Why does everone complain about the screen quality?

[armoguy94]

Apple is like Bose. They overprice everything and still get tons of buyers as many are uninformed about what they purchase and what it's really worth. If we were to build our own computers and be able to install OS X ourselves we would have HUNDREDS saved and probably even better specs.

I'm sure apple can fit in better screens for the MacBook without having a change in price at all.

 

[rushmere]

For the price I paid, I'm a little disappointed by my Macbook screen.

I actually like the glossy finish, but the viewing angle is no more than adequate. I was recently looking at a colleague's much cheaper Dell laptop, and the viewing angle was significantly better, and the screen seemed generally much better quality.

On balance, I definitely wouldn't swap my Macbook for a Dell, but the screen should be better for the price.

 

[Janglo]

I'm sure apple can fit in better screens for the MacBook without having a change in price at all.

Exactly! Apple must make hundreds on the macbooks (And yes, it is a better OS or whatever but still - they do only value it at just inder £100 off the shelf). Only problem is, and Apple knows this, If they update their screens now for the same price, lots of people will know that they were always capable of putting nice screens in there but decided not to to try and con everyone. Just because it's a "consumer" laptop, doesn't give an excuse for a poor screen.

For the price I paid, I'm a little disappointed by my Macbook screen.

When you pay the extra, you expect extra don't you? It's why it's out of order.

Steve Jobs himself talks about passion for "beautiful computers" and "quality". He's as good as lying...

 

[SOLLERBOY]

The screen is fine. It's just as good as my imac screen if not just a little worse on the contrast side of things.

 

[drew0020]

I never put much into this because I can deal with the Macbook display, but I went to Best Buy yesterday and saw a Pro and Macbook side by side. The Pro display killed the Macbook display by a wide margin. You need to see it to believe it!

I still like my MacBook but honestly the display sucks!

 

[Mikey B]

I know this won't placate all the naysayers, but this color profile made a huge impact on display "quality" for me. There was a thread with several, this was my favorite. Give it a try.

 

[teerexx52]

I know this won't placate all the naysayers, but this color profile made a huge impact on display "quality" for me. There was a thread with several, this was my favorite. Give it a try.

Nice, I like it

 

[Corvillus]

The screen is fine. It's just as good as my imac screen if not just a little worse on the contrast side of things.

This is true, but the 20" Aluminum iMac is also an Apple machine that has earned notoriety for having a crappy screen.

As for original subject, people complain about the screens, because the consumer grade screens (MacBook, 20" Aluminum iMac, iPod Touch) are of notably lower quality than the professional or luxury grade screens (MacBook Pro, 24" iMac, ACD, iPhone). And in many cases, comparably priced PC's have better screens than Apple's consumer grade screens.

Now, are the margins better by including the lower quality screens? Undoubtedly. Are they that much better to justify including the crappier screen? Probably not. But the fact of the matter is that Apple wants you to pay Pro prices to get Pro features, end of story. And you can complain as much about that as you want, but I don't think that's going to change any time soon. And since the line between the consumer products and the Pro products is getting blurred (especially on the unibody MacBook vs the unibody MacBook Pro, or the 20" iMac vs the 24" iMac), they have to do something to differentiate the product lines in order to keep selling the Pro products.

Personally, I'm not a fan of the unibody MacBook screen and can definitely tell the difference between it and the Pro / Air screens. But I don't do anything that I actually NEED the Pro screen for, so I can't justify the $700 price delta. So I went with the MacBook. Some people will need the Pro screen, so they'll pay for it, and the same goes for Firewire.

Personally I think the more reasonable comparison is between the new MacBook screens and the old MacBook screens. And realistically, they're both poor screens with comparably terrible viewing angles and contrast ratios, but the new MacBook screen is significantly brighter due to the LED backlighting, so it is an improvement in that respect. The bezel also has a higher opening degree, so it's easier to achieve a workable viewing angle. So if you're coming from an old MacBook, you likely won't be disappointed in the screen. If you're coming from a Pro, you definitely will be.

 

[268144]

Opinions are like Aholes, everyone has one and they all stink. All this whining about "why apple didn't do this" and "why apple didn't do that".... Be happy that you can afford a MB or MBP when A LOT of people can't.

very true specially the nice people here in the UK have to pay like double for our Macs

 

[MattyK]

Also, be thankful you guys HAVE screens...

now you best all stop complaining.

 

[LFC.SL]

For me it goes
HP nc8430 business notebook matte screen < Macbook Aluminium (maxedmaxed config) < Samsung 215TW monitor

Compared to my HP the glossy annoys, but the Macbook is superior in ever other way (especially after applying the Spyder3 Pro profile)

I guess its all relative