Hands-on with the new MacBook Pro

C-Net News ^ | 10/17/2008 | by Peter Glaskowsky

[Swordmaker]

Note: It is easy to add a matte filter to a glossy screen, if one desires or needs a non-glossy surface.

It is much more difficult to change a Matte screen to glossy.

[Swordmaker]

Quick review of the new Macbooks from C-Net News... PING!

New MacBook Ping!

If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me.

[PreciousLiberty]

“Note: It is easy to add a matte filter to a glossy screen, if one desires or needs a non-glossy surface.”

No-glare screens are still a BTO option, and one I hope won’t go away.

[MediaMole]

They need to offer both options. Pro photographers make up a big portion of the Mac’s devoted base and you can’t color correct photos with a a separate anti-glare filter on the monitor. It’s hard to color calibrate even the glass covered monitors of the current iMac.

Too often, photographers have to move images from ad hoc workrooms in gyms and arenas with terrible lighting and no glare control. A matte screen is essential. I made the mistake of buying a laptop with a glossy screen and have regretted it for two years.

I’m thinking about finding one of the last generation MBPs with a matte screen before it’s too late.

[MAD-AS-HELL]

I think they did away with firewire on the less expensive macbook. If so, that sucks because if you have a firewire based video camera, you can’t use it now unless it also has a UBS connection.

[MediaMole]

There is NO matte screen option left on any Mac notebooks except the 17 inch MBP, which was left unchanged.

[papasmurf]

I was thinking about a new one, but I think I’ll wait for Snow Leopard and the ability to utilize both GPU’s at once (SLI).

[B Knotts]

I have a glossy WUXGA, because there are (apparently) no matte WUXGA displays available.

I am a little puzzled what the point of the glossy display is. It’s not awful, but it doesn’t really make a lot of sense to me. Maybe it’s more durable?

[Cyropaedia]

So I went to the Apple store at the Westfield Valley Fair mall in Santa Clara, Calif.

I was at that same store last night, and the new MBP's look great.

[Star Traveler]

I’ve been thinking about upgrading to one of those MacBook Pros. I’m going down to an Apple store and check it out. :-)

[MikeFrancesa.com]

Can you post some links of high quality matte filters, I have to tell you that I tried a new Sony Vaio with glossy display, in about twenty minutes in a normal lit room my eyes were burning, felt like I was on the beach, I returned the laptop because of that.

However with a matte Macbook Pro, I can look at the screen all day with NO eyestrain, I will never use glossy.

[Terpfen]

Predictable yawn material from CNet.

[Terpfen]

A few things struck me about the new design. There's no latch for the lid, but some kind of cam in the hinge keeps it snugly closed unless it's opened on purpose.

I guess the Windows side has been asleep for the last 2 years. Has this guy not heard of Apple's magnetic latches? They've only been in use since 2006.

[Terpfen]

I am a little puzzled what the point of the glossy display is. It’s not awful, but it doesn’t really make a lot of sense to me. Maybe it’s more durable?

Matte displays dampen the image generated by the computer. The point of having a glossy (actually "non-matte") display is to get a clearer picture.

As for the gloss, well, TVs have been glossy for seven decades and no one's complained.

[antiRepublicrat]

Apple has outdone itself with its obsessive-compulsive level of attention to detail. I mean, the attention paid to just the sleep indicator light? Spend two months getting the track pad texture right? Go though hundreds of versions of the thumb scoop where you open the display to get it right? It’s insane, and I love it.

I’m trying to think of any other manufacturer of anything in the world that does this and all I can think of is maybe a high-end Swiss watch maker like Patek Philippe.

[John Valentine]

As for the gloss, well, TVs have been glossy for seven decades and no one's complained.

TVs were glossy because the tremendous stress that the huge CRT vacuum display tubes were under required THICK glass. If the surface were matte, the image, maybe as much as 10mm behind the matte surface would have been muddied beyond recognition, not because there was something inherently good about the glossy, reflection prone screen.

And you say no one has complained!!!??? You have never been around my house. Complaints about the reflections were CONSTANT. When LCD monitors came out they were made matte, and for good reason - customer satisfaction. And, it was technically possible for the first time - the screens are not under a vacuum, and the distance between the matte surface and the actual image is maybe less than 1mm.

Frankly, I think making computer monitor screens glossy is just plain crazy. I certainly wouldn't buy one. The don't NEED to be glossy, so why do it?

At the very least, give us a choice!

[Terpfen]

And you say no one has complained!!!??? You have never been around my house.

I don't care about your house. Show me where consumer demand led to TV manufacturers shipping matte screen versions of their LCD and Plasma displays, and show me data that suggests matte screens subsequently sell more than glossy screens. (You won't be able to, because the sales data indicates that an overwhelming amount of TV and computer purchasers buy glossy.) Until you can produce something besides anecdotal evidence of your own opinion, my statement stands: no one has complained about glossy TVs.

The don't NEED to be glossy, so why do it?

They don't need to be matte, so why do it?

Again: the screen is non-matte to present a better picture than would otherwise be achievable with a matte finish.

At the very least, give us a choice!

You DO have a choice. If it's so important that your display be matte instead of glossy, all you have to do is buy an aftermarket 13.3'' matte film cover for the display. Problem solved. But I suspect you'll continue complaining regardless.

[Terpfen]

Apple has outdone itself with its obsessive-compulsive level of attention to detail. I mean, the attention paid to just the sleep indicator light? Spend two months getting the track pad texture right? Go though hundreds of versions of the thumb scoop where you open the display to get it right? It’s insane, and I love it.

Agreed. It's worth noting that whenever Apple gets this obsessive about a product, good things happen for both their bottom line and the consumer: they were equally fanatical when designing the iPod's click wheel and the iPhone.

[gost2]

You are woefully uninformed. Graphic artists and photographers truly NEED mat screens. Because the consumer public likes shiny things we now get these absurd eye straining and unprofessional screens.

Fine on an imac. Let the little people have what they think they want.

But to put them on ‘pro’ machines is beyond stupid. Its craven. Pathetic really. I’m ordering a 17inch macbookpro asap so I can get a laptop with the latest innards and a decent screen and when I order my new tower I will get another manufacturers 30” display.

If Apple continues to refuse to dance with the ones that brung em and does not accede to our demands in the next couple years or so I guess these will be my last Apple products.

[Terpfen]

Graphic artists and photographers truly NEED mat screens.

Other way around. Graphic artists and photographers use non-matte screens in low-lighting environments. Matte screens impair the full color range of the imagery they're manipulating.

But hey, if you truly want a matte screen, just buy a matte filter and quit bitching that Apple didn't apply a modification you want at the factory.