Originally Posted by DJRumpy
Because not everyone likes matte? Why is this such a difficult concept? Glossy produces richer colors while matte prevents glare. It's all strictly a matter of preference.
Sure, just Apple doesn't allow matte people a lot of choice, that's the problem.
(15" MBP just came out a few weeks ago because of the petitions to Apple and Steve personally)
It's not any more difficult to reach out and turn a 13" laptop display than it is to reach out and tilt a 24" iMac display.
It's a bit more involved than that, light is reflected in various degrees off of everything. With a glossy screen that light gets reflected into ones eyes and obscures the viewing image. Only in a dark room is the glare nearly eliminated, with any reflections caused by lighted devices. Not everyone can change their environment, schools, businesses, malls etc. or want to live in a dark room to use their computer. (one has to paint their walls a grey or black and cover the windows and lights)
Different people have different tolerance levels for glare, some can't use a computer at all with any sort of glare. Some can accept a lot or a little, one size doesn't fit all.
Small hand held devices are fine with glossy screens, because people don't look at them for long or they have a small viewing area and they can be quickly tilted.
But computers are used for hours on end, they have a larger screen which catches more glare. This makes the problems of eyestrain and headaches using glossy screens all the more amplified, the larger the glossy screen the worse the problem.
Glossy TV screens were tried and have failed in the marketplace, because of the size factor.
To say one is better than the other is pointless as it is all personal opinion.
Sure, it's personal opinion based upon user experience and their glare tolerance levels.
Glossy is popular because people like it. If you've forgotten, the glossy screens are a relatively new offering, but very popular. Popular demand and consumer demand has forced manufacturer's to produce glossy to the point where it wasn't cost effective to keep both. If there wasn't a demand, they wouldn't be doing it. Calling it 'cheap' is just insulting to those of us who do prefer glossy.
HP did some research (as you know they bought Compaq so they really don't have any computer selling experience, they make printers primarily) and saw that people were attracted to shiny computers over the matte. But people MOST ALWAYS attracted to bright shiny objects, I see it happen all the time in art stores, the shiny glass baubles get bought faster than everything else. Nearly all perfume is in shiny glass baubles, see the connection?
So HP rolls out this "oh shiny" computers which made competitors on the same shelves less attractive. That's what got the ball rolling and everyone except Leveno (who polled their business customers and found out 86% wanted matte) just tagged along for the ride.
HP and Apple had some dealings which fell out with the ousting of HP's CEO. HP's new CEO entered the consumer computing market, Apple's territory, so Apple couldn't have their computers looking matte dull and HP's looking "oh shiny", the war was on.
So all this glossy business was HP's fault really, most computer makers KNOW (from CRT days) glare and reflections are a problem and that's why they have had matte screens. But now because of competition there hands are tied. (why the matte Mac options are hidden away as a BTO order)
Now Apple admits over 50% of people buying the Apple Stores are new to the platform. Apple takes great pains to make their machines "just work" and therefore attractive to people who don't want to work on their computers, so a lot of new computer users.
These new to computer people DON'T HAVE A FRIGGING CLUE that glossy screens can be a problem until they take it to their various environments and begin having eye problems.
So us OLD COMPUTER GEEKS who know the problems with glare and reflections are seeing a whole new generation of people being subject to a problem that was FIXED with matte screens.
So if you prefer glossy, fine, I like loud music. But I know the loud music is damaging my hearing and causing me to talk to loudly to other people sometimes. Glossy CRT screens have already caused me years of eyestrain and headaches during the DTP days.
Glossy screens may not be a immediate problem, but it's damaging effects are gradual and we old geeks are warning everyone we can and pushing Apple to at least offer a CHOICE in their computer models, like there is with PC's.
And glossy screens are cheap, in the fact that's it's cheaper for LCD makers to produce them.
A matte screen requires a process to apply the matte film, where 'anti-glare' (as they like to call it which is not) only requires applying a spray on film. A much easier and cheaper process.
So now the consumer has to apply a matte film to their glossy or pay Apple $50 more for a matte screen. Most people are not aware of the danger of glossy screens can have, so are damaging their eyes and making using a computer very undesirable, some people won't know why neither.
It doesn't make much sense in reducing repeat sales at the cost of immediate sales, but I guess because Apple's market share is improving it's hard to gauge the effects. However most seasoned Mac users are screaming for matte options.
Shiny computer screens are only effective at the point of sale, nobody cares after that because rarely does one compare computers with others based upon it's shine factor. (like they would do with cars for example). Matte has more functionality in different environments and eventually that will win over the other as more and more people realize they can't see the screen.