4 ms·
Apple historically have not offered anti-glare, but the most recent macbook pros now offer a "nano-texture" display, which is their marketing term for anti-glar
by LordDragonfang 2y ago
Apple historically have not offered anti-glare, but the most recent macbook pros now offer a "nano-texture" display, which is their marketing term for anti-glare.
- szundi 2y agoOnly reason is an other chunk of money they charge for it. But I am sure that they measured it’ll make profits. We’ll see next year wether it stays or not
- Analemma_ 2y agoIt seems to be getting rave reviews based on what I've seen, and it has steadily rolled out over more of the product line and moved down in price (first it was only a $1,000 option on their 6K display, now it's a $100 option on the iPads and MacBooks). I suspect it will stay.
- gruez 2y ago>Only reason is an other chunk of money they charge for it Developing and adding the nano-texture isn't exactly free. There's also downsides to using the "regular" anti-glare technology that most other displays use, so it's not exactly a clear case of apple intentionally nerfing a product just so they can sell an upgrade for it.
- int_19h 2y agoTo be fair, it's actually different from the more traditional take on anti-glare (usually a separate film) in that Apple physically alters the glass surface directly instead, which affects the colors less, so it's not just a pointless marketing distinction. Whether the benefit justifies the price tag is another matter...
- cma 2y agoIsn't altering the texture essentially just 'matte' like most LCD displays used to be, just through something like etched glass like steamdeck had as an option?
- int_19h 2y agoIt is exactly what it is, and describing it as "anti-glare" or "matte" is reasonable and accurate. I'm just saying that I see why Apple uses a distinctive term instead to highlight the difference in their approach and its purported advantages.