Antiglare Displays

  • Posted: 11 August 2009 05:02 AM

    Apple now offers Antiglare Displays for the 15” Macbook Pro as an option (50$)

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 11 August 2009 01:16 PM #1

    Holy smokes! That’s super cool, and about darned time, too. smile

    Signature

    Editor - The Mac Observer

    Favorite (but less relevant than it used to be) Quote: Microsoft’s tyranny lies not in its success, but in the way it achieved and maintains that success.

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 11 August 2009 02:52 PM #2

    I’m so glad Apple brought back the matte display option. I’ve never been able to get reliably accurate color from the glossy displays, and that’s a big problem in color-critical design work. It’s nice to see Apple recognize that we use their laptops for professional work and not just watching movies.

    Jeff

         
  • Posted: 11 August 2009 03:14 PM #3

    That’s good news.  When they offer it as a BTO option for the 13” MBP, I’ll buy.

    Really, the display on the 13” is terrific.  But the reflections are too much for me ... granted the Apple stores are full of bright lights, but so is my office, and so are places I might use it out of the home or office.  I’m hoping we’ll see a matte option on the 13” soon ... so I can buy it for personal use; I have a (matte) 15” MBP I use at and for work.

      Brian

         
  • Posted: 11 August 2009 03:16 PM #4

    Matt screen covers cost around $20. Apple’s BTO costs $50.

         
  • Posted: 11 August 2009 05:22 PM #5

    Love the glossy screen, myself.

         
  • Posted: 11 August 2009 08:48 PM #6

    I’m pleased to see Apple come to its senses regarding the antiglare screen option (matte) for the MacBook Pro. I recall the day the new unibody MacBook Pro was announced along with the demise of the matte screen. Apple did its best to try and convince us this move was in our best interest. I called Apple immediately and complained. Got a call from an assistant to Mr. Jobs the next day, apologizing for the inconvenience. Yet the company line was the matte screen was history.

    Well, good to see Apple reverse course! If the matte screen were not relegated to obscurity last September (or October, when ever it was), I’d be writing this on a unibody MacBook Pro rather than an early 2008 MacBook Pro. Right now I can’t afford a new MacBook Pro, even though I need a backup computer because this poor 2008 MacBook Pro will need to go in to the shop for some repairs and I’ll need something else to work on.

    When the time comes, I’m very pleased to know I can purchase another MacBook Pro with a matte (antiglare) screen. Otherwise, I’d have to find another option because I can’t use a glossy screen in my work.

    Good for you, Apple! And thank you.

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 11 August 2009 09:06 PM #7

    When all this stasrted a couple of years ago I really didn’t see what the big deal was with glossy displays. Last fall I got a Macbook with one and it wasn’t as bad as some said. I liked the crisper view and darker blacks and as long as I was careful glare wasn’t a big issue.

    Now that I’ve lived with one I definitely shell out $50 for the matte screen option. Maybe I’m getting sensitive but it seems like noticeable glare is getting to be more and more common and annoying. What’s more the glossy screen shows every little spot and fingerprint. I point out things on the screen every day and after a while it’s disgusting. I have to clean the screen a lot more than I did with my old matte PowerBook.

    Maybe they are great for some people but I prefer matte and am glad the option is back.

    Signature

    Take Only Pictures, Leave Only Footprints
    Is No Way To Run An Art Gallery

         
  • Posted: 11 August 2009 10:13 PM #8

    Q. What do you call a guy lying in a pile of leaves?

    A. Russell.

    Hahahhahaha.

    Q. What do you call a guy who prefers not to live with a screen that is troublesome to calibrate, that drives him mad with reflections, and makes fingerprints really obvious?

    A. Matt.

    Signature

    Karate ni sente nashi

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 11 August 2009 11:03 PM #9

    coaten - 12 August 2009 01:13 AM

    Q. What do you call a guy lying in a pile of leaves?

    A. Russell.

    Hahahhahaha.

    Q. What do you call a guy who prefers not to live with a screen that is troublesome to calibrate, that drives him mad with reflections, and makes fingerprints really obvious?

    A. Matt.

    Good to see TMO humor is still intact! :eg:

         
  • Posted: 12 August 2009 03:16 AM #10

    I’m VERY happy to see this.  (I noticed it immediately!)
    And it’s about time!

    1.  I wonder how it works exactly? 
    The previous glossy screen setup was a glossy screen behind a glossy glass piece, right?
    So now this is a matte screen. 

    What about the glass piece?  Is it eliminated entirely!  Does the computer weigh less?


    2.  $50 is no big deal.  But the option should really be a no cost optional choice as it was before.


    3.  What I especially hated about the previous removal of matte screens was “the way that Apple did it. ”
    We had no say in the matter (Apple didn’t ask us, the users). 
    Apple made this unilateral decision, telling us what was best for us. 
    Apple put environmental issues (a slightly greener screen) ahead of serious ergonomic issues (daily usage health effects, such as eye strain from glare).
    Apple didn’t give much real/reasonable disclosure of its reasoning (IMO) and no supporting facts to back it up (research re numbers of matte preferring users vs glossy, etc).
    The Mac media also was relatively quiet and ineffective in doing any hard-hitting, heavy investigation of this policy change.
    Apple gave no point person or contact location to receive feedback on the change—apparently wanting NO INPUT from us.
    Apple never said what person or department spear-headed this policy change (so that we could hold someone responsible).  (I wonder if anyone ever got fired or repremanded over this?)
    Etc.

    Now Apple has changed its policy, but again has done it quietly and with no discussion or explanation—no seeking of input, feedback, suggestions, recommendations. 
    If Apple was going to bring back matte screens, I’d have liked to see them ask us about it openly. For instance, maybe the Mac community might have had some input about matte screens that could have made them even better.  Why not ask and seek input?  (I’m not saying that there was any specific recommendation to give, but Apple doesn’t seem to think it should ever ask—and it is often missing opportunities to make things even better).

    So I’m NOT happy with Apple over all of this—both how it did the removal of matter and how it did the return of matte.

    I am happy to have matte back.

    To me, it was a deal-breaker to not have matte.
    Now, and only now, I’m open to getting a newer Mac.  (Prior to this, I was strictly advising all my contacts to buy a used older Mac with matte screen….or fork out for a replacement matte screen from TechRestore.)

         
  • Posted: 12 August 2009 06:46 AM #11

    halleluia! glad to see apple catering to it’s original clientbase - graphics pros - their widereaching entertainment sector targetting doesn’t work for us - it should be included in the price - not cost us more - we were supporting them long before their markets expanded - at a much greater financial cost - we in fact helped to get them into the home market

         
  • Posted: 13 August 2009 07:57 PM #12

    Apple does it to its’ dealer network again!

    Every time Apple offers a choice for CTO they cut out their dealer network. You want a iMac with a 1TB hard drive or a non-glossy screen on that MacBook Pro? Well, you have to buy it direct from Apple ‘cause they aren’t gonna sell it to your favorite dealer because they want that big fat $50.00 profit all for themselves. I am all in favor of choice, I want to play too. Apple seems to have a split personality when it comes to the dealer channel, they want us to sell computers and iPods just not too many… I don’t get it! Do you want to have weak sales just through CTO and direct Apple stores OR do you want to have a thriving network of dealers selling thousands of additional units per month?

    Signature

    Think before you act…

         
  • Posted: 14 August 2009 10:32 AM #13

    1. No expert, but I like glossy displays. All a matte screen does is replace specular reflections with an overall ambient lighting derived “milkiness” and slight blurring, which may well seem more convenient. I don’t believe you can accurately compare color either way unless you rigidly control your ambient lighting environment and match your display calibration to it. It’s certainly easier to evaluate color when its blurred.

    2. It’s Apple’s product, and they can sell it how they like. It was clear more than ten years ago that there was no future in being an Apple dealer unless you were either (a) a specialist with deep knowledge, such as a Pro Video retailer, or (b) a chain of stores able to shift large volumes at Apple’s convenience. In both cases, Apple products are a secondary part of the business. The traditional Apple reseller is long gone apart from one or two in major cities.

         
  • Posted: 14 August 2009 12:09 PM #14

    PSMacintosh - 12 August 2009 06:16 AM

    I’m VERY happy to see this.  (I noticed it immediately!)
    And it’s about time!

    3.  What I especially hated about the previous removal of matte screens was “the way that Apple did it. ”
    We had no say in the matter (Apple didn’t ask us, the users). 

     

    Apple has been well known for not asking for decades.  Might you be new to the wonderful world of Apple?

    Signature

    I don’t mind being wrong…,I just hate being wrong so FAST!

         
  • Posted: 14 August 2009 02:12 PM #15

    Apple has been well known for not asking for decades.  Might you be new to the wonderful world of Apple?

    You are right that Apple has never been very great at listening and garnering input and feedback. (Similar to most corps.)
    But that never made it good or right!

    However, in the earlier years, the Mac Community had much more of a strong, important “voice” that Apple did hear and listen to, whether it liked it or not, such as through the large user groups, like BMUG.
    And Apple Corp was smaller and its employees more accessible.

    Now, Apple has helped to minimalize and marginalize both user groups and Expos.
    Apple has become less seeking of input and even more closed off and isolated.
    And Apple has changed its “values” a bit over time (I won’t elaborate).
    So I think Apple has shifted in directions that I am less proud of.