MBP Retina matte anti-glare option?

[withfilm]

So, I'm curious about the rumored new retina display. Do you think we will get a matte anti-glare option? I can speak for a number of creative professionals that need a matte option. But, wouldn't the matte screen affect the retina display assuming there is a bit of texture to the matte screen?

Thoughts? Who wants to see an anti-glare retina option?

 

[Menel]

So, I'm curious about the rumored new retina display. Do you think we will get a matte anti-glare option? I can speak for a number of creative professionals that need a matte option. But, wouldn't the matte screen affect the retina display assuming there is a bit of texture to the matte screen?

Thoughts? Who wants to see an anti-glare retina option?

Matte does not significantly impact the high PPI clarity 'retina' screens provide.

Just ask the many with PS/SGP anti glare screen protectors. The resolution gain over the old iPad is still extremely noticeable. If the glass is properly matte, it would be far better than a screen protector.

 

[Stetrain]

 

[withfilm]

Image

^ Great advice! I'll take note of that.

 

[ixodes]

So, I'm curious about the rumored new retina display. Do you think we will get a matte anti-glare option? I can speak for a number of creative professionals that need a matte option. But, wouldn't the matte screen affect the retina display assuming there is a bit of texture to the matte screen?

Thoughts? Who wants to see an anti-glare retina option?

Retina, is nothing more than a word that Apple uses to make consumers think they create magical products.

The reality is that it's just a high resolution display that's been around on professional laptops for years.

My ThinkPad T60p I bought in 1996 had what Apple claims as a "retina" display.

They are smooth, there is no "texture".


http://is.gd/UHVc2z

 

[Stetrain]

Retina, is nothing more than a word that Apple uses to make consumers think they create magical products.

The reality is that it's just a high resolution display that's been around on professional laptops for years.

My ThinkPad T60p I bought in 1996 had what Apple claims as a "retina" display.

They are smooth, there is no "texture".


http://is.gd/UHVc2z

That display (15" 1600x1200) is 133dpi, which isn't much higher than the current Macbook Pro's (15.4" 1440x900) 110dpi display or the optional high-res (15.4" 1680x1050) 128dpi display.

The rumored retina display would be a large jump, to something like 2880x1800, which in a 15.4" display is 220dpi.

I don't see any reason why that display couldn't be offered in antiglare, but nobody knows if Apple will actually offer that.

 

[thundersteele]

Retina, is nothing more than a word that Apple uses to make consumers think they create magical products.

The reality is that it's just a high resolution display that's been around on professional laptops for years.

My ThinkPad T60p I bought in 1996 had what Apple claims as a "retina" display.

They are smooth, there is no "texture".


http://is.gd/UHVc2z

Not sure what your point is. 1680x1050 is available for the 15'' MBP without apple calling it retina, and which is very similar to the 1600x1200 on the Thinkpad.

A "retina" 15'' MBP would probably have a resolution of 2880x1800... this doesn't change the fact that "retina" is a buzzword that apple created, but it's still more than is available on any other laptop that I am aware of.

My personal definition of "retina" is a doubling of the linear resolution compared to the previous model, and a corresponding adjustment of the OS (resolution independence!). I don't care much whether a normal human eye can still distinguish individual pixels at some arbitrary distance (I have a hard time doing that on the current high-res 15'' model).

 

[ixodes]

That display (15" 1600x1200) is 133dpi, which isn't much higher than the current Macbook Pro's (15.4" 1440x900) 110dpi display or the optional high-res (15.4" 1680x1050) 128dpi display.

The rumored retina display would be a large jump, to something like 2880x1800, which in a 15.4" display is 220dpi.

I don't see any reason why that display couldn't be offered in antiglare, but nobody knows if Apple will actually offer that.

Not sure what your point is. 1680x1050 is available for the 15'' MBP without apple calling it retina, and which is very similar to the 1600x1200 on the Thinkpad.

A "retina" 15'' MBP would probably have a resolution of 2880x1800... this doesn't change the fact that "retina" is a buzzword that apple created, but it's still more than is available on any other laptop that I am aware of.

My personal definition of "retina" is a doubling of the linear resolution compared to the previous model, and a corresponding adjustment of the OS (resolution independence!). I don't care much whether a normal human eye can still distinguish individual pixels at some arbitrary distance (I have a hard time doing that on the current high-res 15'' model).

Both of you are correct, when it comes to resolution. Thanks for correcting me.

I wrote my post in haste, thinking about the fact that what is being discussed is IPS technology. Then add-in the higher resolution and that is what Apple calls retina.

An example, is that I've worked in a cross platform engineering environment for years. We use Windows and Mac. I have always had the 1600x1200 in my 15" ThinkPads but not my Mac laptops because it wasn't an option. Finally in mid 2010 Apple offered anti-glare hi-res 15" MBP's and I bought one immediately.

So it will be very interesting if they offer a higher resolution with these new models. If they do I will pre-order just like I do iPhones.

 

[therealseebs]

Retina, is nothing more than a word that Apple uses to make consumers think they create magical products.

The reality is that it's just a high resolution display that's been around on professional laptops for years.

My ThinkPad T60p I bought in 1996 had what Apple claims as a "retina" display.

No. 15" 1600x1200 is not the same as 15" 2880x1800. The new high-res display is noticably higher resolution.