Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
the ag lacks the "punch" of glossy,i agree,but,a hell,now i have to sell my hi res glossy after this excellent review,------THANX A LOT MAN-------!!!!!!

im depressed big time,im turning this mbpro off!:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::D
 
I have accurately calibrated my display, so yes the colors are accurate on my glossy display. The pictures, however, show that the antiglare seems to have less backlight, more blur, whiter blacks, and other typical matte disadvantages. The antiglare also seems to have a yellowish tint, which shows the colors aren't as accurate as the glossy.
Also, if you look closely, more detail can be seen on the glossy than the antiglare.
UMBP Glossy Hi-res seems to be of a better quality than the 1440x900 cruddy small screen. It seems to have better color quality, which IMHO surpasses the antiglare by a long shot.

Seriously, with a screen as bright as the glossy, does the glare really bother you enough to shell out another $50-150 on an antiglare screen? I'm using a glossy screen right now and I can barely see any reflections. Save your money, keep the glossy display, and buy some extra RAM or even optibay an SSD.

The topic of either screen's color accuracy is essentially moot since neither screen (or any laptop for that matter) has a display with true enough color accuracy for use in final color grading for print or especially not video. However given the choice between the two I'd have to say your conclusions are completely wrong. Time and time again the AG screens I've used, be it on a laptop or an external monitor, provide far more accurate representations of what the final products will look like for both print and video. You will NEVER get a glossy screen to match print colors accurately unless you're exclusively printing on high gloss photo paper and it's ability with video is even worse. The colors will look absolutely fantastic on your screen but as soon as you view the video on any other monitor it typically appears blown out and low contrast. This is where the ACD falls in comparison with other professional video monitors such as the high end Dell, LaCie and EIZOs.

My Opinion is that glossy screens are for regular Mac users who use the Mac for school, home, gaming and entertainment while also being able to deal with possible glare. Your colors will appear brighter and you will be impressed with the quality of the screen. However if you are using a Mac for professional purposes on anything that will be distributed then anti-glare is always going to be the better option.
 
I am very happy with the antiglare screen on my 2011 MacBook Pro. I also have the 9CB7 panel, and it's great!

It is impressive how much discussion this topic can cause. It is probably the most brought up "issue" on these forums.
 
9CB7 panel for the win. Had that in the 2010 and now 2011 and it's so nice. I dunno but the blacks on my screen are damn black and whites looks really good too.
 
Is anyone seriously trying to say you can compare the colour accuracy of 2 LCD screens from photos when the colour of the photo you're seeing is dependent on:

...

Exactly, thank you

Some thoughts:

Most of your pictures are taken at enough of an angle that it is a useless comparison - 99.9% of the time I am using my computer I am looking straight at it. How the colors/screen varies or looks at an angle (even a relatively small one) away from the screen is largely irrelevant to me, so all your comparison pictures make it really hard to compare the computers in normal use - I never use my MBP at an angle so it doesn't matter at all how the colors look from that perspective. All that matters to me (and realistically should for most users) is the straight on shot.

...

If you are viewing these photos and using them as a basis for screen color/sharpness comparison, then you are wasting your time. Between in-camera processing, image conversion, uploading online, my monitors calibration, your monitors calibration, etc, how can the photo you are viewing be 100% accurate of what I'm seeing right now? It's never going to be. That's why these kind of photo reviews should be taken with a grain of salt. Like I said in the OP, the best way to decide is to visit your local apple store.

The photos are put up to show the difference between a glossy and antiglare under different lighting and viewing different things on the screen. How they react to sunlight, isn't going to change based on viewing angle, dof, etc. Glare will be glare and the antiglare's milky cast will still be there.

From a usability standpoint AG is definitely the winner--- especially if one has to stare at their screen for 10 hours a day in an office setting. On the other hand, why doesn't apple use IPS screens yet?

Well apple does use IPS in iMacs and cinema displays but why not in notebooks? Size and cost. I'm thinking mainly because most users are happy with a TN.

EDIT: Trapped in a pyramid? Need help my friend?
 
Last edited:
Whilst I'm sure the glossy screen's reflections are annoying in bright light/sun, my antiglare laptop is just as unusable in direct sunlight
 
When you buy a laptop, you're stuck with the screen for as long as you keep it. That means you should definitely go to an Apple Store and compare glossy and matte side by side, because it's your eyes and your preferences that are gonna dictate your decision. Better yet, try them both out at home or in the environment you'd normally use them.

If side by side comparisons aren't possible and you're not sure of which display to buy, IMHO, I'd say go with a glossy. I've got a MBP17 and the glossy screen is great. It's viewing angle is über-good and the colors are just brilliant. True, every so often I will have to adjust if the lighting changes, but that is rare.
 
Nice photos and effects. "Light Painting" is by far my favorite.

Also, props to your roommate and his E30. Really clean.
 
The forth picture shows well that there is really a very small difference in a dark room with the best conditions for glossy.
You could add some pictures with both in the garden at a BBQ. AG gets milky but stays usable and you don't have to hide from the sun like some vampire.

I would like to know if yours are equally bright at max brightness, since many reviews say the AG has better max brightness than the glossys.
 
I've used a 2007 Matte MBP (15"), a 2009 Glossy MBP (15") and currently a 2011 HR AG MBP (17"). I couldn't be happier with the HR AG. Mine is the 9CEE screen (LG-Philips) and is the best of the various three screens I've used to date.

Before finally deciding on the HR AG screen (I use my MBP for my Web/Graphics Design business), I compared both the HR AG and HR Glossy screen side-by-side a few times at the Apple Store. As a lot of people have said, do a true comparison and spend a little time with both screens at the Apple Store - the pics/vids online do not do either screen justice.

Having said that, I certainly do not regret HR AG at all.
 
I think they both have their benefits. I love the matte screen but I would not pay that much extra for it. If they were the same price I would take the matte.
 
I'm very happy with my HR AG. And i'm the type of person who instantly notices and complains about uncalibrated TVs. ridiculous blowout colors drive me insane.
 
I love my glossy MBP but till this day I wish I went with the anti glare just because I like the silver bezel a bit more.
 
Nice photos and effects. "Light Painting" is by far my favorite.

Also, props to your roommate and his E30. Really clean.

Thanks!

And he says thank you!

I would like to know if yours are equally bright at max brightness, since many reviews say the AG has better max brightness than the glossys.

The brightness level is at max in every photo but the last.

OP, Why didn't you post this as a reply here? Glossy vs Anti-Glare

I will post it there :)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.