New 13" MBP uses 6-bit display, not 8-bit

Some graphic designer from IconFactory is complaining about the subpar display quality of the new 13" MBP.

http://mantia.me/blog/macbook-pro-thousands-of-colors/


Maybe Apple should have removed the "Pro" from the 13" model.

 

It was supposed to have been greatly improved from the last unibody screen Apple was using. I guess people always find something to complain about.

 

TN has traditionally been 6bit. It uses dithering or HiFRC. Find me a 8bit TN panel and THAT would be surprising.

in other words this is much ado about nothing.

 

For most people, this is a non-issue. For that small percentage, it's a REAL issue.

 

There are true 8-bit TN panels, but I don't know of a single laptop TN LCD that is actually 16.7mill colors.

 

Maybe a bit of generalization here, but...

Graphic designers are a bit ignorant when it comes to tech. lol

There's no laptop monitor out there for some serious color accuracy, they are all TN panels. An external monitor would be needed then calibrated. I only guesstimate the colors on my laptop monitor, but verify them on other standalone LCD's.

The best LCD laptop monitor is from the Dell Studio XPS 16 with its RBG LED screen.

 

^^ Dont you mean the best LED laptop monitor ?

 

Essentially what it boils down to.

 

this guy is a moron.

i just read his whole stupid article, and i want my 90 seconds back.

 

Yup the RGBLED screen found in the M6400 and 8730w are 8bit TN panels.

But why is the guy who wrote the article surprised that Apple put 6 bit panels into those MBs?

 

Apple's claims vs subpar offerings haven't changed since the rollout of the first MBP. I remember Jobs boasting about the screen back then. Apple don't do that anymore

The problem is really in the dithering algorithms used since the same panels / bitdepth don't cause the same problems on Windows machines. You'd think they'd have got the hang of it after three-plus years of Intelism.

He also joked back then that other companies get Apple's cast-offs as far as panels were concerned. My purchase experiences have lead me to believe that Apple actually gets the cast-offs from everyone else.

 

Comparing my 2 year old 15" mbp screen to my friends' laptops tends to make me think otherwise.

Although I am sure there are other premium laptops that have excellent displays as well, even better displays.

Still, apple is generally known for having good to excellent displays, depending on the model.

 

I'm quite happy with my Macbook's screen. It's by far and away so much better than my previous Dell Inspiron E1705's screen. There's just no comparison.

 

Indeed it is, when you compare - as so many Apple fans do - with three-or-more-year-old machines half the price. On the other hand, I keep up.

Talking about keeping up, mighty tough choices out there for my near-complete refresh on the Windows side coming up shortly. Shame about Sony though.

 

well,my bro has old sony and the screen is much better then on his new SR,and it cost him 1/2 the price...so what?

 

I'm comparing a 2 year old macbook pro screen 15" to laptops that are 2 years old or newer (this is at my college) and approximately the same price.

Again, I accept that you can find some really great screens out there, I just think it is funny that you find the macbook pro screen objectively bad when it is highly considered to be among the best of laptops.

Of course, since you are out to get Apple for some reason from the onset, I guess you will *find a reason* that component x is subpar on apple machines.

 

The 13" Macbook Pros have good screens with high contrast and pretty good colors. The contrast and color reproduction are big improvement over the 13" Alu Macbook I had last year.

Still it's not like RGB LED quality of course, but such 13" panels don't exist.

 

By those who haven't tried much else. I'm referring not only to notebook screens but to the much-vaunted (by those who can only compare specs since they don't actually own the competition) desktops. I have fairly large numbers - for an individual - of 30" / 23" ACD's distributed across several locations and they've been probably the most variable and patchy displays that I've had (Dell, HP, NEC and Eizo being the rest of the >24" monitors in my current inventory).

 

So you are saying that apple displays are bad?

 

I just think he likes to hear himself talk.

 

I wouldnt say they are bad .. but I would say they are inconsistant

 

oh, i thought we were making reasonable comparisons only.

nevermind, then. as you were.

 

I think that this guy is insane. I love my macbook pro and I really think that apple made the best product.

Who cares about the 6-bit and 8-bit.

 

I must say the Macbook Pro has the best screen I've seen on a laptop, yet.

I purposely walked around in Best Buy just to check out the displays and all, and as a personal preference, I'd say the MBP's screen is the best.

On a side note and totally offtopic, here's a nice Best Buy picture:

 

Yep I am a bit nuts actually but graphics designers that HAVE to calibrate their screens for digital printing presses or output to high resolution film NEED an 8 bit screen

as for best product .. no one makes the best product as everyone has different needs but I will admit that Apples screens are inconsistant, Order 150 MBP's and you will have a great span of clairity and quality between the screens, many other manufacturers are tighter with their QC but they may NOT be as clear as half of the MBP's for Laptops I actually find the thikpads most consistant and the eurocoms the worst, for desktop screens over 20" Apple worst and NEC and Asus the best

 

I don't know many graphic designers that like to do serious work on 13" screens... but ... ok...

 

Interesting, since Dell and HP generally share the same LCD panel suppliers as Apple

 

I wouldn't compare Bestbuy laptops to MacBooks. Most of the stuff that you find at BB are low-end models. Top laptops from Asus, HP, Dell, Sony, etc. are not available at most BBs.

The best laptop LCD screens that are avilable tend not to be Macs because other brands usually update their panels more frequently than Apple.

 

Hence what I said about the castoffs.

It depends. I've had a few - and I mean a few - on which there have been no issues... but the numbers of failed power bricks, inconsistent panels etc above and beyond other makers I use seem to indicate poor QC than just 'bad'.

The 30-23 combo I'm typing on now for example has a flashing problem that Apple have not been able to sort out (30, and I have this on a few other 30's), replaced power bricks (both) and replaced display due to patchiness affecting calibration (23). This kind of situation has been more typical across my ACD's than monitors I've been able to plunk into place and forget about them.

Not so long ago I had to get a bunch repaired before the warranty ran out on them, and that was a frustrating experiencing requiring multiple returns - indicating that QC of refurbs is no better in many situations. It was eventually sorted out and now the vast majority of my ACD's are uniformly excellent and comparable to non-Apples I have, panel-wise, at the moment but the amount of effort I had to expend getting there was excessive to say the least.

The QC issue isn't a new problem with Apple of course - it extends to throughout their line. If you are afflicted with the RDF though and actually *like* shlepping over to the Apple Store of course, how much that ticks you off will vary.

 

The best laptop lcd that you can get right now is the RGB Led from the Dell studio xps 16.

Doing serious graphics work or photo work on a laptop is foolish anyway. An external monitor is needed for color accuracy.

 

I agree completly but hey .... some users keep doing it anyways and who am I to tell them otherwise, I just support their hardware and networks but we are also discussing external and integrated monitors as well here

 

I know a lot of laptop brands have the same displays, like my sager has the exact same model display as the macbook pros, yet when a friend with a macbook pro wanted to compare them, he commented on how much richer the colors were on his macbook, and how much brighter it was. I noticed no difference only that his was more glossy, and mine was less glossy. But that has nothing to do with the screen quality. Apple has a rep for good screens for some reason, so when people find out that they really are the same as everyone else they get mad.

 

I think this may have to do with drivers. I noticed my MBA looked a brighter and crisper in Windows than it did in OS X.

 

Indeed.

If you compare your laptop with Vista and then with XP, you should notice that the latter appears a bit sharper and crisper overall. Both Vista and especially OS X soften and smooth out the GUI.

 

You are saying that your notebook has same screen as macbook?

 

I think that's what he's saying.

Like mentioned above it might also be the OS. I think mac has a color profile of 1.8 or something and windows is 2.2 (or is it the other way around ). I noticed when I switched between the two on my desktop, the colors would shift.

So this would lead me to believe that Macs and Windows have different color profiles, which might make people perceive the monitors as being different or higher quality.

 

I think he said that he felt that his laptop and macbook have the same screen quality, not the same screen.
But macbook pro screen is another story .

 

He said "exact same model display "....

 

Sony Vaio TT-series has 8-bit panel:
http://www.sony.com.sg/microsite/vaio/products/vaio_tt/8bit.html

Pretty surprising to hear that Apple doesn't include 8-bit panel. Their main target are graphic professionals after all.

 

Only $3000 to start?

 

the 13" mbp starts at $1200

 

Wow that laptop ....
And I thought Apple charged a premium

 

That is one sweet laptop though, and I would love to have it.

 

Thats not even possible-Clevo does not offer LED screens...

No doubt that is very nice small "monster", but wth is going to do serious job on 11" notebook?And for 3000 I would rather get 17" MBP

 

I would suggest that administrator freeze this topic!

 

It starts at $1999, but I agree, it's overpriced. It's a full-featured ultraportable though. And people do buy it.
http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs...Id=8198552921644590401&parentCategoryId=16154

 

I have it. It has a few problems - not more than an Apple, but a few problems all the same - which means I've started the move over to the Toshiba R600. The panel actually has more pixels than a Macbook / Air and it's razor-sharpness does allow you to see it quite clearly.

 

Nothing is perfect...

 

So true. Some are however less perfect than others, and are bolstered only by the way they look.