Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
No, I want Apple to foster innovations in hardware instead of being a me-too PC hardware maker.

They already did quit a big step forward in build quality with new MacBooks, you can't ask for the moon every time Steve go live. Give them some time.
 
They already did quit a big step forward in build quality with new MacBooks, you can't ask for the moon every time Steve go live. Give them some time.

But if apple had only had integrated graphics on the original Mac Pro would you say "you can't ask for the moon every time Steve go live. Give them some time" to come up with a graphics card.

If apple redesigned the laptops again but got rid of the user replaceable hard drive, would you defend that decision?

If apple wants $2500 for a laptop it should be the best laptop it can be. At that price the matte screen is such a trivial option/addition to include, so why drop it?
 
OK, so far the consensus seems to be that reflections in and of themselves are not desirable. What is desirable is the saturation and contrast. So: if we could divorce reflections from the equation, then everyone would be happier.

Therefore, Apple (or some screen manufacturer) needs to innovate a solution, like laser-etched glass or something. There must be a way to have the best of both worlds.
 
Shame on Apple for forgetting about the industry that gives them so much money, the graphic and entertainment industry.

They should ALWAYS have a glossy and matte option for all of their laptops. It's just stupid and careless not to have these options.
 
OK, so far the consensus seems to be that reflections in and of themselves are not desirable. What is desirable is the saturation and contrast. So: if we could divorce reflections from the equation, then everyone would be happier.

Therefore, Apple (or some screen manufacturer) needs to innovate a solution, like laser-etched glass or something. There must be a way to have the best of both worlds.
There is an anti-glare coating for glasses called Crizal that works amazingly well. It's expensive but it works. I don't see why it wouldn't work on the MB screens if you could get someone to apply it.
 
The point is that reflections are an indication that the screen you are using will reflect/transmit all of the light it receives (better color/saturation), rather than absorb and scatter the light (the washed out look). So if you want a screen that allows colors to pass through with little absorption, then you need the glossy/you will also see reflections. As of now, you cannot have the one without the other in the world of laptop screens. By nature, making the screen NOT reflect will also mean that the picture is going through a surface that absorbs or scatters the light, and things will appear more washed out.
 
The point is that reflections are an indication that the screen you are using will reflect/transmit all of the light it receives (better color/saturation), rather than absorb and scatter the light (the washed out look). So if you want a screen that allows colors to pass through with little absorption, then you need the glossy/you will also see reflections. As of now, you cannot have the one without the other in the world of laptop screens. By nature, making the screen NOT reflect will also mean that the picture is going through a surface that absorbs or scatters the light, and things will appear more washed out.
That's why I mentioned Crizal. Trust me, there is no washing out of colors. If I look at tree without my glasses it's vibrant. If I then put my glasses on it's just as vibrant. The coating is absolutely amazing (better be for the price). However, I'm not sure if it only works within an inch of your eyes though as faint reflections can only be seen when the glasses have been taken off.

[EDIT]
I've just looked at the application process. It's quite complicated. If this were to be applied to glass screens on monitors then it would probably have to be done during manufacturing. Also, because it was ~$65 to get it on my two lenses, I can't imagine how much it would cost on 13.3"-24" screen.
 
The point is that reflections are an indication that the screen you are using will reflect/transmit all of the light it receives (better color/saturation), rather than absorb and scatter the light (the washed out look). So if you want a screen that allows colors to pass through with little absorption, then you need the glossy/you will also see reflections. As of now, you cannot have the one without the other in the world of laptop screens. By nature, making the screen NOT reflect will also mean that the picture is going through a surface that absorbs or scatters the light, and things will appear more washed out.

None of this really matters. I'm sitting in front of a MBP with LED backlit matte screen, and I'm really happy with it. It doesn't look washed out to me, despite all the facts that say I'm full of it. To me... it looks just the way I want my laptop screen to look. It's really that simple. If I were to buy a new MBP I would want it to have at least a screen I am as comfortable with as the one I'm using now... and that would definitely exclude the new glassy/glossy ones. No amount of scientific number crunching or physics explanations is going to make a difference. It's all just argument. In the end, it doesn't make me like looking at a shiny screen under most normal everyday lighting conditions. Nothing is perfect, but I prefer the more smooth tones of the matte screen. Why does this bother glossy fans so much?
 
None of this really matters. I'm sitting in front of a MBP with LED backlit matte screen, and I'm really happy with it. It doesn't look washed out to me, despite all the facts that say I'm full of it. To me... it looks just the way I want my laptop screen to look. It's really that simple. If I were to buy a new MBP I would want it to have at least a screen I am as comfortable with as the one I'm using now... and that would definitely exclude the new glassy/glossy ones. No amount of scientific number crunching or physics explanations is going to make a difference. It's all just argument. In the end, it doesn't make me like looking at a shiny screen under most normal everyday lighting conditions. Nothing is perfect, but I prefer the more smooth tones of the matte screen. Why does this bother glossy fans so much?

I believe the question at the start of the thread was why are reflections a good thing, not what does pdxflint think of the screens. What I said was relevant, and therefore "really matters," seeing as it explained how the reflections are good because they indicate a screen's better able to transmit unscattered/absorbed light. Had the question been "why are reflections bad" I would have said something like "They're distracting." But given the thread topic...
 
This is by far the best glossy thread around. We need more people who can compare the experience in real-world situations voicing their opinions. It doesn't really contribute much if we are just going around saying how the glare sucks based on nothing more than similar opinions from others who haven't seen the new screens outside an Apple store.

Personally, I've never had a matte screen (on a Mac) but I understand where the complaints are coming from. The reflection that occurs in direct sunlight hasn't so far prevented me from working, even though I could have used a brighter screen on a number of occasions.

Are there any comments like "I used to be able to do this, but not anymore" around? I'm hoping there'll be at least one decent article from Macworld or someone else capable of doing impartial comparisons done soon.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.