I think it is a little disingenuous of AI to show the laptops side by side while the matte screen is on bright with a busy picture that won't reflex much at all and a glossy screened laptop is of a blank solid desktop in really dimmed mode. Why not be fair and show them both on the same brightness with the same picture?
Maybe AI knows that no one really see much gloss when the screen is on normal brightness so they kept the gloss screened laptop in an unfair comparison. I'm not saying their aren't real problems for some, but maybe if they showed them in a proper compared state, it would support most users opinions_ that it's just not that big a deal.
The fact that you would label me as a troll is something you should think about. Look man, I'm not looking for an argument here but I don't need a lecture on business and economics. I'm well aware of Apple's business model, that's the point. I'm not self entitled type nor do I expect Apple to be giving anything away, I simply don't agree with the Apple tax sometimes.
haha you do need a lecture my zune buddy
YOU say you know buisness yet you say the stupidest comment ever.
<<<apple tax>>>>
APPLE charges the exact amount to piss of the least amount of buyers while sucking the most markup/profit as fast and as long as they can. . Every biz in the world has done this since the dawn of time.
ONLY commies and jealous trolls would not get this.
It could be that the sales numbers do reflect at least a non-aversion to glossy screens. On the other hand, It could be that most people are against glossy screens, but that factor doesn't outweigh the other advantages they see in an Apple laptop. I was, rather obliquely, pointing out that Apple's sales numbers for laptops could be dependent on factors that have little or nothing to do with glossy vs. matte screens, so, without knowing exactly what is driving sales, it's not valid to make points about glossy vs. matte screens based on the sales numbers.
Personally, I'm somewhat ambivalent on the glossy vs. matte issue, and I wouldn't make a buy/don't buy decision based solely, nor even primarily, on that factor.
I think it is a little disingenuous of AI to show the laptops side by side while the matte screen is on bright with a busy picture that won't reflex much at all and a glossy screened laptop is of a blank solid desktop in really dimmed mode. Why not be fair and show them both on the same brightness with the same picture?
+1
Time for AI to stop using that shitty flickr pic (I think this is the 3rd time I've seen it here)
Agree absolutely. The new backlit LCDs on the MacBooks with a glossy screen are significantly superior vs a matte screen outside (especially sporting events), or in an equally, brightly diffussed indoor room, as well as in a darkened interior.
I'm happy for the matte screen fans but I hope Apple does something about the design. The current matte screen Macbook Pros look unfinished... Like a prototype or like someone popped the glass off of a glossy MBP. And no, not a fan of the Chiclet style keyboard either. The old MBP style was much better.
To all those who don't know or who have not actually seen a new MBP in person:
The new MBP screens by default are covered by a sheet of glass. This is why the new MBP screens (in my opinion) are terrible. Whoever says they are usable outside in sunlight is wrong... I have tried myself (I own a new MBP) by going outside on a partly cloudy day with my body facing away from the sun, and I can't see a thing. Caution is advised.
I used to own a previous model glossy MBP. It was amazing, and perfectly fine using outside. I personally do not like matte displays.
So people keep using the word "glossy" when arguing or specifying personal preference / opinion. But remember the reflections caused by glass (severe) are much different than the little bit of glare caused by a normal glossy screen that isn't covered by glass. The new MBP acts as a mirror when dark colors are displayed behind the glass.
Now, if only Apple would make a glossy MBP without the glass. But, that will never happen due to users' not understanding the difference and properly voicing concerns.
Yes, but keep in mind that there is a difference between 'glare' and 'reflection.'
Reflection can be altered by adjusting the amount, position or angle of light shining on the object seen in the reflection.
Glare can be altered by adjusting the intensity of the light shining directly on the reflective surface or the refractive index of the reflective surface, i.e, in this case the screen.
In any case, it should be buyer beware. Gloss and Mattes have their unique features and for some, demanding advantages. Now we have a choice. To continue to dwell on it in an accusatory fashion is childish. As is somebody dissing anyone who attempt to help those make a choice.
In order to reduce the glare caused by the reflective screens, you have to darken the environment, even painting walls a darker color to absorb more light waves so only what gets into your eyes is generated by the monitor.
This experience has shown us this, that people have different acceptance levels of glare. Some posts I read people have totally no problem with glare, some can't accept even a little and all levels in between.
One thing is true, that there wasn't a problem with our screens at all before the highly reflective screens made their appearance. We could use our screens anywhere, in nearly any environment.
Laptops especially need to have a anti-glare option, but Apple is going to find out Pro sales of highly reflective monitors are going to diminish in favor of a Dell or something else.
Monitors last quite some time, so that's a few years before the effects are realized.
I am please Apple is at least offering the 15" MacBook Pro in a matte option, even though it's not "advertised" alongside the highly reflective models and has to be located via the Build To Order. This is going to generate less sales and a self fulfilling prophecy is going to occur.
"We are selling more glossy than matte, we are going to drop matte again!"
Of course the active online community will jump hard on the 15" matte model because that's our optimal screen size. Computer newbies are going to get sucked in by the "oh shiny" and then get disappointed at home and work because they can't see the screen half the time because of the reflections and glare.
The TV industry realized the mistake of glossy/shiny/reflective displays and now they sell matte mostly, but a few try to do glossy. Sony's Bravia's are all matte.
I can't wait until this whole shiny screen fad is over with, computers are to be used in a functional way, not shiny pieces of desktop artwork. Sure some of the two can be combined, but when one interferes with the use of the computer, then why pay for it?
Note to Apple/Steve Jobs:
If your reading this, thanks for the 15" matte option at least, that's my target product and a lot of others too.
Please look at making other adjustments in other lines, your the only provider of OS X, perhaps it's time to expand the niche narrow product line concept in favor of meeting the needs of your rapidly expanding market share.
"If you're going to be thinking anyway, you might as well think big." - Donald Trump
Graphics and web designer here, who used to *hate* glossy screens. I have been using them for two generations of Apple laptops now, and it doesn't bother me one bit at all. With the brighter screen of my new Macbook Pro, it is a non issue. I don't even notice glare. Anybody who is adamantly opposed to this probably hasn't given it an honest shot, at all.
Nonsense pictures like the one in this article are completely misleading.
In order to reduce the glare caused by the reflective screens, you have to darken the environment, even painting walls a darker color to absorb more light waves so only what gets into your eyes is generated by the monitor.
This experience has shown us this, that people have different acceptance levels of glare. Some posts I read people have totally no problem with glare, some can't accept even a little and all levels in between.
One thing is true, that there wasn't a problem with our screens at all before the highly reflective screens made their appearance. We could use our screens anywhere, in nearly any environment.
Laptops especially need to have a anti-glare option, but Apple is going to find out Pro sales of highly reflective monitors are going to diminish in favor of a Dell or something else.
Monitors last quite some time, so that's a few years before the effects are realized.
I am please Apple is at least offering the 15" MacBook Pro in a matte option, even though it's not "advertised" alongside the highly reflective models and has to be located via the Build To Order. This is going to generate less sales and a self fulfilling prophecy is going to occur.
"We are selling more glossy than matte, we are going to drop matte again!"
Of course the active online community will jump hard on the 15" matte model because that's our optimal screen size. Computer newbies are going to get sucked in by the "oh shiny" and then get disappointed at home and work because they can't see the screen half the time because of the reflections and glare.
The TV industry realized the mistake of glossy/shiny/reflective displays and now they sell matte mostly, but a few try to do glossy. Sony's Bravia's are all matte.
I can't wait until this whole shiny screen fad is over with, computers are to be used in a functional way, not shiny pieces of desktop artwork. Sure some of the two can be combined, but when one interferes with the use of the computer, then why pay for it?
Note to Apple/Steve Jobs:
If your reading this, thanks for the 15" matte option at least, that's my target product and a lot of others too.
Please look at making other adjustments in other lines, your the only provider of OS X, perhaps it's time to expand the niche narrow product line concept in favor of meeting the needs of your rapidly expanding market share.
"If you're going to be thinking anyway, you might as well think big." - Donald Trump
mactripp dude you got the matte option so let it go
ThE current MBP 13-15-17" GLASS screen's have the finest quality video playback ever produced in the history of the world . Why would anyone go backwards
PEOPLE who do photos or make movies or watch movies or watch /netflix /hulu want this great screen . The screen quality is so good that all non MBP look real bad .
mactripp dude you got the matte option so let it go
ThE current MBP 13-15-17" GLASS screen's have the finest quality video playback ever produced in the history of the world . Why would anyone go backwards
PEOPLE who do photos or make movies or watch movies or watch /netflix /hulu want this great screen . The screen quality is so good that all non MBP look real bad .
The "glass" screen you talk about is an ordinary LED backlit LCD panel, with a glass face put in front of it. The glass itself doesn't really change the image quality. I really doubt they went to a different LCD panel to make this work.
The objects are not in the exact same place, the camera is not in the same positions, the lighting in the background varies, etc.
Of course the glossy will reflect more than the matte.
But the matte has drawbacks as well. In most cases, we don't work on applications or documents most of the time with black or dark backgrounds. Pure white backgrounds as one uses in word processing, vs the extreme to black, doesn't cause reflection or glare.
Using the MacBook Pro (glossy) on the boat is a hell of a lot better than our mattes.
By the way, matte does reflect. We just tested the Museum Glass and it reflects as well. Everything does in the right position. As everything doesn't in the right position.
Bottom line. As I suggested, take them both out into the daylight before you make a decision. Many have changed their minds, i.e., "the gloss doesn't bother me as much as I thought it would," "The gloss is so much more vibrant, it works better for me," to "I like the matte better because I don't get any glare."
But to unilaterally hate glossy because of what others have said and not make the final judgement yourself under your ideal conditions is ludicrous.
Everybody has the choice now, why not let them decide for themselves?
All surfaces materially have a portion of reflection and refraction.
I'm glad I'm not a fan of laptops, but if I were on a boat much, I'd first ask a store representative to walk outside with me on a table and run through some side-by-side testing before I buy as well.
Whether one loves glossy or matte, we all must admit this is a victory for "choice." And it really costs Apple nothing, as they are getting $50 a pop for matte. May they do the same for the iMacs.
This also illustrates very clearly that "being vocal" has merit, even in spite of the many flames matte proponents have had to endure in forums such as this one while calling for choice.
May now the voices of reason begin to cry out over the insanity of Apple's MACK-truck-flattened abominations they call "keyboards." Bring back tactile feedback and keys that sink down more than 3mm when you tap on them. Apple, stop trying to bring us back to 1984 with a standard keyboard that has the numeric keypad hacked off (yes, I am aware you can get the keypad for free as an optional choice, but only via Apple's store). Apple used to make excellent keyboards. They now are trying to get us all into the iPhone groove. Indeed, I have little doubt that Jobs and Ive both want a 100% non-mechanical keyboard in the future, with recent keyboards from Apple acting as mere stepping-stones to a truly horrific tomorrow. (And yes, I am well aware of the availability of 3rd party keyboards. But some of us would rather not pay extra. And one must also admit that most of those 3rd party keyboards are for Windows users. It's all about What Apple Offers, not about what 3rd parties may bring us.)
You speak the truth, brother. Quoted again for effect.
Okay I'm F..... PIST, This is bullshit on Apple's part, I made the purchase in December with knowledge this was my only choice. As an FCP Editor I HATE glossy , 6 months later Apple back peddles because the ear full they got fro the professional industry. DO I have another $3000 to drop on a Macbook Pro? NO. Well there is no other company like Apple out there, they need to just F.... offering antiglare displays on all there new products.
"Anti glare" sounds like they're actually applying something onto the glare screen. They make it sound like a premium treatment. I wonder what it looks like. I've grown fond of the black frame.
See I was under the impression it was the other way around, where more people wanted matte. They have the numbers though I guess. If it was the other way around, it would really appear as though they were taking advantage of that and getting some extra cash from everyone for the most logical choice in the two.
The iVisor costs like 35 bucks. I guess an extra 15 to have it actually part of the screen aint too bad.
Amazing. I simply ask why it cost so much, looking for an honest response, and I'm told that I'm bitching and I expect a free laptop.
Yeah that's it. I think Apple should give us free laptops because this matte screen business costs too much.
That's because he owns a shiny iMac & shiny 24in LED display and cannot fathom why someone would not like them!
The issue is before this glassy screen hostile takeover you could choose matte or glossy at no extra cost. Take it way, then give it back but somehow now it costs you $50 extra bucks.
Comments
Maybe AI knows that no one really see much gloss when the screen is on normal brightness so they kept the gloss screened laptop in an unfair comparison. I'm not saying their aren't real problems for some, but maybe if they showed them in a proper compared state, it would support most users opinions_ that it's just not that big a deal.
The fact that you would label me as a troll is something you should think about. Look man, I'm not looking for an argument here but I don't need a lecture on business and economics. I'm well aware of Apple's business model, that's the point. I'm not self entitled type nor do I expect Apple to be giving anything away, I simply don't agree with the Apple tax sometimes.
haha you do need a lecture my zune buddy
YOU say you know buisness yet you say the stupidest comment ever.
<<<apple tax>>>>
APPLE charges the exact amount to piss of the least amount of buyers while sucking the most markup/profit as fast and as long as they can. . Every biz in the world has done this since the dawn of time.
ONLY commies and jealous trolls would not get this.
APPLE products are cheaper than there rivals .
Back to school dude.
9
It could be that the sales numbers do reflect at least a non-aversion to glossy screens. On the other hand, It could be that most people are against glossy screens, but that factor doesn't outweigh the other advantages they see in an Apple laptop. I was, rather obliquely, pointing out that Apple's sales numbers for laptops could be dependent on factors that have little or nothing to do with glossy vs. matte screens, so, without knowing exactly what is driving sales, it's not valid to make points about glossy vs. matte screens based on the sales numbers.
Personally, I'm somewhat ambivalent on the glossy vs. matte issue, and I wouldn't make a buy/don't buy decision based solely, nor even primarily, on that factor.
what kind of computer do you own ?
I think it is a little disingenuous of AI to show the laptops side by side while the matte screen is on bright with a busy picture that won't reflex much at all and a glossy screened laptop is of a blank solid desktop in really dimmed mode. Why not be fair and show them both on the same brightness with the same picture?
+1
Time for AI to stop using that shitty flickr pic (I think this is the 3rd time I've seen it here)
what kind of computer do you own ?
An old analog model, doesn't even have a screen, although, I keep it behind a curtain.
Be Forewarned.
Agree absolutely. The new backlit LCDs on the MacBooks with a glossy screen are significantly superior vs a matte screen outside (especially sporting events), or in an equally, brightly diffussed indoor room, as well as in a darkened interior.
Try it before you buy it.
Your joking right?
Have you seen this video?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_X0wo6dIsMU
The new MBP screens by default are covered by a sheet of glass. This is why the new MBP screens (in my opinion) are terrible. Whoever says they are usable outside in sunlight is wrong... I have tried myself (I own a new MBP) by going outside on a partly cloudy day with my body facing away from the sun, and I can't see a thing. Caution is advised.
I used to own a previous model glossy MBP. It was amazing, and perfectly fine using outside. I personally do not like matte displays.
So people keep using the word "glossy" when arguing or specifying personal preference / opinion. But remember the reflections caused by glass (severe) are much different than the little bit of glare caused by a normal glossy screen that isn't covered by glass. The new MBP acts as a mirror when dark colors are displayed behind the glass.
Now, if only Apple would make a glossy MBP without the glass. But, that will never happen due to users' not understanding the difference and properly voicing concerns.
Try it before you buy it.
You talk about outdoor use, what store lets you take a notebook outside before you buy it?
Yes, but keep in mind that there is a difference between 'glare' and 'reflection.'
Reflection can be altered by adjusting the amount, position or angle of light shining on the object seen in the reflection.
Glare can be altered by adjusting the intensity of the light shining directly on the reflective surface or the refractive index of the reflective surface, i.e, in this case the screen.
In any case, it should be buyer beware. Gloss and Mattes have their unique features and for some, demanding advantages. Now we have a choice. To continue to dwell on it in an accusatory fashion is childish. As is somebody dissing anyone who attempt to help those make a choice.
In order to reduce the glare caused by the reflective screens, you have to darken the environment, even painting walls a darker color to absorb more light waves so only what gets into your eyes is generated by the monitor.
This experience has shown us this, that people have different acceptance levels of glare. Some posts I read people have totally no problem with glare, some can't accept even a little and all levels in between.
One thing is true, that there wasn't a problem with our screens at all before the highly reflective screens made their appearance. We could use our screens anywhere, in nearly any environment.
Laptops especially need to have a anti-glare option, but Apple is going to find out Pro sales of highly reflective monitors are going to diminish in favor of a Dell or something else.
Monitors last quite some time, so that's a few years before the effects are realized.
I am please Apple is at least offering the 15" MacBook Pro in a matte option, even though it's not "advertised" alongside the highly reflective models and has to be located via the Build To Order. This is going to generate less sales and a self fulfilling prophecy is going to occur.
"We are selling more glossy than matte, we are going to drop matte again!"
Of course the active online community will jump hard on the 15" matte model because that's our optimal screen size. Computer newbies are going to get sucked in by the "oh shiny" and then get disappointed at home and work because they can't see the screen half the time because of the reflections and glare.
The TV industry realized the mistake of glossy/shiny/reflective displays and now they sell matte mostly, but a few try to do glossy. Sony's Bravia's are all matte.
I can't wait until this whole shiny screen fad is over with, computers are to be used in a functional way, not shiny pieces of desktop artwork. Sure some of the two can be combined, but when one interferes with the use of the computer, then why pay for it?
Note to Apple/Steve Jobs:
If your reading this, thanks for the 15" matte option at least, that's my target product and a lot of others too.
Please look at making other adjustments in other lines, your the only provider of OS X, perhaps it's time to expand the niche narrow product line concept in favor of meeting the needs of your rapidly expanding market share.
"If you're going to be thinking anyway, you might as well think big." - Donald Trump
Nonsense pictures like the one in this article are completely misleading.
An old analog model, doesn't even have a screen, although, I keep it behind a curtain.
lololol
In order to reduce the glare caused by the reflective screens, you have to darken the environment, even painting walls a darker color to absorb more light waves so only what gets into your eyes is generated by the monitor.
This experience has shown us this, that people have different acceptance levels of glare. Some posts I read people have totally no problem with glare, some can't accept even a little and all levels in between.
One thing is true, that there wasn't a problem with our screens at all before the highly reflective screens made their appearance. We could use our screens anywhere, in nearly any environment.
Laptops especially need to have a anti-glare option, but Apple is going to find out Pro sales of highly reflective monitors are going to diminish in favor of a Dell or something else.
Monitors last quite some time, so that's a few years before the effects are realized.
I am please Apple is at least offering the 15" MacBook Pro in a matte option, even though it's not "advertised" alongside the highly reflective models and has to be located via the Build To Order. This is going to generate less sales and a self fulfilling prophecy is going to occur.
"We are selling more glossy than matte, we are going to drop matte again!"
Of course the active online community will jump hard on the 15" matte model because that's our optimal screen size. Computer newbies are going to get sucked in by the "oh shiny" and then get disappointed at home and work because they can't see the screen half the time because of the reflections and glare.
The TV industry realized the mistake of glossy/shiny/reflective displays and now they sell matte mostly, but a few try to do glossy. Sony's Bravia's are all matte.
I can't wait until this whole shiny screen fad is over with, computers are to be used in a functional way, not shiny pieces of desktop artwork. Sure some of the two can be combined, but when one interferes with the use of the computer, then why pay for it?
Note to Apple/Steve Jobs:
If your reading this, thanks for the 15" matte option at least, that's my target product and a lot of others too.
Please look at making other adjustments in other lines, your the only provider of OS X, perhaps it's time to expand the niche narrow product line concept in favor of meeting the needs of your rapidly expanding market share.
"If you're going to be thinking anyway, you might as well think big." - Donald Trump
mactripp dude you got the matte option so let it go
ThE current MBP 13-15-17" GLASS screen's have the finest quality video playback ever produced in the history of the world . Why would anyone go backwards
PEOPLE who do photos or make movies or watch movies or watch /netflix /hulu want this great screen . The screen quality is so good that all non MBP look real bad .
What do you even do on your dell mactripp ??
mactripp dude you got the matte option so let it go
ThE current MBP 13-15-17" GLASS screen's have the finest quality video playback ever produced in the history of the world . Why would anyone go backwards
PEOPLE who do photos or make movies or watch movies or watch /netflix /hulu want this great screen . The screen quality is so good that all non MBP look real bad .
The "glass" screen you talk about is an ordinary LED backlit LCD panel, with a glass face put in front of it. The glass itself doesn't really change the image quality. I really doubt they went to a different LCD panel to make this work.
The objects are not in the exact same place, the camera is not in the same positions, the lighting in the background varies, etc.
Of course the glossy will reflect more than the matte.
But the matte has drawbacks as well. In most cases, we don't work on applications or documents most of the time with black or dark backgrounds. Pure white backgrounds as one uses in word processing, vs the extreme to black, doesn't cause reflection or glare.
Using the MacBook Pro (glossy) on the boat is a hell of a lot better than our mattes.
By the way, matte does reflect. We just tested the Museum Glass and it reflects as well. Everything does in the right position. As everything doesn't in the right position.
Bottom line. As I suggested, take them both out into the daylight before you make a decision. Many have changed their minds, i.e., "the gloss doesn't bother me as much as I thought it would," "The gloss is so much more vibrant, it works better for me," to "I like the matte better because I don't get any glare."
But to unilaterally hate glossy because of what others have said and not make the final judgement yourself under your ideal conditions is ludicrous.
Everybody has the choice now, why not let them decide for themselves?
All surfaces materially have a portion of reflection and refraction.
I'm glad I'm not a fan of laptops, but if I were on a boat much, I'd first ask a store representative to walk outside with me on a table and run through some side-by-side testing before I buy as well.
Thanks for the information.
Whether one loves glossy or matte, we all must admit this is a victory for "choice." And it really costs Apple nothing, as they are getting $50 a pop for matte. May they do the same for the iMacs.
This also illustrates very clearly that "being vocal" has merit, even in spite of the many flames matte proponents have had to endure in forums such as this one while calling for choice.
May now the voices of reason begin to cry out over the insanity of Apple's MACK-truck-flattened abominations they call "keyboards." Bring back tactile feedback and keys that sink down more than 3mm when you tap on them. Apple, stop trying to bring us back to 1984 with a standard keyboard that has the numeric keypad hacked off (yes, I am aware you can get the keypad for free as an optional choice, but only via Apple's store). Apple used to make excellent keyboards. They now are trying to get us all into the iPhone groove. Indeed, I have little doubt that Jobs and Ive both want a 100% non-mechanical keyboard in the future, with recent keyboards from Apple acting as mere stepping-stones to a truly horrific tomorrow. (And yes, I am well aware of the availability of 3rd party keyboards. But some of us would rather not pay extra. And one must also admit that most of those 3rd party keyboards are for Windows users. It's all about What Apple Offers, not about what 3rd parties may bring us.)
You speak the truth, brother. Quoted again for effect.
Okay I'm F..... PIST, This is bullshit on Apple's part, I made the purchase in December with knowledge this was my only choice. As an FCP Editor I HATE glossy , 6 months later Apple back peddles because the ear full they got fro the professional industry. DO I have another $3000 to drop on a Macbook Pro? NO. Well there is no other company like Apple out there, they need to just F.... offering antiglare displays on all there new products.
There's this site called eBay...
See I was under the impression it was the other way around, where more people wanted matte. They have the numbers though I guess. If it was the other way around, it would really appear as though they were taking advantage of that and getting some extra cash from everyone for the most logical choice in the two.
The iVisor costs like 35 bucks. I guess an extra 15 to have it actually part of the screen aint too bad.
Amazing. I simply ask why it cost so much, looking for an honest response, and I'm told that I'm bitching and I expect a free laptop.
Yeah that's it. I think Apple should give us free laptops because this matte screen business costs too much.
That's because he owns a shiny iMac & shiny 24in LED display and cannot fathom why someone would not like them!
The issue is before this glassy screen hostile takeover you could choose matte or glossy at no extra cost. Take it way, then give it back but somehow now it costs you $50 extra bucks.