The downside of Apple lock-in: no matte screens

Disclaimer: I am an Apple fanboy.

Why no matte screen?

(Credit: Apple)

I got a new MacBook Pro about a month ago but was considering giving it to my father and grabbing one of the new ones when they are in stores tomorrow. However, the lack of matte screen really bums me out. In fact, it's the reason why I won't go buy one for awhile despite liking the new features and form factor.

The glossy screen does present a great image provided you are sitting in a place that allows you to position your machine accordingly. Otherwise it can get really annoying. And for those of us who wear glasses when sitting at our computers, we know that anti-glare lenses only go so far.

The bigger issue is that Apple came out with some great new machines that don't provide nearly enough options.

The glossy-only screen highlights the problems consumers face when one vendor controls everything. At least if there were Apple licensees, someone else could solve that problem. And don't give me the story about after-market screens. That defeats the design of the machine and never works as well.

I've always wondered about the hardware vendors that create multitudes of laptops that all run Windows. Now I wish there were other options for Mac OS.

Link to CNET coverage: Apple polishes up its MacBook line
Link to MacWorld: Matte Matters

Feel free to flame me, but I am not wrong about this.

[Mac917]

I thought that Apple was clever to cover the iMac screens with glare prone glass. It forced the pro market to purchase the more expensive Mac Pro and Cinema Display. It made sense. Most professional users had the extra money to spend.

I was floored this afternoon when I found out the new MBP and Cinema Display would follow suit. I'm a professional photographer. I simply can not use these machines. It's ironic because the reason I switched to Mac five years ago was because it was (is) the creative industry standard. Clearly Apple has lost sight of this. Visit any pro photography forum to see the overwhelming disappointment. To those who say, "What's the big deal? CRT monitors were glass." Nobody was trying to use CRT monitors in all different locations and lighting conditions. I could understand if it was just for the Macbooks, whose primary function will be viewing websites, iTunes, & checking email. Are the MBP's really targeted at consumers? They're too expensive for my parents.

Considering they put glass over the new Cinema Display as well, I think it's safe to say that glass is here to stay, at least for now.

It's a sad day for Mac using creatives.

[kelmon]

One does wonder how long it will be before the option is introduced if there is a significant enough backlash.

[lawgone]

Unfortunately, Apple is notorious for not listening to consumer backlash no matter how large. (MMS for iPhone? Multi-card readers for MBP and iMacs?) This is why I have such a love/hate relationship with Apple rather than a healthy relationship.

[karpenterskids]

Do glare filter screens for laptops exist?


I know they do for desktop screens...
http://www.ergoindemand.com/glare_filters.htm

[kelmon]

Yes. Rob Griffiths wrote an article for the US MacWorld site decrying the new gloss-only option and stating that it would he would no longer be buying Apple portables because of this. However, during the article he did note that anti-glare covers do exist for laptops and that, apparently, they work pretty well:

http://www.powersupportusa.com/products/ef.php?category=pb

[gopnick]

This is the worst decision Apple has made in years.

[Jeff Putz]

I think people who object to the glass haven't spent a lot of time in front it. My first clue that perhaps this wasn't a big deal came when I noticed I could use my iPhone last year in bright sun. The LCD is so bright that it's a non-issue. Sure enough, the same was true for the iMacs.

[blue_fireball_eater]

Count me in as being disappointed by the black, glossy display. I had to get an antiglare film from Power Support for my blackbook when I got it (approx $50). However, I ended up giving that computer to my wife and just getting a 15" macbook pro last month. No regrets here, as the glossy display and chiclet keyboard really slum what would be an excellent computer.

[rapier1]

I hate the chiclet keyboard but what is really irking me is the lack of real buttons for the trackpad. Sure, I can double, triple, quadruple tap the trackpad to emulate all of those things but none of these give me the tactile hapatic feedback that I want and expect.

[artistjoh]

Having purchased a 17 inch MacBook Pro Hi Res with matte screen I am now in the position of hoping this computer will last for several years as the matte screen is so much better than the glossy. As a professional artist the fact that the image on screen looks very similar to the same image when printed is important and the non reflective qualities enables long periods working outdoors without eye strain.

Bad decision. Suddenly I am a supporter of Pystar because it seems we need a choice of hardware offerings that run OS X.

[pjcamp]

Antiglare eyeglass lenses don't work AT ALL on that. They minimize reflections from the lens, not from the environment. The former is a simple application of thin film technology. The latter (in the absence of polaroid filters) would be magic.

[egghead1619]

I am the proud owner of a MBP matte screen and love it. I was excited to learn about the new MBP line and was considering upgrading soon. My excitement quickly faded as I learned that there was no matte option for the 15" model and that it would cost me extra if I wanted to connect the new MBP to an external display ($29 for VGA and $99 for Dual Link DVI) which were already part of the boxed MBP (15" 2.33GHz, Late 2006) when I purchased it two years ago. Also, they are charging for the apple remote (another $19.) Apparently Apple has decided to nickel and dime us just to lower the starting price of their MBP line.

[MrKleinpaste]

Personally I LOVE the glossy screen over the matte screen. Sure it's a little annoying when I have bright light shining directly my MacBook Pro or myself. However, the rest of the time I see a SERIOUS improvement in quality over the matte ones.

Should they give you the option for the lower quality matte? Sure. But, in the big picture even matte screens have their drawbacks.

I'd also say the phrase "Apple lock-in" is a little extreme, however. If you want lower quality the Redmond Borg is more than willing to assimilate you with their mediocrity.

[readyyeti]

My IBM Thinkpad of 4 years recently crashed and is unrecoverable without spending $$. So, I was really looking forward to the possibility of switching to the MacBook Pro.

But, the glossy screen is totally a deal-breaker for me. Reflections on my screen are TOTALLY DISTRACTING for me and slash my productivity.

When I'm on an airplane, for example, I have limited options about how to position my laptop and I can't control the lighting. And if I'm trying to maximize my battery life and want to reduce the brightness of my screen (so I can maximize how much work I can get done), then the reflections are only going to be that much more noticeable.

Major bummer. I was really looking forward to switching to Mac OS X. Looks like I'll have to wait a few more years until my next laptop conks out.

[CDubber]

"Major bummer. I was really looking forward to switching to Mac OS X. Looks like I'll have to wait a few more years until my next laptop conks out." - redyyeti

Better yet, pick up a prior model MacBook Pro for a great price and start enjoying OS X now.

[Gergory333]

I agree about the screens. Besides that, I use my firewire port on my little MacBook to run an external HD, and they've eliminated that on the aluminum MBs. BTW... thanks artistjoh for the word on Psystar. Looks interesting...

[David.Jennings]

It's all about economics. If Apple had been selling more matte screens than glossy they would have announced yesterday that all new laptops will have a matte screen. But the majority of users like the glossy screen. Glossy is brighter, sharper and is a clear choice for anyone needing just that. The matte screen models sit on Apple storeroom shelves longer... not good for business.

Don't want glossy? Go to 3M and buy their privacy screen. It will give you the matte effect you want, along with a darker, less sharp image. Don't have the cash?... go to Hobby Lobby and buy a can of matte spray.

[egghead1619]

I don't know that the matte screens set on shelves. I could never find one and had to order directly from apple. I also saw many people selling their glossy macs on eBay because they no longer wanted the reflective screen.

If you think that a matte screen is darker and less sharp, then you have had some bad experiences with matte screens. I guess you could say that a glossy screen is much brighter, but only when you are being blinded by the distracting reflections. My two year old MBP screen has stayed much clearer and brighter than any of my family's glass screen laptops. Imagine scratches, and fingerprints, not to mention the extra weight. Try setting up two MBPs, one glossy and the other matte, right next to one another and play the same DVD. You will notice quickly why matte is the better option.

[Rotschuh]

I switched to Mac 2 years ago mainly because the MBP had been one of the last remaining pro notebook with a matte screen (image editing etc.). Now I love OSX and Apple...but there's no product left for my planned update.

And what for would I need a glossy screen at home on a Cinema Display???

One question: I love the ambient light sensor on my MBP. Nobody mentioned if there's still one in the new MBP? I guess the screen always has to be at maximum brightness (and heart your eyes) to ensure glare is not getting in the way?

[DrewID3000]

Are Apple's product designers too young to remember the anti-glare push in the mid-1990s or do they all habitually avoid sunlight? Maybe the new MBP should be called the MacBook "Deluxe" because "Professional" just doesn't fit anymore. I don't know of any graphics or video professional who actually likes staring at a glare covered screen for 8 hours. It's like Apple re-introduced the original iMac hockey puck mouse and declared it "genius" or something. I am disappointed that I will have to break down and begin purchasing non-Apple hardware for my company UNLESS Apple gets their heads straight and changes course soon. Adobe CS4 works on Windows, right? Just when I thought Microsoft had handed Apple a huge gift with the Vista fiasco, Apple went and gave Microsoft a huge gift by giving up their design advantage.

[4miler]

44% of people prefer matte screens. The local Apple store said it was pretty even between matte and glossy for MBP's (before the latest update).

http://www.macpolls.com/?poll_id=527

I've used an iMac with glossy screen. When there is no strong light, e.g. window, in the rear, then the glossy screen is UNSURPASSED. Totally superb. BUT, when there are strong lights in the background, it is pathetic.

Please, I need a matte screen because I use iMacs for work many hours a day. I cannot tolerate reflections in the screen.

Steve Jobs can thumb his nose at us 44% of users, because he knows we'll still keep using Macs. i.e. his profits won't suffer.

I'm rooting for Paystar too because we need a matte screen, and if Apple won't listen, we need other options.

[CNETFan7]

I don't see why everyone is complaining. Just like the iPhone 3G, vendors will start selling thin, anti-glare covers that you can put on your screen. Since the screen is slightly depressed into the top part of the case, an anti-glare screen will fit perfectly on top of it and not cause any problems with closing the device. I'm sure this is what Apple engineers thought when they switched to all glossy and when they designed the screen, since those that want matte can get it with this add-on and they can just manufacture one product instead of two. That is just good business.

[prairie_grrl]

I completely agree with your comments about the glossy only screen. I have been eagerly awaiting the new macs, but now I will be purchasing one of the older Mac Book Pros in order to have the matte screen.

[jherdt]

David,

I find myself in agreement with you! Agree with most of the posts in the thread as well. I also want to add that this issue was enough for me to stop considering a switch to Apple. Unless this glossy screen is different - they are almost unusable in anything but low light conditions. If you use your laptop in many different and uncontrolled enviroments living with a glossy screen is a huge problem. One Sony VIAO glossy screen laptop was enough for me. It is a shame too - great laptop, but seeing reflections in the display just proved too distracting.

I've got a Dell Latitude 6500 with a matte LED screen that it appears I'll be living with for the forseeable future.

Best Regards, Jim

[PB G4]

I am dismayed about the lack of matte screens in the newer Apple products. Reflection is an issue - and a significant one at that. More troubling is the attributes of the glossy screen for screen work. Yes, the blacks looks "deeper" and the colors more vibrant, but the problem for photo editing is that the blacks and colors look a little too good on screen.

I have a wonderful 23" Apple Cinema Display and was considering adding another my 8-core MacPro desktop, when I noted (while configuring the last of the matte / button MBs - the 17" on the Apple site) that the 23" is no longer offered by Apple. Apparently, the 24" LED backlight - glossy - MB-connector-only model is intended to replace it. It bodes ill for the remaining 20" and 30" models as well as for the future of Apple screens with users who need the display for critical applications.

Scott Kelby, the president of the National Association of Photoshop Professionals, has already noted his dismay over the button issue / no ability to turn off gestures / glossy screens on the new MacBook Pros. Given that so many Mac users are creative professionals like photographers, surely it's not a good sign for there to be significant disappointment in that community. Is Apple listening?