271–280 of 417 posts
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.
> $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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
120Hz is absolutely a noticeable improvement over 60Hz. I have a 60Hz iPhone and a 120Hz iPhone and the 60Hz one is just annoying to use. Everything feels so choppy.
I can't tell at all when my mbp is in 120hz or 60hz. I tried to set up a good test too by scrolling really fast while plugging and unplugging the power adapter (which kicks it into high power 120hz or low power 60hz).
On a perfect display you should see just a faint grey circle.
Another test is moving cursor fast across the white page and tracking it with eyes. On a perfect display it should be perfectly crisp, on my display it blurs and moves in steps.
So basically on a perfect display you can track fast moving things, and when not tracking, they are blurred. On a bad display, things blur when tracking them, and you see several instances otherwise. For example, if you scroll a page with a black box up-down, on a bad display you would see several faint boxes overlayed, and on a perfect display one box with blurred edges.
You won't notice 8ms difference in input lag
I don’t know how many milliseconds the difference is, but going back and forth it’s so obvious to me that it’s painful.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's classic Apple to spend over a decade insisting that that glossy screens were the best option I don't recall Apple ever "insisting" anything about glossy vs. matte. They simply eliminated the matte option without comment, and finally brought it back many years later. If you have a reference to a public statement from Apple defending the elimination of the matte option, I'd like to see it. To be clear, I've been…
> “…featuring the Intel Core Duo processor and a gorgeous new 13-inch glossy widescreen display…” > “…the MacBook provides incredibly crisp images with richer colors, deeper blacks and significantly greater contrast…” This is positioning for glossy being superior. https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2006/05/16Apple-Unveils-New-M...
A sentence in a PR that highlights an indisputable advantage of a glossy display does not position glossy as being superior overall but merely superior in the respects mentioned, which is not controversial.
Moreover, Apple continued to offer a matte display in the MacBook Pro for years after that PR, so why would they sell an "inferior" option?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can't tell at all when my mbp is in 120hz or 60hz. I tried to set up a good test too by scrolling really fast while plugging and unplugging the power adapter (which kicks it into high power 120hz or low power 60hz).
It's super easy, put your finger on a touchpad and move it fast in circle so that the cursor also moves in circle. As the eye is not that fast, you will see multiple faint mouse cursors images. With 120 Hz there will be twice more cursors than with 60 Hz. On a perfect display you should see just a faint grey circle. Another test is moving cursor fast across the white page and tracking it with eyes. On a perfect displ…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They simply eliminated the matte option without comment, and finally brought it back many years later. Wasn’t the matte option that disappeared just then removing the glass in front of the screen? I seem to remember that (my MBP from that time was glossy). The nano textured coating they are using now is quite complex and I am not quite sure it was applicable at such scales cheaply enough back in 2015.
The PowerBook and the first MacBook Pro were only matte. A glossy option was introduced in 2006, but the MacBook Pro was still matte by default. In 2008, the MacBook Pro case was redesigned, and then the display situation changed significantly.
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…
I have done real work, using a computer 10+ hours a day on every ecosystem, Windows, Linux, Mac. I've used each for ~10 years a piece. My most recent laptop died and it really showed me what I appreciate in a laptop, performance, build quality, lightweight, good battery, low noise, good ergonomics. I was sick of the recent overheating generation of pc laptops that don't last more than a couple years under my usage. A…
Which one did you buy? I’m also considering leaving mac just because of how slow and battery intensive the new macOS tahoe is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We're still waiting to see any CAMM-style memory module show up in a mass market product at any speed , instead of merely getting press coverage where the number of articles written seems to outnumber the number of laptops actually built and shipped. But even if you are willing to take the examples thus far seriously as real products, they haven't come close to matching the speed of soldered LPDDR.
I was considering an LPCAMM2-fitted Thinkpad. I was eyeing to buy one with less memory and then buy a 96GB module to upgrade it. However, the module was nowhere to be found in stock, and where it was found, it was priced almost like the whole laptop.
> I don’t notice going back to 60 Hz displays on computers. However, on phones, where a lot more animations are a key part of the user experience, I think 120 Hz displays are more interesting. I'm always so jealous of these people, 60hz is just so bad for me now and even make me a bit motion sick. I can see it in everything, moving the window, scrolling, the cursor.