the SONY Hybrid patented screen used in the TT line- hands down the best.
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.
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.
Anyone care to provide an example of a glossy screen that defeats glare more effectively than Apple's line.
Feel free, any time now.
Actually you are correct.
Glare (vision) is difficulty seeing in the presence of very bright light such as direct or reflected sunlight, or artificial light such as car headlights at night.
Glare should not be confused with reflection.
Reflection on the other hand is the change in direction of a wave at an interface which makes it return to the original medium. A mirror shows your reflection because the light on you is brighter than the light shining directly on the mirror' surface.
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.
The simplest way to reduce reflection besides adjusting the angle of light hitting the surface of the monitor, is to decrease the amount of light on the objects in front of the monitor, or increase the amount of light behind or coming from the monitor.
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.
Hahaha...nice. I'm pretty sure mechengit is a Facilities Management Lighting Engineer, although I'd ask to see his/her badge first.
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.
It's a hybrid glossy/matte- very cool. You can view it very easily at an angle. Check it out at any Best buy - you'll be struck how the glare from the flourescent lights is minimal.
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.
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.
There you confirmed it- the iMac and MacBook glossy screens, which are basically LCD's under glass, are good for sheet compared to their pri0r matte counterparts.
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.
Actually, it's exactly what you said. You may have meant something different but if that is the case I think you should have worded it differently. Having said that, I would like if there was the option for a matte display. The glossy I have now does bother me on rare occassions BUT provides more color depth. It's something I'd like to be able to compare side by side and make a decision on. It's all a matter of personal preference. I hate ultra glossy plasma TV's but some people prefer them.
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.
The new 17 "matte in gorgeous and will eventually return in all the models- IMO. The reason it is only available is because it was the last size laptop produced not because no one wants it.
I wll buy the new 13" LED model not because the screen is my choiuce buy because I have no option. I mean how long can I wait? At least now it is a brighter Pro LED not average LED like the previous 13" UNibody.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
The problem was glare and reflections. I work as a senior software developer so gamut, saturation etc is not a very big deal for me.
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.
You are talking out your ass. I am in the Sony Style Madison Ave store once a week. The laptops don't show glare because they are a patented hybrid (matte/glossy) technology that no one else has. These screen not only are under bright lights but also under bright windows. What are you talking about?
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.
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.
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.
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. 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.
Comments
the SONY Hybrid patented screen used in the TT line- hands down the best.
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.
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.
Anyone care to provide an example of a glossy screen that defeats glare more effectively than Apple's line.
Feel free, any time now.
Actually you are correct.
Glare (vision) is difficulty seeing in the presence of very bright light such as direct or reflected sunlight, or artificial light such as car headlights at night.
Glare should not be confused with reflection.
Reflection on the other hand is the change in direction of a wave at an interface which makes it return to the original medium. A mirror shows your reflection because the light on you is brighter than the light shining directly on the mirror' surface.
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.
The simplest way to reduce reflection besides adjusting the angle of light hitting the surface of the monitor, is to decrease the amount of light on the objects in front of the monitor, or increase the amount of light behind or coming from the monitor.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glare_(vision)
http://www.azooptics.com/Details.asp?ArticleID=79
With a perfect dismount into a pesonal attack
Hahaha...nice. I'm pretty sure mechengit is a Facilities Management Lighting Engineer, although I'd ask to see his/her badge first.
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.
It's a hybrid glossy/matte- very cool. You can view it very easily at an angle. Check it out at any Best buy - you'll be struck how the glare from the flourescent lights is minimal.
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.
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
There you confirmed it- the iMac and MacBook glossy screens, which are basically LCD's under glass, are good for sheet compared to their pri0r matte counterparts.
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.
Actually, it's exactly what you said. You may have meant something different but if that is the case I think you should have worded it differently. Having said that, I would like if there was the option for a matte display. The glossy I have now does bother me on rare occassions BUT provides more color depth. It's something I'd like to be able to compare side by side and make a decision on. It's all a matter of personal preference. I hate ultra glossy plasma TV's but some people prefer them.
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.
The new 17 "matte in gorgeous and will eventually return in all the models- IMO. The reason it is only available is because it was the last size laptop produced not because no one wants it.
I wll buy the new 13" LED model not because the screen is my choiuce buy because I have no option. I mean how long can I wait? At least now it is a brighter Pro LED not average LED like the previous 13" UNibody.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
The problem was glare and reflections. I work as a senior software developer so gamut, saturation etc is not a very big deal for me.
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.
You are talking out your ass. I am in the Sony Style Madison Ave store once a week. The laptops don't show glare because they are a patented hybrid (matte/glossy) technology that no one else has. These screen not only are under bright lights but also under bright windows. What are you talking about?
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.
Small edit to improve readability.
Small edit to improve readability.
IS a PATROLL a troll with a Prince Albert?
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.
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.
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. 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.
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.
In the Fifth Ave Store they teach classes using the old Matte cinema display. Why- NO GLARE!!!