[AlbanianGenome]

that glossy screen continue to be the trend for Apple. iMacs are plagued with it across the board, I may have not looked into them as closely as I should, but I am pretty sure that is the only option these days for those computers. Now as that does not frustrate me for the fact that I don't use or have the need for an imac. I have used laptops pretty exclusively for the past 7 years and the trend is scary. Every laptop used to have a matte appearance(or now called anti-glare) I take for granted the matte screen for I have always had laptops with them. I don't care too much, but many of my friends use macbooks and those are plagued by the glossy screen, apple has even gone as far as producing anti-glare coatings to put on top of the screen. I notice that every time I use a friends computer with a glossy screen it is a very unpleasant experience every time, no question. Sometimes I feel that I am too hard on the glossy, but i am hearing way too many people say they love the glossy, especially newer mac owners. The thing that scares me, is that there is only one computer you can now get the anti-glare screen on, and that is the 17" Macbook Pro. In the future, will this be taken away as well? I really do not think I could buy a laptop in the future with a glossy screen, and I would have to buy older machines with them. Does anyone else find this trend disturbing? Is there anything as users we can do about it? The most important question is, why is Apple going that direction? Cheaper to produce? Demand for glossy too high? The whole trend is a little crazy to me, but perhaps I am the only one and not with the times, or missing out on why the glossy is so great. Comments of all kinds are always welcome

[Spheric Harlot]

Better color reproduction, higher contrast, brighter displays.


And FWIW, the "real" professionals in the field that I've met - photographers who are so involved in travelling and *using* their stuff that they have absolutely no time whatsoever to complain anywhere - have told me outright that the whole glossy vs. matte discussion is complete bogus.

YMMV, of course - as it appears to.

However, for perspective: as with every single tool on the planet, different variations come with different trade-offs.

The glossy displays perform much better under some very specific conditions, perform better over a wide range of conditions, and have serious drawbacks under other conditions. The same is true of matte displays.

Professionals live off their tools and work with their respective advantages, and around their limitations.

[AlbanianGenome]

I just hear a lot of people complaining about not having the matte option, even those who work at the mac store say they all pretty much prefer matte. I just find it interesting that apple is going away from them, and in my experience matte has "truer" color, and does not glam it out like the glossy does. It also performs better in more conditions than the glossy, I mean how bright do we need our colors seriously, need thing we know apple is going to have super glossy screens that make every color look like neon, which would go with the trend right now to be more like the 80's(fashion) although highly unlikely that will ever happen. I felt as if the pc community started the whole glossy trend and people were really liking the initial look so apple eventually followed suit.

[sek929]

I love my glossy screen, way easier to read than my previous 17" matte LCD and my 19" CRT. My buddy's Dell laptop w/glossy screen is way easier to look at than my other friend's 15" iBook w/matte screen. It's brighter, has better contrast, and any glare stays as a point of light instead of diffusing across the whole display.

I agree there should be a matte option, but I wouldn't go far enough to call glossy displays a 'plague.'

[Jasoco]

I have no problem with glossy. I also have no problem with matte. My 13" MacBook (White before the LCD upgrade) is glossy and I have no problem seeing it as much as my 20" ACD which is matte.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by AlbanianGenome 

I just hear a lot of people complaining about not having the matte option,

As I wrote:

It is no coincidence that those who complain are those who have the time to.

Originally Posted by AlbanianGenome 

in my experience matte has "truer" color, and does not glam it out like the glossy does.

Well, you're quite simply flat-out wrong.

Glossy displays have deeper color saturation and contrast, meaning that once they're calibrated, they don't "glam it out", but rather, the matte just flattens it out.

Originally Posted by AlbanianGenome 

It also performs better in more conditions than the glossy, I mean how bright do we need our colors seriously, need thing we know apple is going to have super glossy screens that make every color look like neon, which would go with the trend right now to be more like the 80's(fashion) although highly unlikely that will ever happen. I felt as if the pc community started the whole glossy trend and people were really liking the initial look so apple eventually followed suit.

Okay:

You haven't worked with a glossy display, ever.

You haven't researched the subject, instead you simply restate an incorrect assumption and assigning that to the decline of quality due to the influx of pop and pc culture.

This is not a basis on which to have any meaningful discussion.

Good day.

[fisherKing]

i will probably always prefer matte, but have (pretty-much) adapted to the glossy screen. i HATE seeing my reflection in the screen, hate seeing light reflected in it. but...the screen is bright enough to somewhat compensate for the reflectivity. so it goes...

[ghporter]

The ONLY real-world problem with glossy Mac notebook screens I have ever seen in person is fingerprints. That's it. My classmate's 17" glossy MBP next to my 15" matte MBP were both very easy to read, both had clear and bright displays, both were extremely usable. My classmate's glossy screen was definitely brighter and more "brilliant" in color reproduction than my matte screen, which made a difference in examining specific photographic materials (anatomical photographs). But her only complaint (aside from the size of her computer-her parents gave it to her as a "starting grad school" gift) was that she had to work at cleaning the screen from time to time because it showed fingerprints.

Today's screens are clearer and brighter than these 2006-ish MBPs' screens, and the way the glossy surface is done is different. My wife's "just before the refresh" MacBook has a lovely screen, and she has no problem with it being glossy. It was never an issue for her, even though much of her use involves examining very detailed photographs.

Spheric Harlot's pro photographer friends' opinion holds a lot of weight with me. If someone who could legitimately complain about a real, functional difference in the two kinds of screens says "what issue?" then that pretty much tells me that it just ISN'T an issue at all.

[Jasoco]

I'll go with the fingerprints thing. With my white MacBook, the screen is recessed. So it's hard to clean the screen when the edge gets in the way. It would be the same with the matte screen too though. My 20" has smudges, and they're pretty much the same as the glossy screen.

The plus I can see with the glossy glass displays on the new MacBooks, ACD's and iMacs is that you can clean it off a lot easier from edge to edge because there's no walls to get in the way. But with the 15" option to replace the screen with a matte version, you're adding in that recess again. Making it harder to clean again.

Would be nice if we could remove the glass cover easily and run it through the dishwasher. I don't assume the MacBook's glass is as removable as the iMac's are.

That's really my main issue. All the nooks and crannies in computers that like to collect dirt and dust. The screen is the worse because of how dirt likes to be pushed under the edges of the plastic when you're trying to clean it.

[CharlesS]

I just got a unibody MBP about a week ago, and I have to admit that the easy-cleaning and fingerprint-proof nature of the screen is quite nice, although it annoys me that I can see my face in the screen. I'm finding myself trying to position the screen at the right angle so that my face doesn't appear over the text I'm reading.

[msuper69]

To the OP:

Here's a comment - try breaking your thoughts into comprehensible paragraphs.

[Jasoco]

I can't see myself in my screen, Charles. Even if I lower the brightness to 0.

I guess the glass must be shinier than the plastic. I haven't seen a newer Mac with the glass in a while so I haven't played around with one much.

[EndlessMac]

I think the issue is more about the lack of options. Whether a person prefers matte or glossy we should be given the option to make that choice rather than Apple telling us what we want.

I'm sure it's a financial reason why Apple is not providing matte on everything except the 17" but I really think Apple should at least provide a matte option for the 15" too if not for the rest of the computer lineup. The 17" laptop is more of a niche market so providing a matte option doesn't benefit that many people.

Both sides have valid arguments for liking one over the other so forcing everyone to like the same thing seems a little silly for Apple to do.

[indigoimac]

I must say that I have found using glossy screened iMacs in a number of rooms w. fluorescent overhead lighting to be quite annoying. The glare when you aren't focusing directly on what is on the screen is absolutely ridiculous and I refuse to buy the product. I have a 17" white intel iMac at home and while the display isn't great as far as color reproduction at least it has no glare.

On both of my MacBook Pros I went for the matte option -- I have used numerous macbooks and macbook airs w. the glossy coatings and while not as bad as the iMac, mostly because you can much more easily adjust the angle, I still find it to be annoying especially in spaces with non-diffused fluorescent lights. No idea whether or not the new MBPs are any better, but I'm sure I'll find out when the new school year starts out.

Thankfully, I am not looking to buy a new mac for about another 2 years and maybe this fad will be replaced by oled or god knows what. Otherwise my next mac will likely be a mac pro with a likely, unless the update their current matte displays to new matte panels, non-apple display. So, in the end, Apple wins when the option for a discerning "pro" is to buy the "pro" priced product, whether that is the mac pro or the 17" MBP. ..Or, I suppose, the mini which are the only devices that give the option to either go w. a third party display or select non-glossy (for a fee I might add)

For the financial argument I will throw out that the 17"MBP AFAIK is converted from glossy to matte after production either stateside or at the factory to streamline assembly and not have 2 "separate" products.

[Brien]

Maybe Apple will add that oleophobic coating to all the notebook lines and the iMac/20" ACD. From what I've seen, it gives more of a satin/less reflective surface to the screen, as well as minimizing fingerprints. It's the same coating on the new glass trackpads.