Macbook pro screen comparison

Hi everyone,

After the disappointment of buying a windows laptop, I've decided to buy a mac.

I'd like to get one of the new pros, either a 15" or 13". i don't need the 9600gt as I just web surf and do documents.
So its either
the 2.26 13" version
2.53 13" version
or 2.53 15" version.

What I'd like to know is which screen has more pixels per inch, ie a clearer/crisper screen.

I'm used to a full hd vaio screen, so which would be the smallest step down in terms of crispness of images?

Thanks

 

The 15" has a higher res than the 13", but it will still be a step down from the Vaio you owned.

 

Go with the 13" since you don't need the 9600.

The 13" is the perfect size for a travel notebook, IMHO. Moreover, the pixels/inch is more tolerable on the 13" since most 15" PC's have a higher res than the macbook pro 15" (1400)

 

screen on new macbook pro's is very good! see notebookchecks review for more "specific" information!

 

Hi,

So the consensus is that the 13" would be better, that was the one I was more in favour of due to the portability aspect.

Does anyone know if the viewing angles of the 13" screen have improved, my sister has a 2008 unibody 13" and the angles are frankly rubbish.

Thanks

 

The 15" screen has vastly superior color and viewing angles, however, I think the 13" actually looks a bit crisper, as IMO 1440x900 is simply too low for a 15.4" screen.

 

the 13" unibody Macbook had a pretty poor screen. I do not know the viewing angle differences, but the 13" Macbook Pro has a much better screen overall, its one of the main selling points in how they upgraded to a much better display.

 

Well the new 2009 13mbp has the updated screens which are similar to the 15" and 17". So it'll be much better than the 2008 screens. As for viewing angles, I am biased and imo almost all laptop screens suck when it comes to viewing angles.

 

Alright guys thanks very much for your help. I'll go for the 13" then. Just have to see how much money I can save in the next few weeks to determine which processor i go for.

Thanks

 

I personally think that OSX's resolution management is superior to Windows. Let me give you an example: Right now at home I'm using a Dell with a 24" 1920x1200 display. In the beginning of June I left for Taiwan for a month to do community service and only brought my 13" Macbook Pro (1280x800). It WAS a step down, but it wasn't that discernible. Like you, I did web surfing and documents, but I ALSO edited pics from my D90 in Adobe Lightroom.

My guess is that you'll get used to it. I think you should get the 13", and if you don't find it comfortable to use, buy an external monitor (don't forget the adapter) with the money you save by going with the 13" instead of the 15".

 

Thanks very much chyidean, thats very helpful. I had thought about the monitor option, why does the apple monitor cost soooo much more than other brands?Am I just paying for the brand or has it got some breakthough new feature?

Thanks

 

Mostly brand and design. The 24" LED ACD is very nice but the price is still a bit too high. The 23" and the 30" are plain overpriced.

 

this is very true. I work at bby and the old unibody was horrible. while the new unibody is very nice and a ton better.

 

Um, I think its all in your head. Pixels are pixels.

The new apple monitors are not overpriced. The 23"/30" ACDs are overpriced, but the new 24" ACD aren't.

There are two reasons why the 24" ACD costs so much.

#1 its an S-IPS panel
#2 its LED backlit.

There are very few LCDs that have these two features in one package and even when they do they cost over $1k.

I personally have a 13mbp and a dell 2408wfp and I love this set up.

 

Yup the 24" ACD would be a steal if it had normal inputs instead of just the mini display port. S-IPS are the best LCD panels if i'm not mistaken, they're superior to MVA and of course TN panels.

 

I thought the 24" LED has a TN panel. Seems like I'm wrong but can anyone show me a link where it states that the 24" LED has a S-IPS panel? (not a forum)

I haven't done the calculation but I think 1280*800 on 13.3" is about the same PPI as 1440*900.

The gamut on the 15" is higher.

Well if it has S-IPS it's not that expensive. The reviews I read weren't that good. Especially power consumption was too high.

Samsung is going to release a competitively priced 23" LED with TN panel soon: XL2370.

 

Well, I cannot be sure of this. I have not read anything about the 24" ACD being a TN panel, if it is $900 is a total rip.

Anyway, the only place that I've seen that it was mentioned/speculated that it was an S-IPS was off the hardocp forum.

I just remember reviews of the monitor were very scarce when it was released, maybe there are more reviews now.

 

All Apple's Cinema Displays use IPS panels. You can see that from the quoted viewing angles. It is incredibly difficult to achieve identical viewing angles of 178 degrees with a TN panel, which is the also main disadvantage of TN panels.

 

Wow guys thanks for all the comments and info. So are we saying that actually the apple screen costing £635 is not over-priced for what you get in terms of picture quality?

I still don't think i would spend that much money on a monitor, I'd either buy an hp I've seen which looks similar with the black and silver colouring for under £200, or just buy a regular tv.Nowadays you get a lot of tv for £635.

Thanks for all your advice guys

 

see post #24...it will totally destroy ANY 200£ display

 

A television has very low pixel density, so everything will look very blocky if you sit close to it and do computer work.

The Cinema display will blow away any TN film based display, but there are other IPS displays in the market that go for much less than £635. For example, the HP LP2475w which goes for around £350-400.
Some will argue that the Apple display will look better since it's LED etc. Whether it justifies the extra cost is up to you.

 

Reading comprehension is an essential skill.

Let me try rephrasing it: OS X can give the appearance of having a higher resolution than there really is.

 

To address some questions here:

1.) The 13" unibody MBP is leagues ahead of the 13" unibody MacBook which quite frankly, sucked. Screen was poop. And guess what you look at all day?

2.) The 24" ACD is a phenomenal screen, and nothing in its price range touches the features it has. See my review here:

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=332875

I personally hated the resolution of my 15" unibody MBP, so I got the 17". I never had a problem with the 13.3" MacBook Air resolution because of the smaller screen size, so you'd be happy with the 13.3" MBP.

 

"Appearance" aka its in your head.

Show me some proof that the OS itself gives you the impression of a higher resolution because I call BS.

 

Just having Spaces gives you a lot more real estate.

 

What he said.

 

Spaces?

lol, what a pitiful answer. I have a mbp and I'm aware of this.

What I'm getting at is that 1280x800 on a mac is the same pixels on a Windows.

 

Stop trying to save face, and just admit you're wrong. You may have a mbp and you may be aware of the feature, but you obviously haven't used it.

It's essentially the same thing as having multiple monitors. There ARE third party apps on Windows that replicate the same functionality, but aren't built into the OS.

 

Got anything else to contribute besides just whining about what you don't use?

 

Look at the title of this thread and the OP's post. This is a hardware discussion.

I don't use spaces on my 13mbp cause I have a 24" external. Although we use spaces at my work on our Mac Pros.

Spaces has nothing to do with the physical resolution of a monitor, this is software you're talking about.

We are comparing the crispness of and density of the resolution in a monitor, no software can change this.

 

I am looking at the Air I just bought and wondering if the 13" MBP would be better...

So far the battery life is meh. 4 hours doing stuff like this.

 

I think the MBP's have better screens. I could be wrong though.

 

Air and 13" MBP have similar quality (contrast, gamut) screens. The Air screen is usually a lot brighter and better suited for working outside.

 

yeah the air's screen is awesome! the other day, i went to my local apple retailer and the air was definitely brighter than the 13" macbook pro(i don't know if it was me or the lighting of the room but the air's screen was pretty impressive).

 

Also, the lack of the thick glass layer causes less reflections than the MBP.