Glossy - simply awful

[Tosser]

The only thing I can gather from that rambling diatribe is that either you need to lay off the narcotics before posting on Macrumors. Or, there really is truth to the term "Ignorance is bliss".

Either way, thanks for giving me the opportunity to laugh at something tonight.

It was sarcasm. Using the same type of nonsensical argument that they use, only transferred to something else, to show that the argument is indeed nonsensical. Oh, and yes, perhaps it was a bit too long

 

[jTreu]

I dont think all glossy is bad, I love the previous gen MBP glossy, which is very usuable, but when it's overdone it ruins the laptop.

 

[coledog]

One other point...how would Apple even make a matte screen for the new MBP? The glossy is one big pane of glass over the LCD and the black trim.

We should be thankful that they didn't "2-tone" the screen. Maybe they will come out with a matte when they update the 17" MBPs. If they do, it'll probably have an upgrade cost and be quite ugly...

 

[MarkCombs]

letter to Apple

there is a new strand about sending Apple a group letter. Maybe this site can help us address this issue...

 

[Red-red]

As mentioned, they not only nixed one FW port on the MBP, they also swapped the FW chipset for an inferior chipset. That inferiour chipset is called the Agere chipset, as opposed to the superior one from Texas Instruments. If you cannot see how that adheres to FW, then you certainly shouldn't be even trying to make an argument that these revisions are all just dandy.

oh dear....

Personally, I don't need it calibrated. Other pros do. I, however, do not a laptop that doesn't reflect every man and his dog (thank you, for that turn of phrase).

According to most people who actually own one, the reflections are not a problem? Apposed to those who haven't got one, who seem to think they are awful?

Well, this doesn't mean much, coming from someone who suggests lugging an external monitor around to do work in the field.

I did?

You cannot be for real!?
Going by hands? Are you seriously suggesting that because more people think of something as excellent, then it automatically must be? Going by that notion, MP3s, JPEGs, and crappy hollywood films are the epitomy of quality.
Besides, you're confusing consumption with creation. Different needs, different demands. You know, there's a reason Apple is still calling their 15" a "Pro". It's to make belief that it somehow has pro features, that it's "better", even though it's a consumer notebook in a 15" form factor.

There are no other laptops that are scrutinised more than an apple one. The only way to take an impression on how good something is, is to see what others have said about. The majority have said it's fine, now you obviously feel you are some how on a higher plane of intelligence to everybody else so their opinions do not count, because people download MP3's to use for portable music.

Could it be that some of us have had plenty of experience with glossy screens, that plenty of us have had our share of problems with the Agere chipset? Noooh - the thought!!
Oh, and from a "creative" standpoint (not necessarily "merely" photo editing) a glossy screen IS the worse when compared to a matte. It's just because ignorant consumers tend to fall in love with oversaturation and cannot wait to watch a film in bed we have to settle for such idiocy.

Again, you seem to think you are better than others because of what they like to do or like.

It doesn't matter if it was "amazing" or not. It was BETTER than a glossy. That's all that matters.

But was it? According to you, yes. According to other, no?

Define "better", and for the sake of your red herring-argument, back it up with some valid argumentation.

Better because I liked it more, hence my opinion. But that's not yours so it's wrong of course.

Talk about logical fallacies: You just threw a strawman argumentation for me to bite into. Noone ever said that. However, if I had to choose between the comparitively dim matte PB screens and a glossy bright glassbook screen, I'd go for the former. The reason being that it would get less in the way, allowing me to concentrate on work.

Not in this thread, but over the years many have and do. Again as many have said, the new screen isn't a distraction to them. I can go only from the opinion of those who have it, not those who don't.

You comment on firewire, yet you know nothing about FW. Your comment on the screens amounted to telling people who works in the field to carry around an extra monitor. Yes, you comment on what you see, but perhaps a little research before you commented would work wonders?

I comment on firewire because it said it has a firewire 800 port, according to you it's inferior. It maybe is? I never said it wasn't.

Sure. I can only imagine this argument also extends to FW: That it doesn't matter if it's there or not, it's just because "we're used to it"
Let me tell you that I have worked on my share of glossy books. I hate it. It makes me concentrate less. Hell, even a glossy desk (as in a physical desk in a room) can be annoying as hell if the sun or sharp lighting hits it just right.

A personal preference of course though and your opinion. Is it right? Is it wrong? I have gave my opinion on what I think, I haven't tried to smite anybody down with my great intelligence.

You "feel" a lot, don't you? Yet you haven't come up with anything but "feelings", hearsay, projection and guesswork yourself.

Yes because that's my opinion, it's forum, people discuss things and give their "feelings". It's a new laptop, so any concrete information on it is lacking so pretty much every post on it is hearsay and guesswork. Is that a bad thing? No it keeps places like this going and something for people to do bored at work.

 

[Stang68]

Ok, can someone just post a link to an anti-glare film for the new MBP's already? If you dont want the glossy look, then just buy one of those. I remember seeing the link, but cannot find it.

 

[Tosser]

oh dear....

Yes, indeed.

According to most people who actually own one, the reflections are not a problem? Apposed to those who haven't got one, who seem to think they are awful?

You never stopped to think that the people who find nothing wrong with them, are the ones that then choose to buy them? Of course you're entitled to only listen to proponents of certain product, but choosing to not listen to someone who hasn't bought the product for a given reason, simply because that person haven't bought it (because it was awful/not good enough/whatever it might be) is an Erasmus Montanus train of thought.

I did?

Well, you suggested that the monitor didn't matter in the field, and that proper pros should be using an external monitor. That, by extension, is a suggestion that you cannot be a pro, unless you carry an external monitor into the field.

There are no other laptops that are scrutinised more than an apple one. The only way to take an impression on how good something is, is to see what others have said about. The majority have said it's fine,

Yes, just like the "majority" on these boards thinks that the iPhone is the best smartphone ever, that it is a full fledged pda with smart phone capilities. Those people bought the thing, which is fair enough, but to claim they then must be right is a logical fallacy. It's an appeal to popularity.

now you obviously feel you are some how on a higher plane of intelligence to everybody else so their opinions do not count, because people download MP3's to use for portable music.

No I don't. I just recognise that my needs aren't the same as someone who really likes the saturation and don't mind the reflections because they happen to use their computer to write a little, but otherwise use it as an enternmaint centre - films being an important part for them. I'm not that person.
With regards to the MP3s, yes, here I certainly have much higher demands, but then again, I work with audio for a living, so of course I can't live with poor audio.

Again, you seem to think you are better than others because of what they like to do or like.

Again with the playing a victim … Seriously, if you cannot understand, that I'm simply trying to get through, that some of us have different needs – needs that cannot be fulfilled by just any consumer crap, be it USB, glossy screen, or heck, jpeg pocket cameras, then, fine, call me elitist.

But was it? According to you, yes. According to other, no?

Yes, for being out in the field, my PB screen was NOT "amazing", but it was better than any glossy screen, because it didn't reflect anything and everything, and I didn't have to angle it ad nauseum in order to get rid of the reflections in order to concentrate on my work.

Better because I liked it more, hence my opinion. But that's not yours so it's wrong of course.

Ha ha ha! You call that a "definition" of "better"? At least try to put together a coherent argument instead of relying on the old tiresome "everything is just opinion, and everything is relative".

Not in this thread, but over the years many have and do. Again as many have said, the new screen isn't a distraction to them. I can go only from the opinion of those who have it, not those who don't.

See one of the first comments in this post, why that is logical fallacy and a circular argument.

I comment on firewire because it said it has a firewire 800 port, according to you it's inferior. It maybe is? I never said it wasn't.

Nope, you never said it wasn't but you certainly implied it was "good enough" and that there was no reason to think bad of it.

A personal preference of course though and your opinion. Is it right? Is it wrong? I have gave my opinion on what I think, I haven't tried to smite anybody down with my great intelligence.

I never claimed you were. I don't use such cheap rhetorics to win an argument. But what you DID was that whenever you couldn't put together an argument, you simply went "Well, I imagine all you just bitchh and whine because you don't like change and are just set in your ways". This cheap rhetoric trick was also used earlier on by you in the case of fw.

Yes because that's my opinion, it's forum, people discuss things and give their "feelings". It's a new laptop, so any concrete information on it is lacking so pretty much every post on it is hearsay and guesswork. Is that a bad thing? No it keeps places like this going and something for people to do bored at work.

Actually, we're discussing glossy screens and Agere FireWire chipsets, these things aren't "guesswork", and even though you (once again) try to hide behind "oh, I'm just uttering my opinion", these things are a little more down to earth than that. This is not about some new fantastic/horrific (depends on view) technology the world haven't seen before. This is about proven tech most of us have had experience with.
And yes, I do believe lemming mentality and flock behaviour is a bad thing.

 

[Tosser]

Ok, can someone just post a link to an anti-glare film for the new MBP's already? If you dont want the glossy look, then just buy one of those. I remember seeing the link, but cannot find it.

It's a glossy screen behind a glass face plate. That in itself will make it hard to make a proper matte screen.
Secondly, such a film is far from optimal compared to an antiglare _coating_. If for nothing else, then because the thickness of the film will be more prone to causing distortion.
Someone will propably sell them soon, though.

 

[donbadman]

Not going to happen. If matte displays sold in sufficient quantities, they'd still make them.

I guarantee the design of the new ones was chosen to make more money and not to cater to the market.

 

[Red-red]

Tosser, you're completely missing the points of my posts. I'm not trying to argue as you appear to do with everybody. The laptop isn't for you, but it might be the perfect machine for a lot of other people and threads calling the glossy display awful ( when it clearly isn't ), misleads people.

You still keep going on about the FW, I couldn't care. I didn't know it used an inferior chipset for it, you corrected me. I apologized, what more do you want?

I just read the Ars review part one and on the screen issues some interesting points where made.

 

[Tosser]

Tosser, you're completely missing the points of my posts. I'm not trying to argue as you appear to do with everybody. The laptop isn't for you, but it might be the perfect machine for a lot of other people and threads calling the glossy display awful ( when it clearly isn't ), misleads people.

No, it's not "misleading" in any way, form or fashion. To SOME it is indeed "awful". What's misleading is countering any and all argument with "well, it doesn't suck", "Don't listen to people who thinks it's so bad they won't buy it", "only listen to people who love it and thus bought it", "It's excellent. The majority says so". THAT'S misleading.

You still keep going on about the FW, I couldn't care. I didn't know it used an inferior chipset for it, you corrected me. I apologized, what more do you want?

I mentioned FW because that too was part of your pseudo argumentation you uttered in an attempt to substantiate the argument that people don't like these things because they "fear change" and are "set in their ways". Hence, it was important, premise-wise, to include that part of your argument.

I just read the Ars review part one and on the screen issues some interesting points where made.

Yes, I especially liked this part in between all the "techno-awe":

Dave Girard on glossy vs. matte
I think that you can get a glossy screen that has deep blacks, accurate color and a wide gamut, so the problem really is just the glare. It's distracting and for someone like me, who's constantly retouching images and scouring images for dust (next to a window, no less). A glossy screen would make my work a nightmare of squinting and head-bobbing.

I do use an external monitor, but I need to work on the road, and sitting in a café during the day with one of the new machines would be really annoying. Apple should sell one of the new MacBooks with a handy black drape.

In other words, you can take my last-gen matte MacBook Pro from my cold, dead, hands!" [Wow, tell us how you really feel, Dave. --ed.]

 

[guest8t88]

The new Macbook is nice, but I have to agree with the matte people, the screen not so great. I know a few who works with high-end graphics on the move, and they do prefer the matte.

Sources say you can buy a coat for the screen to cover the glossy effect, problem soulved. What is interesting are people, who have a problem with the professional users who mention their disapointment with the new screen.
Why flame professional users in such a way, envy?

Bottomline is people like or dislike the new screens for the macbooks, can't we all just agree on that and write feedbacks to apple itself.

 

[bushbaby]

Tosser, you're completely missing the points of my posts. I'm not trying to argue as you appear to do with everybody. The laptop isn't for you, but it might be the perfect machine for a lot of other people and threads calling the glossy display awful ( when it clearly isn't ), misleads people.

You still keep going on about the FW, I couldn't care. I didn't know it used an inferior chipset for it, you corrected me. I apologized, what more do you want?

I just read the Ars review part one and on the screen issues some interesting points where made.

Tosser's not missing anything. We're all getting your points and you're wrong.

You said: "threads calling the glossy display awful ( when it clearly isn't )"

Sorry. Wrong. Go start your own thread entitled: "Why I think the new mbp glossy (glassy) display is great." And base it on your experience looking at the screen. Too many lame posters (on other threads) who argue and defend it when they haven't seen even it in person.

 

[drewsof07]

Can anyone tell me whether the macbook pro has a visible space between the glass overlay and the actual screen (like the imac)? I can handle a reflection, but a dual reflection annoys me to no end. Just PM me if possible, to eliminate unnecessary posting here in the thread. Thanks!

 

[Red-red]

I mentioned FW because that too was part of your pseudo argumentation you uttered in an attempt to substantiate the argument that people don't like these things because they "fear change" and are "set in their ways". Hence, it was important, premise-wise, to include that part of your argument.

I did? You might want to check that as I was talking about the screen, nothing to do with the FW.

No, it's not "misleading" in any way, form or fashion. To SOME it is indeed "awful". What's misleading is countering any and all argument with "well, it doesn't suck", "Don't listen to people who thinks it's so bad they won't buy it", "only listen to people who love it and thus bought it", "It's excellent. The majority says so". THAT'S misleading.

I haven't said anything of the kind, again your making things up. It's an opinion and most of the matte hating is coming from those who haven't seen it. I'm basing the "Glossy isn't so bad" on several hands on, reviews and user comments who have them.

Yes, I especially liked this part in between all the "techno-awe":

Of course but then you forgot this part:

Everyone has a preference when it comes to matte versus glossy, and there's no question that in real-world usage in a variety of environments, each has distinctive strengths and weaknesses. You also can't discount the familiarity factor; most people are just used to the look of a matte LCD screen, and that is what feels right to them. Personal preferences aside however, there are some persistent myths about glossy screens that seem to make the rounds every time this debate comes up. Let's examine a couple popular ones.

First up is the person who tries to equate the differences to glossy versus matte paper stock. You simply can't do that. The mediums are just not comparable. One relies on reflective light to carry the image to your eyes, the other emits light. To put it another way, a printed CMYK image relies on subtractive color, while an image on an LCD uses additive color. It is an apples and oranges comparison.

I suspect that the false comparison with the paper stock argument feeds another persistent myth, which is that glossy screens are not for professionals. Let's just leave aside the the fact that an image on a monitor will never entirely match an image printed on paper no matter what kind of screen you have, for a variety of reasons not least amongst them the differences between subtractive and additive color cited above. The simple fact of the matter is that a matte screen, far from a neutral view, is actually distorted when compared to a glossy screen. The matte coating that diffuses glare and reflections also works on the image on the screen, reducing contrast and saturation.

In a properly light-controlled environment (without which there is zero point in talking about professional work), with all tech specs being equal, and with properly calibrated screens, a glossy LCD is going to outperform a matte one every time. This is particularly evident in the higher contrast a glossy screen provides, the deeper blacks are what give it the richer look people often comment on when first exposed to a glossy display. Like any consumer tech this can be abused and cranked up to impress people in stores, but no pro uses a screen the way it comes out of the box.

Tosser's not missing anything. We're all getting your points and you're wrong.

You said: "threads calling the glossy display awful ( when it clearly isn't )"

Sorry. Wrong. Go start your own thread entitled: "Why I think the new mbp glossy (glassy) display is great." And base it on your experience looking at the screen. Too many lame posters (on other threads) who argue and defend it when they haven't seen even it in person.

So if somebody starts a thread only those who agree should post in it?

On the flip side there are also too many "lame" posters who haven't seen who knock it. Bit of both perhaps?

 

[coledog]

Wow...

 

[Tosser]

I did? You might want to check that as I was talking about the screen, nothing to do with the FW.

Really?

I haven't said anything of the kind, again your making things up. It's an opinion and most of the matte hating is coming from those who haven't seen it. I'm basing the "Glossy isn't so bad" on several hands on, reviews and user comments who have them.

Yes, I know you're basing everything you say on those reviews. All the while doing that, you choose to ignore the people who dislike them. So not only are you not truly researching, you're merely finding support for your views, ignoring any and all caveats.

Of course but then you forgot this part:

Nope. I didn't forget that part as I was aware it was that part you were referring to. Besides, I posted with "I especially liked this part" before I posted it.
But let's take a look on the premises of his arguments (my bolding):

Everyone has a preference when it comes to matte versus glossy, and there's no question that in real-world usage in a variety of environments, each has distinctive strengths and weaknesses.

Already here, the guy – unlike you - recognises that matte has some real advantages in real-life scenarios (and vice versa).

[Removed part thart didn't pertain to my argument]

In a properly light-controlled environment (without which there is zero point in talking about professional work), with all tech specs being equal, and with properly calibrated screens, a glossy LCD is going to outperform a matte one every time.

Well, that's the problem isn't it? You cannot have a "properly light-controlled environment" on the go. You'll have a hard time even get a "properly lighted environment".

So, yes, it's absolutely correct that glossy can be as good (and even better) than a matte screen. However, in real-life field work, this is practically impossible quite a few of us have found.
It truly is laughable that even when you try to find something that back up your nonsense claims, when looking a bit closer, it actually supports the opponent.
Thanks, btw. I always like reading tech news when done properly.

 

[Red-red]

As I have said before, I haven't ever had a problem with a glossy display, I do live in the north of england so bright sunshine isn't exactly a problem.

On a side note, which does sound quite contradictory, if they had a matte option I would have picked it. Jumping on the bandwagon as such even if it could potentially have been the lesser of the two for me. That's why I feel some of the complaints are by people who don't really know what they are talking about and in reality wouldn't notice a blind bit of difference, some would however but I find it hard to believe apple would alienate a large % of it's market, so the need for it couldn't have been high over-all.

When I get mine, i'll dig this thread up and post what I think. I might completely agree with you or I might not.

Still it wouldn't go amiss if you weren't so condescending, it's a forum not a playground.

 

[Tosser]

As I have said before, I haven't ever had a problem with a glossy display, I do live in the north of england so bright sunshine isn't exactly a problem.

On a side note, which does sound quite contradictory, if they had a matte option I would have picked it. Jumping on the bandwagon as such even if it could potentially have been the lesser of the two for me. That's why I feel some of the complaints are by people who don't really know what they are talking about and in reality wouldn't notice a blind bit of difference, some would however but I find it hard to believe apple would alienate a large % of it's market, so the need for it couldn't have been high over-all.

So, it's projection on your part? Good. I can live with that.
But you're kidding yourself if you think the pros are a large percentage of mac-buyers.

Still it wouldn't go amiss if you weren't so condescending, it's a forum not a playground.

I'm as condescending as I feel like – especially when dealing with nonsensical utterings.

 

[Red-red]

So, it's projection on your part? Good. I can live with that.

Most definitely, I never said it wasn't.

But you're kidding yourself if you think the pros are a large percentage of mac-buyers.

We'll see how it pans out.

I'm as condescending as I feel like – especially when dealing with nonsensical utterings.

Nice, real nice.

 

[MrJingles]

...if they had a matte option I would have picked it. Jumping on the bandwagon as such even if it could potentially have been the lesser of the two for me. That's why I feel some of the complaints are by people who don't really know what they are talking about and in reality wouldn't notice a blind bit of difference, some would however but I find it hard to believe apple would alienate a large % of it's market, so the need for it couldn't have been high over-all.

Sadly for me I just went and checked them out at my nearest Apple Store and I tried, I really did, to convince myself I would be okay with it. I tried moving the screen up and down, side to side, cranked up the brightness all the way bending over until my wife let out a huge sigh and said:

"Just let it go, you know you wouldn't be able to use it without being angry you hate these screens. I wouldn't even use this and I don't mind my glossy screen at home."

Never a fan of glossy but I LOVE the older versions glossy over these. (I'd say 50-60% worse with glare/reflections than the previous models) So there you have it, I'm glad that people love them and bless apple for listening to what they want and giving it to them but I won't be getting one I just cannot NOT stop seeing my reflection/glare.

 

[Red-red]

It's always hard in store though, there's lots going on around you, the lighting is obviously nothing like real world conditions.

I can't see myself not liking it, spending £1500 on a laptop may have something to do with it but like I said, I live in northern england, it's not bright anyway and my uni's lighting isn't a problem. ( they have loads of the new imacs and there perfect )

 

[MrJingles]

It's always hard in store though, there's lots going on around you, the lighting is obviously nothing like real world conditions.

I can't see myself not liking it, spending £1500 on a laptop may have something to do with it but like I said, I live in northern england, it's not bright anyway and my uni's lighting isn't a problem. ( they have loads of the new imacs and there perfect )

Oh I'm sure you and tons of people will love them but I have very strong prescription glasses (hurrah for the almost blind) and for some reason it's a headache maker for me which is why I'm in a personal bind. I NEED a laptop just not now, but if I don't buy a matte one now who knows if I will ever find one again you know?

Oh well maybe in the next 3-5 years we will have holographic displays shooting directly into our retinas! One can dream...

 

[840quadra]

It was sarcasm. Using the same type of nonsensical argument that they use, only transferred to something else, to show that the argument is indeed nonsensical. Oh, and yes, perhaps it was a bit too long

Well there will be nothing I can post, or say to convince someone with such a virulent way of thinking. I don't consider myself a professional in graphics or photography yet, but I do work in the field, and know what is, and isn't recommended practice.

Regardless, I hope that everyone enjoys whatever side of the fence they are on with regards to this subject. It is a heated one, but only time will tell what Apple and it's customer base will decide.

Looks like we will have an interesting couple of years to figure this all out!

 

[twotontito]

I just received the new MBP today. Not knowing if I was going to like the glossy screen or not, it was somewhat of a risk that I spent as much money as I did on this machine. So, here is my first impression.

I absolutely love the glossy screen. The black is black. The white is white. The sharpness of the images is absolutely amazing. I have used the computer indoors and outdoors. Lighted environments and dark environments. So far, I have not run into any problems with glare or reflection at all. The display is absolutely beautiful.

I got really nervous reading threads such as this one as I was waiting for my computer to be shipped. Everyone made the glossy screen into such a big deal that I thought I was going to absolutely hate it.

Well, I think the people who don't have some personal experience with the new MB's and MBP's need to leave the subject alone until they experience it for themselves. These really are some very nice displays.