[folklore]

sporks said:

Amazing how you survived all those pre-LCD years when you stared all day at a CRT screen.

That's exactly the point. Returning to reflection-prone screens is a step backward.

[ElectroTech]

Somehow, I must have gotten my Rob's mixed up. This sounded like Rob Enderly whining again.
Get over it buddy! It is just your preference to have a matte screen and you have NO EMPIRICAL DATA TO SHOW THAT THERE IS ANY DIFFERENCE.
I have used both types of screens and find there is hardly any difference except that the matte finish makes my screen images a bit fuzzier. Try your missive again when you have some real data.

[myramoki]

I agree that gloss sucks, and so do my parents. They totally want to get a new iMac, but with the builtin office they have, they really only have one location for the iMac and the lighting is going to turn it into a mirror. My sister who does work in graphics industry must have matte. Two sales gone.

[henryhbk]

As to the "with an iMac you have total positioning control", that isn't even true. My glossy imac is facing towards a window across a hallway. It is helpful as I always know when my boss is getting up, and I can sort of see the weather, but that's REALLY annoying. Yes I can turn the brightness up to overcome this, but I hate having to wipe the char off my retinas after working for a while.
You can overcome much glare with brightness, but not reflection. When there is something bright red and lit (like a neon sign in an airport food court, or a big display at an airport with it's brightness turned to 110%) you will see color tinges everywhere.
I find their response a tad un-apple like. I'm supposed to move to accommodate my mac?

[experimental]

I'm still not buying one, cant stand the glare. My office window is
behind me so as not to be distracted by passing traffic, seeing the
reflections instead are just taking the miki mouse.Sad, but true. There are many (capital M) other (capital O) options out there.

Re : FW800 : It has been touched previously on but ...

Check out the FW 800 to 400 cables (sonnet/belkin etc etc) since there are none in the box. They are cheap enough and you only really need one since FW device can string together easily enough (in most cases unless they are at opposite sides of your studio of course). Good quality FW devices, eg the LaCie desktop HD don't need to be turned on to activate the FW through connection. Hope that helps.

[Inkspot]

This myth that glossy screens produce "more vivid color and deeper blacks" is completely false. It is the panel technology and calibration that produce this, a glossy screen may at best give the illusion of this.

There is a reason why fashion magazines are glossy, and newspapers and books matte. Matte surfaces are much more suitable for looking at for long periods of time as they cause less eye strain.

There is no logic in adding glass over the LCD display in the first place. CRTs had glass because it was required by the technology, not so with LCDs.

The sheer fact that people are thinking of buying anti-glare coatings indicates a fundamental product design flaw. Good design does not require add-on products to make it acceptable.

Hopefully this is only a period of adjustment. Does anyone know if Apple will be discontinuing the current matte LCD cinema displays?

[TowerTone]

Schneb said:

So what is stopping an entrepreneur from creating a magnetic matte protector screen?

We are talking aluMINium, aren't we?....

[dreyfus]

On me it will have a big effect. And that is giving up on Apple after 24 years and roughly 400k spent with them. Glossy is simply a complete no-go for me. And yes, I have tried to grow into a 24" iMac for three month, even in a dim room with controlled lighting I developed headaches and neck pain, and got into the habit of wiping the screen nervously every few minutes, as every single piece of dust was sitting three-dimensional on top of my work. Whenever watching widescreen movies, I had myself letterboxed and editing black and white images the excessive contrast made any serious work impossible. Do I need to even top that by trying to get into acrobatic performances when using my laptop in a train or plane? I thought Schiller's comment was downright condescending and humiliating. I will not continue to bother a company that hates its customers so much with my money.
Yes, Apple has the best OS in existence, but no way am I going to give them my or my companies business ever again. Since the keynote has finished I have terminated three subscriptions to Mac-related papers and a paid broadcast, my equipment will be on eBay or a similar site within a week. I can get a really professional Lenovo machine with three years international warranty, card reader, matte high res display, longer battery life, all connectivity, sudden motion sensor, webcam and all the toppings for less than this glorified mirror.
How can somebody with reason talk for 15 minutes about improved manufacturing process, smaller shipping packages etc. and then reveal a product that is more expensive than its predecessor while having less ports, same battery life, same resolution, still 5400rpm HDs standard, still 4GB RAM max, etc. Why is it more expensive: You will need a display adapter for everything and not a single one is included. Attaching my 30" Cinema Display would add 100 bucks, adding my 23" another 30 and then I still need something for a projector (VGA) and the remote... great deal.
What have we got: less ports, same performance, worse keyboard, worse location of the optical drive (needs more desk space), ugly design (subjective, I hate this black frame and the black keyboard), and a higher price while gaining nothing but glare. With every keynote we get less options than before (you would think that a company with growing market share would be nice to its customers, but ignorance is bliss it seems). Where is a decent desktop Mac, where is a replacement for the 12" PB (no, the MBA is not it - too big and no connectivity), what is going on with the Mini, what will happen to the 17" model, what will happen to the other displays???
A company inviting the press to kick its customers behinds is another Apple first.

[GaryPDX]

I have an old matte MPB Core Duo and like it. I have always liked matte screens. However my wife bought a new MBP a few months ago with the LED backlighting and a glossy screen. I must admit that I really do prefer her machine. To me, the brightness more than compensates for any glare problems. I have to admit I prefer her machine's display.

[Adam_Cohen]

Yes Matte Matters! If you want to know how your images will actually look, in Final Cut Pro or PhotoShop....if you're a Graphic Designer, a Filmmaker or a Photographer....a glossy screen won't do it. It pumps up the contrast and saturation in ways that aren't true to what you'll see when you make a print or output your film.
I was ready to buy one of the new line of MacBook Pros....not now.

[griffman]

I have "no empirical data" to back up the fact that I prefer matte screens? Did you miss the bit about how I actually spent my own cash on a MacBook, used it for everything I did for six months, then sold it because I found the reflections and glare way too distracting to put up with?

I'm not sure how to get any more empirical than "I used a glossy screen. I personally found the reflections and glare so troublesome that I chose to sell it and spend $1,000 more to purchase a machine with a matte display."

What sort of empirical data are you looking for? As far as I know, there's no official measure of "how much of my face can I see in the screen?"

-rob.

[webraider]

Ummmm, regardless of Matte or Not.. a screen will get dirty if you touch it. There are oils on your fingers that are not good for ANY screen finish. You just notice it more on a glossy screen. It kills me how many people touch screens all over the place not thinking about it.

[webraider]

What the heck did all you guys do BEFORE we had Matted Screens. Back in the CRT days.. all the screens were glossy. Whatever you did there.. you'll simply have to do again! Stop griping and get over it.

[griffman]

Keep in mind we're talking about laptops, not desktops. Until the original MacBook came out, Apple had never offered a glossy-screened laptop. So there's no "adjustment" to think about back to CRT, because Apple laptops have always been matte.

-rob.