The glare problem is like the IP4's "atennagate." Completely overhyped in a negative light. Glossy screens are ****ing boss and very rarely do I have any reflection issues to contend with. (And when I do, it is well worth the richness of the display the other 99% of the time.)
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
For me, I didn't want to adapt to looking past the reflections. I understand you can definitley get used to them but I preferred not having them altogether for a very little trade off.
Also for people who say they get no reflections, lol. I've used my friends glossy machine and wherever there is a dark background, unless I dim the lights (I don't, my house has a lot of natural light and I'm not a vampire), I'll see my reflection. I really do love my face but I also like the porn I watch so had to go for AG.
I've used my friends glossy A LOT recently and I've never noticed "no glare" even at full brightness when there is a dark background unless its at nighttime and/or dimmed lights. Heck, even when its dark, I can see the reflection of the backlit keyboards in the dark. :S
I think glossy is perfectly fine/amazing IF you aren't bothered by the reflections or your sight has adapted to ignoring them. For me, I couldn't be arsed going through an adjustment period.
...says the guy who had no other option available to him in the 13" form-factor. but whatever helps you sleep at night.
In my opinion, glare/glossy type screens would be better on smaller screens, like 13inch and smaller, especially for portable devices, it will be easier to view and usability is not sacraficed otherwise. For 15inch and bigger screens, if you're working on it for a long time with graphic intese duties, and needs accurate vision of color, and not distracted by other things, and or even just normal usage, the AG screen might be better.
AG in my opinion only helps in direct sunlight, as to I agree with the sharper/better colors with glossy screens, for in a complete dark room you see no reflections, etc.
AG would be a great upgrade option for 15.4 and 17inch macbook pros. You don't see professional monitors with glossy exterior, do you? Same point.
Then again, this is all just personal preference, no need to nail it, pin point and gave it a defination. I personally prefer anti-glare type for the simple fact that I am used to it (as in not used to seeing reflections, faces etc, when I am working and trying to focus), and the macbook pro AG screen option provided is certainly better than the default/stock ThinkPad ones (T, R, W series) that doesn't even have a glossy option.
and to the thread poster, Dear Bobby: IT'S NOT A MYTH, LOL
AG in my opinion only helps in direct sunlight, as to I agree with the sharper/better colors with glossy screens, for in a complete dark room you see no reflections, etc.
AG would be a great upgrade option for 15.4 and 17inch macbook pros. You don't see professional monitors with glossy exterior, do you? Same point.
Then again, this is all just personal preference, no need to nail it, pin point and gave it a defination. I personally prefer anti-glare type for the simple fact that I am used to it (as in not used to seeing reflections, faces etc, when I am working and trying to focus), and the macbook pro AG screen option provided is certainly better than the default/stock ThinkPad ones (T, R, W series) that doesn't even have a glossy option.
and to the thread poster, Dear Bobby: IT'S NOT A MYTH, LOL
Last edited:
One thing I find humorous is the notion that in direct sunlight, a glossy screen is more accurate. Enough experience with both suggests that they'll both fare exactly the same - they wash out into a greenish tint as that's what the material of the LCD is made out of. 
Both are also fairly usable in direct sunlight.
Some cheap antiglare finishes have a 'sandpapered effect' to them because they aren't that great - ironically my matte 23" cinema has that problem. My 20" doesn't.. nor does my PB.
Seriously though, MBP screens aren't that terribly accurate to begin with, whether it's glossy or matte won't make a damn difference. At least they're using an uncoated LCD and covering it with glass (or.. are they actually doing that? I forgot?)
I think I'd buy an antiglare mostly for the look, and the lack of reflections. That and the lack of glass.. it'd suck to smash that thing just from a minor drop lol.
Both are also fairly usable in direct sunlight.
Some cheap antiglare finishes have a 'sandpapered effect' to them because they aren't that great - ironically my matte 23" cinema has that problem. My 20" doesn't
.. nor does my PB.Seriously though, MBP screens aren't that terribly accurate to begin with, whether it's glossy or matte won't make a damn difference. At least they're using an uncoated LCD and covering it with glass (or.. are they actually doing that? I forgot?)
I think I'd buy an antiglare mostly for the look, and the lack of reflections. That and the lack of glass.. it'd suck to smash that thing just from a minor drop lol.
You got some issues dude. So you agree that people who get glossy are anti-matte? So dumb. You go through life thinking this way about every decision someone makes? I am going to go to Chipotle today, so that means I am anti-everything else?
Some options work better for other people. You need to get over it.
Lets just end this nonsense (not going to happen, but hey, i can hope)
the MAIN reason the glossy screens are prevalent on apple products, and not so much everywhere else is because they make the mac products look pretty when switched off, thus adding to the "designer" look that apple strives for in its products..
thats the reality , they want to offer a product that "looks" better then any competitors product, even when unplugged, its part of the
brand ethos.
I really doubt anyone at the design department gives a crap if it is better than a matt screen or not, it just looks pretty and that comes 1st, whats under the hood, and the quality of the parts used, comes WAY down the list.
the MAIN reason the glossy screens are prevalent on apple products, and not so much everywhere else is because they make the mac products look pretty when switched off, thus adding to the "designer" look that apple strives for in its products..
thats the reality , they want to offer a product that "looks" better then any competitors product, even when unplugged, its part of the
brand ethos.I really doubt anyone at the
design department gives a crap if it is better than a matt screen or not, it just looks pretty and that comes 1st, whats under the hood, and the quality of the parts used, comes WAY down the list.
I need to understand one thing....do you own or have access to "2" 2011 MacBook Pro laptops (one with glossy, one with AG)?
It depends on the LCD for me. I think the older A1150/A1211 machines look better in matte, perhaps because of the weaker backlight. I like the newer ones in glossy.
I actually find glossy easier to read in light than matte. With glossy, if I focus, I stop seeing myself, and see the screen. With matte, it doesn't matter how I focus - if light is shining on the screen, a big blotch of white blocks out everything else.
I actually find glossy easier to read in light than matte. With glossy, if I focus, I stop seeing myself, and see the screen. With matte, it doesn't matter how I focus - if light is shining on the screen, a big blotch of white blocks out everything else.
It's not just Apple, they're all doing it!
I was in my local (Moore Park, Sydney) JB Hi-Fi during the week and they have several "banks" of Windows laptops in addition to the usual Apple display.
Out of ALL the Windows laptops (I would say more than 30, but I didn't count them, Acer, ASUS, HP, Dell, Samsung, etc...) only 1 had a non-glossy display and I think it was a Samsung and it was horribly dull (compared to my pre-Unibody anti-glare screens).
Comparing the glossy screens on the Windows machines with the glossy screens on the MacBooks I prefer the MacBooks' screens. A lot of the screens also feel like plastic, not glass.
I don't think all those Windows notebook manufacturers even offer an anti-glare option, do they?
I was in my local (Moore Park, Sydney) JB Hi-Fi during the week and they have several "banks" of Windows laptops in addition to the usual Apple display.
Out of ALL the Windows laptops (I would say more than 30, but I didn't count them, Acer, ASUS, HP, Dell, Samsung, etc...) only 1 had a non-glossy display and I think it was a Samsung and it was horribly dull (compared to my pre-Unibody anti-glare screens).
Comparing the glossy screens on the Windows machines with the glossy screens on the MacBooks I prefer the MacBooks' screens. A lot of the screens also feel like plastic, not glass.
I don't think all those Windows notebook manufacturers even offer an anti-glare option, do they?
...and this thread remains little more than a food fight.
both displays are fine. it all depends on what you're doing with it and how you want to do it. for my work professional graphics and photography work, the matte screen is the superior choice thanks to its color accuracy and matte finish. it's not even a debate, as I can't afford to lose so much of the black range to crushed colors. But if my primary usage of the Mac was to watch movies, edit documents and surf the web, I'd probably prefer the "pop" that the slightly exaggerated contrast on the glossy version offers. None of those activities are irritated by reflections anyway...and color accuracy is largely irrelevant.
There is a right answer for you...but it's not necessarily the same answer for everyone because we all have different needs or goals. If you want color accuracy, the matte is your best choice. If you want more "pop" and don't mind the reflections, the glossy is for you. Just know that even after calibration, the matte will never look quite as "poppy" as the glossy...and the glossy will *always* crush blacks, making it incompatible with serious photo editing or graphics work/design.
both displays are fine. it all depends on what you're doing with it and how you want to do it. for my work professional graphics and photography work, the matte screen is the superior choice thanks to its color accuracy and matte finish. it's not even a debate, as I can't afford to lose so much of the black range to crushed colors. But if my primary usage of the Mac was to watch movies, edit documents and surf the web, I'd probably prefer the "pop" that the slightly exaggerated contrast on the glossy version offers. None of those activities are irritated by reflections anyway...and color accuracy is largely irrelevant.
There is a right answer for you...but it's not necessarily the same answer for everyone because we all have different needs or goals. If you want color accuracy, the matte is your best choice. If you want more "pop" and don't mind the reflections, the glossy is for you. Just know that even after calibration, the matte will never look quite as "poppy" as the glossy...and the glossy will *always* crush blacks, making it incompatible with serious photo editing or graphics work/design.
Weird, the glossy screen has better color accuracy. The anti-glare puts a milky shade over the blacks, making them whiter. That whiteness will always be there, no matter what.
Don't like the "crushed colors"? Turn down the saturation and contrast.
Can a MOD not stop this pointless stupid thread instead of banging people for calling others an idiot or using sarcasm....???
Seriously, what is the point in arguing over something that is entirely personal preference? It must be the most pointless thread on the net right now?
Seriously, what is the point in arguing over something that is entirely personal preference? It must be the most pointless thread on the net right now?
But isn't the point of a public forum to allow people to voice their opinion and let the people decide for themselves what information is relevant? If it was up to you, youd sensor everything you don't agree with eh?
It's just a thread bro.
I've never really seen anyone else claim that glossy screens have better accuracy.
Out of the box, matte screens do have the better color accuracy. This isn't really subjective and can be readily proven. While neither glossy nor matte laptop screens provide a great experience if you need color accuracy, matte screens of any kind generally need to be calibrated to a lesser degree than the glossy.
I work for a large publishing company here in the US in the IT department. We are primarily a Mac establishment with a mixture of Mac Pros/20" matte Apple displays and glossy iMacs. We wanted to continue using the 20" matte displays, but sadly Apple no longer offers them. In the end, we were able to save some money going the iMac route now. The printing industry isn't what it once was, so price tends to trump most everything to a certain degree. Unfortunately, even with a Spyder3 calibrating, it's very hard to get the glossy screens to a low enough brightness level to calibrate correctly.
Say what you want about the whole glossy/matte "my dad can beat up your dad" argument. Both have those that are biased (like the op), that will blindly proclaim one is better than the other. Fortunately others are more level headed and know it really is personal preference. Don't buy something until you can see it in an Apple store.
- Status