Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The original article doesn't mention that... seriously why is everyone taking my comment out of context? The assertion "extremely popular" without any qualifier definitely needs a citation. That is my original point.

I’m not taking you out of context. I’m just pointing out that graphic artists prefer mat screens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: masotime
The true question is, when will Apple create something that isn’t a copy? We just have copies of other products. And, NO Apple Vision Pro doesn’t feature “new” technology with the exception of the displays. Remember how Apple sued Samsung for copying the iPhone and won? Apple now is just finding ways on how to copy and not be punished…

 
  • Like
Reactions: Surf Monkey
The only improvement for me personally would be a MagSafe attachment. I use my iPad as a digital flight bag anything else wouldn’t make the purchase worthwhile for me. Or Mac OS for the Pro version.
 

Unless they turn off the blue... This is why "blocking blue" makes this whole claim ridiculous. It kills the color accuracy, and if they really want to reduce blue they can do it by dimming the blue LEDs as they do for Night Shift. Generating blue and then blocking it in the cover glass is useless, inefficient and stupid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tlnargi

It's not wrong. It depends on how you use your display. A high gloss display kills dynamic range where you get specularities and leaves the rest of the display high contrast. Matte spreads the effect across a larger area and avoids hotspots.

I'm not a graphic artist, but I imagine they can't be bothered to keep moving their heads to get the reflections out of the way of their work-- they want to see the whole display at once. So a matte display used in areas with controlled lighting to minimize washout is probably the right option.

For the rest of us working in brighter ambient conditions and either consuming video or reading a few lines of text at a time, it's better to be able to see the part of the screen we're interested in and we'll move when we need to.
 
Unless they turn off the blue... This is why "blocking blue" makes this whole claim ridiculous. It kills the color accuracy, and if they really want to reduce blue they can do it by dimming the blue LEDs as they do for Night Shift. Generating blue and then blocking it in the cover glass is useless, inefficient and stupid.

I was talking about matte screens, not blue light.
 
It's not wrong. It depends on how you use your display. A high gloss display kills dynamic range where you get specularities and leaves the rest of the display high contrast. Matte spreads the effect across a larger area and avoids hotspots.

I'm not a graphic artist, but I imagine they can't be bothered to keep moving their heads to get the reflections out of the way of their work-- they want to see the whole display at once. So a matte display used in areas with controlled lighting to minimize washout is probably the right option.

For the rest of us working in brighter ambient conditions and either consuming video or reading a few lines of text at a time, it's better to be able to see the part of the screen we're interested in and we'll move when we need to.

Excellent description. And yes, that’s why designers prefer matte. Glossy displays are LESS accurate than matte, especially when it comes to creating and editing print output.
 
When will apple bite the damn bullet and let us run macOS or macOS lite from the iPad? That would be a killer feature!
When they're sick and tired of selling Macbooks, likely. IpadOS is Apple main throttling device on Ipads.
 
All the complaining of iPadOS being a "toy OS" or "crippled" or whatever will not obstruct me from enjoying the hell out of the iPad.

Yes I want more power, but it must be more iPadOS power not macOS-on-a-tablet crap.

Now, this nano-display stuff better not compromise durability, otherwise, it's a non-starter for me.

I don't mind the iPad's (spectacular) glossy screen, so I'd have to try it in store to see if I like the textured one.
 
Uh…that nano texture is extremely delicate, worse than the oleophobic coating on the MacBook retina displays. MacBooks get permanent smudges on the display just from opening and closing the lid too many times. How exactly would this work with a touch screen?
 
Why would something called MacOS be on a non Mac device? Wishful thinking. Apple would lose sales of MacBooks if people did get it on a cheaper device
 
I ac
This is a top tier comment. I mean I like my m2 but it is so clunky sometimes to use. Apple needs to bite the bullet and just let users run macOS or macOS lite. Freeform window management, a more functional dock, etc.

Stage manager has failed. The hardware is already powerful enough to run macOS so why do they give us this weird window manager?

Too bad window managers aren't apps that developers could submit to the app store or host on their alternative app stores, so if Apple doesn't want to do it, then let developers do it.
I actually love Stage Manager and keep it on at all times…. on MacOS. Its kind of like having desktop spaces, except you can see whats going with the open windows at all times, like if a new message pops up, or your rendering is done, and its easy to multitask than desktop spaces.

But in iPad it is indeed kinda useless. We need MacOS on iPad. I’m still holding tight to my M1 12.9 Pro incase this becomes a reality. Other than that its just easier to use iPad Mini than fumble with a 12.9 inch iPhone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: falkon-engine
As a graphic artist I have to say that your comment is a little short sighted. A mat screen is exactly what designers want. Shiny reflective screens are not optimal for design work. The potential issue is how Apple handles the mating. If they can reduce the amount of finger prints it collects they’ll be offering exactly what many of us want: an iPad screen that’s more like a piece of paper and less like a consumer monitor. And to add to that, there are already many mat screen protector options, mostly aimed at artists and designers using the device as a drawing surface.
Thanks for taking the time to contribute your viewpoint. As a video editor I can tell you that matte screens compromise both both brightness and resolution. I work with no lighting behind me and much prefer the full glass experience.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tlnargi
Because Mac is a marketing term and can applied to anything Apple wants to apply it to.
You’re a designer, why would Apple have to rewrite the entire UI for macOS to be touch friendly…when they’ve already made an OS from the ground up around that UX paradigm?
 
You’re a designer, why would Apple have to rewrite the entire UI for macOS to be touch friendly…when they’ve already made an OS from the ground up around that UX paradigm?
Because a touchscreen UI must be dumbed down and blown up, with giant buttons and plenty of whitespace because your fingertip is an imprecise and crude pointing tool and your hand blocks your view of the UI that you're using.

Touchscreen computers are a dumb idea for that reason, in addition to the fact that computers already have touch-based controllers. Those controllers move a precise cursor that affords you the ability to manipulate a far-more-complex or rich UI without blocking the view of what you're doing.

And finally: Waving your hands in front of you all day would be a crappy way to work. Thus the utter failure of companies seeking to build a Minority Report UI.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Surf Monkey
This is the Apple that made self destructing keyboards and black MacBooks that come pre-chipped right out of the box, so if this rumor carries any weight then it would be a grave mistake to assume they’ve properly considered wear & tear. Approach with extreme caution ⚠️
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.