post #39: A large number of consumers, if not most consumers, are ignorant. Period.


So that means whoever uses glossy screen are ignorant?

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

With a perfect dismount into a pesonal attack
Post #40: [At Macxpress] ...then you're obviously ignorant.

Oh... so that draws to the conclusion that whoever uses glossy screen are ignorant?

Man, you really crack me up.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › University claims Apple's glossy screens may cause injury