Matte hi-res screen...

[therealseebs]

So, looks like I lose. My existing MBP is 1920x1200 matte. It appears that my options in new Macs are:
1. 1680x1050 matte.
2. 2880x1800 unspecified-glossiness.

Historically, any time Apple has not specified degree of gloss, it's meant glossy/reflective, and I am not really okay with the glossy/reflective display. So they have only noticably lower resolution options for me now. I like the 16:10 ratio, at least, but I'm really liking my x1080/x1200 displays, and going down to the 1680x1050 seems like it'd be a pretty noticeable decline.

Any suggestions? I guess I could get a 17" refurb, but those are noticably less awesome in some other ways.

 

[Mackilroy]

They claim to have reduced glare by quite a bit, and it's an IPS display, which is very nice.

 

[therealseebs]

They claim to have reduced glare by quite a bit, and it's an IPS display, which is very nice.

I was under the impression that some of the old ones were IPS too.

I dunno. "Claim to have reduced glare" doesn't make me very encouraged. The matte screens really *work* -- you can sit anywhere, with your back to basically anything, and still use the computer. Glare and reflections are really distracting for me.

 

[ma2ha3]

where is the new 4k desktop monitor? i cant believe i see the day my 30 incd lcd beaten by a laptop screen. yes it is an upgrade for laptop, what about my desktop LCD?

 

[Mackilroy]

I was under the impression that some of the old ones were IPS too.

I dunno. "Claim to have reduced glare" doesn't make me very encouraged. The matte screens really *work* -- you can sit anywhere, with your back to basically anything, and still use the computer. Glare and reflections are really distracting for me.

No. This is the first MBP with an IPS display.

I can only tell you what Apple said -- the keynote claimed 75% reduced glare.

where is the new 4k desktop monitor? i cant believe i see the day my 30 incd lcd beaten by a laptop screen. yes it is an upgrade for laptop, what about my desktop LCD?

You're going to be paying quite a bit of money (think tens of thousands of dollars) if you want a 4k desktop monitor at the moment.

 

[therealseebs]

Huh, right you are -- they were just high-end TN, not IPS.

Thing is, reducing glare doesn't really solve the problem, which is that I can clearly see things that are not part of the display on a glossy display. So I guess I lose; they aren't making anything that offers a decent resolution and isn't glossy.

 

[Tipsy McStagger]

So what do you think will be better for reading large amounts of text. A high-res anti glare screen or a newer retina screen? Reflection is a big issue for me

 

[therealseebs]

So what do you think will be better for reading large amounts of text. A high-res anti glare screen or a newer retina screen? Reflection is a big issue for me

Unless the retina screen is really, really, magical, I would say the high-res anti-glare screen.

... Well, honestly, at this point what I'm likely to use is a 15" ASUS with a 1920x1080 matte screen, which is noticably higher res than the 15" MBP. Or my old 17" 1920x1200 MBP. The new ones are ... well, I'm sure they're pretty in stores, but it doesn't seem like they're really targeting the "actually spend all day looking at this display" market.

 

[Mojo1]

I traded my early 2008 15" MBP for a 13" early 2011 MBP. No matte option? No Problem...

I got the $35 Power Support anti-glare film. It isn't the cheapest option film-wise but when I compared it to my 15" MBP I could not see a difference.

 

[therealseebs]

I traded my early 2008 15" MBP for a 13" early 2011 MBP. No matte option? No Problem...

I got the $35 Power Support anti-glare film. It isn't the cheapest option film-wise but when I compared it to my 15" MBP I could not see a difference.

Hmm, that's a thought. I hadn't looked at those, if they work reasonably that's better than nothing, I guess.