MacBook Pro Late 2008: Glass Screen Comparison

Oct 22 2008 Published by under Apple

It’s no secret that many people are alarmed by Apple’s decision to drop matte screen displays from their lineup of ‘professional’ products. Many say that they won’t upgrade their existing MacBook Pro because of this feature. I can’t speak for everyone, but I find the new glass screen a general improvement over earlier models. Having said that, I realize that this is a highly subjective matter, and I expect there to be a lot of variance in opinion.

To summarize my impressions, I find that the display on the late 2008 MacBook Pro is noticeably brighter, has deeper contrast, produces more vibrant colors, and has much truer whites than previous models. Placing the new MBP alongside two older models, and tweaking each display to match for color and brightness, the new MBP easily steals the show.

Under normal indoor lighting conditions, the glass screen MacBook Pro is a star—the colors have so much more pop and viewing photos, videos or text documents is an absolute joy.

With bright, overcast daylight entering the room through open windows, the late 2008 MBP still outshines the old MBP, due mainly to its superior brightness; however, glare becomes much more noticeable and this is where personal opinions begin to diverge.

In my opinion, even under very bright and high glare situations the new MBP is often easier to view. Under such conditions, the dimmer matte screen of the old MBP’s can get washed out to a point where reading anything off of its display becomes a headache. Thus, I think the only people who should really feel resistant towards the new glass screens are those who find themselves in high glare environments, but where the readability of matte screens are somehow not affected. Fortunately, I don’t live or work in a setting like this, but I understand that some types of lighting can produce this effect.

After reading many threads on the topic of glass vs matte, I’ve concluded that much of the issue lies in an individual’s tolerance for glare. Similarly, back in the CRT days, a lot of people were tormented by flickering monitors, whilst others were not nearly as bothered by this phenomenon. Having used matte screens exclusively over the last five years, I find the glare on the new MacBook Pro visibly apparent, but otherwise quite tolerable.

To sums things up, the new MBP offers a tradeoff that provides better brightness, contrast and color at the expense of glare on the screen. For me, I prefer the glass finish, because I rarely find myself in situations where sunlight or harsh lighting is directly hitting the screen. But others working in less accommodating environments, or those who are much more sensitive to glare, may want to compare the new glass screen to their existing matte display before committing to this pricey upgrade.

No responses yet

MacBook Pro Late 2008: Glass Trackpad and Loud Clicking Noise

Oct 21 2008 Published by under Apple

Early reviews found that the late 2008 MacBook Pro had a much louder mouse click than older MBP models. My own tests confirm these findings and I’ve captured the excessive ‘snapping’ sound in the video below. Although it is difficult to capture on camera, I would say that the clicking noise from the new MBP is about 2-3x louder and has an unpleasant, higher tone.

Fortunately, tap clicking, where you lightly tap the trackpad without actually making it click, still works fine, but sometimes this method is less precise, such as when attempting to click without moving the cursor, highlighting text, or click-and-dragging objects.

As for the larger trackpad surface and the absence of a mouse button, it is another refinement in this model that I’m greatly liking. I use the trackpad for everything—I refuse to plug in a mouse—so the larger control surface only stands to improve my accuracy and freedom when controlling the cursor. It just boggles my mind how PC makers have fallen behind on improving the trackpad. I doubt they will continue dragging their feet for long…

Finally, a lot has been said about Apple’s use of glass in their new trackpads. It’s true, it doesn’t actually feel like glass, but this is probably a good thing. A quick test using my iPhone’s touchscreen and it’s obvious that the smooth glass surface actually provides quite a bit more resistance than one might expect. The late 2008 MacBook Pros feature a slight grit on the glass, which makes them feel similar to the early 2008 MBP models. But after a side-by-side comparison, it’s apparent that the new glass trackpads feature much less resistance. The fingers just seem to glide more and there’s hardly a jump or stutter when moving around or changing directions. The new glass trackpad is not just hype!

No responses yet

Bad iPod Nano 4G: Sharp Edges and Auto Cover Flow

Sep 19 2008 Published by under Apple

ipod nano 4g

Having used the iPod Nano 4G for a few days now, I can definitely say that my foreboding over its sharp corners was quite warranted. When reaching into my jeans pocket to get a hold of the device, I find myself poking my palm and fingers more often than naught, and it’s really beginning to irritate me!

I think, essentially, there are two kinds of music listeners: those that press play and hardly touch their mp3 player while on the move, and those that are constantly adjusting the volume and skipping to different tracks. I definitely fit the latter category, so it is especially annoying having to take extra caution when reaching for the Nano 4G.

Another feature that I am dreading is the tilt sensor. When holding the Nano 4G in my fist down by my side, the unit lies naturally in a landscape position. This automatically puts the Nano 4G into Cover Flow mode, which makes the click wheel flip through albums instead of controlling the volume. I find this very annoying as I often adjust sound levels blindly when the player is clutched in my hand or even when it’s inside my pocket. Now, I have to hold the Nano upwards and take a glance at the screen to make sure it’s out of Cover Flow before making an adjustment. That’s two steps too many, if you ask me.

Some of you might suggest that the iPod Shuffle is a better unit for my needs, but I cannot live without a display. Part of what makes the Nano so great is the embedded OS X, which provides an excellent user interface for making quick selections amidst gigs of music. Also, I enjoy giving ratings to my music; the included 5-star system a great way to keep tabs on my current favorites.

I realize now that the old Nano 3G is superior to the 4G in almost every respect, but as I’m stuck with the 4G until the next upgrade cycle, I’m hoping to find some workarounds to my problems. For instance, a case would probably cover the sharp edges of the Nano 4G and would also add a bit of bulk to the device for better gripping (was this Apple’s plan all along?). Also, a firmware update to deactivate the automatic Cover Flow mode sounds like a possibility if enough people complain. I hope that I’m not the only one with this concern — add a comment if you’re with me!

2 responses so far

iPod Nano 4G vs 3G: Is It Time To Upgrade?

Sep 18 2008 Published by under Apple

Today, I picked up an iPod Nano 4G 8GB silver and thought I’d capture the moment on video and also do a brief comparison with the Nano 3G.

My first impression of the Nano 4G is that it feels lighter than the 3G, and that its click wheel has more grain on it, which might allow for more accurate control.

On the down side, the Nano 3G ‘fatty’ definitely feels more comfortable in my hands for a variety of reasons. For starters, the Nano 4G has really sharp corners that dig into the palm if it isn’t held exactly right. It’s enough to worry me about placing the device in my front pocket while climbing stairs, bending over or doing any type of exercise. The sharp corners are also noticeable when grasping the unit to use the click wheel, which brings up another issue — the 4G’s slender build makes it necessary to pop the Nano upwards in the hand to use its controls. In comparison, the Nano 3G’s wider girth allows easier access to the click wheel and takes less grip adjustment to get the thumb into position. Some people – perhaps most people — won’t find this an issue, but I prefer to cup my handheld devices rather than to hold them high like waving a winning raffle ticket or something.

Back to the positives, I prefer the Nano 4G’s portrait-oriented display. A longer screen allows for more text to appear in list view, such as when scrolling through song lists. Unfortunately, Apple decided to increase the font size on the 4G, which results in 6 tracks being listed at once. This is still greater than the 3G’s 5 tracks, but I was hoping for at least two more lines of text to appear on the screen at a time. Hopefully, Apple will include a smaller font setting in a future firmware update.

Another feature of interest, and one I knew nothing about prior to owning the Nano 4G, is the built-in voice recorder. I just happened to be using my iPhone 3G’s earphones + mic cable when I was testing the Nano 4G and was pleasantly surprised to find that I could record my voice, and some ambient sounds, (perhaps both sides of a conversation?) with a simple hit of a button.

As for the accelerometers in the 4G, I feel that this is a bit of a gimmick. Sure, you can play games that make use of awkward tilt controls, but the rounded glass will produce some nasty glare when viewing it at odd angles. Also, I have never been a fan of Cover Flow – especially on an iPod – so holding the 4G in landscape to activate album cover viewing is just a battery waster for me. Finally, the shake to shuffle feature works, but you’ll look like an idiot using it in public!

In summary, I like the old Nano 3G version better than the 4G, and I kind of wished I had purchased an 8GB version of the fatty instead. As much as I like new toys, the Nano 4G offers very little over the 3G. In addition, it sports some dangerous looking corners and I also suspect the unit is not as physically robust as the 3G (its top and bottom are now made of plastic). Despite these concerns, I’m sure I’ll grow accustomed to the new Nano in time, but if you’re thinking of upgrading to the 4G, I would only do so for the fresh battery life and/or increased storage capacity (my two reasons).

No responses yet

« Newer posts Older posts »