24 ms·

One of the things I really hate about reviews of laptops, screens, etc, is the focus on how bright the screens are as though it's a good thing. Who really want

One of the things I really hate about reviews of laptops, screens, etc, is the focus on how bright the screens are as though it's a good thing. Who really wants to be staring at 1,600 nits of brightness all day? Certainly not me. A much better screen, in my opinion, would have super high contrast with low brightness. Yet, this isn't something that gets measured by reviewers. Coincidentally, that's also why I like using OLED screens. At least with true black, much of the light can get turned off completely.

post_break 3y ago
What? That's like complaining your car reviews talk about how it has 300hp, why would you be at full throttle every time you drive? High brightness is a good thing because it's used for HDR, areas where there is a lot of sunlight, etc. Something OLED struggles with as well. My wifes laptop with OLED only does like 600 nits.
- dijit 3y ago
  I think the parent has a point. We talk a lot about peak brightness, which is useful in some scenarios like you mentioned. But you know whats more interesting? Brightness stepping, min brightness and ambient light sensors; which are never talked about by reviewers, which is then a weird cycle because manufacturers seem to care a lot about what reviewers focus on.
- 1270018080 3y ago
  A car having unnecessary hp is a great example against your point.
  - post_break 3y ago
    Help me understand. When a car has multiple trim levels, and one has more horsepower, you would want the one with fewer? Because in theory you wouldn’t use it? And this has nothing to do with MPG either because in some cars the higher power engines get better fuel economy. But based on that metric alone, you would pick the lesser model? Just like if a MacBook Pro came in either 1600nits or 400nits, you’d pick 400? Yes or no?
    - Savely 3y ago
      > one has more horsepower, you would want the one with fewer? Not necessarily, I would choose using other factors. I argue we should rely less on rarely practical characteristics (maximum power / brigthness) and add more day-to-day aspects into reviews and search filters. There are few qualities usually mentioned along side displays: size, technology, resolution, colour rating, contrast ratio, and max brightness. I think brightness matters less past some point and we really should focus more on traits listed by @boplicity and @dijit (there's got to be more). Similarly with cars: I don't care about top speed as long as it goes upto the motorway limit, I don't care about engine power as long as car feels nice in real life; I pay attention to size (will it be comfortable in the city and in my tight parking lot?), fuel consumption, interior quality, luggage space, steering sensations. > Just like if a MacBook Pro came in either 1600nits or 400nits, you’d pick 400? Well, if the 400 nits one has an advantage (for example it has OLED, so only the letters will burn my eyes in the evenings, not the whole area of the screen) then I would pick that one.
jerlam 3y ago
Most mainstream computer monitors, designed for use indoors, are not going to be anywhere near 1600 nits. The monitor I bought last year for $400 tops out at 400 nits. Laptops, phones, and smart watches are designed to be used in varying conditions like outdoors, where the sun can easily overpower a 400 nit monitor. Also in low light conditions, which is why they mostly have ambient light sensors. There's always some user out there who wants to watch HDR videos in the middle of the Sahara desert at solar noon, which would actually be an interesting use case for the monitor in the article.
adfgiopjionio 3y ago
A bright panel can be turned down.
- SomeRndName11 3y ago
  Not below their factory defined minimum. Which is all over of place, except for Dell and HP, which around 40 nits minimal brightness.
  - hollerith 3y ago
    Most LED monitors flicker at low brightness settings, but you can get ones that don't. The ones that don't have more expensive electronics driving the backlight. Eizo's FlexScan EV series is one example. I have a FlexScan EV, and I don't find being able to turn the brightness down to 1 or 2 nits without any flicker as useful as I thought I would. Even in complete darkness, it is hard to read the screen when the brightness is that low.
    - SomeoneFromCA 3y ago
      You info is dated. 95% of monitors on the market have zero flicker at any brightness. All LG and Acer monitors are for example are all like that.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
charcircuit 3y ago
>Who really wants to be staring at 1,600 nits of brightness all day? Certainly not me. If you go outside you will experience over 100,000 nits. 1,600 nits is not as bright as you think it is.

post_break 3y ago

What? That's like complaining your car reviews talk about how it has 300hp, why would you be at full throttle every time you drive? High brightness is a good thing because it's used for HDR, areas where there is a lot of sunlight, etc. Something OLED struggles with as well. My wifes laptop with OLED only does like 600 nits.

dijit 3y ago
I think the parent has a point. We talk a lot about peak brightness, which is useful in some scenarios like you mentioned. But you know whats more interesting? Brightness stepping, min brightness and ambient light sensors; which are never talked about by reviewers, which is then a weird cycle because manufacturers seem to care a lot about what reviewers focus on.
1270018080 3y ago
A car having unnecessary hp is a great example against your point.
- post_break 3y ago
  Help me understand. When a car has multiple trim levels, and one has more horsepower, you would want the one with fewer? Because in theory you wouldn’t use it? And this has nothing to do with MPG either because in some cars the higher power engines get better fuel economy. But based on that metric alone, you would pick the lesser model? Just like if a MacBook Pro came in either 1600nits or 400nits, you’d pick 400? Yes or no?
  - Savely 3y ago
    > one has more horsepower, you would want the one with fewer? Not necessarily, I would choose using other factors. I argue we should rely less on rarely practical characteristics (maximum power / brigthness) and add more day-to-day aspects into reviews and search filters. There are few qualities usually mentioned along side displays: size, technology, resolution, colour rating, contrast ratio, and max brightness. I think brightness matters less past some point and we really should focus more on traits listed by @boplicity and @dijit (there's got to be more). Similarly with cars: I don't care about top speed as long as it goes upto the motorway limit, I don't care about engine power as long as car feels nice in real life; I pay attention to size (will it be comfortable in the city and in my tight parking lot?), fuel consumption, interior quality, luggage space, steering sensations. > Just like if a MacBook Pro came in either 1600nits or 400nits, you’d pick 400? Well, if the 400 nits one has an advantage (for example it has OLED, so only the letters will burn my eyes in the evenings, not the whole area of the screen) then I would pick that one.

jerlam 3y ago

Most mainstream computer monitors, designed for use indoors, are not going to be anywhere near 1600 nits. The monitor I bought last year for $400 tops out at 400 nits. Laptops, phones, and smart watches are designed to be used in varying conditions like outdoors, where the sun can easily overpower a 400 nit monitor. Also in low light conditions, which is why they mostly have ambient light sensors. There's always some user out there who wants to watch HDR videos in the middle of the Sahara desert at solar noon, which would actually be an interesting use case for the monitor in the article.

adfgiopjionio 3y ago

A bright panel can be turned down.

SomeRndName11 3y ago
Not below their factory defined minimum. Which is all over of place, except for Dell and HP, which around 40 nits minimal brightness.
- hollerith 3y ago
  Most LED monitors flicker at low brightness settings, but you can get ones that don't. The ones that don't have more expensive electronics driving the backlight. Eizo's FlexScan EV series is one example. I have a FlexScan EV, and I don't find being able to turn the brightness down to 1 or 2 nits without any flicker as useful as I thought I would. Even in complete darkness, it is hard to read the screen when the brightness is that low.
  - SomeoneFromCA 3y ago
    You info is dated. 95% of monitors on the market have zero flicker at any brightness. All LG and Acer monitors are for example are all like that.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]

charcircuit 3y ago

>Who really wants to be staring at 1,600 nits of brightness all day? Certainly not me. If you go outside you will experience over 100,000 nits. 1,600 nits is not as bright as you think it is.