Apple heart glossy

[czachorski]

You state YOUR opinion as fact. You are not the arbiter of all that is true, supported by fact or otherwise. Get used to THAT.

I think you better be careful of statements like this, when the record is so easy to pull up in the thread. I have not stated my opinion as fact. I have even acknowledged here and in other threads that other opinions on the matter are valid points of view (although not my own): I understand that some people prefer matte. I understand that it is frustrating that Apple does not offer it as an option. Personally, I have an opinion as to why Apple does this, and I have posted it.

I have stated as fact the irony and flaws in your logic based on the information you posted. I think the facts surrounding your flawed logic are pretty obvious and clear. You claimed this was hurting Apple's sales, and then went on to describe how your own planned actions would in fact indicate the opposite. Fact is, that is a pretty odd and weak argument. So when your flawed logic is pointed out, you label me as "taking offense at any criticism of Apple", and when the flaw and flame-bating in that logic is pointed out, you resort to "you post your own opinion as fact". Neither are true, and you keep digging yourself deeper and deeper. Can you make your point without resorting to these flame-bating tactics every time the flaws of your logic are pointed out? If you have a good point to make, why the need to resort to bating? It only detracts from the validity of any point you can make.

Another fact is that your own anecdote supported my earlier theory (read opinion): Apple does this as a design and marketing philosophy - they assign features to each product that best suit that particular function (consumer, pro,mobile, etc), and they keep a high focus on the features of that intended use. This means glossy for consumer products and matte for pro. Glossy screen make consumers go "ohhh and ahhhh" and get out their wallets with a greater return to Apple than the lost sales resulting from people who don't like Glossy. My opinion is that because of the many other benefits of Macs, people will not abandoned the platform over the issue, and instead will just migrate to another model that suits them. Your anecdote provided a nice little example of what I am talking about. So my opinion is the lack of this option really doesn't hurt them all that much, and that Apple is betting that they get a bigger benefit from it by enticing consumers, having a simpler model line-up for consumers to select from, not having to stock and ship multiple configurations, etc. I believe this is a decision based on risk/reward analysis, not based on SJ mind control or other BS.

---------

For reference, here are my statement from earlier in the thread that support what I am saying above:

Exactly. That's the part that pisses people off. Glossy may be a better option for making consumer photos and home video pop off the screen, but not everyone wants it. People also don't want to spend $4000 on a Pro set up just to avoid it, and thats the rub.

At first glance, I never understood why not offer both as options, but that is just not the Apple way. They look at the function, and then put the best combination of choices together for that function with no options. What they lose in sales from the lack of that choice, they more than make up for in the simplicity of their line-up, ease of ordering, etc. It's just a balancing act that Apple has chosen to balance differently than most other PC makers. It's not some conspiracy. It's a marketing and design philosophy - and one that happens to be working quite well!

If you are mad at anything, be mad at the free market and that this approach works, and so they keep doing it. Or just go buy from another maker, or if it has to be a Mac (and it does for me), live with it, or pony up for the pro machine. And then welcome yourself to the wonderful world of capitalism where companies will always behave in what is in their own best interest.

Right. Apple does this thing that pisses off a lot of people: they assume the iMac is a consumer machine, and the Mac Pro with an ACD is for pros, and they assign features to each product that best suit that particular function. It is frustrating to those who want the features of the pro machine, but without the expense, and that is understandable. But it is also what allows Apple's products to be great - they are highly focused on the features of their intended use. It is a design and marketing philosophy, not an attempt to force the CEO's opinion on everyone, as others have naively suggested.

 

[inkswamp]

The iMac is and has always been aimed at the consumer level.

How did we get to the point where the phrase "consumer level" has become synonymous with fewer choices? Claiming the iMac is a consumer level machine is something of standard defense amongst Mac users and yet, when you look out at the wider PC world, you'll see that the most variegated selection of PC hardware is aimed at the consumer level.

Yet amongst Mac users, the phrase "consumer level" has become code for necessarily restricted options. Calling the iMac and the Mini consumer level machines is no defense for Apple's lack of options for each, and that includes this missing matte screen option fiasco.

 

[czachorski]

Exactly. That's the part that pisses people off. Glossy may be a better option for making consumer photos and home video pop off the screen, but not everyone wants it. People also don't want to spend $4000 on a Pro set up just to avoid it, and thats the rub.

At first glance, I never understood why not offer both as options, but that is just not the Apple way. They look at the function, and then put the best combination of choices together for that function with no options. What they lose in sales from the lack of that choice, they more than make up for in the simplicity of their line-up, ease of ordering, etc. It's just a balancing act that Apple has chosen to balance differently than most other PC makers. It's not some conspiracy. It's a marketing and design philosophy - and one that happens to be working quite well!

If you are mad at anything, be mad at the free market and that this approach works, and so they keep doing it. Or just go buy from another maker, or if it has to be a Mac (and it does for me), live with it, or pony up for the pro machine. And then welcome yourself to the wonderful world of capitalism where companies will always behave in what is in their own best interest.

Right. Apple does this thing that pisses off a lot of people: they assume the iMac is a consumer machine, and the Mac Pro with an ACD is for pros, and they assign features to each product that best suit that particular function. It is frustrating to those who want the features of the pro machine, but without the expense, and that is understandable. But it is also what allows Apple's products to be great - they are highly focused on the features of their intended use. It is a design and marketing philosophy, not an attempt to force the CEO's opinion on everyone, as others have naively suggested.

How did we get to the point where the phrase "consumer level" has become synonymous with fewer choices? Claiming the iMac is a consumer level machine is something of standard defense amongst Mac users and yet, when you look out at the wider PC world, you'll see that the most variegated selection of PC hardware is aimed at the consumer level.

Yet amongst Mac users, the phrase "consumer level" has become code for necessarily restricted options. Calling the iMac and the Mini consumer level machines is no defense for Apple's lack of options for each, and that includes this missing matte screen option fiasco.

I view it more of an interpretation of Apple's design, more than code for the restrictions. I mean, looking at Apple's design choices with the iMac, isn't their intended audience rather obvious?

 

[flyfish29]

How did we get to the point where the phrase "consumer level" has become synonymous with fewer choices? Claiming the iMac is a consumer level machine is something of standard defense amongst Mac users and yet, when you look out at the wider PC world, you'll see that the most variegated selection of PC hardware is aimed at the consumer level.

Yet amongst Mac users, the phrase "consumer level" has become code for necessarily restricted options. Calling the iMac and the Mini consumer level machines is no defense for Apple's lack of options for each, and that includes this missing matte screen option fiasco.

I agree that the matte should be an option, but the point of a "consumer level" mac is based on trying to make an economical option for the consumer who is not usually able or willing to dish out two thousand dollars or more. While PC companies can do a build your own type service, there are shortcommings to that method...such as inferior components to name just one. The ability for Apple to purchase in bulk allows them to sell the computer cheaper.

And remember, until recently Apple's relatively very low sales numbers made it difficult for them to compete very well with component costs. Those companies that are building to order every computer, etc have such large numbers they sell they only need to make a few bucks off each one to make a profit. (Also note- those build to order companies are not doing so well or else they wouldn't be trying to sell them not in every retail location they can get now.) Thankfully Apple's numbers are increasing rapidly which gives them much more leverage in cost numbers!!!

don't get me wrong, I think this was one option they have screwed up on, but there is a method to their madness no matter how mad you and I think they are!

 

[Leon Kowalski]

How did we get to the point where the phrase "consumer level"
has become synonymous with fewer choices?

I view it more of an interpretation of Apple's design, more than
code for the restrictions.

I view it more as a lame smokescreen to divert attention from
the weasel-tongued pronouncements of The Anointed One:

"... EVEN BETTER ... professional ... most professional ... PROFESSIONAL ..
.. professionals .... pro .... HIGHER-END .... very elegant .... pro .... pro ....
.... most expensive .... pros .... pro-line .... UPGRADED ...."

http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/specialevent07/

-- elapsed time 96 seconds -- beginning at 00:03:12 --

score card:
"aluminum" ................................................. 10
"glass" / "silicon" ........................................... 8
"pro" / "pro-line" / "professional" ..................... 8
"elegant" / "higher-end" / "expensive" ............... 3
"even better" / "upgraded" .............................. 2
"consumer grade" ....................................... ZERO!


...if "aluminum and glass" is the answer, WHAT was the question?

LK

 

[SaSaSushi]

score card:
"aluminum" ................................................. 10
"glass" / "silicon" ........................................... 8
"pro" / "pro-line" / "professional" ..................... 8
"elegant" / "higher-end" / "expensive" ............... 3
"even better" / "upgraded" .............................. 2
"consumer grade" ....................................... ZERO!

Wow, it must have taken some effort to count all those.

Do you really expect a CEO to refer to a product as "consumer grade"? That's not exactly the sexiest description even if it is the truth.

Clearly Steve Jobs is a salesman extraordinaire and highly trained in the art of carnival barking. Thanks for pointing out the obvious.

...if "aluminum and glass" is the answer, WHAT was the question?

LK

I was going to say

What is the new iMac made out of?

but I realized this must be a trick question. So instead I submit:

What is Leon's second favorite thing to gripe about after gradients?

 

[Nordichund]

I don't know why some people always want to try and ridicule Leon. He seems to always aruge his points with FACTS. When users come on this message board or the Apple MB with technical questions he always seems very helpful in answering them.

I must admit I was a bitt annoyed when Steve Jobs gave the impression at the Al iMac launch that it was for professionals as well as consumers. I know some professionals in the photographic and graphic design industry seem to like the iMac, but judging by the many posts since the Al iMac's launch they are in a very small minority. Still if glossy is not for you then for an extra cost you can buy an extra matte screen.
I know a retired media professor from the university here in Oslo who is one of Apple's biggest fans, he is very disappointed in the new iMac.

At the end of the day business is business and Apple are doing very well thank you, especially with the new iMac. If you don't like it don't buy it.

 

[SaSaSushi]

I don't know why some people always want to try and ridicule Leon. He seems to always aruge his points with FACTS. When users come on this message board or the Apple MB with technical questions he always seems very helpful in answering them.

Well, in this case he was using the "fact" that Steve Jobs never used the words "consumer grade" but did use words like "professional" to express his (Leon's) own opinion that Jobs was lying about a computer he (Leon) does not personally consider to be up to those descriptions. It's still just his opinion.

I was not ridiculing Leon. I like to think I was replying in style. Leon can dish out the sarcastic wit like few others in here so let's not pretend he's a poor helpless soul getting constantly picked on.

Leon and I made our peace some time ago over the gradient thing. I'm well aware that he is a highly knowledgeable, if vociferously opinionated member of these forums and helps out a lot of folks.

I must admit I was a bitt annoyed when Steve Jobs gave the impression at the Al iMac launch that it was for professionals as well as consumers. I know some professionals in the photographic and graphic design industry seem to like the iMac, but judging by the many posts since the Al iMac's launch they are in a very small minority. Still if glossy is not for you then for an extra cost you can buy an extra matte screen.
I know a retired media professor from the university here in Oslo who is one of Apple's biggest fans, he is very disappointed in the new iMac.

I think that if the professionals don't find the iMac to be in line with their needs they are much more likely to be using other computers and not going to the ridiculous expense of adding secondary monitors to iMacs.

I hope for the sake of all those that want a matte iMac option that Apple will offer it again sometime in the future. As I keep saying I don't consider that likely but I don't see why anyone would complain about it if they did.

Only Steve Jobs can decide whether it's going to happen or not and instead of complaining about it I recommend all those who are not satisfied with the iMac at present go with other options. (like buy a different computer and stop wasting time blasting the one Apple sells now in user forums.)

At the end of the day business is business and Apple are doing very well thank you, especially with the new iMac. If you don't like it don't buy it.

EXACTLY! On this, at least, we agree completely.

 

[Sir Cecil]

Many macbook pro buyers convince themselves they prefer glossy for one simple reason. They are buying yet another Macbook Pro that looks basically the same as their last one and the one before that. They pick the glossy screen because it actually makes them think they're getting something that looks "updated" cosmetically. Has little to do with usage for a lot of people. I know at least three people who acknowledge matte is the more suitable screen for a lot of what they do, but they bought glossy so they could look at their new investment and see something different about it compared to their previous model.

 

[CWallace]

How did we get to the point where the phrase "consumer level" has become synonymous with fewer choices? Claiming the iMac is a consumer level machine is something of standard defense amongst Mac users and yet, when you look out at the wider PC world, you'll see that the most variegated selection of PC hardware is aimed at the consumer level.

Well Apple offers "fewer choices" across every product line, regardless of what market they are aimed at.

A Mac Pro offers more choices then an iMac or Mac Mini, but HP and Dell and Lenovo and other PC manufacturers all offer a lot more choices in workstations (and their accessories) then Apple does with the Mac Pro.

It's the price we have to pay for having a single source supplier.

 

[czachorski]

...if "aluminum and glass" is the answer, WHAT was the question?

Why did Leon buy one?

 

[Leon Kowalski]

Why did Leon buy one?

I watched Steve's August '07 intro and foolishly believed his bald-faced
lies about "even better" ... "more professional" ... "upgraded".

- Bought a crappy ALU "6-bit upgrade" that same week.

- Exchanged it for a crappy 24" ALU with a 2.5:1 gradient.

- Returned that for 100% refund and mail-ordered a beautiful
white C2D -- with EXACTLY the same display as the 20" ACD.

The rational question isn't "Why did you buy one?"

...but "Why did you keep one?"

LK

 

[czachorski]

I watched Steve's August '07 intro and foolishly believed his bald-faced
lies about "even better" ... "more professional" ... "upgraded".

- Bought a crappy ALU "6-bit upgrade" that same week.

- Exchanged it for a crappy 24" ALU with a 2.5:1 gradient.

- Returned that for 100% refund and mail-ordered a beautiful
white C2D -- with EXACTLY the same display as the 20" ACD.

The rational question isn't "Why did you buy one?"

...but "Why did you keep one?"

LK

I can read specs and I don't have a 2.5:1 gradient. Are you really that gullible?

 

[Leon Kowalski]

Are you really that gullible?

...gullible? That's pretty funny coming from a "millions of colors" ALU iMac owner.

LK

 

[czachorski]

...gullible? That's pretty funny coming from a "millions of colors" ALU iMac owner.

LK

The 24" is 8 bit. It's not that hard to do some research and read the specs, you know, before you buy a machine.

I don't buys computers based on Keynotes from CEOs. I read specs, see the machine in the stores and judge for myself if it will meet my needs. If you buy them based on the colorful language used by Jobs at the keynote, to each his own, I suppose. But if you are going to go through life doing that, and then blaming other people for your laziness in not doing your own research, it is no wonder you are going to go through life an angry individual. There is a sucker born every minute. If you buy only based on promises at the keynote, we know who it was the minute you were born.

 

[Leon Kowalski]

The 24" is 8 bit. It's not that hard to do some research and read the specs,
you know, before you buy a machine.

1) I challenge you to produce a link to ANY Apple document that specifies
an 8-bit color depth for the 24" ALU iMac.

2) I challenge you to produce a link to ANY Apple document that specifies
any difference in color depth between 20" ALU and 24" ALU iMacs.

...WHERE are these specs you claim to have read?

LK

 

[SaSaSushi]

1) I challenge you to produce a link to ANY Apple document that specifies
an 8-bit color depth for the 24" ALU iMac.

2) I challenge you to produce a link to ANY Apple document that specifies
any difference in color depth between 20" ALU and 24" ALU iMacs.

...WHERE are these specs you claim to have read?

LK

Is there some reason I am missing here that one must limit all of their iMac pre-purchase research to ONLY Apple's listed specs for their machines? Czachorski said "do some research" he didn't say "read what Apple says about the iMac".

It didn't take long for the part numbers on the actual LCD panels to be determined and wouldn't it make more sense to check with the LCD maker for the full detailed specs?

Then you go see the machine for yourself and decide how it looks.

Its only the fanboys that jump up and down at Job's keynotes and then mindlessly run out and buy 10 of whatever it is he's releasing based solely on his corny speeches. There are plenty of Apple users who are educated customers and fully research their products prior to purchasing.

 

[Leon Kowalski]

Its only the fanboys that jump up and down at Job's keynotes and then mindlessly run out and buy 10 of whatever ...

I believe there's an even more time-honored way to earn the fanboy badge:

Freely admit that S.J. is a scum-sucking, bottom-feeding, weasel-tongued liar...

...deserving of great admiration for his all-American bidness ethics,

LK

 

[bobertoq]

I prefer the glossy screen. Brighter, sharper, clearer, more vibrant... The only downside is the reflection, and I don't notice it unless it is bright in the room, and I actually look for the reflection. But I guess it all has to do with what the user prefers. Matte should be an option because most people prefer matte.

1) I challenge you to produce a link to ANY Apple document that specifies
an 8-bit color depth for the 24" ALU iMac.

2) I challenge you to produce a link to ANY Apple document that specifies
any difference in color depth between 20" ALU and 24" ALU iMacs.

...WHERE are these specs you claim to have read?

LK

your emphasizing ANY. you should be emphasizing APPLE.

According to multiple sources, the 24" imac can display 16,777,216 colors, but the 20" imac can only display 262,144 colors. However, the 20" imac uses dithering.

 

[Leon Kowalski]

According to multiple sources, the 24" imac can display 16,777,216 colors...

"According to multiple sources" IS NOT a specification. It provides NO
assurance of what a customer should reasonably expect to find inside
the factory-sealed box. If it's not on an Apple spec sheet or product
description, it's nothing more than an anecdotal report of what Apple
happened to ship ...with some products. ...at some time in the past.

"According to multiple sources," ALL 20" and 24" iMacs used high quality,
8-bit, S-IPS or S-PVA LCD panels ...until they suddenly and silently didn't.

With the release of ALU iMacs in August '07, Apple ceased to specify the
color depth of ANY iMac display panels. They even weasel-worded the
August-2007 section of the Video Developer Note to remove any mention
of display color depths. There's no plausible explanation for this change
other than a sneaky and deliberate effort to conceal the 20" downgrade.

LK

 

[SaSaSushi]

I believe there's an even more time-honored way to earn the fanboy badge:

Freely admit that S.J. is a scum-sucking, bottom-feeding, weasel-tongued liar...

...deserving of great admiration for his all-American bidness ethics,

LK

I made no such claim about ethics nor admiration. I only stated the facts.

I do think Steve Jobs is a shyster. I hold far more contempt for the dorks that stand on line overnight to see him make speeches than himself though.

 

[SaSaSushi]

"According to multiple sources," ALL 20" and 24" iMacs used high quality, 8-bit, S-IPS or S-PVA LCD panels ...until they suddenly and silently didn't.

Actually, the 24" uses even higher quality H-IPS panels don't they?

With the release of ALU iMacs in August '07, Apple ceased to specify the
color depth of ANY iMac display panels. They even weasel-worded the
August-2007 section of the Video Developer Note to remove any mention
of display color depths. There's no plausible explanation for this change
other than a sneaky and deliberate effort to conceal the 20" downgrade.

LK

LG Phillips themselves list the 20" panel (LM201WE3(TN)) as:

Number of Colors - 16.7 M, 8bit(FRC)

I realize full well that this is with frame rate control dithering but still you can hardly lay all of the blame on Apple for the misinformation thing. Even the panel maker is being less than honest.

I haven't seen the 20" myself but is the panel so bad that this dithering is that obvious?

 

[Leon Kowalski]

Actually, the 24" uses even higher quality H-IPS panels don't they?

I've never seen a spec from LG.Philips that mentions either "S-IPS" or "H-IPS"

I've never seen any evidence that "H-IPS" and "S-IPS" are materially different.

I realize full well that this is with frame rate control dithering but still you
can hardly lay all of the blame on Apple for the misinformation thing. Even
the panel maker is being less than honest.

The LG.Philips Catalog clearly describes that panel as 6-bit+A-FRC (a.k.a.
Frame Rate Control, a.k.a. dither). Do you really expect anyone to believe
that Apple knows nothing more about the panels they buy than what's on
the thumbnail description you linked?

Why do you insist on minimizing, rationalizing, and excusing Apple's lies
and deliberate deceptions? What possible reason, other than deception,
could explain the deletion of color depth information for ALU iMacs --
when color depths are clearly spelled-out for ALL previous iMac models?

..."even better"? ..."more professional"? ..."upgraded"?

LK

 

[SaSaSushi]

The LG.Philips Catalog clearly describes that panel as 6-bit+A-FRC (a.k.a.
Frame Rate Control, a.k.a. dither). Do you really expect anyone to believe
that Apple knows nothing more about the panels they buy than what's on
the thumbnail description you linked?

I'm not saying they don't know more than that. I was just pointing out that Apple is far from exclusive in the game of marketing deception. I'm not minimizing nor trying to say that two wrongs make a right. I totally accept that Apple made a big step backwards in panel quality on the 20" from the white Intel iMac to the aluminum.

Why do you insist on minimizing, rationalizing, and excusing Apple's lies
and deliberate deceptions? What possible reason, other than deception,
could explain the deletion of color depth information for ALU iMacs --
when color depths are clearly spelled-out for ALL previous iMac models?

..."even better"? ..."more professional"? ..."upgraded"?

LK

I'm not minimizing either. Take it easy.

By the way, are you involved with the class action lawsuit? I have been following it closely.

Another thing, just so I'm clear. Are you saying that Apple has stopped marketing the 20-inch as being capable of displaying "millions of colors" or just that they have removed color-depth information? The specs page for the mid-2007 still shows "millions of colors" on the 20" models.

 

[czachorski]

There's no plausible explanation for this change
other than a sneaky and deliberate effort to conceal the 20" downgrade.

LK

And yet somehow, despite this deception, I still managed to educate myself on all of this before I bought an iMac, and chose the model that had the specs that I desired. It wasn't even that hard to do the research. Took about 5 minutes on google and these forums. Welcome to the wild-west world of sales - it's buyer beware, and Apple is no different. They are even smart enough to cover their tracks well enough to avoid a valid legal challenge, as you have pointed out. Even more of a reason why I will never behave as you have - acting like the fanboy who rushes out to buy something based on only what a salesman says at a Keynote speech. I will always be skeptical, do my own research, see the product first hand and draw my own conclusions.

You screwed up. Got sucked in by Jobs. Are angry about it. And take out your anger here everyday. It is so obvious now.