I've got the glossy screen on my current MacBook Pro and I think the screen looks great. On those exceptionally rare cases that I use my laptop outside, I can still see well enough, and I'm sure there will be third party screen overlays available for the new Macbooks soon.

[ Reply to This | # ]

I've owned a glossy screen MBP for a while now; I chose it intentionally (because the display looks a *lot* better) and I wouldn't buy a matte screen now unless there was no other choice.

Glossy screens have been an option for quite a while; it's only the loss of the matte configuration that is new.



---
--fyngyrz


[ Reply to This | # ]

And it's the loss of the option that's upsetting. (And glossy has only been around since the introduction of the original MacBook.)

-rob.

[ Reply to This | # ]

What about, "Hate glossy screen, but wasn't planning on buying anyway."?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Another missing option: no preference for glossy or not. All of the choices are "love it" or "hate it". I do plan to buy, but would have if it'd been only matte, only glossy, or a choice.

[ Reply to This | # ]

I strongly dislike the glossy screens (from experience in stores; I've never owned one) and am unlikely to buy the new MacBook because of it. (I still happily use my trusty PowerBook G4 with a recently replaced battery and upgraded hard drive and memory and, of course, a matte screen.)

Two other issues also concern me greatly and help to temper my enthusiasm to go ahead and upgrade. 1: The removal of the standard DVI port: most of the projectors I use now finally have DVI ports, so I don't need the DVI-VGA dongle all the time. Why force users back into the dark ages of carrying dongles to every meeting and presentation? 2: The lack of firewire 400. Again, why? This renders my time machine disk useless and also eliminates the only way to charge my iPod through the sleeping laptop (with the firewire cable from iPods past).

With these exceptions, the new MacBook and MacBook Pro both look like exciting machines which I'd love to buy.

[ Reply to This | # ]

All you need is either a cable adapter/dongle (800->400) or a cable with a Firewire 800 on one end, and Firewire 400 on the other end. The Apple Store carries both. The Belken Firewire 800->Firewire 400 cable is of the thin variety, like Apples.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Good. That helps, but it still requires another dongle, although that's not so much a problem for my non-portable external hard drive.

[ Reply to This | # ]

should of been one of the cables included w/ the laptop...

[ Reply to This | # ]

Matte screen is a deal broker to me - It has to be glossy screen. I am definitely getting a 17" MacBook Pro to replace my current 17" one.

[ Reply to This | # ]

I'm one of those people who dislikes glossy screens. I'll definitely not be purchasing any high-end system of any kind which has a glossy screen. I may eventually purchase a second-hand budget system with a glossy screen to fill the gap until decent screens become available again.

I expect that we're going to find out that these glossy screens are actually cheaper to manufacture. It's the only reason I can think of that they are being pushed so hard. There has to be some kind of benefit to the manufacturers. The most obvious answer is that they make more money per unit on the glossy screens and to-heck with quality or usability.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Erm, machines with glossy screens aren't "high end". They're completely unsuitable for graphic design work, video work, or engineering work.

I might buy one. But only if I can also get a proper Firewire port for all my external HDs and my movie camera, a proper DVI port, and a third party PSU (I'll never trust Apple's PSUs after one nearly set my house on fire. They need to make them bigger, and stop fannying around with "clever" designs. This is a safety issue.). I'll also need a sandblaster, to take the Fisher Price sheen off the display.

And then, I might just install OS X if they remove hard linking to directories (a stupid security hole which was prompted by an inability to develop Time Machine properly). I'm surprised there's been no mention of this since 10.5's release.

I think you get the idea that I'm planning on buying a professional computer from a professional computer company to replace my PowerBook (a perfect example of a professional computer), once it becomes necessary. Oh yeah, and I'll be running Linux. Probably Ubuntu, possibly Debian or OpenSuSE, maybe CentOS or Scientific Linux. Apple made my decision for me.


[ Reply to This | # ]

And Linux dosen't use Hard links?

Gee.. get a life!

---
/Marook

[ Reply to This | # ]

The poll is good, but this is even better:
http://www.apple.com/feedback/macbookpro.html

Go tell them. Tell them what you think and what your consequences will be. Especially if you DON'T belong to the "vast majority" of glossy lovers... (I don't. Definitely.)

[ Reply to This | # ]

Thanks for the link. I left constructive feedback and honestly told them that this means I will have to abandon all future Apple hardware purchases and switch to generic PC hardware with Linux for software development and Windows (yuck) for Photoshop work.

I just can't believe that someone at Apple would make a mistake like this. This is Apple company image/philosophy/direction changing and a lot of people will simply leave Apple.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Don't really know if threatening to stop buying Apply products will have much effect. Apple has been known to do what they think is right for you, regardless of what you think. E.g. abandoning the floppy disk drive. They're probably hoping that eventually, most laptop screens (Win. and Apple) will be glossy and then you'll all be forced to go along.

[ Reply to This | # ]

I don't know what you people are talking about. Matte screens DIFFUSE light, making reflected light sources appear as indiscriminate fuzzy regions. The glossy screen is like a mirror, and light sources show up as actual images of the source.

The brain is MUCH better at viewing two superimposed images and removing one subconsciously, than it is at desaturating and adjusting colors in a nonuniform image (ie, that produced by a matte screen).

That being said, any company that EVER removes user choice is making a wrong decision. My (and the human brain's subconscious) preference for glossy screens does not mean matte should disappear.

Personally I'm more upset at the trend towards "tap to click" which is the most retarded "feature" I've seen on any laptop, and confuses WAY more users.

[ Reply to This | # ]

I think the problem is that for some people -- like me -- the mirrored images are very disruptive. My mind finds it nearly impossible to just "filter out" the floating image; I find I have to move the machine around (if I can) to eliminate the floating mirror image in order to work without distraction.

-rob.

[ Reply to This | # ]

I see your point - where people who can't deal with the glossy screen are hooped; unlike having no floppy disk or the hockey puck mouse, where you can find a workaround if you really have to. The only option for you is to hook up an external monitor, which is not available when you travel.

While I've learned to love the glossy screen, I can see that different people's brains work differently.

[ Reply to This | # ]

ljharb wrote:

"Personally I'm more upset at the trend towards "tap to click" which is the most retarded "feature" I've seen on any laptop...."

Perhaps you didn't absorb the full content of the news on the new trackpad. The trackpad is, itself, a *moving* button. You press on it, and it moves beneath your thumb, like any other button. No need to reply upon "tap to click."

[ Reply to This | # ]

Yes, I understand - much like the entire-mouse-button on some Apple mice. The concern is, moving the cursor and clicking the button have always been and should always be two distinct hand motions, so that one never accidentally does one when intending the other.

If Apple does the mechanics well, it won't be a problem - but it's an easy one to mess up.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Jason Snell over at Macworld reports that the trackpad is smart enough to realize that if you have your thumb at the "bottom" of the trackpad and index finger in the main portion it will sense the click with your thumb and pointing with your finger separately without being confused.

This obviously doesn't cure the confusion of the user who doesn't try this and gets frustrated looking for a button!

They'll probably have to add a message, "Welcome to OS X! CLick the bottom portion of the trackpad with your thumb while...


[ Reply to This | # ]

I don't have the glossy screen on my early 08 MBP, but I think I'd have to see it first hand before I make a judgement. I'd rather the matte, but it does look great.

[ Reply to This | # ]

I really despise the gloss, but I can live with it. I'm more likely to buy a netbook to compliment my MBP instead of buying an overly expensive new Mac at this point. I just don't need any more power than I have, but some portability would be nice.

[ Reply to This | # ]

I bought a Feb '08 MBP glossy, and have been very happy with it; the brightness and liveliness of it compared to the other screens I have to do with are phenomenal, and I wouldn't go back to matte by choice.

The new glass covered ones look to be even better in this direction, and they should be easier to clean, and with less dust under the rim!!

[ Reply to This | # ]

I currently own a MacBook Pro (first of the peryn versions, with a Matte screen) and a late 2007 iMac 24". My personal opinion of this new model is that it's pretty sweet, and if I didn't have the MBP I would seriously consider getting one of these new models. Here's why:

1) From my experience with the iMac (glass/glossy) I know that it works very well in both natural light, incandescent bulb light and office florescent lighting. I've never had glare with it unless I had the sun directly on the thing (which nothing in my opinion stands up to).

2) The only hint of glare that I get is at the bottom corners of my iMac's screen and I believe it's more to do with the angle than anything else. It is pretty big.

3) My wife's MacBook, which is glossy obviously, never seems to suffer from a lot of glare in the situations that she's been around. She also is a professional graphic artist dealing with nearly all the CS3 apps on a daily basis.

4) The display port on the MB and MBP (not to be confused with the previous mini-DVI that my wife's MB has as well as my iMac) is a very welcome addition. Yes, it's not all that interesting to previous MBP owners since they had full DVI, but on the MB side of things (and I'm assuming future iMacs) it means that you can run full 30" displays and larger now.

5) The backlighting on the chicklet keyboard works a LOT better than the outgoing model's keyboard. This was from my experience with the MBA.

6) The graphics potential of the MBP seems almost too much. Good for gamers (me at times) and anyone else that can utilize the GPUs on it (3D, CS4, etc)

7) if it feels anywhere as rigid as the MBA, both the MB and MBP are going to be amazing to move around. To this day, I'm still amazed at how amazingly solid the MBA felt; how secure it felt in the hand. To me, having something that flexes when you pick it up to put it away gets old after awhile. Not that the previous generations did much, but they do in comparison to the air.

Now, here's my reservations on the MB:

My opinion is that you are getting less for the MB than the outgoing model. It's lost FW, and with it target disk mode. To me, the latter is more important than losing FW itself.

With that, it also seems more expensive than the previous model for what you get. My feeling is that this new fabrication process is still expensive, as well as coupling it with green technologies which is one of the reasons behind the glass screen (at least on the iMac). Those costs seem to be more pronounced on the MB than on the MBP.

Last thoughts:

The new track pad is something that I have to play with before I make any decisions on. If it works, then great, but if it turns out to be clunky when doing more complicated things, that's going to be a real show stopper to me when I go to get a replacement for my current MBP in a few years (they do last).

Adam.

---
Xaren Development
http://www.xaren.net

[ Reply to This | # ]

One final thing: The pictures that have been taken of these new books I don't think do them justice. If you are lamenting them, that's fine, but you should at least give them the benefit of the doubt by checking them out first hand.

Adam.

---
Xaren Development
http://www.xaren.net

[ Reply to This | # ]

I dislike glossy screens because they can be annoying sometimes. But most of the time I barely notice it and the reflection is actually useful in bright sunlight where matte is just washed out. But I do prefer matte for photo work.
Ok but here's my thing: glass is even more reflective than the MB screen IMO-and that could cause problems.

Also the huge 16" piece of glass is unnecessary!!!!!!! Glass is recyclable, but so is a thin Al bezel. The 15" MBP is actually HEAVIER .1lbs!!!! A think bezel is lighter, allows for a matte display, and is probably cheaper.

Then I don't like the black look. Yes, I know apple wants a unified mac look, but I was also more fond on the what iMacs. I've never been fond of black glass, why not just aluminum and a matte display? Or the option as you could do glass over Al. This would be very is for the iMacs and pretty easy for MB/P.

Personally there are some things I hate. I will not buy the 24" display!!! THERE'S NO FIREWIRE DARN IT!!!!!!!!!!! And the MBPs are missing a port! Still no graphics mem in MB, though an improvement. Also I wonder if the no mouse button will deter people. But I very rarely use mine!

[ Reply to This | # ]

It's not just the look, but the practicality of the glossy screens that is a real problem. I love the deeper blacks that come from a glossy screen- when I'm watching a movie or something entertaining. Fine for the Macbook, as a class distinction from the MBP. But when I need to match screen to print output (to the already limited extent you can on a laptop screen), it will be nearly impossible, especially when the print media isn't glossy. The MBP should have a matte option, as work machine. This is an even bigger problem with the new Cinema Display, which I assume is more calibration-friendly. It's a shame because I was waiting to buy one and now I'll have to look elsewhere, and try to snatch up an older model MBP before they disappear.

So the question isn't whether I like it, but whether I can work with it. And the answer is a resounding NO.

a side note: Apple is doing a great job of making their older models more attractive (and valuable) than the new ones. I still see the older iPhones selling for much more than the new 3G on ebay. Same with the 160GB iPods. Really strange.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Interesting last point. Especially given that the 160 GB iPods and new 120 GB iPods look almost exactly the same.

[ Reply to This | # ]

We've never gonna get a consensus here but looking at the poll 40% prefer matte. Why not have a stock matte and glossy? Do those who like glossy screens mostly use them as 'Entertainment Machines' i.e. iTunes, internet etc? I guess many who prefer matte use them for work as well.

I currently have an Alu glossy iMac 24". I remember switching from CRT to matte LCD and the benefits gained. The insanely bright iMac glossy screen (reflections and very little brightness control) reminds me of those CRT days.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Of course "popping" colours on a glossy screen are nice. When you're watching a movie etc.
And frankly, I don't have a strong opinion about reflections. I would have to see one of those backlit LED displays first.

My biggest concern is true colours. As a photographer I need to do a lot of work on the road, where I don't have my external Eizo display with me. That's why a screen with an ability at least close to colour calibrated standards is absolutely necessary. So if these glossy LED backlit screens don't perform as "colour correct" as previous matte displays, I won't buy a new MBP.

[ Reply to This | # ]

I hate glossy screens, have a MacBook Air and it's the worst thing about it. Don't want to be forced to use glossy on a machine for work (the MBA is not my main work Mac)

[ Reply to This | # ]

We replaced a 15" PowerBook G4 with a 15" glossy screen MacBook Pro this Spring or Summer. The new display is so much better. They are so much more crisp than matte screens with their blurry anti-glare finish. There was no way I could use the PowerBook outside. The screen basically absorbed and diffused all the sun/sky light, obscuring the image. The glossy screen doesn't do that at all. You only need to make sure you're in a good place and position with a glossy screen outside so the reflection doesn't overpower the display's output, which is not hard to do.

[ Reply to This | # ]

As a photographer, I used to fall into the camp that hated glossy screens, thought they would never be as good as my matte 14" TiBook. But the cheapskate in me won over -- I needed a new MacBook, faster than I would have liked and didn't want to pay the extra for a matte screen nor wait for it to arrive special order.

I've honestly never missed the matte display in a year of owning and using (quite a bit) the MacBook. In fact, if anything I think I might be a glossy convert now. Something that I thought would never happen.

[ Reply to This | # ]

No Firewire? NO THANKS! Apple removing complaints about this on their discussions forum is sick. Taking away what was once standard is really lame. I'm all fired up about this! :/

[ Reply to This | # ]

I've owned several matte PowerBooks before my current glossy MacBook and I like the glossy screen. I'm actually surprised to read there is any strong opinion against it!

I've been using this glossy MacBook 2.16 for over a year now, traveling to Mexico, China, and Hawaii with it. I take pictures with my Canon EOS 30D and show them off on the MacBook. It never even occurred to me anybody would have a problem with the glossy screen.

[ Reply to This | # ]

My friend keeps saying "People change" and "Take her to the Apple store and have her look at it".

I've stopped explaining it is a portable and she needs to see and use the screen in all sorts of lighting conditions and that SHE HATES GLOSSY SCREENS.

She'll get a previous generation and that'll be the end of it until Apple comes out with a matte screen again or she switches to a PC.

[ Reply to This | # ]

I too like the look of the glossy screen for viewing images and movies, but it's absolutely useless for image editing. I currently use a MacBook Pro with a matte screen for all my initial edits on my wedding photos using Aperture, then they move to my wife's PowerMac for the final edits and culling. I mainly deal with color correction and balance for my edits and the glossy screen makes that impossible to do.
We also have a MacBook with a gloss screen that we use at shows for displaying our photos and it looks fantastic, but we need need the matte option for actually working with our computer and not making it a glorified slide projector.

[ Reply to This | # ]

I was very sceptical of glossy screens. Then I got my MacBook. Now I prefer it over the matte kind.

The latter was unreadable if there was any daylight in sight, because the reflection was smeared out across the screen. With the glossy, I can just turn the laptop, so that the bright object does not show as a reflection (or in a corner of the screen which I don't use), and then that's it.

In any case your poll should feature another option: "I prefer glossy, but matte should be an option." I mean, why should my preference be the guideline for other buyers?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Me too. I was also very skeptical about the glossy screen; but now when I compare the glossy MacBook with the iBook matte screen, there's just no comparison that the glossy screen is so much brighter and clearer. I can sit with the sun behind me shining on the glossy screen and still see the screen.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Had glossy MacBook for several months. Hated it. Useless outside.

Upgraded to a MBP largely for the matte option. Perfectly fine for me outside.

Total BS about the brain "tuning out" reflections — not my brain!



[ Reply to This | # ]

As a Graphic Designer the Gloswsy Screens that have been out on the market in the past several years look all nice and fancy on display in the store - but that is all_

They are impractical in a real world environment_ Unless the global lighting is way down in any given location or the viewer is immediately in front of the display they give off relections from any nearby light source_ ANd the viewer is no longer able to see the content on the screen_

So if 2 or more people are sitting around a glossy display - the less likely they are going to be able to see the screen_

I tend to work with my monitors at a slight upward angle as opposed to straight up and down vertical and I have lighting directly over my sitting area - a glossy screen would wash out the view_

Even in Apple's own Special Presentation when they showed off the monitor the added in a "glossy" effect over the top right od the display [I guess for simulation effect] and it washed out 30% of the screen_

I'd might be inclined to grab a new MBP up down the road if a Apple either adds back in a Non-Gloss Display or a 3rd Party Company begins producing the option_

[ Reply to This | # ]

I think we should get the word out and begin complaining to Apple_ If they get enough response they tend to listen to their customers_

Especially here at MOSXH Rob and his exploits are known around the "Mac Community" and this seems like a good place to "light the fire"_

[ Reply to This | # ]

I've spent quite a bit of time studying both screens under varying light conditions over the past several months and finally came to the conclusion that my next laptop purchase will be a glossy screen.

Now I'm just waiting for the 17" MBP to be updated with the new 15" features. As soon as it is, I'll be ordering one.

To say that you'll not buy a Mac just because they only come with a glossy screen is silliness...unless you really plan on switching platforms. You might miss one or two upgrade cycles with that attitude but then you'll have to fish or cut bait. Because a glossy screen is perfectly usable by anyone who isn't a graphics designer doing prepress work. And those folks will likely be using a specialized display anyway.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Well, believe it or not, I simply won't buy another Mac laptop until there's a non-glossy screen option in the 15" size. (I am not going to carry a gargantuan laptop just for the matte screen.)

In practice, what that means is that I will use my current MacBook Pro as long as practical -- which I think may be something in excess of five years. Hopefully by then, a non-glossy regime will have restored a matte screen option to the MacBook Pro line.

But until they do, yes, I have purchased my last Apple laptop. If, indeed, five years pass and there are no matte Apple options, I'll more than likely (assuming it's still possible) buy a PC laptop with a matte screen and install OS X on it via osx86.

-rob.

[ Reply to This | # ]

To say you won't use a glossy - is like saying you are only going to use PPC. You've just committed yourself to obsolescence.

-P



[ Reply to This | # ]

It's not quite that bad, given that a MBP of today's Core 2 generation will be more than usable for quite a few years -- it will run the upcoming Snow Leopard just fine, for instance. In general, I don't push my laptop the way I push the desktop, so I don't need the ultimate in CPU (or video card) performance -- I just need it to work at a reasonable speed.

As a point of reference, we still have (and I still use on occasion) a 12" PowerBook G4. I expect that one will remain here for a long time, though clearly it's not going to run Snow Leopard :).

So yes, I'm dooming myself to technological obsolescence, in some way, as laptops get faster and faster. But it's not really going to matter in the relative short term. I just hope Apple realizes the error of their ways and adds a matte screen before my MacBook Pro completely dies of old age.

(To make that event as far off as possible, I've just ordered a factory refurb 2.6GHz MBP to replace my two-year-old model, which I'll sell. Apple's got some great refurb deals right now...)

-rob.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Aside from the fact that I just bought my MacBook Pro eight months ago, and it still feels new to me... I looked at the glossy and matte screens in the Apple store when I bought it, and the glossy screen seemed to pick up fingerprints and throw off too much glare from lights. I have used my laptop while riding down the highway (as a passenger) and the last thing I need is for my laptop screen to cast a glare into the eyes of somebody driving a car (especially if it's the car in which I am a passenger.)

[ Reply to This | # ]

That's the dumbest thing I've heard in weeks. How would your laptop screen cast a glare into the eyes of the driver?

That would require you to be sitting on the hood of the car, with the laptop off to the side of yourself so that the sun (which would have to be behind you and the driver) shines so incredibly bright that it reflects off a black screen, through the windshield and into the driver's eyes.

I guess you have the magic laptop from Willy Wonka's factory!

[ Reply to This | # ]

- I'll NEVER use this candied-looking Aqua... I'm staying with OS 9!
- I CAN'T use these new flat screens, I do color work for a living. I'm staying with my trusty 19" CRT!

Puhleez... everyone here who says they aren't or can't use a glossy screen, WILL use one within the next two years. They CAN be color calibrated. They ARE color accurate once you do it. You are NOT going to switch to Windows and re-purchase all your software just because of the glossy screen.

[ Reply to This | # ]