Re:Glossy vs matte screens: why the PC industry’s out of touch
by uast23 on Monday May 23, 2011 @06:30PM
(#2577853)
I did not understand seriously what kind of robustness you are talking about? Do glossy screens last longer than the matte ones? At least from the look of it, matte looks less fragile compared to glossy, although I am not sure if either of them is less fragile than other. Looking at matte is much easier to eyes. And as far as cleaning goes, cleaning the glossy one with towel will leave scratch everywhere! Isn't it?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Glossy vs matte screens: why the PC industry’s out of touch
by gst on Monday May 23, 2011 @07:26PM
(#2578010)
With a matte screen you have your thin matte layer directly over the screen. The matte layer itself offers no protection. So if something hits a little bit too hard against the screen, your screen will look like this: http://goo.gl/qSQxl
Cheap glossy screens have exactly the same issue, but more expensive glossy screens such as the ones in Apple's Macbooks or Lenovo's X1 laptop are basically a glass board right in front of the screen. So they are much more resistant against scratches and against other types of physical abuse.
Re:Glossy vs matte screens: why the PC industry’s out of touch
by uast23 on Tuesday May 24, 2011 @02:53AM
(#2578950)
Oh I get it. You meant the screen/cover which goes till the edges, as in MBP. Yeah, compared to that, matte sounds more touchable.
Re:Glossy vs matte screens: why the PC industry’s out of touch
by chromic on Monday May 23, 2011 @06:53PM
(#2577917)
It depends on the screen. A cheap glossy screen might scratch easy, but something like a macbook screen probably has a pretty good anti-scratch layer. Glossy screens tend to get dirty easier, but also clean a bit easier with readily available materials (e.g. paper towel + water).