Z Screen vs Rest of the World

Is the Z's screen (1600 x 900) so much better than every other ultralight 11-13 inch, that it's worth the extra cash? For someone who cares about this kind of thing, I mean.

 

As far as I have been able to figure out.. yes! by far! im going to order a z within next week probably

the fact that sony makes really good LCD tvs and monitors and always has, shows in their top end laptop. read several reviews saying that the full HD screen has better contrast and colours than the 15" macbook pro

 

Actually amazing screen + <1.5kg + raid0 SSD + i5/i7 is worth the price, but it's not really "extra cash" it's upper league...

 

Both versions 1600x900 and 1920x1080 are better than the screen of a MacBook Pro. The important thing of this screen is that it covers more than 90% of the Adobe RGB color space, and of course the contrast is very high because of the low black point. I think the screen is RGB-LED or RG-ph-LED.
The screens of cheaper models have usually WLED screen which doesn't even cover sRGB color space.

 

It's a good screen, but the colors are whacky. Search for threads about this. The blues especially are very very neon.

 

I haven't noticed anything like that on my screen (1600x900) with and without assigned color profile, yet.

 

Aren't you seeing them right now? Look at any of the blue hyperlinks.

 

No they look blue to me. Maybe I have a purple filter in my eye

 

Travfar do you own a Z?

 

Of course. Do you?

 

Maybe you can get rid of it by calibrating the screen with i1Display or Spyder 3. If that does not help, I would call Sony. Blue should still be blue and not purple. What Z model do you have?

 

They are blue, but they are glowing neon blue. Way oversaturated compared to every other screen I've seen.

Here's a thread that talks about the oversaturated colors.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/sony/496560-sony-z12-colors-blown-out.html

 

I never said they were purple. I said they are glowing neon blue.

I've tried calibrating, like many others, doesn't really help.

 

Okay, sorry. I've read, someone had purple. Well for me it looks normal blue. Maybe there is a difference between 1600x900 and 1920x1080 screen?
Did you try calibrating with the windows internal tools or with the ones I've mentioned? The Windows internal calibration tool is useless. Also calibrating and creating an ICC profile helps only at programs that use ICC profiles.

 

Nah

.....

 

Exactly what I didn't want to hear.

So, the best screen on the market, and it's still no good?

 

No screen is perfect... it will always come down to preferences.

 

All displays (expensive/cheap) required calibration, if you want to have correct color and tone.

 

It is really hard to find a notebook with a good display. Most notebook displays have much less brightness, contrast and color gamut as what the Vaio VPCZ1 has. Before I bought my Sony notebook I considered buying the Lenovo W510 because it also has a good display but the contrast is still not as good as at the Sony Z.

 

the macbooks has always been said to have the best screen.. just like 24" mac desktop screen.

 

The Vaio Z screen is according to tests better than the MacBook Pro regarding color space coverage: Review Sony Vaio VPCZ11X9E/B Notebook - Notebookcheck Reviews
except of course the neon blue issue ...

And who wants to give greedy Steve more money?

 

Z12

• Maximum:314 cd/m²
• Average:303.2 cd/m²
• Illumination:91 %
• Black Level:0.4 cd/m²
• Contrast:773:1

MacBook Pro 15" (13")

• Maximum:321 (308) cd/m²
• Average:271 (273.9) cd/m²
• Illumination:76 (79) %
• Black Level:0.47 (0.44) cd/m²
• Contrast:683:1 (700:1)

My source for this is german notebookcheck, so I'm not sure if I translated the tech vocabulary right.
Looking on the sheets the Z is better, but for me personally there is no competition, because the MacBooks screen is glossy^2, what is, in my eyes, a total fail, especially for a 13" Notebook.

 

The link I posted above is the english version of notbookcheck
The screen is the same between Z11 and Z12. Of course the screen of the same display model is not always 100% the same because the production process is not 100% .

I agree a glossy display is crap.

 

I couldn't find the MacBook Pro review on english Notebookcheck, so i went for the german site.
I thought they are just translating the reviews, but looking at your link, i see, that there are big (?) differences between the test:

Especially the difference in contrast bothers me, this looks like a big difference to me: 636:1 on 773:1 ...

 

I get on my notebook at a lower brightness setting a contrast of almost 1000:1 . Because the production process is not 100% the same at each display (even at the same display model) there can be differences.

 

Yeah, i was just wondering the difference is that big.
But i have to admit, that i don't really know if i could tell the difference between 600:1 and 700:1, for me its just like 15% is alot

 

People who want to own good high-quality products, perhaps? What makes him greedy anyway, as opposed to the CEO of any other big company that sells stuff.

 

I wouldn't have responded to the Apple vs Google/Microsoft never ending discussion but:

lol
I admit that the Apple products are shiny and good looking but that's about it.

 

High quality? Surely you jest. I've pretty much owned every Apple product since the ][ pre plus. It's been downhill since then. Apple has big time soldering problems. I like these fixes. Personally, I use a heat gun.

YouTube - iBook G4 Repair with a Blowtorch
YouTube - Julian Laptop Repair
YouTube - iBook G3/G4 réparation chip graphique

Because Steve is greedier than most. His cult members don't help things. What they attribute to Steve, it's really his arch enemy Bill who embodies it. How many billions have Steve and Paul given away for the benefit of all humankind. I challenge you to find even one instance where Steve gave a quarter to someone who was homeless.

 

I agree that the new generation Apple products (i.e. the last couple of years) are shiny and good looking, but I also think they have great User Interfaces and are well designed.

I am not very familiar with older Apple products as my first (and only) Apple product was the iPhone 3GS. I think its build quality, as well as of the new MacBook Pros is outstanding, however.

I believe a person has the right to choose how he spends his earned money. Just because you don't choose to donate money does not make you greedy IMO.

 

Just because the Apple products are shiny and seem well build does not mean they are the best products and provide the most features. With most Apple products you have less flexibility than with any other product (upgrades and options). Also the Apple products cost usually a lot more for the features they have. That already began with the iPod, there are several Music(MP3) Player out there which have more features and cost less.

 

I don't think Apple products are "the best," I merely think they are good. There are always cheaper options and some that offer more features. However, I value things like the quality of features and the User Interface design/ease of use more than the sheer quantity of features. In this regard, Apple often wins against others.

In any case, I don't see how any of that makes Jobs greedy. He's just a regular guy in my books.

 

dear enny, I got a simple q for u.

I was wondering if you have felt any performance difference by upgrading to c300 and intel g2. (like noticeable improvement..)

it's because I am thinking of putting 160g3 x 2, later when they become available.

thanks in advance.

 

Not sure if greedy is strong enough: psychopathically anti-competitive more like it. Apple products are more now than ever about locking customers into a gated community rather than giving them tools to do what they want.

I have an iPad, and I can assure you, it's not "the ultimate browsing experience," it's a annoyingly nobbled shopping trolley for the App store.

 

And now back to the Z again before we descend into an Apple flame war - as tempting as that is - do we have a workaround for the oversaturation?

I suppose the only time it really matters is photo editing and that can be altered through an ICC profile, right? If so, how hard is that to calibrate?

 

I think the intel gnu gas some settings in it's control panel actually, I'm just not sure if it stays after reboot.

 

You are getting a great screen by any current standard so I don't understand this obsession with having the best. That is a great phantom that you can chase forever in this industry and never find it. Or if you do find it, you won't have it for very long.

 

About the screen, I use the ICC profile that you can find here (the one for VPCZ11Z9E) wich is supposed to offer a deltaE=0.4 from a calibration with LaCie Blue Eye Pro.

IMO this screen is not oversaturated.

 

I wonder how Sony stacks up in your books, given how all their products (TVs, camcorders, cameras, etc.) use proprietary Memory Sticks instead of SD cards like everyone else. Yet that has the plus side of everything working together if you have different Sony products. In fact, it can work more seamlessly together because everything's been built with that unifying concept in mind. This is what Apple does too, and they do it better. Some see it as being locked it, others see it as simplifying their life.

Edit: What "tools to do what you want" are missing? Perhaps there's something missing for you, but I'm completely content with what I have. Also, Apple supports open standards like HTML5 and even FaceTime will be an open standard.

My mom has an iPad too, and I can assure you it's a much better "computer" for her than any full-OS PC would be. She doesn't need to deal with anti-virus, drivers, Windows updates, etc. It's great for her to browse and write/read emails.

I think I have a somewhat different problem with my Z122GX, but it's also related to oversaturation.

It happens kinda intermittenly; for 5~ mins during a course of a few hours of usage (mostly on Stamina/Intel setting, but I'm not 100% sure if it happens with Nvidia too). The screen tends to be fine, but during those couple of mins it suddenly becomes _extremely_ oversaturated before fading back to normal again.

Does that happen to anyone else at all?

 

^You're problem is the intel graphics power management. Go into the intel panel under power...then power options. On battery make sure the "display power saving technology" is disabled.

 

You sure? I'll try that, and if it helps, it'll be awesome! Thanks.

But I hope it doesn't decrease the battery life too much.

 

Itll fix it, that option should never have been enabled IMO

 

current Intel/RealSSD C300/Sandforce SSD (and maybe others) are noticeble faster than the Toshiba and maybe Samsung SSD's which come with the VPCZ1. You maybe won't notice any difference when you have the the bigger SSD versions installed and/or the quad SSD RAID 0. I had 2*64GB Toshiba's installed and noticed the difference even after I installed the Gen1 Intel SSD.
The noticeable difference is not like 50% faster but more like 10-20%, in situations where you work with many small files you'll notice a bigger differnce. But what someone notices is really subjective... It depends on what you do with your notebook to decide if you need faster SSD's or not.
For basic notebook use (m$office, web, movie) the SSD's that come with the notebook are probably fast enough.

I'm not 100% sure but when the ICC profile that is created by the monitor calibration software will be used by the photo editing software (Lightroom/Photoshop and others ... not every program uses ICC profiles) it automatically adjusts the color data from the pircture to the output color space you have select. The ICC profile contains the color space what the display has.
I'm still trying to figure out how exactly it works with the ICC profile.

The url to the ICC profile does not work. How do you know it is not oversaturated?

 

I calibrated my display with i1Display2.
Here is the created ICC profile compared to Adobe 1998 color space (transparent grid).


Here is the ICC profile that comes with the notebook compared to Adobe 1998 color space (transparent grid).


I don't know what to think of that and the differences.

 

im using 1st gen Z and am very much like and satisfied with the screen. like some said, the difference with other screen are usually focus on contrast and color, and also the matte coating which reduce the glossy level. brightness? enough with staying at 40% before it burn my eyes lol..

when im compare with my friend Ace (the timeline series), the only difference which noticeable on both screen is the color on Acer screen somehow not sharp and tend to more white when brightness level is high. the color a lil bit wash out compare to my Z.

i have compare with my friend MBP (new lineup), the thing has glossy level like no other. however viewing photos, movies, is decent.

i would conclude that the Z screen pretty much good to my eyes and fine with the MBP screen too provided if i apply the matte screen on it. i dont want to have mirror on the screen

ps: this is feedback from 1st generation Z user

 

The link to ICC profile do work, go on the webpage I linked (or here) and then click on " Sony Vaio VPC Z11 Z9E.icc" (or on my link...)
Oversaturation is relative to your perception, if you find blue is too blue or whatever.

 

I get error 404 page not found when I click on the url to the icc profile.

 

Don't know why, it works fine for me...

 

Is that so? I guess we shouldn't count the psychopathically anti-competitive Microsoft locking the damn enterprise industry into their gated community of Windows, Exchange Server, Office, .NET, Active X, Active Sync, Direct X, Windows Live and Visual Studio.

For the record, although the Z has a "decent" screen, it has poor horizontal viewing angles. The screen on the white Macbook and the entire Macbook Pro kicks the crap out of the Z's screen.

 

An ICC (or WCS) profile can only work by reducing the colour space -- it can't magically make the display show more colours.

What colour calibration does for you is make sure that the colours displayed are as close to the colours that should be displayed, e.g. if you use the colour "thistle", it should look as close to the same as possible on all calibrated displays and printers. 'Thistle" should not be the purplish pink you get on a display that has a very wide gamut and oversaturated reds.
Similar for other colours -- the sky is never electric blue, a dark blue suit isn't black, and women seldom wear orange make-up.
To make the necessary adjustments, an ICC profile will reduce the overall gamut. For good reasons.