Technically their displays do produce millions of colors, just through an analog function (dithering).
Dithering is one thing I've seen Apple fans claim that Apple doesn't do, even recently on this board. I don't see it all the time on the displays that do dither, but when I do see it, I'm pretty annoyed by it. I hadn't noticed my MacBook Pro doing this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by laurence13
I am not one of those people as I didn't know that laptop displays were 6 bit. Is this true of all LCDs or just laptops? Are the Cinema displays 6 bpc as well?
The Cinema displays are purported to be 8bpc, but I think by the same people that claimed that Apple didn't use dithering.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveGee
- If the manufacturer lists the color as 16.7 million colors, it should be assumed that the display is 8-bit per-color.
- If the colors are listed as being 16.2 million or 16 million, consumers should assume that it uses a 6-bit per-color depth.
I have never heard of the 16.2M number. How is it derived? It seems like a bullshit number to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by guest
What you had for lunch can affect your color perception.
I hadn't heard of that.
Quote:
No serious professional would consider color work on a laptop. But lot's of other image work can certainly be done, and that's why portables outsell towers 10 to 1.
The typical sales figures for most manufacturers is getting very close to 1:1. 10:1 is a long ways away.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveGee
Run out and show me a Display/TV/Projector that doesn't degrade as time goes on...
Most displays don't seem to degrade noticibly within the first year that I've found. It usually takes about three or more to get a shift that's noticible to most people.
as i'm sure it's been said, no professional is going to rely on the laptop screen for their final product. If you want a screen that produces perfect color, you'll have to go with a multi-thousand dollar flat panel or a $500+ CRT. I don't know what professionals use, but I'm sure ultra-thin laptop displays aren't it. I thought they would use CRTs anyway because of their superior color reproduction and contrast, as well as black reproduction.
Besides that, even if it does "trick" the user's eye into seeing millions of colors, it still appears to display millions of colors.
I think these guys are just taking Apple's usual marketing exaggeration the wrong way. And as it's been said, if one isn't satisfied with the color quality of the display, Apple's return policy is fine.
I'm sure the displays used on the Macbook/Pros are exactly the same as the ones used on other laptops.
as i'm sure it's been said, no professional is going to rely on the laptop screen for their final product. If you want a screen that produces perfect color, you'll have to go with a multi-thousand dollar flat panel or a $500+ CRT. I don't know what professionals use, but I'm sure ultra-thin laptop displays aren't it. I thought they would use CRTs anyway because of their superior color reproduction and contrast, as well as black reproduction.
Besides that, even if it does "trick" the user's eye into seeing millions of colors, it still appears to display millions of colors.
I think these guys are just taking Apple's usual marketing exaggeration the wrong way. And as it's been said, if one isn't satisfied with the color quality of the display, Apple's return policy is fine.
I'm sure the displays used on the Macbook/Pros are exactly the same as the ones used on other laptops.
Yep, but as someone else pointed out, Apple may've been pouring on the marketing honey a little extra thick:
"Promote your ideas on the MacBook Pro’s dazzling display. An aggressive ATI Mobility Radeon X1600 graphics processor under the hood coupled with up to 256MB of GDDR3 SDRAM powers the mobile visual studio you’ve been waiting for. Retouch color, edit on location, video conference with colleagues: Do it all, anywhere.
MacBook Pro makes your ideas more enlightening, with a sharp, high-resolution screen. See blacker blacks, whiter whites, and many more colors in between on a brilliant 15.4-inch, 1440-by-900-pixel or 17-inch, 1680-by-1050-pixel digital display. Enjoy a nuanced view simply unavailable on other portables."
Why is something like this even news anymore? Class action lawsuits are ubiquitous these days because of our broken, discriminatory (anti-buisiness) legal system.
Yeah, Apple should be told off for being over the top on their marketing of their laptop screens when they're the same as any other manufacturer, and the main difference is in the software.
I think a lot of people are still thinking "ooh, pixelly dithering, like Floyd-Steinberg" when they see the word "dithering", i.e., static dithering. That's not how 6-bit LCD panels dither as far as I am aware, they dynamically dither so that a pixel, on average over time, appears to be the correct tone. You would have to have excellent eyes, or very ideal conditions, to see this happening. If you're on a laptop now, can you see it on a smooth grey gradient (e.g., Mac OS X titlebar)? I can't on this iBook.
One very annoying thing about 6bit displays is that they are harder to calibrate. A pretty popular device called the Huey (by Pantone and x/brite) can fail on it but other models of calibration devices also have their difficulty. Just search for Huey, pink and MacBook Pro or iMac.
And yes, I have the strong suspicion that iMacs also use 6bit panels. Now wouldn't it be rather helpful if Apple told their potential photographic customers that they will have trouble with the iMac and should stick with the Cinema Displays? No, let the customers find this out the hard way, why should Apple provide any information about the specifications of their products.
Well aside from the merits of the whole lawsuit. Do the MBPs really have 6-bit displays?
This really sucks if true as I've got my money ready to buy a MBP. And what is up with Apple lately? We have this now and then there was the ipod nano scratching on the first version. Why can't they just accept a little less profit and use higher quality parts? I know I sound like I hate Apple but I don't. I've been a big Apple fan for years and am glad as heck that Steve Jobs came back to run it. But he (and probably most other execs at Apple) is a liberal and as such should have a long-term mindset that shuns short term profits but that is not what I am seeing. I'm also seeing a little bit of Verizion type pricing happening which also sucks.
I'm far from an Apple Apologist... And I'm the first that calls them out when I feel they've done something wrong. You freaks on the other hand are far worse then I..... You want to crucify Apple for the fact that they use electricity... the same electricity that's used to kill convicted criminals in Texas.
Apple does NOT manufacture their own displays.... **NOR** do they deal in enough volume to dictate the use of shitty components in the manufacture of their displays to the true manufactures of said displays.
Are you living in such a fantasy land as to believe that Apple has input into the components that make up an LCD display? If so, more power to ya...
A pretty popular device called the Huey (by Pantone and x/brite)
That is X-Rite.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveGee
Apple does NOT manufacture their own displays.... **NOR** do they deal in enough volume to dictate the use of shitty components in the manufacture of their displays to the true manufactures of said displays.
Are you living in such a fantasy land as to believe that Apple has input into the components that make up an LCD display? If so, more power to ya...
They have made significant up-front investments in the manufacture of LCD panels.
I'm far from an Apple Apologist... And I'm the first that calls them out when I feel they've done something wrong. You freaks on the other hand are far worse then I..... You want to crucify Apple for the fact that they use electricity... the same electricity that's used to kill convicted criminals in Texas.
Apple does NOT manufacture their own displays.... **NOR** do they deal in enough volume to dictate the use of shitty components in the manufacture of their displays to the true manufactures of said displays.
Are you living in such a fantasy land as to believe that Apple has input into the components that make up an LCD display? If so, more power to ya...
D
Agree with everything you said, however, the last sentence is not true. Apple sells the LCD, they are responsible for it (So they better have input or else their stupid). I work in a company that sometimes sells foreign made products, we are the ones that are responsible because we sold it. Apple will probably settle this one out of court, what's terrible about all this is we Americans sue for anything even a parking space.
Dithering is one thing I've seen Apple fans claim that Apple doesn't do, even recently on this board.
It's usually not too difficult to find out. Among notebook displays manufactured by LG Philips there is only one 8-bit display, the 20.1-inch wide LP201WE1.
MacBook (Pro) owners can run a test with SwitchResX or ASTRA32 to learn about the display, once you have the exact reference you can use Google to find the specs like this guy did. Apple should make clear to customers that notebook displays are 6-bit instead of spouting marketing nonsense: "MacBook Pro makes your ideas more enlightening, with a sharp, high-resolution screen. See blacker blacks, whiter whites, and many more colors in between on a brilliant 15.4-inch, 1440-by-900-pixel or 17-inch, 1680-by-1050-pixel digital display. Enjoy a nuanced view simply unavailable on other portables." Bwahaha!
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
The Cinema displays are purported to be 8bpc, but I think by the same people that claimed that Apple didn't use dithering.
Seems like they are indeed 8-bit displays.
Anandtech review: "Although both the Apple and Dell 20" displays use the same LG.Philips LCD LM201W01 panel…"
I remember seeing some specs on the new Samsung LED LCD 15.4" display that could end up in the next MBP. I shuddered when it said it only supported 6-bits per channel or 262K colors. Here's the link: Samsung LED backlit display
Apple's tech specs for the 15.4" MBP reads: 15.4-inch (diagonal) TFT display, support for millions of colors;
If it's only capable of displaying 262,000 colors then I call that false advertising. Why should we have to parse the term "support for?" That's misleading.
What Apple needs to do is be honest or put the quality in that we expect. The goal of a class action suit like this is to get the company to do the right thing.
So, what does HP say about their high-end 17.0" WSXGA+ BrightView Widescreen (1680x1050) laptop display on their web site?
"The 17-inch WSXGA+ BrightView display with high-definition means brighter, more vivid and color-rich images like you've never seen before in a notebook computer."
No mention of number of colors. However, I am thinking of class action suit against HP over their "color-rich images like you've never seen before..." comment. I beg to differ! So, who's with me???
Toshiba doesn't mention numbers either.
"...the Satellite® P100 series features a choice of 17" diagonal widescreen displays* with Toshiba's TruBrite? technology, dramatically expanding your multimedia and multi-tasking possibilities."
Y'know, I'm proud that I've never joined a class-action lawsuit against any company. The net result is that you'll receive a check in the mail for 12 cents and feel none the better for it.
Generally true, but I did get $200 for joining the Chevy Lumina bad brakes lawsuit! \
Apple notebooks may employ sub-par displays only capable of 6 bits per channel (18-bit color), rather than 8 bits per channel, making them capable of displaying only 262,144 colors without dithering, as opposed to millions.
Why be honest with your customers when you can fleece them with overpriced computers using outdated or sub-standard parts sold agressively through an "unbelievable, out of this world" hyperbole ad campaign, AKA the Reality Distortion Field ?
For those that don't want to hit the link and scroll down I present:
Quote:
MacBook Computer (May 2007)
The MacBook computer introduced in May 2007, based on the Intel Core 2 Duo, has a 13.3-inch, glossy, widescreen flat-panel display (measured diagonally). The display has a Low Reflection Glossy Polarizer (LRGP). Display depths up to 24 bits per pixel at all supported screen resolutions .
The MacBook supports an LCD display size of 1280x800 pixels at 114 dpi, 250 nits single bulb and shows up to millions of colors.
Quote:
MacBook Computer (November 2006)
The MacBook computer announced in November 2006, based on the Intel Core 2 Duo, has a 13.3-inch, glossy, widescreen flat-panel display (measured diagonally). The display has a Low Reflection Glossy Polarizer (LRGP). Display depths up to 24 bits per pixel at all supported screen resolutions .
The MacBook supports an LCD display size of 1280x800 pixels at 114 dpi, 250 nits single bulb and shows up to millions of colors.
Quote:
MacBook Computer (May 2006)
The MacBook computer announced in May 2006, based on the Intel Core Duo, has a 13.3-inch, glossy, widescreen flat-panel display (measured diagonally). The display has a Low Reflection Glossy Polarizer (LRGP. Display depths up to 24 bits per pixel at all supported screen resolutions .
The MacBook supports an LCD display size of 1280 x 800 pixels at 114 dpi, 250 nits single bulb and shows up to millions of colors.
Quoted for truth
Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan
Why be honest with your customers when you can fleece them with overpriced computers using outdated or sub-standard parts sold agressively through an "unbelievable, out of this world" hyperbole ad campaign, AKA the Reality Distortion Field ?
Would you like to retract your lemming like following of the idiots? ^^^^
Can we cut with the calls of apologists and such now? The freaking lawsuit and nay-sayers just "forgot" to actually check the facts.
Well, I've been counting colors on my screen for several hours, and I can't come up anywhere near 16 million....
Seriously - like most here, I'm a big fan of Apple, but if there is MERIT to the claim that there was false advertisement (not what they say NOW in their marketing, but what they said at the time...), then any company, including Apple, needs to be bitch-slapped straight.
Well, I've been counting colors on my screen for several hours, and I can't come up anywhere near 16 million....
Seriously - like most here, I'm a big fan of Apple, but if there is MERIT to the claim that there was false advertisement (not what they say NOW in their marketing, but what they said at the time...), then any company, including Apple, needs to be bitch-slapped straight.
We all hate lawyers until we need one.
No merit, just a fast lawyer with absolutely no Googling skills. Or even the brains to effectively check Apple's website. Apple is selling 24 bit per pixel displays in the MacBooks, and has been all along. If someone is getting a bad picture it is a defect and replaceable.
I do not have time to go through the 50 odd messages here but there are lots of other major flaws in the Intel laptops Apple has produced, and that they will not acknowledge. The random shutdown issues, flawed logic boards, and screen flickering. I have experienced all 3 of these on my original Macbook.
It was hell trying to get them to repair it. I use it every day for school and work and had to send it in to Apple, after much arguing in their store, to have them "fix" it. I went through this 3 times for the random shutdown issues and once for a bad logic board. Each time it was sent out, it was gone for over 2 weeks. Very ridiculous.
Now my screen is flickering a ton, like a loose connection or something. I've looked online and there seems to be thousands upon thousands of other similar reports so obviously mine isn't an isolated incident. This thing is only about 10 months old, no excuse for so many problems like that and the bad service. I imagine trying to battle in the store about the display issue will be just as painful, especially since it doesn't happen all the time and I haven't found a particular way to reproduce it. With only 2 months left of my 1 year warranty, I wouldn't put it past them to just meddle around with it for 2 months and then say my warranty is up, tough.
Not happy with Apple's quality on their laptops at all, if you couldn't tell.
Shhhh!!! Don't say stuff like this unless you want to get chased out here by the pitchfork and torch wielding fanboys!
Oh, and you forgot to mention the mooing/whining fans (cooling device not the users) and the discolored white Macbooks, two other issues Apple refused to acknowlege until negative publicity forced them to.
Oh and then there's the Mac "laptops" that get so hot you can't actually put them on your lap without wearing firefighter pants. In case that doesn't bother you, keep in mind that heat is the number one cause of component failure, so expect a lot of MBs, MBPs to start dying very soon.
I'm not posting this to troll. Apple makes beautiful products and a superior OS and I and am interested in getting a MB (l'm a long time Windows user). But they really need to be held accountable, something its rabid fanbase refuses to do, no matter how much crap they have to put up with.
What I don't understand is, if you need a computer with a display which is perfectly color accurate (for preparing files for print or whatnot), wouldn't that be the very first thing you test for when you buy a computer? And if it doesn't measure up, I'm sure you'd be able to return the computer and get a refund if you do it within a reasonable amount of time (though I admit, I'm not familiar with Apple's return policy).
Yes. Refunds are tricky though in the USA and worldwide. Usually a 10-25% restocking fee applies. But clearly, yes, users would have to research screen appearance and so on. I held off buying a MacBook because I was unhappy initially with the screen appearance, and concerned about the MacBookPro screens. However I am no longer doing paid graphic design, and I love my MacBook Core[1]Duo, Core[2]Duo (on loan from work) BlackBook, and my previously (2 years ago) purchased Sony 17" 1280x1024 LCD.
Quote:
Originally Posted by alansky
"The matter is of particular concern to MacBook and MacBook Pro users who rely on the accuracy of the displays for graphic use, such as photography..."
What a bunch of bull crap! No self-respecting professional in his (or her) right mind would ever rely on a laptop screen for critical photo editing for one very simple reason: It is extremely difficult to be certain that the screen is opened to exactly the same viewing angle each time the machine is turned on; and even the slightest change in the viewing angle alters the perceived brightness and contrast of the displayed image. This is a fact of life for laptop users, who should know better than to rely on any laptop screen for absolutely faithful image reproduction. Not to mention the fact that, when traveling with a laptop, the constantly changing viewing environment has a very significant effect on the perceived brightness and contrast of the display. The morons who brought this suit have their heads so far up their asses that it's a wonder they can see anything at all.
Bingo.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kresh
"the Law Offices of Peter M. Polischuk" will receive a settlement of 200 million USD, and the Macbook owner will get a coupon for $50 USD off their next Apple purchase.
Yes. Sadly this is the most likely case, though of course lawyers are an easy punching bag (they are scum though... ) ...Nonetheless it is good that this has been brought to light. It is a pity this is the only way these things become major news... I'm confused.
Comments
Technically their displays do produce millions of colors, just through an analog function (dithering).
Dithering is one thing I've seen Apple fans claim that Apple doesn't do, even recently on this board. I don't see it all the time on the displays that do dither, but when I do see it, I'm pretty annoyed by it. I hadn't noticed my MacBook Pro doing this.
I am not one of those people as I didn't know that laptop displays were 6 bit. Is this true of all LCDs or just laptops? Are the Cinema displays 6 bpc as well?
The Cinema displays are purported to be 8bpc, but I think by the same people that claimed that Apple didn't use dithering.
- If the manufacturer lists the color as 16.7 million colors, it should be assumed that the display is 8-bit per-color.
- If the colors are listed as being 16.2 million or 16 million, consumers should assume that it uses a 6-bit per-color depth.
I have never heard of the 16.2M number. How is it derived? It seems like a bullshit number to me.
What you had for lunch can affect your color perception.
I hadn't heard of that.
No serious professional would consider color work on a laptop. But lot's of other image work can certainly be done, and that's why portables outsell towers 10 to 1.
The typical sales figures for most manufacturers is getting very close to 1:1. 10:1 is a long ways away.
Run out and show me a Display/TV/Projector that doesn't degrade as time goes on...
Most displays don't seem to degrade noticibly within the first year that I've found. It usually takes about three or more to get a shift that's noticible to most people.
Besides that, even if it does "trick" the user's eye into seeing millions of colors, it still appears to display millions of colors.
I think these guys are just taking Apple's usual marketing exaggeration the wrong way. And as it's been said, if one isn't satisfied with the color quality of the display, Apple's return policy is fine.
I'm sure the displays used on the Macbook/Pros are exactly the same as the ones used on other laptops.
as i'm sure it's been said, no professional is going to rely on the laptop screen for their final product. If you want a screen that produces perfect color, you'll have to go with a multi-thousand dollar flat panel or a $500+ CRT. I don't know what professionals use, but I'm sure ultra-thin laptop displays aren't it. I thought they would use CRTs anyway because of their superior color reproduction and contrast, as well as black reproduction.
Besides that, even if it does "trick" the user's eye into seeing millions of colors, it still appears to display millions of colors.
I think these guys are just taking Apple's usual marketing exaggeration the wrong way. And as it's been said, if one isn't satisfied with the color quality of the display, Apple's return policy is fine.
I'm sure the displays used on the Macbook/Pros are exactly the same as the ones used on other laptops.
Yep, but as someone else pointed out, Apple may've been pouring on the marketing honey a little extra thick:
http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/graphics.html
"Promote your ideas on the MacBook Pro’s dazzling display. An aggressive ATI Mobility Radeon X1600 graphics processor under the hood coupled with up to 256MB of GDDR3 SDRAM powers the mobile visual studio you’ve been waiting for. Retouch color, edit on location, video conference with colleagues: Do it all, anywhere.
MacBook Pro makes your ideas more enlightening, with a sharp, high-resolution screen. See blacker blacks, whiter whites, and many more colors in between on a brilliant 15.4-inch, 1440-by-900-pixel or 17-inch, 1680-by-1050-pixel digital display. Enjoy a nuanced view simply unavailable on other portables."
[thanks to Haggar]
.
I think a lot of people are still thinking "ooh, pixelly dithering, like Floyd-Steinberg" when they see the word "dithering", i.e., static dithering. That's not how 6-bit LCD panels dither as far as I am aware, they dynamically dither so that a pixel, on average over time, appears to be the correct tone. You would have to have excellent eyes, or very ideal conditions, to see this happening. If you're on a laptop now, can you see it on a smooth grey gradient (e.g., Mac OS X titlebar)? I can't on this iBook.
And yes, I have the strong suspicion that iMacs also use 6bit panels. Now wouldn't it be rather helpful if Apple told their potential photographic customers that they will have trouble with the iMac and should stick with the Cinema Displays? No, let the customers find this out the hard way, why should Apple provide any information about the specifications of their products.
Well aside from the merits of the whole lawsuit. Do the MBPs really have 6-bit displays?
This really sucks if true as I've got my money ready to buy a MBP. And what is up with Apple lately? We have this now and then there was the ipod nano scratching on the first version. Why can't they just accept a little less profit and use higher quality parts? I know I sound like I hate Apple but I don't. I've been a big Apple fan for years and am glad as heck that Steve Jobs came back to run it. But he (and probably most other execs at Apple) is a liberal and as such should have a long-term mindset that shuns short term profits but that is not what I am seeing. I'm also seeing a little bit of Verizion type pricing happening which also sucks.
- Mark
I'm far from an Apple Apologist... And I'm the first that calls them out when I feel they've done something wrong. You freaks on the other hand are far worse then I..... You want to crucify Apple for the fact that they use electricity... the same electricity that's used to kill convicted criminals in Texas.
Apple does NOT manufacture their own displays.... **NOR** do they deal in enough volume to dictate the use of shitty components in the manufacture of their displays to the true manufactures of said displays.
Are you living in such a fantasy land as to believe that Apple has input into the components that make up an LCD display? If so, more power to ya...
D
A pretty popular device called the Huey (by Pantone and x/brite)
That is X-Rite.
Apple does NOT manufacture their own displays.... **NOR** do they deal in enough volume to dictate the use of shitty components in the manufacture of their displays to the true manufactures of said displays.
Are you living in such a fantasy land as to believe that Apple has input into the components that make up an LCD display? If so, more power to ya...
They have made significant up-front investments in the manufacture of LCD panels.
http://www.crn.com/it-channel/18809048
The display world has many grades of panel technology.
Hey!
I'm far from an Apple Apologist... And I'm the first that calls them out when I feel they've done something wrong. You freaks on the other hand are far worse then I..... You want to crucify Apple for the fact that they use electricity... the same electricity that's used to kill convicted criminals in Texas.
Apple does NOT manufacture their own displays.... **NOR** do they deal in enough volume to dictate the use of shitty components in the manufacture of their displays to the true manufactures of said displays.
Are you living in such a fantasy land as to believe that Apple has input into the components that make up an LCD display? If so, more power to ya...
D
Agree with everything you said, however, the last sentence is not true. Apple sells the LCD, they are responsible for it (So they better have input or else their stupid). I work in a company that sometimes sells foreign made products, we are the ones that are responsible because we sold it. Apple will probably settle this one out of court, what's terrible about all this is we Americans sue for anything even a parking space.
Dithering is one thing I've seen Apple fans claim that Apple doesn't do, even recently on this board.
It's usually not too difficult to find out. Among notebook displays manufactured by LG Philips there is only one 8-bit display, the 20.1-inch wide LP201WE1.
LG Philips specifications: page 11
MacBook (Pro) owners can run a test with SwitchResX or ASTRA32 to learn about the display, once you have the exact reference you can use Google to find the specs like this guy did. Apple should make clear to customers that notebook displays are 6-bit instead of spouting marketing nonsense: "MacBook Pro makes your ideas more enlightening, with a sharp, high-resolution screen. See blacker blacks, whiter whites, and many more colors in between on a brilliant 15.4-inch, 1440-by-900-pixel or 17-inch, 1680-by-1050-pixel digital display. Enjoy a nuanced view simply unavailable on other portables." Bwahaha!
The Cinema displays are purported to be 8bpc, but I think by the same people that claimed that Apple didn't use dithering.
Seems like they are indeed 8-bit displays.
Anandtech review: "Although both the Apple and Dell 20" displays use the same LG.Philips LCD LM201W01 panel…"
LCD Search:
Cinema Display 20" M8893
IDTech 20" S-IPS IAWS64
Cinema Display 20" M9177
(new) LG-Philips 20" S-IPS LM201W01
Cinema HD Display 23" M9178
LG-Philips 23" IPS LM230W01/02
LG Philips specifications: page 9
20-inch wide LM201W01: resolution 1,680x1,050, colors 16.7M (8-bit)
23-inch wide LM230W01: resolution 1,920x1,200, colors 16.7M (8-bit)
30-inch wide 2 different models: res. 2,560x1,600, colors 16.7M (8-bit)
IDTech specifications: page 5
20-inch wide IAWS64: resolution 1,680x1,050, native 24bit colors (RGB 8-bits per each subpixel)
I remember seeing some specs on the new Samsung LED LCD 15.4" display that could end up in the next MBP. I shuddered when it said it only supported 6-bits per channel or 262K colors. Here's the link: Samsung LED backlit display
Apple's tech specs for the 15.4" MBP reads: 15.4-inch (diagonal) TFT display, support for millions of colors;
If it's only capable of displaying 262,000 colors then I call that false advertising. Why should we have to parse the term "support for?" That's misleading.
What Apple needs to do is be honest or put the quality in that we expect. The goal of a class action suit like this is to get the company to do the right thing.
So, what does HP say about their high-end 17.0" WSXGA+ BrightView Widescreen (1680x1050) laptop display on their web site?
"The 17-inch WSXGA+ BrightView display with high-definition means brighter, more vivid and color-rich images like you've never seen before in a notebook computer."
No mention of number of colors. However, I am thinking of class action suit against HP over their "color-rich images like you've never seen before..." comment. I beg to differ! So, who's with me???
Toshiba doesn't mention numbers either.
"...the Satellite® P100 series features a choice of 17" diagonal widescreen displays* with Toshiba's TruBrite? technology, dramatically expanding your multimedia and multi-tasking possibilities."
Must be a conspiracy.
Y'know, I'm proud that I've never joined a class-action lawsuit against any company. The net result is that you'll receive a check in the mail for 12 cents and feel none the better for it.
Generally true, but I did get $200 for joining the Chevy Lumina bad brakes lawsuit!
Apple notebooks may employ sub-par displays only capable of 6 bits per channel (18-bit color), rather than 8 bits per channel, making them capable of displaying only 262,144 colors without dithering, as opposed to millions.
Why be honest with your customers when you can fleece them with overpriced computers using outdated or sub-standard parts sold agressively through an "unbelievable, out of this world" hyperbole ad campaign, AKA the Reality Distortion Field ?
How can it be that I am the first one to actually go looking at the ADC Developer note that lists out the only actual truth on the subject?
http://developer.apple.com/documenta...TP40003994-SW1
For those that don't want to hit the link and scroll down I present:
MacBook Computer (May 2007)
The MacBook computer introduced in May 2007, based on the Intel Core 2 Duo, has a 13.3-inch, glossy, widescreen flat-panel display (measured diagonally). The display has a Low Reflection Glossy Polarizer (LRGP). Display depths up to 24 bits per pixel at all supported screen resolutions .
The MacBook supports an LCD display size of 1280x800 pixels at 114 dpi, 250 nits single bulb and shows up to millions of colors.
MacBook Computer (November 2006)
The MacBook computer announced in November 2006, based on the Intel Core 2 Duo, has a 13.3-inch, glossy, widescreen flat-panel display (measured diagonally). The display has a Low Reflection Glossy Polarizer (LRGP). Display depths up to 24 bits per pixel at all supported screen resolutions .
The MacBook supports an LCD display size of 1280x800 pixels at 114 dpi, 250 nits single bulb and shows up to millions of colors.
MacBook Computer (May 2006)
The MacBook computer announced in May 2006, based on the Intel Core Duo, has a 13.3-inch, glossy, widescreen flat-panel display (measured diagonally). The display has a Low Reflection Glossy Polarizer (LRGP. Display depths up to 24 bits per pixel at all supported screen resolutions .
The MacBook supports an LCD display size of 1280 x 800 pixels at 114 dpi, 250 nits single bulb and shows up to millions of colors.
Quoted for truth
Why be honest with your customers when you can fleece them with overpriced computers using outdated or sub-standard parts sold agressively through an "unbelievable, out of this world" hyperbole ad campaign, AKA the Reality Distortion Field ?
Would you like to retract your lemming like following of the idiots? ^^^^
Can we cut with the calls of apologists and such now? The freaking lawsuit and nay-sayers just "forgot" to actually check the facts.
Seriously - like most here, I'm a big fan of Apple, but if there is MERIT to the claim that there was false advertisement (not what they say NOW in their marketing, but what they said at the time...), then any company, including Apple, needs to be bitch-slapped straight.
We all hate lawyers until we need one.
Well, I've been counting colors on my screen for several hours, and I can't come up anywhere near 16 million....
Seriously - like most here, I'm a big fan of Apple, but if there is MERIT to the claim that there was false advertisement (not what they say NOW in their marketing, but what they said at the time...), then any company, including Apple, needs to be bitch-slapped straight.
We all hate lawyers until we need one.
No merit, just a fast lawyer with absolutely no Googling skills. Or even the brains to effectively check Apple's website. Apple is selling 24 bit per pixel displays in the MacBooks, and has been all along. If someone is getting a bad picture it is a defect and replaceable.
I do not have time to go through the 50 odd messages here but there are lots of other major flaws in the Intel laptops Apple has produced, and that they will not acknowledge. The random shutdown issues, flawed logic boards, and screen flickering. I have experienced all 3 of these on my original Macbook.
It was hell trying to get them to repair it. I use it every day for school and work and had to send it in to Apple, after much arguing in their store, to have them "fix" it. I went through this 3 times for the random shutdown issues and once for a bad logic board. Each time it was sent out, it was gone for over 2 weeks. Very ridiculous.
Now my screen is flickering a ton, like a loose connection or something. I've looked online and there seems to be thousands upon thousands of other similar reports so obviously mine isn't an isolated incident. This thing is only about 10 months old, no excuse for so many problems like that and the bad service. I imagine trying to battle in the store about the display issue will be just as painful, especially since it doesn't happen all the time and I haven't found a particular way to reproduce it. With only 2 months left of my 1 year warranty, I wouldn't put it past them to just meddle around with it for 2 months and then say my warranty is up, tough.
Not happy with Apple's quality on their laptops at all, if you couldn't tell.
Shhhh!!! Don't say stuff like this unless you want to get chased out here by the pitchfork and torch wielding fanboys!
Oh, and you forgot to mention the mooing/whining fans (cooling device not the users) and the discolored white Macbooks, two other issues Apple refused to acknowlege until negative publicity forced them to.
Oh and then there's the Mac "laptops" that get so hot you can't actually put them on your lap without wearing firefighter pants. In case that doesn't bother you, keep in mind that heat is the number one cause of component failure, so expect a lot of MBs, MBPs to start dying very soon.
I'm not posting this to troll. Apple makes beautiful products and a superior OS and I and am interested in getting a MB (l'm a long time Windows user). But they really need to be held accountable, something its rabid fanbase refuses to do, no matter how much crap they have to put up with.
What I don't understand is, if you need a computer with a display which is perfectly color accurate (for preparing files for print or whatnot), wouldn't that be the very first thing you test for when you buy a computer? And if it doesn't measure up, I'm sure you'd be able to return the computer and get a refund if you do it within a reasonable amount of time (though I admit, I'm not familiar with Apple's return policy).
Yes. Refunds are tricky though in the USA and worldwide. Usually a 10-25% restocking fee applies. But clearly, yes, users would have to research screen appearance and so on. I held off buying a MacBook because I was unhappy initially with the screen appearance, and concerned about the MacBookPro screens. However I am no longer doing paid graphic design, and I love my MacBook Core[1]Duo, Core[2]Duo (on loan from work) BlackBook, and my previously (2 years ago) purchased Sony 17" 1280x1024 LCD.
"The matter is of particular concern to MacBook and MacBook Pro users who rely on the accuracy of the displays for graphic use, such as photography..."
What a bunch of bull crap! No self-respecting professional in his (or her) right mind would ever rely on a laptop screen for critical photo editing for one very simple reason: It is extremely difficult to be certain that the screen is opened to exactly the same viewing angle each time the machine is turned on; and even the slightest change in the viewing angle alters the perceived brightness and contrast of the displayed image. This is a fact of life for laptop users, who should know better than to rely on any laptop screen for absolutely faithful image reproduction. Not to mention the fact that, when traveling with a laptop, the constantly changing viewing environment has a very significant effect on the perceived brightness and contrast of the display. The morons who brought this suit have their heads so far up their asses that it's a wonder they can see anything at all.
Bingo.
"the Law Offices of Peter M. Polischuk" will receive a settlement of 200 million USD, and the Macbook owner will get a coupon for $50 USD off their next Apple purchase.
Yes. Sadly this is the most likely case, though of course lawyers are an easy punching bag (they are scum though...