A possible alternative to coating might be doping the sapphire do reduce reflectance. I'm not sure whether that has been fully explored yet.
Reflectance is a surface phenomenon. Doping it won't do much, if anything. It could affect the surface somewhat, but it would also color the material. I don't agree with the good doctor on this because multi coatings could reduce that reflectance enough. It's just more expensive to do.
While reflection manifests as a surface phenomenon, it is due to the impedance mismatch between the two media and thus determined by the relative refractive index, which is a bulk property. In principle that could be modified by doping and while that can be used to alter color, it is not an inevitable effect.
Multi-coatings are almost certainly more effective but, as noted by others, prone to scratching.
I have a preorder in for the Nexus 9 based solely on my fear of the Anti-reflective coating on the Air 2. I have had way too many bad experiences with AR coatings in eyeglass lenses. Scratching, Crazing, and oily smudging made them unusable for me. Apple may have solved these problems, but honestly I'll wait until the Air 3 or Air 4 to make sure the kinks have really been worked out.
I'm not going to speculate about sapphire vs. class and anti glare coatings, but as I said yesterday, my Air 2 is much easier to read in direct sunlight than my original Air, when directly comparing them side to side, with the same thing open on the page, despite the disappointingly lower maximum brightness. If brightness was 10% higher, to match the Air, it would be even easier to read.
Interesting.
I wonder if they reduced the max brightness so as not to drain the battery too much. Although I imagine the battery life is still fine for almost everyone, I've read that it's quite a bit less than the Air.
I'm on the cusp of biting. My iPad 2 is getting tired.
Edit: I see you have pre-empted my wonderment with a grumble.
I presume that the Air 2 can go brighter than the iPad 2.
1) I thought he recently rated the iPhone 6 as the best.
2) It was weird that he ignored the iPhone 5S last year considering it's the best selling smartphone in the world.
I believe he said that it was the best iPhone screen ever other than for the higher resolution of the 6+.
But now that Samsung is finally calibrating their AMOLED screens, the color is slightly better. Apple always falls down on their ludicrously high white point. I've never understood why Apple insists in setting this to 7,000K, when the standard is 6,500K. The Air 2 lost points because it's even worse, at 7,300K. The Samsung is close to the ideal 6,500K.
This is something that Apple sets when calibrating the display. If they prefer 7,000+K, then at least offer the option of setting it to 6,500K in the brightness adjustment section. That's not hard for them to do. Or allow monitor calibrators to connect to the port, and adjust the display. I can make an adjustment with the Spyder calibrator, but it only works with their own app to display photos. And it's complex to do because it works through the Mac.
I actually preferred the iPhone 6 screen to the iPhone 6 Plus in-store, because it seemed to have higher contrast. That's one display benchmark that the 6 'wins'.
While reflection manifests as a surface phenomenon, it is due to the impedance mismatch between the two media and thus determined by the relative refractive index, which is a bulk property. In principle that could be modified by doping and while that can be used to alter color, it is not an inevitable effect.
Multi-coatings are almost certainly more effective but, as noted by others, prone to scratching.
It is a surface phenominum. The bulk property only has an effect at the very surface of the material, say the top molecular level. That why coatings work so well. And coatings aren't all that vulnerable. Titanium dioxide has been used as a surface coating for decades, and is harder than the underlying glass. Lens manufacturers have been using multi coatings since the late 1960's without scratch problems. And, after all, Apple is using a coating here, covered by the oleophobic coating. Multicoats are no more vulnerable than single coats.
Doping affects transmissibility of the material. It won't make it better. At best, it wouldn't make it worse, but it's a better chance that it will. And doping is expensive.
I wonder if they reduced the max brightness so as not to drain the battery too much. Although I imagine the battery life is still fine for almost everyone, I've read that it's quite a bit less than the Air.
I'm on the cusp of biting. My iPad 2 is getting tired.
Edit: I see you have pre-empted my wonderment with a grumble.
I presume that the Air 2 can go brighter than the iPad 2.
I believe you're correct. The battery is significantly smaller. The screen backlight takes up several watts at full brightness. Lowering that by even 10% would affect battery life.
Yeah, the iPad 2 isn't as bright. It's quite not able outdoors. Indoors, it doesn't matter. 200 nits, which is what standard testing is done at, is well below the 415 nits this can get to.
I'm still using a mid-2009 MacBook Pro because Apple doesn't make a newer laptop that I can readily use. Yes, they've had the custom anti-glare displays, but the pixels are so small that it adds a different kind of strain. The iMacs have been making small improvements in recent years, but still look like mirrors to me, and I need a laptop in any case, because I work in multiple locations.
I haven't yet put my hands/eyes on the iPad Air 2, but looks like I'll need to go check it out in person soon. If it's as good as it sounds here, then I expect that in time this new tech will migrate to laptops. Please please please please please!
The Retina Macbook Pros had screen lamination from the start (they were introduced in 2012). You can see the difference with the glossy one here:
The glossy one is not usable. The matte one spreads the light out more evenly but is duller overall. They can't add a matte-style to Retina displays because it would blur the image defeating the purpose of the extra sharpness. The iPad Air 2 still gets some glare:
but it's at a level now that the displays are usable in bright environments. I would say they are just as usable as matte displays. It takes a little while to get used to the difference but you do get used to it.
If that’s undoctored, that’s amazing. Sans glare, it looks like an advertisement shot of the product.
This video gives a good view side by side:
[VIDEO]
The iPad Air 1 is washed out but the Air 2 is much more vivid. Around 3 minutes in, it shows up more with imagery and games but even just the Facebook login screen, you can see a huge difference in the blue. If they'd done that with the iPad mini 3, that would have been a more compelling upgrade than just Touch id. Touch id is a good feature to pay extra for especially with ?Pay though so maybe they decided to split it into two upgrades for the iPad mini and the laminated screen will be in the mini 4.
That video above is pretty telling. The difference is so noticeable that I thought he might have had the original iPad air adjusted incorrectly. Damn....now that I've seen this video.......... credit card.....out.
Good stuff Marvin, thanks for the 3-laptop comparison.
If I was to describe that photo, it would be: 1) unusable to most people 2) unusable to me 3) dim, but perfectly acceptable to me in most (indoor) environments. I don't actually care about outdoor 99+% of the time.
Reflections don't disappear to me, ever, and honestly I can't understand how anyone, let alone most people, can live with the reflective displays that Apple (and many other manufacturers) has been selling in recent years. I sometimes feel like I'm living in some alternate reality where people can't see what's right in front of their eyes! ;-) I do understand and appreciate that the displays are (very slowly) getting better in this regard, but even newer MacBook Pros just aren't even close for me. At this point, if my laptop dies, my only real option seems like it will be to locate a used laptop from a similar vintage prior to the shift to reflective surfaces. It's really frustrating.
I did spent a lot of time watching the iPad Air 1v2 video you linked above, looking not so much at the difference in overall vividness, which was clearly visible, but I was looking at the difference in reflections, and I'm cautiously impressed. At least as much as I can be over a non-professional youtube video. ;-) My plan now is to go to an Apple store soon and get a look at the new Air2 displays in person. I can only hope that it's as big a step as it appears here, and that this will migrate to the professional laptops soon. Thanks.
Good stuff Marvin, thanks for the 3-laptop comparison.
If I was to describe that photo, it would be: 1) unusable to most people 2) unusable to me 3) dim, but perfectly acceptable to me in most (indoor) environments. I don't actually care about outdoor 99+% of the time.
Reflections don't disappear to me, ever, and honestly I can't understand how anyone, let alone most people, can live with the reflective displays that Apple (and many other manufacturers) has been selling in recent years. I sometimes feel like I'm living in some alternate reality where people can't see what's right in front of their eyes! ;-) I do understand and appreciate that the displays are (very slowly) getting better in this regard, but even newer MacBook Pros just aren't even close for me. At this point, if my laptop dies, my only real option seems like it will be to locate a used laptop from a similar vintage prior to the shift to reflective surfaces. It's really frustrating.
I did spent a lot of time watching the iPad Air 1v2 video you linked above, looking not so much at the difference in overall vividness, which was clearly visible, but I was looking at the difference in reflections, and I'm cautiously impressed. At least as much as I can be over a non-professional youtube video. ;-) My plan now is to go to an Apple store soon and get a look at the new Air2 displays in person. I can only hope that it's as big a step as it appears here, and that this will migrate to the professional laptops soon. Thanks.
Just a quick follow-up for whoever is still reading here.
I did go check out the iPad Air 2 in person, and there definitely is a big improvement with the display. Not only vividness, but MUCH better color gamut and significantly better glare reduction. I don't know if the glare reductions is quite good enough that I would consider purchasing a new laptop with that kind of display, but it's finally within the range that I would at least go take a close look. The current models are all still unusable for me, so I'm really hoping for these improvements to continue!
Comments
While reflection manifests as a surface phenomenon, it is due to the impedance mismatch between the two media and thus determined by the relative refractive index, which is a bulk property. In principle that could be modified by doping and while that can be used to alter color, it is not an inevitable effect.
Multi-coatings are almost certainly more effective but, as noted by others, prone to scratching.
Interesting.
I wonder if they reduced the max brightness so as not to drain the battery too much. Although I imagine the battery life is still fine for almost everyone, I've read that it's quite a bit less than the Air.
I'm on the cusp of biting. My iPad 2 is getting tired.
Edit: I see you have pre-empted my wonderment with a grumble.
I presume that the Air 2 can go brighter than the iPad 2.
I actually preferred the iPhone 6 screen to the iPhone 6 Plus in-store, because it seemed to have higher contrast. That's one display benchmark that the 6 'wins'.
It is a surface phenominum. The bulk property only has an effect at the very surface of the material, say the top molecular level. That why coatings work so well. And coatings aren't all that vulnerable. Titanium dioxide has been used as a surface coating for decades, and is harder than the underlying glass. Lens manufacturers have been using multi coatings since the late 1960's without scratch problems. And, after all, Apple is using a coating here, covered by the oleophobic coating. Multicoats are no more vulnerable than single coats.
Doping affects transmissibility of the material. It won't make it better. At best, it wouldn't make it worse, but it's a better chance that it will. And doping is expensive.
I believe you're correct. The battery is significantly smaller. The screen backlight takes up several watts at full brightness. Lowering that by even 10% would affect battery life.
Yeah, the iPad 2 isn't as bright. It's quite not able outdoors. Indoors, it doesn't matter. 200 nits, which is what standard testing is done at, is well below the 415 nits this can get to.
The Retina Macbook Pros had screen lamination from the start (they were introduced in 2012). You can see the difference with the glossy one here:
The glossy one is not usable. The matte one spreads the light out more evenly but is duller overall. They can't add a matte-style to Retina displays because it would blur the image defeating the purpose of the extra sharpness. The iPad Air 2 still gets some glare:
but it's at a level now that the displays are usable in bright environments. I would say they are just as usable as matte displays. It takes a little while to get used to the difference but you do get used to it.
If that’s undoctored, that’s amazing. Sans glare, it looks like an advertisement shot of the product.
This video gives a good view side by side:
[VIDEO]
The iPad Air 1 is washed out but the Air 2 is much more vivid. Around 3 minutes in, it shows up more with imagery and games but even just the Facebook login screen, you can see a huge difference in the blue. If they'd done that with the iPad mini 3, that would have been a more compelling upgrade than just Touch id. Touch id is a good feature to pay extra for especially with ?Pay though so maybe they decided to split it into two upgrades for the iPad mini and the laminated screen will be in the mini 4.
That video above is pretty telling. The difference is so noticeable that I thought he might have had the original iPad air adjusted incorrectly. Damn....now that I've seen this video.......... credit card.....out.
If I was to describe that photo, it would be:
1) unusable to most people
2) unusable to me
3) dim, but perfectly acceptable to me in most (indoor) environments. I don't actually care about outdoor 99+% of the time.
Reflections don't disappear to me, ever, and honestly I can't understand how anyone, let alone most people, can live with the reflective displays that Apple (and many other manufacturers) has been selling in recent years. I sometimes feel like I'm living in some alternate reality where people can't see what's right in front of their eyes! ;-) I do understand and appreciate that the displays are (very slowly) getting better in this regard, but even newer MacBook Pros just aren't even close for me. At this point, if my laptop dies, my only real option seems like it will be to locate a used laptop from a similar vintage prior to the shift to reflective surfaces. It's really frustrating.
I did spent a lot of time watching the iPad Air 1v2 video you linked above, looking not so much at the difference in overall vividness, which was clearly visible, but I was looking at the difference in reflections, and I'm cautiously impressed. At least as much as I can be over a non-professional youtube video. ;-) My plan now is to go to an Apple store soon and get a look at the new Air2 displays in person. I can only hope that it's as big a step as it appears here, and that this will migrate to the professional laptops soon. Thanks.
Good stuff Marvin, thanks for the 3-laptop comparison.
If I was to describe that photo, it would be:
1) unusable to most people
2) unusable to me
3) dim, but perfectly acceptable to me in most (indoor) environments. I don't actually care about outdoor 99+% of the time.
Reflections don't disappear to me, ever, and honestly I can't understand how anyone, let alone most people, can live with the reflective displays that Apple (and many other manufacturers) has been selling in recent years. I sometimes feel like I'm living in some alternate reality where people can't see what's right in front of their eyes! ;-) I do understand and appreciate that the displays are (very slowly) getting better in this regard, but even newer MacBook Pros just aren't even close for me. At this point, if my laptop dies, my only real option seems like it will be to locate a used laptop from a similar vintage prior to the shift to reflective surfaces. It's really frustrating.
I did spent a lot of time watching the iPad Air 1v2 video you linked above, looking not so much at the difference in overall vividness, which was clearly visible, but I was looking at the difference in reflections, and I'm cautiously impressed. At least as much as I can be over a non-professional youtube video. ;-) My plan now is to go to an Apple store soon and get a look at the new Air2 displays in person. I can only hope that it's as big a step as it appears here, and that this will migrate to the professional laptops soon. Thanks.
Just a quick follow-up for whoever is still reading here.
I did go check out the iPad Air 2 in person, and there definitely is a big improvement with the display. Not only vividness, but MUCH better color gamut and significantly better glare reduction. I don't know if the glare reductions is quite good enough that I would consider purchasing a new laptop with that kind of display, but it's finally within the range that I would at least go take a close look. The current models are all still unusable for me, so I'm really hoping for these improvements to continue!
Thanks for posting a video comparison, Marvin. The improvements they made look incredible.