I don't think that JC is the moderator of this board.
I'm trying really hard to completely destabilize this thread but it doesn't seem to be working.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Deconstructing the Anti-Glare VS Glossy myth. AKA beware of liars.
- Thread starter Bobby Corwen
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
I don't think that JC is the moderator of this board.
I'm trying really hard to completely destabilize this thread but it doesn't seem to be working.
It doesn't matter what I have, because what I prefer is meaningless to what someone else prefers. I'm not arguing for glossy or antiglare. I'm simply saying that your thread is nothing more than another biased glossy/antiglare debate that proves nothing. Besides, what difference does it make what others choose? Do you have to look at my screen all day? No! Only I do. I could care less what others prefer. Just don't label your opinion as fact, because that is truly misleading.
Please, be honest... its AG isnt it?
I am not labeling my opinion as fact, I am simply trying to even the playing field because right now, things are skewed towards the right (AG) when it should be more towards the center. Thats what this thread is, its reverse bias, bringing it to a more stable middle ground because its definitely not biased towards the Glossy side.
Just trying to be neutral is making you think I am being biased but we were already in a biased hole and I am digging back towards a more neutral stance.
The first post says it all really...
Last edited:
The technical term that applies here is: poppycock! You're just a pro-glossy advocate (as indicated in your first post) who is falsely claiming to be neutral. It's not a reverse-bias.... it's just a bias for the opposite argument, which is still biased.
OP, you ego is too inflated. You're no different than the countless other threads on this issue. Stop trying to sound like you are...you're equally a part of the problem.
It's down to subjective personal preference and no matter how much you try to sound benevolent/indifferent, your subjective preference on the matter holds no more weight than other people's preferences or the countless threads that have been made on the issue.
BMW and pretty ladies? and then going on to malign your own father's preference on how he lives his life?
Get over yourself.
It's down to subjective personal preference and no matter how much you try to sound benevolent/indifferent, your subjective preference on the matter holds no more weight than other people's preferences or the countless threads that have been made on the issue.
BMW and pretty ladies? and then going on to malign your own father's preference on how he lives his life?
Get over yourself.
there is no way this kid isn't a troll.
he has to be. there's no other explanation at this point.
he has to be. there's no other explanation at this point.
Like I said, AG gets more votes, yet more have Glossy nationwide.
Its just self justification. A guy who bought AG is gonna vote in every single one of those threads, while standard glossy people are less likely to care about the topic or click on it.
I dont know if you realize that your post supports my argument but whatever...
Facts to support this claim? The truth is, you have no idea what percentage of glossy or antiglare has been sold.
Again, you have zero facts to back up that assumption.
What happened to that "sound critical thinker" you claimed to be? You're not making sense. What's truly sad is that you appear to think that, in some way, which people choose is important to you. I don't have a vested interest in glossy or antiglare. I receive no benefit from people buying one or the other. I just choose what works best for me and leave it up to others to choose what's best for them. You, on the other hand, appear to have some emotional investment in glossy and feel threatened by anyone who doesn't share your biased viewpoint.
Eh? Why are you lot arguing over something that is personal to your own set of eye's and requirements??
Very strange thread....
Very strange thread....
The reason it supports my argument is because I am merely painting a profile of these biased people, and though you are not one, nor do you get benefit from what other choose, others are biased.
So in trying to psychologically analyze this archetype profile, I am making the point that there is bias in these types of people.
Your data was congruent with my profiling of these people. That is why I say it supports my argument.
If you want to leave it up to others to choose for themselves, you would gives them the information they need to make an informed choice based on their needs. The people I am profiling arent doing that, they are biased.
Not you, them.
A little late to the party, but that's ok.
Because this is a Bobby Corwen thread. They're all awesome like this. Look for the one on "musis".
He's an evangelist for projectors and glossy displays.
...HEAR THE WORD OF THE CORWEN!
There is bias in all people. Everyone has personal preferences, likes/dislikes and opinions. Everyone is biased about something. Those who prefer glossy are biased. Those who prefer antiglare are biased. You're just not admitting that you are, even though you've demonstrated that fact quite clearly.
The only information that someone needs to make an informed choice is to see the screens for themselves. Nothing you or I or anyone else may say is as useful as the buyer looking at the screens.
Again with the "too much glare on the glossy screen" thread. 
It's a bit like a mirror - if you shine a light directly into it, the light reflects directly back. Shine a light onto it from the right, it reflects to the left; shine a light overhead, the light reflects downward.
If you use a glossy screen and sit where lights reflect off the screen toward your face, then you'll have glare. If you sit where the lights reflect elsewhere, there will be no glare.
I use a glossy iMac at a desk with overhead lights to my left. There's never any glare.
It's a bit like a mirror - if you shine a light directly into it, the light reflects directly back. Shine a light onto it from the right, it reflects to the left; shine a light overhead, the light reflects downward.
If you use a glossy screen and sit where lights reflect off the screen toward your face, then you'll have glare. If you sit where the lights reflect elsewhere, there will be no glare.
I use a glossy iMac at a desk with overhead lights to my left. There's never any glare.
There is a difference between having your own personal choices, and giving out advice in a biased way. You can believe what you want and still disclose the pros and cons of a particular choice to someone.
I am not biased towards Glossy, because I know why I chose glossy. To me looks matter, so I chose the one that gives me the most eye candy.
There is no real reason to hate glossy except out of anger. (which is an illogical mind state in itself) So if you are an angry person, and something as simple as mere reflections (!) are enough to make you want to dilute your overall experience, thats fine.
But make it clear that that is the reason behind the choice. When you recommend AG to people, let them know that they are choosing to give up some vibrancy too. Dont mislead them and make them think its all benefit and no downside. Make sure you convey exactly the nature of the choice they are making.
They are still the ones choosing.
I am not biased, I just like nice things and a hit to color vibrancy and sharpness is more of a downside than reflection.
You do realize that you're wasting your breath, right? He's all wound up and has this seemingly huge emotional investment in exposing the anti-glare conspiracy. He feels that he's the only one who can bring objective information to those who are trying to choose and that he's rescuing them from making an error and getting the anti-glare.
You can tell him that people can choose for themselves, that personal preference is all that matters, and that he's as biased as the alleged conspiracy that he's battling against.
It's not going to matter because in the threads that I've seen him start, he casts the die of his opinion in the first posting and no matter what anyone else writes, that opinion isn't going to change.
He claims to be this enlightened thinker with a sound decision making methodology, but in reality he is biased and closed minded. No matter what others may say, his position cannot be changed in the least. No one is right all the time and no one should be above looking at an issue from a different perspective. Sometimes you might find that the other guy was right!
I'm fairly certain that this is the most read and commented on thread of the day. His other threads have also been pretty well trafficked. There's a reason for that, I think. Because of the extremity of the opinions he states in his opening salvo, people are drawn to disagreeing because many times it's just so absurd. Then he fires back and escalates. This cycle continues and all of a sudden we have a 4 page in one day thread.
It is, however, entertaining. That's probably the other reason they're popular. It's like the reality TV of Mac forums.
Yours in Anti-Glare,
John
No, I am popular because, like Jesus, I speak the truth.
People are attracted to truth.
- Status