MacBook Pro anti-glare design flaw

[sycho]

I just received a Mid 2009 (made last week) Anti-glare MacBook Pro. It is replacing my defective Late '08 unit. I tried twisting both screens and honestly, the difference in strength is so minimal... I can't see the Anti-glares bending anywhere near as much as the pre-unibodies ones.

 

[TuffLuffJimmy]

This flaw could really put a damper on Shambo's future proofing plans.

 

[Jaro65]

I've had a matte 17" on my hands quite a few times in the last months and never noticed anything bad about the screen except that the whole notebook feels much more solid than my non-unibody 15".

Going for glossy because the screen is more sturdy? Come on, you must be joking...

Nope. Just probably nothing better to do.

This flaw could really put a damper on Shambo's future proofing plans.

LOL!!!

 

[Patriks7]

The anti-glare 17" Unibody MacBook Pro was announced and shown in the keynote. It wasn't an "after thought".

And the bezel being like "tin foil".. stop talking rubbish.

The lid is the exact same design as the previous non-unibodies but actually much much sturdier.

Just because it was shown in the keynote, doesn't mean it wasn't an after thought. Do you think we would have one if the demand wouldn't be so high? No.

 

[kolax]

Just because it was shown in the keynote, doesn't mean it wasn't an after thought. Do you think we would have one if the demand wouldn't be so high? No.

The design of the anti-glare model's lid is the same as the previous non-unibody Macs.

It is essentially the MacBook Air's style bezel.

Are you guys saying that the MacBook Air is also a crappy lid because it doesn't have a sheet of glass infront of the screen?

 

[Patriks7]

The design of the anti-glare model's lid is the same as the previous non-unibody Macs.

It is essentially the MacBook Air's style bezel.

Are you guys saying that the MacBook Air is also a crappy lid because it doesn't have a sheet of glass infront of the screen?

No, but the Macbook Air wasn't made to have the glass there, the current generation of Macbook Pro's was.

 

[chrispholt]

It does

By looking at apples website could have sorted this problem out.

However i'm sure a company as big as appple would ensure that the screen is strong enough without glass (they did make laptops before the unibody). I'm still going to buy a AG macbook pro as if you travel a lot in trains in the summer you cant avoid the sun = watching you own face for 4hrs.

 

[l.a.rossmann]

Anti-glare films are JUNK. I used to think otherwise, even using a Moshi iVisor AG myself. However, in the end I sold my MacBook Pro because there is absolutely no substitute for a factory anti-glare display. My next MBP will most definitely have an anti-glare display, just like my first one which sold me on Apple products back in 2006.

They really are. You see the red, green and blue pixels everywhere instead of seeing what's actually there. I bought some for my HTC Incredible and it was disgusting.

 

[Thunder82]

Completely disagree. Screen is fine and the lid is strong. The previous non-unibody MBP's had a similar lid design.

I really don't see what you are fussing about..

Agreed entirely. My 2010 HR AG screen is no less flimsy than my old 2009 glossy unibody. In no way does the anti glare screen flex, even under a fair amount of pressure.

 

[Sace]

The non-unibody MacBook Pro's didn't have an LED screen that was as thin as these are though did they?

They did in the last revision with Penryn C2D's.

 

[bigjobby]

The AG screen doesn't twist or flex, and probably only happens slightly if it is opened and closed using the corners of the lid. This is not a 'design' flaw but a 'user' flaw. Also, continuous opening/closing using this method would probably cause damage to the hinges regardless of the screen type.

 

[neversaynever]

what are you talking about? my antiglare is solid as solid as a brick of metal can be.

 

[chrispholt]

Screen

Does anyone have buyers remorse with their AG screen? Does it handle colours well when outside etc?

Thanks.

 

[singhjeet29]

I've had a non-unibody MBP and now the new 2010 revision with Matte Screen Option, and My screen is sturdier than my old MBP, which I never had any issues with. So maybe the glass is more sturdier than this, but this screen is fairly solid as it stands.

I don't exactly see how you could bend it, unless you crushed it somehow, in which case that same pressure on a glossy would like crack the glass anyways.

 

[maker]

maybe you should stop trying to bend your screen into a taco shape or hitting it so hard with your 'hard drive" when your on the blue side of the internetz

 

[diablo2112]

This is a resurrected dead thread to begin with. And the AG screen is flimsy? Seriously? Do us a favor. Go handle the new Sony Vaio Z, then come back here and claim that the AG screens are flimsy. You can literally bend the Sony screen a good 3-5" at the corners with moderate pressure, and you'll get a lovely rainbow of colors off the LCD for your efforts. The MBP AG screens are rock-solid compared to most other brands.

This isn't a "design defect". Folks throw around terms like that, and "broken" and others and honestly don't have a clue about product engineering and design. The MBP is a well-designed laptop, and you pay the price for such premium design elements, I might add....

 

[wishfulllama]

Don't really know what you are talking about mate, I've encountered no bending or flimsiness in my new 15" AG mbp. Stop trying to create problems where there are none

 

[SonicBoom1981]

matte user her (2010 mbp) and no design flaw present.

Obviously not as sturdy as a pain of unbendable glass!

 

[cluthz]

They did in the last revision with Penryn C2D's.

Yes and also the Santa Rosa.
The SR MBP as the first laptop to use LED screens.

 

[bigjobby]

Obviously not as sturdy as a pain of unbendable glass!

Not sure about that. Put enough pressure on glass and it'll shatter. Next thread: Gloss display flaw.

 

[Mirabella]

I'm glad this thread was resurrected.

As someone who used a matte screen (pre-unibody) Macbook Pro for almost 4 years (with no glass, and with the "tin foil" bezel), and used a matte screen titanium Powerbook for 4 years before that (basically the same screen design), and used a matte screen blueberry iBook for a few years before that (with no glass, and with a plastic lid and a plastic bezel!), and a Powerbook 150 for a few years before that (again, with no glass, and with another plastic lid and bezel!) – the hand-wringing about this purported "design flaw" with the "flimsy" screen is pure comedy gold.

I expect many long time Apple laptop computer users can similarly appreciate this thread. This is just looking for things to worry about, and, in their absence, making stuff up.

OK, back to using my new matte screen 2010 unibody MacBook Pro for processing some pictures.

Cheers!

 

[SonicBoom1981]

Not sure about that. Put enough pressure on glass and it'll shatter. Next thread: Gloss display flaw.

Indeed there is a Glossy Display Design Flaw: it's called reflections.

Honestly, to me, the glossy displays downfall is the reflections. I could go as far and call it a design flaw.

 

[l.a.rossmann]

They did in the last revision with Penryn C2D's.

The non unibodies used the LP154WP2-TLA* where * is a number from 1 to 4, AUO B154PW04 V.0/V.6, LTN154BT02, N154C6-L01, N154C6-L02

All of these were thicker. It was only the unibody model where there wasn't a separate inverter, with an ultra thin LCD.

The older ones weren't too great - they had a higher instance of very tiny spots that looked like stars in the night sky in the back of the screen, most noticeable on the regular Apple startup screen. The screens deemed acceptable often weren't those without these marks, rather the ones with these marks on the borders/corners where they were not noticeable.I could order a carton of 100 of the older CCFL backlit ones and put 7 in the b-stock pile, and 100 of the A1226/A1260 ones and throw 43 in the b-stock pile. It's why even at the same actual price from China so many places will resell the latter one for much more money. See examples of random first generation LED backlit laptop LCD fail here. I wish I had some with the bright spots for example.

They also, in my experience, had the highest rate of random stupid failure, like the black shadow bars down them because the back light controller on the LCD failed.

Gotta love first generation technology.

 

[adammjenkins]

I am leaning toward the 15" AG, and while I think structural integrity is important, I certainly won't be thrashing my new $2,000+ computer around. I'll treat it carefully just as I would any other big investment. I looked the 15" AG model over pretty well in the Apple store today, and sure, the lid flexed. But I can't think of a single situation where I'll be intentionally flexing the lid to a capacity that might cause damage. I'll be opening and closing the lid with the latch, and I have a feeling that it'll probably be fine.

At least the the lid's flexing is a problem that I can avoid by simply not abusing the machine. Glare and reflections from the glossy screen are problems that will persist throughout the entirety of the computer's life. I know this is a hotly debated topic around here, but my opinion is that a little more flex to the display lid is a much lesser and controllable evil than permanent glare on a portable device where environmental factors can't always be controlled.

 

[SonicBoom1981]

My AntiGlare screen hardly flexes, only a little, so it really is not an issue AT ALL for me, and didn't come into play with making a for and against list for AG.