SR Macbook Screen LED?

mattyh

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Nov 1, 2007
5
0
Alright, so hear me out, this might sound crazy. I bought a macbook 2 weeks ago and took it back today in order to get the new Santa Rosa Macbook. I just got home and fired up the new Macbook and the first thing I did was look at the screen to see if it was Matte or something because it looked different than the Macbook I had been using only a couple hours earlier. I remarked to my wife that the greys almost seemed a little more brown. She remarked that from the side they looked brown, but when she looked head on it wasn't. I dismissed it at that, but I kept thinking that the screen looked different.

I've been trying to figure out if something was wrong, but then it hit me to look into the LED backlight stuff that was written about the Macbook Pro. Now, I hadn't looked into what an LED LCD is before because I've never been interested in the Macbook Pro. Two articles I found caught my eye though.

The first, a review with side by side pics of the the MBP with and w/o a LED backlight. My screen honestly looks like the right one and my wife agrees. Link: http://www.engadget.com/2007/06/06/macbook-pro-backlight-comparison-led-vs-ccfl/

The second article that caught my eye was one from engadget that mentioned the MBP losing .2lbs when it went LED (or at least that's what I gathered from the article). The new macbook is 5lbs instead of 5.2lbs correct? These seem like interesting coincidences. Link: http://www.engadget.com/2007/06/05/more-apples-new-led-backlit-macbook-pro/

I full well realize I could be crazy and might be completely wrong, but what do you guys think?
 

Sun Baked

macrumors G5
May 19, 2002
14,874
57
macbook says...

* 13.3-inch (diagonal) glossy widescreen TFT display with support for millions of colors
* Supported resolutions: 1280 by 800 (native), 1152 by 720, 1024 by 768, 1024 by 640, 800 by 600, 800 by 500, 720 by 480, and 640 by 480 pixels at 16:10 aspect ratio; 1024 by 768, 800 by 600, and 640 by 480 pixels at 4:3 aspect ratio; 720 by 480 pixels at 3:2 aspect ratio


macbook pro says

* 15.4-inch (diagonal) TFT LED backlit display with support for millions of colors; optional glossy widescreen display
* Supported resolutions: 1440 by 900 (native), 1280 by 800, 1152 by 720, 1024 by 640, and 800 by 500 at 16:10 aspect ratio; 1024 by 768, 800 by 600, and 640 by 480 at 4:3 aspect ratio; 1024 by 768, 800 by 600, and 640 by 480 at 4:3 aspect ratio stretched; 720 by 480 at 3:2 aspect ratio; 720 by 480 at 3:2 aspect ratio stretched
 
Comment

mattyh

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Nov 1, 2007
5
0
macbook says...

* 13.3-inch (diagonal) glossy widescreen TFT display with support for millions of colors
* Supported resolutions: 1280 by 800 (native), 1152 by 720, 1024 by 768, 1024 by 640, 800 by 600, 800 by 500, 720 by 480, and 640 by 480 pixels at 16:10 aspect ratio; 1024 by 768, 800 by 600, and 640 by 480 pixels at 4:3 aspect ratio; 720 by 480 pixels at 3:2 aspect ratio


macbook pro says

* 15.4-inch (diagonal) TFT LED backlit display with support for millions of colors; optional glossy widescreen display
* Supported resolutions: 1440 by 900 (native), 1280 by 800, 1152 by 720, 1024 by 640, and 800 by 500 at 16:10 aspect ratio; 1024 by 768, 800 by 600, and 640 by 480 at 4:3 aspect ratio; 1024 by 768, 800 by 600, and 640 by 480 at 4:3 aspect ratio stretched; 720 by 480 at 3:2 aspect ratio; 720 by 480 at 3:2 aspect ratio stretched
I understand all of that, but I find it odd that I noticed those things about my screen before ever seeing the LED information. I realize it's more than likely that my screen is messed up, or that I am just crazy, than for apple to have failed to update their specs to show such a big feature addition. But, I wonder if anyone else is noticing these things.
 
Comment

thies

macrumors regular
Jul 22, 2002
202
0
Well, considering that everything else appears to be more or less identical to the last generation I'd be curious what else could explain the weight loss.

Would also argue that the omission about mentioning LED backlighting in the specs on the Macbook might be purely psychological in regards to customers buying the Pro.

Anyone up to cracking a new MB open to check? :D
 
Comment

youyesyou

macrumors member
Sep 13, 2007
53
0
Paris, France
The LED display Panel was the feature i was waiting for. Good upgrade but i really missed the LED. I think we will see 13,3 MBP with LED display in january, with maybe a redesign of the MBP.

I noticed this weight loss too but there was a redsign of the maiboard to get on santa rosa, and at the same time the X3100, maybe here is the point ?

If this is the same ****** AUO display panel like the May upgrade : 9C5F / 42717C0, i will be really disspointed.

Anyone with a new Macbook around ? I'm scarry :(
 
Comment

dadudeness

macrumors regular
Oct 31, 2007
111
7
de
LED or no LED - that's the question

i'm pretty excited about the possibillity they just updated the panel to LED backlight silently and would really be happy if anyone could confirm that.

in germany they wont be available until mid or end of next week so im on pins and needles here all the time... aaargh
 
Comment

Salty Pirate

macrumors 6502
Oct 5, 2005
469
499
kansas city
Honestly I was not crazy about the LED screen at first, but now I would not want a old style CF again. I had to mess with the color calibration, but I am in love with the uniform brightness. Also, it will not dim over time. I put it next to my brothers 17 powerbook 1.67 and his so was so dim and crappy looking.

Very happy with LED backlight.
 
Comment

Celeron

macrumors 6502a
Mar 11, 2004
704
9
I picked up a new MacBook last night. The box says the LCD backlight contains mercury, so I believe its your classic LCD backlight and not LED.
 
Comment

tianuk3

macrumors member
Oct 29, 2007
91
0
are the standard (non LED) screens hazadous in anyway to the consumer?or is it just that they are energy wasting
 
Comment

DaLurker

macrumors 6502
Mar 30, 2006
364
0
are the standard (non LED) screens hazadous in anyway to the consumer?or is it just that they are energy wasting
CCFL backlighting is not as environmentally friendly when you want to throw it out and use more energy relative to the LED backlights.

In terms of your exposure, they're not more hazardous to you.
 
Comment

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
318
  • mrgreenfirework
4
Replies
4
Views
725
  • Kalisungrl18
3
Replies
3
Views
421
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.