My Impressions of the MacBook Pro M4

Post by scoodah » Sat, Nov 01, 2025, 5:43 AM UTC

asdff wrote: post #71

LeoPanthera wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Historically, traditional matte screen finishes exhibited poor optical qualities by scattering ambient light, which tended to wash out colors. This scattering process also affected the light from individual pixels, causing it to refract into neighboring pixels. This reduced overall image quality and caused pixel-fine details, such as small text, to appear smeary on high-density LCDs. In contrast, well-designed glossy…

I used to have a 2006 macbook pro with the matte screen. It was glorious. None of these issues were present or really noticeable. Maybe you'd notice it in lab setting but not irl. Kind of like 120hz and 4k; just useless to most peoples eyes at the distances people actually use these devices. I've only owned matte external monitors as well and again, no issues there. The glossy era macbooks otoh have been a disaster i…

Post by nine_k » Sat, Nov 01, 2025, 5:53 AM UTC

dylan604 wrote: post #114

asdff wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to have a 2006 macbook pro with the matte screen. It was glorious. None of these issues were present or really noticeable. Maybe you'd notice it in lab setting but not irl. Kind of like 120hz and 4k; just useless to most peoples eyes at the distances people actually use these devices. I've only owned matte external monitors as well and again, no issues there. The glossy era macbooks otoh have been a disaster i…

> Unless your room is pitch black it is so easy to get external reflections This is nearly my preferred setup, only I have wall lights on the wall behind the monitors so it's not truly a dark room (which is horrible for your eyes). No over head lights allowed on while I'm at the keyboard.

Post by nine_k » Sat, Nov 01, 2025, 6:02 AM UTC

tjwebbnorfolk wrote: post #212

ekianjo wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> $3K for a computer isn't going to be anywhere near the top of the list. That says a lot about the community you live in.

That they've worked hard to be able to afford nice things? What do you think it says, exactly? This is a pretty irritating comment.

Post by bgarbiak » Sat, Nov 01, 2025, 6:07 AM UTC

dylan604 wrote: post #117

IshKebab wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it actually would be quite near the top, in terms of ranking. Most hobbies are a lot cheaper. Of course, not near the top in terms of money because there are a few hobbies that cost vastly more.

Just off the top of my head in hobbies that I've been in/around that this $3k would be a nothing burger: photography, wood working, grease monkey, cycling, gun collecting, antiquing, recreational substances...

Post by timothyduong » Sat, Nov 01, 2025, 6:14 AM UTC

asdff wrote: post #82

criddell wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are going to start making a list of expensive hobbies, $3K for a computer isn't going to be anywhere near the top of the list.

The type of person shelling out 3k for a computer is not running it until the wheels come off.