MBP Antiglare Option

For those that got the antiglare option with their MBP, how well does it work outside in the sun?

 

Works just the same as any monitor that doesn't have a glass shield in front of it.

The anti-glare option is essentially a MBP without the glass cover.

That being said, nothing LED is going to be great in the sun.

 

what the ????

so they charge $50 to essentially remove the glass for antiglare option?
there has to be alil more to this i hope.

 

You're talking about Apple here. What makes you think they WOULDN'T do that? haha

 

It works as you might expect any matte screen to work.

For normal outside daylight, it works fine--you won't see your own reflection on the matte screen, whereas with the glossy, you might have a nice view of the clouds.

If the sun shines directly on it though, the parts the sun's light directly hits will still be hard to read (turns sort of white/grayish and really bright--so contrast becomes horrible and you can't read what's there clearly). That said, glossy's far worse in direct sunlight.

 

No, you really are paying more for less.

 

Nope... I'm a manager of an Apple store, and trust me, the same other then the glass. What a lot of people complain about is that they know longer get the black edging around the screen (bezel).

 

Seriously, from an aesthetic point of view, the bezel of the matte screen is far inferior

Fortunately I use an external at home so it's not a huge issue except for when I travel, but otherwise it would be a deal-breaker.

 

The black bezel is glossy, so it would reflect light. Why would people pay more for a matte screen and have a glossy black bezel bouncing light and reflections into their eyes?

 

You're not reading anything on the bezel, so a glossy bezel would provide a minor distraction at best. Having reflections right on the surface of what you're trying to read is much more of a nuisance.

But I'm not saying a glossy black bezel is necessarily the way to go - the difference in textures would detract from the aesthetics as well. I just feel the current design of the white one is quite ugly.

 

I had 2 13" MBP's over the last 3 years with glossy screens and currently have a 13" MBA with a matte screen with a silver bezel.

The chunky black bezel on the Pro's was crap in reality and when you have a matte screen, the black bezel would reflect so it's necessary to remove it on matte screens.

Anyway, the biggest dealbreaker with the 13" MBP is the useless 1280x800 resolution! The bezel is just a side issue...

 

i know people say matte for outdoor and glossy for indoor, etc...but since you own or have owned both, which do you prefer for indoor?

other weekend, went to local apple store and tried to compare, but they won't let you take mbps outside to test screens unfortunately ; but w/ the lighting in store, the glossy, although more reflective, seemed alil bit better when looking at pictures, reading online, and whatever short movies were stored on that laptop.

 

Matte. Glossy shouldn't even be an option on a screen IMO. Glossy doesn't have any plus points whatsoever. It might look nicer and make a machine more marketable, but in practical terms, it's useless.

 

Everyone's eyes are different...

I think the picture on a glossy screen looks MUCH better than matte... its just the reflections you have to watch out for.

 

Nothing wrong with looking nicer if the reflections don't bother you or if you're rarely in an environment where reflections are a problem.

Great thing about options--everyone can get what they want (more or less). Glossy's cheaper at any rate for Apple, and the reverse for other laptops (or was a few years ago).

Plus, there's something inherently amusing about making a practicality argument on the Apple forums. Don't underestimate the value of something merely looking nicer!

 

I'm with Doh on this one. I'm glad that there is a choice.

Given a choice, I would choose glossy for most of my particular uses. I have never been bothered by a reflection.

 

Worth a read:

http://www..com/matte-vs-glossy-screens

 

People say they like glossy screens better only because they have never actually owned a really good matte IPS screen. All of the top quality IPS screens are matte finish, not glossy. Glossy makes crappy TN panels look a little less crappy but it otherwise serves no other purpose except to add needless reflections onto your screen.

 

Are you saying that ALL of Apples matte screens lump into that category (not really good)? Because I visit my local Apple store at least once a week, and have viewed all the screens they have available, and I still, by personal preference, favor the glossy screens. And I don't think it is because Apple " has never actually used a really good matte IPS screen".

I am by no means promoting glossy screens, because I happen to think it is a personal preference issue wherein no one person can possibly say that one is inherently "better" than the other. It is the eye of the beholder, and can sometimes depend on where it is being used, as well.

 

The best screen I've ever seen is on my VAIO Z. It's pretty much flawless...

 

Maybe I'm really too ignorant for my own good nowadays, but from when did Apple start selling the MB A with a matte screen?

 

Everyone's opinions and preferences are always the right ones, and everyone else is always stupid or wrong.

 

No, none of Apple's laptop screens are IPS, though I think the majority of their desktop screens are (The 30" cinema display is a matte IPS screen) except for the 27" iMac.

I would argue that screen quality, once you reach the upper levels of professional grade, are in the eye of the beholder. But first you have to get to that point, and the majority of screens for both laptop and desktop are based on TN technology which is pretty inferior to IPS when it comes to overall picture quality and viewing angles. Glossy tends to help MOST TN panels look pretty good, but they can never really compete with an IPS panel for serious graphics professionals, and the majority of those IPS panels (save only for the 27" IPS iMacs) are matte.

In short, what I'm trying to say is glossy only looks better to most people because most people only see a picture on a consumer level TN panel and not on a professional IPS screens. In fact, its extremely rare to even find a good TN panel on a laptop... the best probably being Dell's b+rg screen, with the FHD Apple screen somewhere in the middle of the pack. Here is a great post to help you understand laptop screens a bit more:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/har...550475-15-6-fhd-1920x1080-panels-reviews.html

If we could actually get some IPS panels for laptops (such as the HP Elitebook and now the Lenovo x220) there wouldn't be any argument for glossy v. matte because the choice would clearly be matte.

 

So, you were comparing Apples to oranges.

I was confining my comment to Apple Laptops, as is the forum (Apples to Apples, so to speak).

After all, are we not comparing Apple Matte Laptop screen to Apple Glossy Laptop screen, as is which is preferable?

 

Fair point, it's not a true matte screen, but it's not the ultra glossy type found on MBP's...