Screens on Unibody Macbook pro 17": Antiglare is inferior?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by pabsw, May 27, 2009.

  1. pabsw macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    #1
    Would welcome any technical information about the following: I've summarised what I've been able to find out myself:

    The anti-glare is the screen from the previous generation macbook pro 17" 1920x1200 option.

    The glossy screen is a new build with the advertised 60% greater gamut. The colours are 'truer' according to the sales dept at apple.

    The two are entirely different screens. both are LED backlit but the glossy is the newer tech.

    Apple don't make this explicit on their website and their is even conflict between staff at apple when you ring to try and clarify the situation.

    I have the antiglare but under remorse I am comparing it with a glossy. I'll take some pics and post them when the glossy arrives

    The antiglare is still awesome but I am eager to compare it with the glossy.

    I did compare it with my previous generation 15" MPB and the screen is brighter, with better contrast (enough to be obvious) just FYI

    does anyone have any other knowledge / comments on this?
     
  2. quackwack macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2008
    #2
    i dont know if the antiglare screens are from the previous generation or not but comparing them side by side after calibrating both with the colorsync utility they appear identical in terms of colour except for the fact that the glossy seems to have more clarity and seems a little more clearer / sharper. the antiglare is still very sharp but because the light is diffused the clarity is not of the same level. brightness seems to be the same as well.

    also there are two antiglare screens being used: 9cac and 9cad
     
  3. pabsw thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    #3
    gamut

    so do you benefit from the 60% greater gamut with the matte?

    thanks for your reply
     
  4. quackwack macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2008
    #4
    i wouldnt know how to measure a "60% increase in gamut" as i dont have a previous generation macbook pro.

    all i can say is, that by eye the glossy and antiglare unibodies look identical in terms of colour after calibration. this is comparing them using the same photos and desktop backgrounds.

    the only noticeable differences i can see are those that i stated in my previous post (the clarity issue etc).
     
  5. Apple Corps macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2003
    Location:
    California
    #5
    pabsw:

    "Would welcome any technical information about the following: I've summarised what I've been able to find out myself:"

    Where / how did you confirm that that the anti-glare screen is the previous generation?

    That is different from many of the posted "opinions" on the topic.
     
  6. NovemberWhiskey macrumors 68030

    NovemberWhiskey

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    #6
    Why do I keep hearing this rumor that the anti-glare screen is basically a glossy screen with the glass removed, and a bezel put on?

    I asked a guy at the Apple store and they said that they are two completely different screens.
     
  7. Apple Corps macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2003
    Location:
    California
    #7
    They well may be two different screens BUT that does not confirm that the anti-glare option is the "previous generation" screen - if I understand your post correctly. There were some direct quotes that the increased gamut was on both the glossy and anti-glare screens. If so - that would demonstrate that the anti-glare screen is NOT the previous generation - yes?
     
  8. MacsomJRR macrumors 6502a

    MacsomJRR

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2003
    Location:
    San Diego
    #8
    My guess is that this is accurate. Makes sense considering adding a new screen to an order delays it a couple days.
     
  9. quackwack macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2008
    #9
    yeah they must be different screens, it would make no sense having an anti glare coating on the panel and then putting glass over it as that would take away the clarity of the image. the glossys are basically similar to the imacs arent they? clear panel and then clear glass on top.
     
  10. Apple Corps macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2003
    Location:
    California
    #10
    Deep Breath - the OP is postulating that the anti -glare screen is PREVIOUS GENERATION.

    Both the glossy and anti - glare screens have the increased gamut - thus the anti - glare would NOT be the previous generation.
     
  11. quackwack macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2008
    #11
    relax yourself man, i know what he postulated.

    "The antiglare is still awesome but I am eager to compare it with the glossy.

    I did compare it with my previous generation 15" MPB and the screen is brighter, with better contrast (enough to be obvious) just FYI

    does anyone have any other knowledge / comments on this?"

    i merely offered a comment.
     
  12. NovemberWhiskey macrumors 68030

    NovemberWhiskey

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    #12
    I never thought the current anti-glare screen was the previous gen screen, nor did I intend to imply it in my post.

    I was just asking whether or not the anti-glare was an entirely different screen or if it was just the glossy screen minus the glass and with bezel.

    I mean, the anti-glare option does seem like an ad hoc after-thought...considering the bezel is tacked on there. Looking at older generation screens, the bezel is integrated much cleaner--it actually looks like it was designed this way.

    The new anti-glare screen def. looks like someone is hacking things up.

    But the guy at the macstore said they are two diff. screens.
     
  13. Apple Corps macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2003
    Location:
    California
    #13
    Several issues at play - my comments were just emphasizing that per the OP's question the anti-glare screen is not the older technology screen as his "findings" indicate - the gamut shows that I think.

    I went down to the Apple store and looked at both screens in detail - actually left very impressed with the anti glare version for my needs when the time comes.
     
  14. Apple Corps macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2003
    Location:
    California
    #15
    Thanks - that was what I was re-calling - the operative words were about the same anti glare PROPERTIES as the last 17".

    There were a number of posts referencing Phil's presentation and how most interpreted it as the new screen - wider gamut - glass removed...
     
  15. NovemberWhiskey macrumors 68030

    NovemberWhiskey

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    #16
    Thanks!

    So for those that didn't watch it, or can't understand what the other posters are saying:

    The anti-glare screen is the same screen as the glossy screen--but the glass has been removed and a a bezel has been put around it.

    He did NOT say it was the same screen as the last 17'' macbook. He said it has the same anti-glare properties as the last 17'' macbook.
     
  16. pabsw thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    #17
    I know it's different, I get conflicting information from the apple store. When I bought the antiglare I assumed it was the same screen as the glossy but when I spoke to an engineer he told me that there was no difference in tech between the antiglare screen on the new macbook pro and the previous generation models. They told me that the increased colour gamut did not apply to the antiglare. So they offered to send me a glossy to compare it with.

    Can you see my problem - apple's advertising gives no indication. The keynote is a little ambiguous as it said 'same display properties for anti-glare as the previous generation macbook pro'. Engineers at apple give conflicting verbal information. Even the sales chat team online say it's previous generation.

    When I get the glossy i'll try to take some shots and post them.

    I'm aware there have been loads of opinions on whether antiglare / glossy is better in terms of use, and that's not the purpose of this discussion. This is more to do with the build of the screen. Does anyone have their screen build identifiers to hand to compare the two? Mine just has a blank space.

    Thanks again for all your comments
     
  17. Apple Corps macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2003
    Location:
    California
    #18
    pabsw - your call on posting images of the two screens. I'm not sure of the value as many of us have seen them side by side in person and there are many many posts on people's views in the "glassy vs glossy vs matte threads.

    That topic has been beaten to death many times over.

    Phil's comments could have been a bit clearer on the point but I doubt he was anticipating the precise point that has developed.
     
  18. taphil macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2007
    #19
    This question comes up again and again, and the answer is always the same.

    The glossy and matte are both the same except for the matte or glossy finish.

    Apple uses two display vendors, each with glossy and matte: glossy displays are 9C98 by Samsung and 9C99 by LG, and matte displays are 9CAC by Samsung and 9CAD by LG. The two matte are shown in this thread http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=9314843 and the two glossy in various threads here.

    This review http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-MacBook-Pro-17-Unibody-Non-Glare.16952.0.html proves the point. A close look at the top middle color space graph clearly shows that the matte screen has the same color as the glossy version. And here is the review of the glossy 17" for comparison http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review...minium-Unibody-17-9600M-GT-T9550.16035.0.html

    Finally, I have already posted pics directly comparing the matte vs the glossy http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=671435

    Thus, matte and display are identical in terms of widened color gamut, and the only difference is the finish.
     
  19. NovemberWhiskey macrumors 68030

    NovemberWhiskey

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    #20
    Thanks for all the good links!

    I'm pretty sure I want some sort of anti-glare protection, but I don't know whether or not I should get the $50 anti-glare option from apple, or if I should buy a regular Glossy screen and add an aftermarket anti-glare film on top of that glossy screen.

    I was thinking that I would get the better picture, and the anti-glare properties (as well as some screen protection) if I go that route. What do you guys think?
     
  20. taphil macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2007
    #21
    Putting an anti-glare film over the glass will make the screen look like crap. Since the film is so far away from the actual LCD, the image is very distorted. It has been reported here in various threads.
     
  21. pabsw thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    #22
    Cheers

    thanks taphil for your technical comments. that's what I was hoping for.

    This thread was never intended as a 'what do you prefer' discussion as I know there are hundreds of these. I've found it difficult to get clear answers from apple and the net.

    So thanks for everyone's contributions
     
  22. NovemberWhiskey macrumors 68030

    NovemberWhiskey

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    #23
    I went to the Apple store to compare the two screens yesterday.

    There was such a big difference in image (the glossy was far superior) imo. Even more so than I remember the last time I went to check out the two.

    However, the glossy did suffer from MUCH MORE glare than the anti-glare screen. I felt that I could read faster and comprehend more of what I read on the anti-glare screen. But watching videos was not as fun. The images looked almost grainy when compared to the glossy version.

    I was wondering if this large discrepency could have been due to which video card was selected. I think the new MBPs have two different settings you can choose from. Would this affect the sharpness of images?
     

Share This Page