Worth getting the nano Display on the New 2020 iMac?

[pldelisle]

Hey Freida !

Just wanted to say your thoughts are very founded and solids. I felt almost the same when WFH since March. My office is too next to a window with natural light.

But I still work with 1080P Dell displays. Sure, it's high end displays, Ultrasharp. But it's still 1080P. I feel like the Retina display puts a lot less strain on the eye. I read, program a lot. Doing the same tasks on Retina display, even glossy, gets my eyes a lotttttt less tired at the end of the day than a 1080P 24" mate display.

So yeah. Combining Nano + retina should put even less strain on the eye. You eye doesn't need to compensate the glare. But the sharpness of the writings might be less. It's difficult to say.

 

[oneafour]

The nano display will literally make your screen look fuzzy/not as sharp as the standard display...

 

[ZacksWorld]

Any chance you could post a side by side picture of the two? One with both screens off and another with both screens on?

You know, I should have taken more pictures before I returned my Nano-textured iMac... I included links in post #21 of this thread to a pair of high-res comparison photos of a desktop background, but didn't take any with something like Photoshop or Illustrator opened, or Pages, Numbers, etc. (oops)

Even when using a high-end camera to take pictures it's hard to really capture the difference in a way that mimics the experience in real life between the two. Definitely go to an Apple Store to see a ProDisplay XDR if you can, I doubt many Apple Stores will have a nano-textured iMac on display...

Here's one of the displays off, side-by-side, and a short gif:

 

[Donnation]

You know, I should have taken more pictures before I returned my Nano-textured iMac... I included links in post #21 of this thread to a pair of high-res comparison photos of a desktop background, but didn't take any with something like Photoshop or Illustrator opened, or Pages, Numbers, etc. (oops)

Even when using a high-end camera to take pictures it's hard to really capture the difference in a way that mimics the experience in real life between the two. Definitely go to an Apple Store to see a ProDisplay XDR if you can, I doubt many Apple Stores will have a nano-textured iMac on display...

Here's one of the displays off, side-by-side, and a short.

Great photos, thank you for these. Mine is scheduled to arrive this week (FedEx has been slow so it could be next week) and I’m curious as to how I’ll like it. Like I said, I do prefer to have a matte screen protector on my iPhone and iPad, so this will be interesting for me if I do actually like it on the large screen of the iMac.

I will post some more comparison photos when mine finally gets here.

One of the reasons I think I will be ok with the screen is that I have a work issued Dell Laptop with a matte screen that I really enjoy (screen wise). Its just a regular matte finish and I very much like the look of it.

 

[Donnation]

You know, I should have taken more pictures before I returned my Nano-textured iMac... I included links in post #21 of this thread to a pair of high-res comparison photos of a desktop background, but didn't take any with something like Photoshop or Illustrator opened, or Pages, Numbers, etc. (oops)

Even when using a high-end camera to take pictures it's hard to really capture the difference in a way that mimics the experience in real life between the two. Definitely go to an Apple Store to see a ProDisplay XDR if you can, I doubt many Apple Stores will have a nano-textured iMac on display...

Here's one of the displays off, side-by-side, and a short gif:

View attachment 946527

View attachment 946532

Also, I really dig your office setup. Minimal and clean. Beautiful.

 

[Freida]

This looks great. From the video I clearly prefer the nano coating. Staring at a mirror is really not for me but I would want to get more specific explanation from someone who knows. What is truly better for the eyes.

You know, I should have taken more pictures before I returned my Nano-textured iMac... I included links in post #21 of this thread to a pair of high-res comparison photos of a desktop background, but didn't take any with something like Photoshop or Illustrator opened, or Pages, Numbers, etc. (oops)

Even when using a high-end camera to take pictures it's hard to really capture the difference in a way that mimics the experience in real life between the two. Definitely go to an Apple Store to see a ProDisplay XDR if you can, I doubt many Apple Stores will have a nano-textured iMac on display...

Here's one of the displays off, side-by-side, and a short gif:

View attachment 946527

View attachment 946532

 

[Freida]

Its a tough one. We know that Apple really doesn't care about ergonomics so we can't count on them for the answer.
And we also don't have enough info to know what is truly better so it makes it hard to know. Maybe there isn't any difference and maybe its just the natural light that makes it better and the rest is not important at all. I have 2017 MBP so thats retina but right now I have 24 Dell attached to it and I work mainly on that. I can see the difference in sharpness but its not something that would really bother me as I see it when I stop and think about it or when I focus on it. I know its crazy but I really have to order both the imacs to see them side by side (as none of the apple stores have nano coating on display - wtf?)
So if this is how Apple wants us to do it then it shall be. So I'll order 2 basic imacs. One glossy and one nano and BOTH will go back. I will just test drive it and see which one i like better. Then I will order the configuration I really want.
So, someone will get refurbished Freida 'touched' iMacs

I wish Apple stores were better. It used to be a place where you could test drive and see products. Now, its just full of iToys and the rest is not even complete.

There is a difference when Matte was £25 option for 17" MBP back in the days and when its £500 now on iMac.

The stores here didn't even have XDR & Mac Pro for months on display.

I really hope AS will change everything and that Apple revitalises their product line and stores. Its needed

Hey Freida !

Just wanted to say your thoughts are very founded and solids. I felt almost the same when WFH since March. My office is too next to a window with natural light.

But I still work with 1080P Dell displays. Sure, it's high end displays, Ultrasharp. But it's still 1080P. I feel like the Retina display puts a lot less strain on the eye. I read, program a lot. Doing the same tasks on Retina display, even glossy, gets my eyes a lotttttt less tired at the end of the day than a 1080P 24" mate display.

So yeah. Combining Nano + retina should put even less strain on the eye. You eye doesn't need to compensate the glare. But the sharpness of the writings might be less. It's difficult to say.

 

[ZacksWorld]

Its a tough one. We know that Apple really doesn't care about ergonomics so we can't count on them for the answer.
And we also don't have enough info to know what is truly better so it makes it hard to know. Maybe there isn't any difference and maybe its just the natural light that makes it better and the rest is not important at all. I have 2017 MBP so thats retina but right now I have 24 Dell attached to it and I work mainly on that. I can see the difference in sharpness but its not something that would really bother me as I see it when I stop and think about it or when I focus on it. I know its crazy but I really have to order both the imacs to see them side by side (as none of the apple stores have nano coating on display - wtf?)
So if this is how Apple wants us to do it then it shall be. So I'll order 2 basic imacs. One glossy and one nano and BOTH will go back. I will just test drive it and see which one i like better. Then I will order the configuration I really want.
So, someone will get refurbished Freida 'touched' iMacs

I wish Apple stores were better. It used to be a place where you could test drive and see products. Now, its just full of iToys and the rest is not even complete.

There is a difference when Matte was £25 option for 17" MBP back in the days and when its £500 now on iMac.

The stores here didn't even have XDR & Mac Pro for months on display.

I really hope AS will change everything and that Apple revitalises their product line and stores. Its needed

Definitely look at the two of them side-by-side, it's the only way to make the right choice for yourself.. Unfortunately, yeah, if you have to order and return, I mean, that's what you gotta do.

I think there are a few legit reasons why they might consciously avoid putting Nano-texture screens in an AS, but it certainly would be nice to see them at the store before you buy them... At my local AS the guy returning my iMac said that they don't have any nano-texture on display and won't be getting it.

Another note on the sharpness/softness: You will see that the Nano-texture doesn't really look like a lower-res display, it looks soft in a different way... Even in a lower-res display with less PPI you have an unobstructed view of square pixels making up an image, but the nano-texturing being etched on the glass is adding a layer on top of square pixels that gives a look that I would describe as being almost right in the middle between very fine digital noise and a nice film grain.

It's interesting – though it was mostly a no-brainer for me to return the nano-texture due to the work I do and my personal preferences, it has a unique property to the way it looks that is nice. Almost like glittery e-ink. But, it kind of looks like what happens if you set a display to a non-native resolution that isn't evenly divisible...

 

[Freida]

Thank you. Yeah I think the reason Apple stores don't have them is because its so fragile that they know it would get ruined very quickly. (not a good sign to start with anyway)

Ill get both and test it. I never liked glossy and hated the trend but will have to see.

All the videos etc. showed nano as being amazing but this is the first bad 'review' that I have found. And now I have doubts whether or not I want it so at least this forces me to try both and see which I prefer.

I almost feel that I won't be getting the nano but yeah, lets test it.

Still might try to ask an optician about this eye thing

Definitely look at the two of them side-by-side, it's the only way to make the right choice for yourself.. Unfortunately, yeah, if you have to order and return, I mean, that's what you gotta do.

I think there are a few legit reasons why they might consciously avoid putting Nano-texture screens in an AS, but it certainly would be nice to see them at the store before you buy them... At my local AS the guy returning my iMac said that they don't have any nano-texture on display and won't be getting it.

Another note on the sharpness/softness: You will see that the Nano-texture doesn't really look like a lower-res display, it looks soft in a different way... Even in a lower-res display with less PPI you have an unobstructed view of square pixels making up an image, but the nano-texturing being etched on the glass is adding a layer on top of square pixels that gives a look that I would describe as being almost right in the middle between very fine digital noise and a nice film grain.

It's interesting – though it was mostly a no-brainer for me to return the nano-texture due to the work I do and my personal preferences, it has a unique property to the way it looks that is nice. Almost like glittery e-ink. But, it kind of looks like what happens if you set a display to a non-native resolution that isn't evenly divisible...

 

[rkuo]

Thank you. Yeah I think the reason Apple stores don't have them is because its so fragile that they know it would get ruined very quickly. (not a good sign to start with anyway)

Ill get both and test it. I never liked glossy and hated the trend but will have to see.

All the videos etc. showed nano as being amazing but this is the first bad 'review' that I have found. And now I have doubts whether or not I want it so at least this forces me to try both and see which I prefer.

I almost feel that I won't be getting the nano but yeah, lets test it.

Still might try to ask an optician about this eye thing

It's one of those things you do need to see for yourself, but IMO the nanotexture is just a slight improvement over the matte films people purchase for their iPad's. You could buy one of those films and experiment with that first.

Let me be clear ... the nanotexture finish is objectively worse in all situations except for the need to cut glare. You will understand this when you see it, but if you have any sort of discerning eye you will understand this quickly.

I doubt an optician will be able to give you an answer on that kind eye strain ... that is highly personal and depends on the situation. Again, if glare is an expected issue, spend on it ... if it's not, you are giving up image quality. There is no way to have your cake and eat it too here.

 

[RAWvJPG]

I was really surprised that my local Apple Store neither had the iMac nano texture nor XDR on display. The store I went to was made up of 80% iPhone/watch/stuff, 15% MacBooks and 5% iMacs. That's also the only store I'm able to reach within 1 hour from where I live. Still couldn't justify to buy two just to send one back. Too bad for the environment.

 

[rumorguy]

why does apple supply a special cleaning cloth for the nano. is it harder to keep clean? is there a durability issue if i do not use the special cloth? a microfiber cloth from costco works well on my 21 inch imac.

 

[pldelisle]

why does apple supply a special cleaning cloth for the nano. is it harder to keep clean? is there a durability issue if i do not use the special cloth? a microfiber cloth from costco works well on my 21 inch imac.

Yes harder to clean and it needs extreme care by the owner. The surface is easily scratchable.

 

[rkuo]

why does apple supply a special cleaning cloth for the nano. is it harder to keep clean? is there a durability issue if i do not use the special cloth? a microfiber cloth from costco works well on my 21 inch imac.

The cloth itself to my understanding is not that special. It’s the same cloth they give you for the glossy. But they cannot guarantee and do not test other cloths.

 

[costica1234]

The cloth itself to my understanding is not that special. It’s the same cloth they give you for the glossy. But they cannot guarantee and do not test other cloths.

It's not the same cloth. @MacRS4 talked about it in his video @13m57s.

 

[Donnation]

Yes harder to clean and it needs extreme care by the owner. The surface is easily scratchable.

I'm not sure there is any evidence that its actually harder to clean. They just have said that the screen should only be cleaned with the provided cloth.

 

[pldelisle]

I'm not sure there is any evidence that its actually harder to clean. They just have said that the screen should only be cleaned with the provided cloth.

Based on my experience, mate displays are typically harder to clean than glossy ones, nano-thing are not.

 

[elicash]

One question comes to mind after ordering this option and then reading here: given the nano texture was an expensive option on a display long previous to the arrival of the iMac, why was this issue with definition not more widely known?

I cancelled my first order to upgrade to nano after reading here and asking a question or two. Kind of wish I didn't now, and may well return the machine if I find it tough to deal with.

Seems a heck of a price to play for glare reduction, based on images in the thread here on Macrumors.

 

[filmgirl]

One question comes to mind after ordering this option and then reading here: given the nano texture was an expensive option on a display long previous to the arrival of the iMac, why was this issue with definition not more widely known?

I cancelled my first order to upgrade to nano after reading here and asking a question or two. Kind of wish I didn't now, and may well return the machine if I find it tough to deal with.

Seems a heck of a price to play for glare reduction, based on images in the thread here on Macrumors.

I mean, I think it was? I know some actual owner reviews mentioned it, but you’re right in that I don’t recall seeing this kind of comparison, in part because it’s a $1000 add-on to a$5000 display. My guess is that people that are buying $5000 or $6000 displays are aware of their options. A colleague got one in February and I spent some time with it via the Blackmagic eGPU and for what I do, the coating would drive me nuts. But for specific video colorists or animators or whatever, I’m sure there are people that wants the matte even with the tradeoffs (like my colleague).

A $500 option on a consumer machine opens the tech up to way more people, which is why we're now seeing more reactions and comparisons.

 

[rkuo]

It's not the same cloth. @MacRS4 talked about it in his video @13m57s.

How do you know it's not the same cloth?

 

[costica1234]

How do you know it's not the same cloth?

See here (@2m37s) the standard cleaning cloth. The same one used to come (maybe still comes) with MacBook laptops.

 

[Donnation]

One question comes to mind after ordering this option and then reading here: given the nano texture was an expensive option on a display long previous to the arrival of the iMac, why was this issue with definition not more widely known?

I cancelled my first order to upgrade to nano after reading here and asking a question or two. Kind of wish I didn't now, and may well return the machine if I find it tough to deal with.

Seems a heck of a price to play for glare reduction, based on images in the thread here on Macrumors.

This display is going to come down to personal preference, period. I think that some people who have only ever used a glossy display are thrown off by the matte finish, which is understandable. I myself have always preferred a matted display as I can't stand the glare that comes off of glossy screens. I find a matte screen more pleasing to look at and also much easier on the eyes. But everyone is going to be different here.

To your question though, I don't think there has been a lot of discussion regarding the Nano screens because the people who have ordered know exactly what they are getting. Those who don't and think "Hey this looks cool, no glare and it will look exactly the same as my glossy screen" are the ones who have an issue with it.

 

[MacRS4]

It's not the same cloth. @MacRS4 talked about it in his video @13m57s.

How do you know it's not the same cloth?

It isn't the same. The one with the nano screen feels more like a car chamois leather tbh - the 'normal' one feels like a thinner micro-fibre cloth that you can buy anywhere; quite thin and almost silky.

 

[MacRS4]

This display is going to come down to personal preference, period. I think that some people who have only ever used a glossy display are thrown off by the matte finish, which is understandable. I myself have always preferred a matted display as I can't stand the glare that comes off of glossy screens. I find a matte screen more pleasing to look at and also much easier on the eyes. But everyone is going to be different here.

To your question though, I don't think there has been a lot of discussion regarding the Nano screens because the people who have ordered know exactly what they are getting. Those who don't and think "Hey this looks cool, no glare and it will look exactly the same as my glossy screen" are the ones who have an issue with it.

Completely agree. I've used the matt screen all week, and tbh going back to my iMac Pro is quite refreshing - I much prefer the glossy screen. I wouldn't order one as I don't need it in my office.

 

[ZacksWorld]

There is definitely an "it goes without saying"-ism associated with any matte screen; of course there will be a tradeoff in sharpness. However, virtually every single review I read, listened to, and watched either didn't mention it at all or expressed it as a "minimal" drop-off – which led me to believe that it was something you could only see if you "looked closely" but the second I turned the machine on from a distance of around 36" and I saw the Apple logo and the progress bar come on screen, I thought "you have got to be kidding me"...

People have different eyes, different tolerances for softness, etc. but in my opinion the difference is large enough to warrant a more in-depth comparison than many of these YouTuber's did. You see more reviews now mentioning it (even from graphics professionals) coming from people who didn't get early machines sent to them for free to test / review.

Here's another comparison picture – I should have taken more with Finder windows open and things like that, was just rushing to get the machine packed back up so I could reorder (I picked a poor background image to compare because it isn't even a tack-sharp image to begin with):

Like Donnation said: "This display is going to come down to personal preference, period." ...Just be aware of the tradeoff's –to the degree that you're able to– before purchasing.


The level of glare I work with during the day, for reference: