Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

MacBook Pro Now Available With Nano-Texture Display for First Time

alexandr said:
100% — that thing weighs a ton. Of course who am I to talk with my 16" M2)) But I only take it with me if I'm traveling and working, which only happens a couple times a year. But yes, that disc drive — mmmm :)
Click to expand...
I’ve long wanted to transplant an M series Max into a 17 inch MacBook Pro. Keep the optical drive, replace the display with an OLED, keep that lovely keyboard. Now THAT’s a machine worth getting excited about.
 
  • Love
Reactions: alexandr
I just got an antiglare screen protector for my iPhone, and now I want it everywhere lol. Nanotexture on macbook pro makes me really want it. When the 17 Pro comes out with Nanotexutre everyone will be thinking the same, where was this all these years.

Nanotexture Apple Watch? lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thymio
ctjack said:
if only that is a booger that were dropped in the AM onto the keyboard and the person tried to close the lid by the evening when that thing became hard as rock.
Click to expand...

Bruh, there have been users who had their display glass cracked by crumbs of food on their keyboards. The tolerances are insane.
 
Since nano option is available for the iMac, I guess it will be also for the next Macbook air M4 :)
Would be the perfect student laptop ! :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: zoga
Analog Kid said:
Game changer.

Zero regrets with the iPad Pro nano texture.

I used to hate matte screens because the ambient light washed out too much of the display and it was easier to move my head to avoid the local reflections of a glossy screen. Between higher brightness displays and advancements in anti-reflective coatings and the really well engineered nano-texture, the situation has changed and I've swung hard toward nano.
Click to expand...
Huh, really?! I worked at a mac dev shop back in the day when our devs had a mix of gloss and matte and the comparisons were always night and day worse for the matte.

I was always in the camp that there was no such thing as 'anti-glare' only 'average-glare' where everything was washed out. Which has always been true before.

I've never heard somebody like you share this opinion, but then talk about what a difference the nano is. Very interesting. 🤔

Thanks!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thymio
MrTemple said:
I was always in the camp that there was no such thing as 'anti-glare' only 'average-glare' where everything was washed out. Which has always been true before.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's about how I thought of matte vs gloss back in the day as well. What you're seeing is screen+glare. I can either focus the glare in one place and totally wipe out the on-screen content in that area, or I can spread that same energy across the screen and make everything equally bad. If the ambient light is strong, then equally bad is unreadable, if the ambient light is low then it just gets washed out.

If you search far enough back in the forum archives, you'll probably find threads where I'm arguing strenuously in favor of gloss over matte.

My experience with the nano-texture has been quite different. Yes, there is still that effect, but to a much smaller degree and the screen is now able to power through the glare. I think there's a few factors at work: better anti-reflective coatings allow more light to pass through the coverglass and into the display where it dissipates rather than reflect, the nano-texture I believe is doing what they claim and scattering the light in a much more effective way, but also you've got a much brighter screen than we used to have so screen has a fighting chance in the screen+glare mashup.

It's not going to let you see brilliant high contrast colors with the sun behind you-- it's still a developing technology and thus distinguishable from magic-- but sitting in a office with uncovered windows is no longer a problem for me. I'm not doing high accuracy color grading or anything, but for text work or watching a movie? Much clearer and less fatiguing on my eyes.

I've also got a regular and nano-texture ASD on my desk and both look quite usable in the room and better than my M1 MPB, but in the standard display I can see what's behind me and how many fingers I'm holding up, the nano-texture has none of that. If you push it, you can see light gradients under intense light which is what people mean when they say the "lose contrast"-- but no content is lost anywhere on the screen for me.

It's truly remarkable to me. The standard screens used to feel high contrast and have more pop, but now they feel like I'm looking at everything underwater where there's this annoying reflection on the surface at a different focal depth than the content I want to see.

Different people will certainly have different sensitivities, but I haven't found a use case yet where I don't prefer the nano. Not for the ASD, not for the iPad, my next MBP will certainly be nano, and I look forward to it coming to the iPhone where I think it will have the biggest impact.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: CyclingHermit, zoga, MrTemple and 4 others
DominikHoffmann said:
I did not like their transition to only glossy screens at all. I loved the 15-inch high-resolution matte screen of my 2011 MacBook Pro. It took until the M1 MacBook Pro, until they came out with a screen that was the Retina equivalent of what I had then.
Click to expand...

I purchased the same 'upgrade' to my 2011 MBP—where they basically left the glass off the front of a slightly higher res display.

I agree, it was a great machine… well… until the solder cracked on the GPU that is. I got a few more weeks out of it by baking the motherboard in the oven, but that's another story! 😂
 
Awesome news, definitely ordering for next MBP.

nano texture should have come to MacBooks first, since you can usually arrange your office to reduce glare, but while on the road or outside with your MBP its a lot harder.
 
DMG35 said:
I have the Pro Display XDR and iPad Pro with Nano texture. I use the Apple Cloth as well as a microfiber cloth and they both look brand new. Never had any issues with the screens getting scratched.
Click to expand...
What product do you use? Water?
 
Brien said:
Tangentially, offer an 18” MBP. With the current bezels, it’d be smaller than the old 17”. Cowards.
Click to expand...
Funny, when I had the 17" iMac — I thought it — "my what a huge display I have, grandma", now when I travel with my 16" I suffer from lack of screen real estate. Got myself a 13" iPad as a secondary :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: robfoll
******* said:
Love these displays. And I have two more in case they fail. Pretty old now, but they still work like a charm.
Click to expand...
They are absolutely beautiful pieces of tech. I have 2(in different cities) and I just adore them. Unfortunately in my line of work, I often times have to use my MacBook as a reference for resolution/quality. Not ideal, but it's so hard to find something that will look decent on my desk and not cost what the XDR costs. I've had my eyes on the BenQ PD3225U 32" for a while now, but still haven't pulled the plug. From reasonably priced monitors it seem to be the only one I'm seriously considering.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0134168
Last time I checked at the Apple Store, if I recall correctly, the nano texture display did affect color rendering. Is that still the case?
 
Analog Kid said:
Yes, there is still that effect, but to a much smaller degree and the screen is now able to power through the glare. I think there's a few factors at work: better anti-reflective coatings allow more light to pass through the coverglass and into the display where it dissipates rather than reflect, the nano-texture I believe is doing what they claim and scattering the light in a much more effective way, but also you've got a much brighter screen than we used to have so screen has a fighting chance in the screen+glare mashup.
Click to expand...

I think you nailed the key difference.

From a physics perspective there is just no such thing as “better scattering”, unless they can literally shape the reflections from every angle away from the angles a viewer will likely be at.

You’d need the etching to be little lenses that take light from basically any of 180 degrees in x and y axes, then have each angle reflected different, away from the centre cone the viewer would be in. You could easily do that for one source angle, but every micro-etch on the screen would need to do it for all the angles simultaneously differently.

Which I don’t think they’re doing. I’m not sure that’s even physically possible at the scale at which the scattering would have to be to not distort the screen.


But what would work is to just massively brighten the display in high glare environments.

Which is literally what they announced (higher nits outdoors/etc).

So it’s still “average glare” but they’ve got the screen bright enough to overpower the average.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back