15-inch MacBook Pro gets anti-glare option

Love Apple laptops but hate glossy displays? Good news, then: you don’t have to cough up $2,549 for that 17" MacBook Pro with the non-glossy display. CNet News reports that Apple has added a non-glossy option to its more affordable 15" MacBook Pro.

The smaller system starts at $1,699 with a 2.53GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB of RAM, GeForce 9400M integrated graphics, a 250GB hard drive, and a seven-hour battery (or so Apple claims). Here, too, you’ll need to shell out an extra $50 for the "antiglare" option. Oh, and regardless of the finish, the 15" MacBook Pro has an LED-backlit display panel with a 1440×900 resolution.

If you’re hoping to get a 13" MacBook or MacBook Pro without a shiny display, well… keep hoping. Those two machines are still glossy-only.

Apple claims the glossy display delivers "richer colors and deeper blacks," but it neglects to mention that the mirror finish can be distracting in brightly lit environments, or if you’re sitting with your back to a window. Of course, some folks don’t mind that tradeoff and may (rightfully) point out that matte displays are vulnerable to glare, too.

Comments closed
    • matter3
    • 13 years ago

    Yeesh Apple just turns me off with their prices!

    ———
    §[<http://freenintendowiipoints.com<]§

    • ludi
    • 13 years ago

    Now snort a couple lines of coke and belt it out like Billy!

    • blastdoor
    • 13 years ago

    It’s funny how there’s this annoyingly strong and persistent positive correlation between price and the desirability of products. It’s almost as if Apple knows they have a good product and have decided to intentionally ask people to pay more for it. I guess it must be due to that scientology thing that the other poster mentioned.

    • yehuda
    • 13 years ago

    I don’t know if we can use the term “catch up” with anything related to notebook displays. They’re one part of the market that doesn’t necessarily get better with time and the variation in quality between manufacturers and models (neither of which we get to control as end users) can be night and day. I was checking out notebookcheck.net several months ago. This site takes a look at the LCD contrast as part of its testing suite, and I’ve seen some extreme variations between 1:150 (maybe less) and 1:700, all on contemporary notebooks. The only thing I can say for the moment is that 1440×900 LED screens at 15″ look to be a safer bet than the others.

    • DaveJB
    • 13 years ago

    Glossy displays actually did have a purpose, originally – at the time they offered somewhat more dynamic range than their matte/anti-glare equivalents, at the cost of problems with reflections. Of course, anti-glare screens have caught up in most aspects now, but manufacturers still keep with the glossy screens for whatever reason.

    • ludi
    • 13 years ago

    I dunno, you might be too sophisticated for him. He’s more of a flaming-bag-o-dog-poop type of character.

    • Mourmain
    • 13 years ago

    lol

    • Mourmain
    • 13 years ago

    Great stuff man, you have a bright career in spam advertising ahead of you. Without sarcasm though, I actually enjoyed that. Did you come up with it yourself?

    The points made are kinda true, but it’s called marketing, not scientology.

    • Kurotetsu
    • 13 years ago

    There was a poster named ZootyGray on AMDzone who had an eerily similar posting style to this guy. He was banned from that site and all his posts were deleted, so I can’t link to them as evidence, but he got tossed out for basically being too much of a brain damaged AMD zealot (which is impressive considering who that site caters to). I suspect that same person has now wandered over here.

    • MadManOriginal
    • 13 years ago

    I think this was your best crazy trollrant yet. I especially enjoyed this line and what followed q[

    • Kurotetsu
    • 13 years ago

    I really wish I could get a Macbook Pro. I mean, hardware spec-wise, its like the ultimate laptop of dreams. A fast Core 2 Duo, lots of DDR3 memory, 16:10 screen resolution, very powerful (non-Intel) integrated graphics, very thin and very light, LED backlit screen, and it has insane battery life despite all the performance hardware its packing. Now it has an anti-glare option. Its everything I ever dreamed of in a laptop…except for price. No matter how much I want it I just can’t afford $1,700 (or $1,300 for the 13-inch).

    What’s worse, other OEMs have similar laptops, but they always fail in one area in compared to the Macbook Pro. They usually use far inferior Intel integrated graphics, or they have crappy battery life despite using comparable hardware.

    *weeps in a corner*

    • snakeoil
    • 13 years ago

    apple user: dont let steve jobs be your master.
    you have the right to have a personality and the right to choose the things that you like. don’t believe steve jobs when he tells you that cannabis is good for creativity.
    abandon the pseudotechnological cult called apple.

    do you know that the church of scientology are the owners of apple?
    do you know that in products like the iphone they used design tricks that are the same tricks they use to brainwash their members?
    did you see the tom cruise movie( scientology leader) minority report.
    well they ported the same graphic interface to the iphone and ipod.
    why?
    because that let them manipulate you easily.
    how?
    when you use the letter i (iphone, ipod) in every apple product you associate the product with yourself( i =me)
    iphone=this pruduct is me

    and the iphone interface?
    the interface is organized in the same way that people use to remember, the interface has multiple icons, when pressed this icon opens a program or a video.
    when you remember something you first think about an image (the icon) and later this opens a memory movie associated with the event.

    the result is that iphone = me, my life.

    here for your entertainment:
    §[<http://www.scientology.org/#/inside_scn_church<]§ and remember that you are not cool.

    • derFunkenstein
    • 13 years ago

    Err, no? Apple was about the last manufacturer to pick up glossy displays. They were all the “rage” on Windows laptops in about 2005.

    The first Mac, however, was the Macbook released in May 2006:

    §[<http://www.macworld.com/article/50858/2006/05/macbookfirst.html<]§

    • Kurkotain
    • 13 years ago

    applecalypse?

    • adisor19
    • 13 years ago

    Glad someone here knows why i spelled it this way 🙂

    Adi

    • adisor19
    • 13 years ago

    No, it wasn’t them.. hence my non rhetorical question.

    Adi

    • SomeOtherGeek
    • 13 years ago

    *rubbing my hands* I like starting fights!

    • Voldenuit
    • 13 years ago

    Actually, the 8 hr life was with only loading plain html pages.

    With Flash and mp3, he got 6.5 hrs. Which is still pretty darn good, and better than any windows laptop I’ve seen with a comparably sized battery.

    I recently got 9 hrs out of my thinkpad X300 w ultrabay battery on html and pdf, but the 2009 MBPs get close without having to make the compromises in speed and GPU.

    • KoolAidMan
    • 13 years ago

    You can pick one or the other in the OS. For standard usage with better battery life, select the 9400M. For something that uses heavy 3D (games, etc), you can switch it over to the 9600M GT.

    I suspect I wouldn’t use the 9600M GT unless I was gaming in Windows. Most applications and things like Final Cut Pro wouldn’t benefit much from using the 9600M GT. Either way they do not work in conjunction with each other, you choose which one you want to use.

    • KoolAidMan
    • 13 years ago

    His conditions for 8 hours were pretty standard, constant wireless web browsing mp3 playback: §[<http://anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=3580&p=4<]§ Heavy downloading plus video playback plus web browsing brought it down to about five hours. Considering that it adds no additional weight or size, I'd say that's very impressive.

    • KoolAidMan
    • 13 years ago

    Yes, you are correct, I wasn’t aware that the baseline model didn’t include a 9600M GT

    • odizzido
    • 13 years ago

    it is true, but the conditions needed to get those 8hrs are pretty unlikely to happen. Still, it seems under heavy load it will still last something like 4.5hrs which is pretty good.

    If netbooks hadn’t come out, I might have actually been interested in the product. Too bad for them netbooks are smaller lighter and have better battery life.

    • adisor19
    • 13 years ago

    Actually, i’m just waiting for snakeoil to show up..

    Adi

    • ironoutsider
    • 13 years ago

    That’s pretty cool, how does the dual 9400 + 9600 work though? I though dual gpu’s had to be the same model. Or maybe it’s a hybridpower thing.

    • jstern
    • 13 years ago

    I remember when glossy display was the cool new thing, and now you have to pay $50 extra to relieve yourself of that train wreck.

    • A_Pickle
    • 13 years ago

    I can almost see how he’s going to reply to that. Trust me, that one will NOT go unanswered. 😀

    • no51
    • 13 years ago

    Did I say BS? I meant revolutionary.

    Adi

    • no51
    • 13 years ago

    The $1999 option has the 9400+9600, the $1699 has the 9400 only.

    • ironoutsider
    • 13 years ago

    Are you implying that this has both a 9400m and a 9600m gt. like some dual gpu machine? 1440×900 resolution isn’t great either, but I wouldn’t call it crappy. 8 hour battery life is amazing, if it is true.

    • SomeOtherGeek
    • 13 years ago

    1700 BUCKS! Yea, Apple is definitely listening to their customers.

    • SomeOtherGeek
    • 13 years ago

    Um, Apple?

    • KoolAidMan
    • 13 years ago

    It has a 9600M GT as well as a 9400M, two GPUs.

    That said, the great keyboard, multitouch trackpad with gestures (hands down the best out there, and it works in Windows via Boot Camp drivers), the great international power and airline seat power adapters, the motion and ambient light sensor, the amount of horsepower in such a light and thin enclosure, as well as ridiculous battery life (8 hours in OS X as benchmarked on Anandtech), are all things that make me prefer Mac notebooks. Even if I was only running Windows it would be on a MBP.

    You’re paying a premium over a Dell or an HP, absolutely, but it isn’t for intangibles, nor is it for features that don’t improve it as a portable.

    • Machupo
    • 13 years ago

    and people who like crappy resolution on their panels

    • Voldenuit
    • 13 years ago

    Apple listening to customers?? @[email protected] Surely this is one of the signs of the Apocalypse? :p

    Glad to hear that matte is back. Now if only someone could invent a truly glare-less screen with good contrast and outdoors readability.

    • ironoutsider
    • 13 years ago

    l[

    • adisor19
    • 13 years ago

    Apple are being morans for not offering non glossy displays at least as options on all their laptops.

    Who the heck started this BS trend with glossy displays in the first place ?!

    Adi

    • Sanctusx2
    • 13 years ago

    It’s nice to have the option but at the same time, I can’t help but laugh at a previously stock feature now being a “premium” one.

    • MadManOriginal
    • 13 years ago

    I agree they are not very good for laptops where the whole point is portability and you won’t be able to control the environment. For desktop use they can be good though.

    • ludi
    • 13 years ago

    I don’t, but Choice Is Good ™.

    • thecoldanddarkone
    • 13 years ago

    When the alum body mbps came out only the 17 inch had a matte version.

    • derFunkenstein
    • 13 years ago

    From October until now that wasn’t true – it was true pre-Unibody, though.

    • potatochobit
    • 13 years ago

    I thought you could always special order the matte version?

    • sweatshopking
    • 13 years ago

    also me i do

    • flip-mode
    • 13 years ago

    I do hate glossy screens, I do.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This

Share this post with your friends!