Just saw the unibody 17" mbp at local Apple store, Good God its dim!!

[Abstract]

i never said you had a problem... im just saying, people should talk with their money, if they want to moan about Apples screen brightness, great, go buy a non Apple computer then? Surely theres more pressing issues in life. If Apple started taking the P**s with their monopoly and offering seriously sub standard components, screens etc, i wouldn't think twice about getting a netbook and hackintoshing it, but as it happens their hardware is fine.

Discussing an observation made after comparing the brightness of 2 machines isn't the same as "moaning."


And also, I said that the screen brightness of the 17" MBP isn't a problem, nor did I imply it before. I never implied that I thought you said I had a problem. I know you didn't say that.

 

[kastenbrust]

on a serious note, perhaps there is a way to directly edit the SMC to change the default brightness and set the maximum higher.

 

[Abstract]

And just for interest's sake.....HERE

That MacBook seems really bright.

 

[kastenbrust]

And just for interest's sake.....HERE

That MacBook seems really bright.

the extra colour gamut on the 17" really seems to be noticable there. The Macbook and 15" Pro almost look washed out...

 

[Abstract]

Colour gamut isn't the same as saturation, and it's nearly impossible to tell the difference in gamut from the desktop wallpapers on the screens of those laptops.

Also, the 13" MB's screen looks washed out not because the colours on the screen aren't saturated. It's because the shutter speed of the screen wasn't high enough for that screen, so it overexposed slightly.



If the camera accurately exposes the screens of the other 2 laptops (the previous 15" MBP and the new 17" MBP), and the MacBook's screen was darker, it would appear darker than the other screens in the image (obviously).

If the camera accurately exposes the screens of the other 2 laptops (the previous 15" MBP and the new 17" MBP), and the MacBook's screen was brighter, it'll overexpose that area of the image so that saturation looks low, and everything looks whiter. That's not how it looks in real life, but it is how it'll appear in the photo.


If the MacBook's screen was MUCH brighter, the entire screen would look completely white, or nearly so. It doesn't mean the screen can't show colours, or that it has a lower gamut. What this is is an indication of how much brighter the MB's screen is when compared to the other screens at the same exposure (camera's particular shutter speed, ISO, and aperture settings at that time).

 

[jjahshik32]

Colour gamut isn't the same as saturation, and it's nearly impossible to tell the difference in gamut from the desktop wallpapers on the screens of those laptops.

Ditto.

 

[HoosierInFL]

Got mine today. The screen is super bright, so much so that I can't run it at full brightness because it hurts my eyes.

 

[Abstract]

I'm going to assume that jmark was correct, and it has something to do with the OS installed on the models at the Apple Store not being correct for the machine it's on.

People are reporting that their personal machines are too bright, and from what I saw at the Apple Store 2 days ago, I wouldn't have believed it.

 

[workerbee]

I would bet the "dim" unit had the "standard" OS image that the stores are using for all display models, while the brighter one had a proper OS install from the disc that ships with the 17-inch model.

You could easily check this by looking at the Energy Saver preference on both machines. On the computers "imaged" with the incorrect OS install, Energy Saver's icon is the old-fashioned "light bulb".

Has anyone found out what if anything is different in the OS that ships with the 17"?

I swapped the HD from my 15" unibody to my new 17" unibody, which so far seems to work. However, installing the OS on the 15" using the 17"s discs does not work, so I guess there must be a difference in there somewhere. Also, I'm not overly enthusiastic about the 98c display just yet.

Hmmm.... I wonder if I really should go the dreaded erase-and-clean-install way.

 

[Abstract]

Each type of machine comes with specific install disks for that model. I doubt I'd be able to take my old white MacBook install disks and install it on your 17" MBP either. They're quasi-specific install disks, meaning they're specific enough to prevent you from using your install disks on any Mac you please, but not specific enough to prevent you from installing it on another 17" MBP from the same revision, or similar revision. I can install OS X on my friend's Rev A MacBook, and I think I have a Rev C. Upgrade disks are different. You can install on any Mac.

Has anyone found out what if anything is different in the OS that ships with the 17"?

What Jmark was talking about is NOT that 17" MBP comes with a version of OS X that makes it dimmer than the 15". What he's saying is that Apple didn't do a clean install of OS X using the installation disks that come standard with each 17" MBP.

At Apple Stores, they don't always install OS X on each individual laptop shown on display, and then install MS Office, Photoshop, Aperture, Final Cut, etc etc. What they do is install everything they want onto a single machine (e.g. a 15" MBP) and create a copy of the entire harddrive. Then they place this "image" on every other display unit so that each machine is running off the same install, whether it's a 13" MB, 15" MBP, or 17" MBP (and perhaps even desktops.....not sure). However, since each OS X disk that comes with the machine is specific for that model, this may have an effect on certain features on the laptop if they have different hardware.

What Jmark was hypothesizing was that the install on the 17" MBP isn't a clean install using its own disks. It's just an image from the harddrive of a 15" MBP (or another type of machine), which has an affect on the maximum brightness of the display.

He proposes that if you install OS X on a 17" MBP using its own disks, then brightness isn't a problem. It's not dim.

 

[gr8tfly]

The "dimness" of the 17's on display is due to them using an OS image for all their display machines that is actually incorrect for the 17.

The Apple Store people (at least here in SF) seem to know about it.

With a correct installation of the OS, the 17's screen is plenty bright.

I've heard of the same problem at another location. I also experienced a color temp problem when booted from another 10.5.6 drive (on my new UB 17"). I believe the problem (temp and brightness) are because the standard 10.5.6 build is different than what is shipped with the UB 17" (9G55 vs 9G2141). When booted on the 9G2141 10.5.6, the standard "Color LCD" profile was normal.

Like you say, I also hear they're aware and working to correct the in-store boot images.

 

[jmark]

Has anyone found out what if anything is different in the OS that ships with the 17"?

I swapped the HD from my 15" unibody to my new 17" unibody, which so far seems to work. However, installing the OS on the 15" using the 17"s discs does not work, so I guess there must be a difference in there somewhere. Also, I'm not overly enthusiastic about the 98c display just yet.

Hmmm.... I wonder if I really should go the dreaded erase-and-clean-install way.

Yes, I'd say definitely do a clean install.

I originally did exactly what you did (when exchanging the Unibody 15 for the 17), and quickly realized:

1) the screen was just not right;

2) I couldn't turn off Bluetooth.

Looking at the System extensions that are on a clean install from the 17" OS DVD, there are a number of newer (date and version) .kext files than what got installed onto my 15 (even though the 15 had been fully updated, and both OS installations were 10.5.6).

I had thought before that "all Leopard installations are universal", but this is apparently not the case.

 

[workerbee]

Yes, I'd say definitely do a clean install.

I originally did exactly what you did (when exchanging the Unibody 15 for the 17), and quickly realized:

1) the screen was just not right;
2) I couldn't turn off Bluetooth.

Looking at the System extensions that are on a clean install from the 17" OS DVD, there are a number of newer (date and version) .kext files than what got installed onto my 15 (even though the 15 had been fully updated, and both OS installations were 10.5.6).

OK, Thanks for the advice! I'll do some work (on my Cinema Display now), and re-install everything later today.

Now if I could get a Samsung 256Gb SSD drive, I'd be much more motivated

 

[workerbee]

Each type of machine comes with specific install disks for that model. I doubt I'd be able to take my old white MacBook install disks and install it on your 17" MBP either.

(snippetysnip)

He proposes that if you install OS X on a 17" MBP using its own disks, then brightness isn't a problem. It's not dim.

Heh... there's a difference between using your old white macbook install disks and my brand-new unibody 15" MacBook Pro install disks, but: point taken anyway.

And the display is definitely not dim - it's just that the colours don't seem quite right.

 

[Nikos]

I can't imagine mine being any brighter. I had the 13" unibody MacBook and 15" unibody MBP and, from what I remember, this is just as bright.

 

[Mr. Giver '94]

I can't imagine mine being any brighter. I had the 13" unibody MacBook and 15" unibody MBP and, from what I remember, this is just as bright.

Wow do you still have all 3??? Or did you just decide to keep buying until you had the full collection?

 

[Nikos]

Wow do you still have all 3??? Or did you just decide to keep buying until you had the full collection?

Had a blackbook and had to sell it in November. Decided to get the unibody MacBook in December to replace it. Realized I couldn't deal with 1280x800 anymore, so I upgraded to the 15". After that, I realized what I really wanted/needed was 1920x1200 so I returned it and waited for the 17". Now I am finally happy, lol.

Wish I still had the others, I'd take some comparison pics. Maybe I'm not remembering correctly, but this seems just as bright. As a matter of fact, I find myself keeping this at half or lower and that isn't the usual for me.

 

[Mr. Giver '94]

Had a blackbook and had to sell it in November. Decided to get the unibody MacBook in December to replace it. Realized I couldn't deal with 1280x800 anymore, so I upgraded to the 15". After that, I realized what I really wanted/needed was 1920x1200 so I returned it and waited for the 17". Now I am finally happy, lol.

Wish I still had the others, I'd take some comparison pics. Maybe I'm not remembering correctly, but this seems just as bright. As a matter of fact, I find myself keeping this at half or lower and that isn't the usual for me.

Wow. Glad you're finally happy with your setup. I don't think I could deal with the 1280x800 either. Now that they offer the 256GB SSD in the 15" MBP, I think that'd be the one I'd get to go along with a 24" monitor. From what I've seen at the Apple store the 15" does look brighter than the 17" and I can't really compare the 17" to the MB just because it's such a big difference in screen size.

 

[Abstract]

If I bought a 15" MBP today, I'd actually be afraid of doing the same thing. Perhaps Apple knows that people want a higher res screen on the 15" MBP, but that this would result in a decrease in sales of the 17" MBP.

 

[gilesrulz]

If I bought a 15" MBP today, I'd actually be afraid of doing the same thing. Perhaps Apple knows that people want a higher res screen on the 15" MBP, but that this would result in a decrease in sales of the 17" MBP.

Or perhaps the smaller screen with that resolution (if even made) is prohibitively expensive.

To be honest. The HD resolution make UI text very small on a 17" It'd be danm near unreadable on a 15" screen.

 

[workerbee]

Installing the "official" System that comes with the 17" did wonders to the display quality here, all traces of washed-out blueish colours are gone.

Definitely recommended to anyone - especially those who have a 98 screen and have read horror stories here.

 

[Sir Cecil]

I thought people were over-exaggerating about the 17" unibody mbp being overly dim.. but wow it is REALLY that dim!

No it isn't. It's just that the Apple Store folks were apparently dim, and displayed it with the wrong setup.
My 17" is a fantastic laptop screen, the best by far of any I've seen from Apple.
Anyone postponing buying one because of claims here that it is dim is losing out because you won't find better than this.

 

[Abstract]

Or perhaps the smaller screen with that resolution (if even made) is prohibitively expensive.

It's an LCD, and it really couldn't be more than $10 difference for them.

But maybe you're right.

To be honest. The HD resolution make UI text very small on a 17" It'd be danm near unreadable on a 15" screen.

Crazy enough, but you can even buy a 13" Sony laptop with 1680 x 1050 resolution. THAT is insane.

15" screen with 1680 x 1050 resolution has 132 pixels per inch.
17" screen with 1920 x 1200 resolution is 133 pixels per inch.