We've had matte screens for a long time that don't show glare. The problem is, the blacks are much more washed-out because that light still has to go somewhere, so it's basically just being smeared across the entire display.
This page shows lots of side-by-side photos of content that is primarily white, and most of the black bits (like text) are too small to make out.
The comparison needs to use things like busy photographs with bright areas and black areas. Then you can judge how much more washed-out the black areas look.
The second photo makes the Nano texture look pretty washed-out, but sadly doesn't include the traditional glossy laptop next to it for comparison, so it's impossible to tell.
Also, in all the side-by-side photos the Nano screen looks like it's set to much brighter. So any fair comparison should have them set to equal brightness. There's no universe in which a glossy screen is going to make the white areas look darker, as they are in all these examples.
I'm very curious if/how the Nano is better, but unfortunately these photos don't do anything to demonstrate it.
Contrast is worse, it's a trade off. For me in most environments there will be bright reflections on the glossy screens, even indoors - your brain actually does a good job of ignoring them to the point you're not even conciously aware most of the time, but when you smear them out with the nano texture display it's just way more comfortable to look at, for me at least.
If I was focused on watching movies, or grading photos in a dark room then glossy would be the way to go.
Depends a lot on the screen and environment in my experience.
A glossy Apple Studio Display or iMac (both of which have a decent antiglare treatment despite being glossy) in an office setting for example isn’t too bad.
On the other hand, your average touchscreen laptop (which are always almost-mirrors with no hint of treatment, for some reason) with screen angled up slightly and overhead fluorescent tube lighting or a skylight on the other hand? Borderline useless if the screen isn’t bright enough to outshine the strong glare covering 40-60%+ of the screen.
"The nano-texture adds a filter-like appearance, resulting in a lower contrast ratio than the glossy panel. That said, there are differing opinions about the subjective appearance of the raised blacks. Some say it's a dealbreaker, while others prefer it, arguing that it looks more like what you would see on paper. The glossy panel produces a deeper, more Google Pixel HDR type of contrast that some find unnatural." — https://www.rtings.com/laptop/learn/apple-nano-texture
Appreciate the feedback and notes here- I would love to revisit the methodology and use a separate physical brightness meter to normalize for that. To my best memory I made sure both devices were at max stock brightness for each photo.
I tried the iPad with Nano Texture and didn’t really like the rainbow effect that shows up on white brackgrounds. So I ended up returning it.
A while later I had an idea to mount an iPad to my fridge so that I could check the weather, add things to my shopping list, play music, etc. I bought the rather expensive iPad with Nano Texture screen and it has been amazing to use. There is a big window opposite the fridge, and without the nano texture the glare from behind makes it hard to read what’s on the screen.
Not sure I would enjoy nano texture on my MacBook. For outdoor use I found that Vivid is great to turn up the brightness using the extended range of HDR that Apple doesn’t otherwise allow me to use.
But never apply it directly on screen. I think it's important to mention you just do not use "some alcohol" but it should be 70% isopropyl alcohol solution.
Btw. alcohol is a very good way to destroy the old glossy screens (non nano texture).
> Btw. alcohol is a very good way to destroy the old glossy screens (non nano texture).
Respectful disagree. My partner's family's go-to surface spray has always been a home-made mix of ~30% methylated spirits to water. That's the only bench spray I've used for 10+ years and I can report it's as effective as any commercial spray, and 10% the price. Just mix it at home and use it everywhere. Kitchen, bathroom, anywhere else. I speak as a clean-freak. It works.
It's also amazing for cleaning laptop screens. I spray it directly on. I shouldn't. I do. I type this on a 5-year-old Macbook Air whose screen has been cleaned countless times using this method. It looks like this. (The moon-surface-like texture at the top is the texture of the reflected wall, above.) https://share.cleanshot.com/bnHrCQDZ
1. Make this mixture in a $1 spray bottle at home.
2. Lock your laptop and press Escape so the screen turns off. Lay it screen-back-down, keyboard open at about 80°, so it sits on the bench.
3. Spray a small amount of this mixture on the screen, directly. But don't be shy. Just don't have the screen be swimming.
4. Wipe carefully with a kitchen towel.
5. Repeat as necessary.
So far the only danger I've found is catching an abrasive particle in the cloth in the wiping process. A pre-wipe can alleviate the issue.
Apparently they're 39.5% isopropyl alcohol. 1 wipe is basically enough to clean 1 laptop screen before it all evaporates. Been using them for over a decade now on my MacBook Airs.
I believe Apple stores used to use "Whoosh" cleaning spray along with a cloth replaced once a day. It's an alcohol free cleaning solution (very similar to alcohol free eyeglass cleaners).
Mild alcohol causing issues for MBP screens was primarily an issue with 2012-2014 "staingate" (due to defects in the coating process).
Lens wipes are only ~30% alcohol and are probably fine assuming correct application, but I guess given how often staingate has appeared as coatings get more complex there's a risk... Unfortunately you either have to tradeoff "contains alcohol but completely clean wipe" versus "alcohol free but using a cloth that might be contaminated by dust/grit".
Maybe you could do alcohol free eyeglass solution (or maybe even ROR fluid) + lens tissue (e.g. kimwipe).
The screen has an oleophobic coating. That is the danger of alcohol, that it strips the coating. For your phone absolutely don't do this. For your laptop it should be fine.
I recently purchased a "paperlike" for my iPad Pro (M4, if it matters).
I'll be honest, it has made the writing like 20% better, but the touching about 50% worse.
The feel of the screen is somewhat irritating, though it looks nice when the backlight is dim so I thought I'd go to Apple and check out the nano-texture.
All I can say is that subjectively, I liked it even less.
I have no idea how people can live with nanotexture on iPad screens.
That said, a consistent issue I have with my Macbook Air and my iPad pro is that the "peripherals" touch the screen. My Macbook ends up with oily cubes where the keyboard and its edge has rubbed up against the screen display; and similarly on the iPad I have a perpetual line where the smart folio has its segments.
I thought I had unusually oily hands and started washing more frequently, but that seems to have made the problem worse somehow. :\
I don't touch my display on my MacBook and it's always yucky because of the finger oils on my keyboard, so the thought of having to use a special cloth to clean it always seemed like too much of a hassle for me compared to the glossy display. I did wonder if this improved ever since they added nano texture to the ipad pro, but sounds like fingerprints are still annoying.
For the longest time, I kept the sheet of foam that comes with the new laptop. Eventually that got lost. I then picked up a pre-cut bit of microfiber that fit the laptop and thin enough to allow for full closing. Once you get in the habit of remembering to put the cloth back before closing the lid, you'll be amazed at your screen's lack of oils.
I've been using a sunshield I made out of some black mat board for at least a decade now. There's a few little magnets in it to cling to the magnets hidden in my Mac's lid. It's been on like 3-5 computers now, looking increasingly battered; whenever I upgrade I get to see if the magnets are in the same orientation or not.
Works great, I keep it in the padded pocket in my laptop bag next to the computer and the drawing tablet and take it out when I'm sitting in the park.
It looks great but I can't imagine I'll be up to the cleaning protocol.
For outdoor use, I've had some decent success with the app Vivid which hijacks various MacOS abilities to superbrighten your display: https://www.getvivid.app/
> The screen needs more effort to keep clean than a normal screen and comes with a special wipe that needs to be used instead of microfiber
> I’ve learned to bring my special wipe when I bring my laptop, and I slip a few rubbing alcohol wipes in there as well.
Not for me then, the extra flexibility wouldn't be worth the loss of convenience; I prefer low maintenance and I work mostly indoors anyway. Still, good to have options, I guess.
While I’m glad for the author, in that they’ve found something that delights them, this just seems like a really long-winded way to say “matte screens have less glare” - not a new fact.
There are special surfaces (also used in some TVs I believe) which actually reflect somewhat less light. I assume this "nano texture" is something like that. (Of course the screen being matte also helps.)
Oh, I see Macbook screens may become actually usable again. All the Macbooks my employers issued to me previously were only usable with an external screen, or at least with all ceiling lights off, and away from windows.
I've been saying glossy screens are pure cancer for 20 years and every time I was dismissed as a Luddite that should get with the times.
Now they can sell you "nano texture" at a premium after getting you hooked on functionally terrible displays (they look pretty in the store though).
My worst experience with glossy displays was when I had to perform some work outside on a sunny day and I comically could not see a single thing. It looked like a pure black square. I laughed, packed up and left, and told my boss it wasn't happening.
This is a great option if you work outdoors a lot. As a designer though, I couldn’t get used to the “dusty” appearance of the nano texture (and yes, contrast loss – glossy displays are just more punchy) at least on the Pro Display XDR. You mostly get used to it if you aren’t doing design, I’m guessing.
Def a tradeoff that depends on your lifestyle if you work outside a lot (or want to). It does look nice there in the mountains
It's nice to know there are people whose preferences are so different to my own. I'm much happier using a computer indoors, as much as I love doing other things outdoors.
I’ve been using a nano iPad Pro for a year or so now and fingerprints have never once bothered me. The cleaning cloth works great. I love the nano screen as reflections are just not a problem any more.
I just bought an iPad Pro and really wanted the nano-texture, but that would mean I would also have to upgrade the storage and it made the device too expensive for me.
I bought a Paperlike 3 screen protector and it's ok. Not great, not terrible.
Pay attention to the compatibility list though. If you use the Cloth™ on an iPhone 4 or earlier then you're in uncharted territory, who knows what could happen.
I thought the same. I had no idea there was a special cloth in the box. I'll have to dig it up and search for it. It sounds like a quality microfiber cloth is still fine though.
I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again: the nano texture screen decreases the apparent pixel density, so much that my eyes don’t perceive them as retina screens. With nano texture, my eyes feel like looking at individual pixels even though they are not. It introduces a noticeable blurry effect. It’s a huge turn-off. Apple introduced retina screens back in 2010 and this viscerally felt like going back to 2009.
I do not recommend buying nano texture screens without having seen one. I get it that some people won’t be bothered but it’s a big no-no for me. Traditional matte screens are way better.
Works great. I also got a huge one for my TV. Once I learned how to press the bubbles out I was good. The trick is to use a larger bubble to catch the smaller ones and press them out the sides.
Not to my knowledge, I think Samsung was one of their manufacturers for a while, but they do have patents on nano texture which differs somewhat apparently from traditional matte screens. I'd love to understand more of the differences and more about their manufacturing process though.
umm, anti-glare/matte used to be the norm for LCD. Around 2005-2006 that changed. As laptops became more of a consumer product, and DVD watching was an important usage, the glossy screens became the norm.
So, I would call it a massive step backwards! The 2006 MBP had an optional glossy screen, and the 2008 was the first one with default glossy. Around 2012 Apple dropped the matte option altogether.
We've had matte screens for a long time that don't show glare. The problem is, the blacks are much more washed-out because that light still has to go somewhere, so it's basically just being smeared across the entire display.
This page shows lots of side-by-side photos of content that is primarily white, and most of the black bits (like text) are too small to make out.
The comparison needs to use things like busy photographs with bright areas and black areas. Then you can judge how much more washed-out the black areas look.
The second photo makes the Nano texture look pretty washed-out, but sadly doesn't include the traditional glossy laptop next to it for comparison, so it's impossible to tell.
Also, in all the side-by-side photos the Nano screen looks like it's set to much brighter. So any fair comparison should have them set to equal brightness. There's no universe in which a glossy screen is going to make the white areas look darker, as they are in all these examples.
I'm very curious if/how the Nano is better, but unfortunately these photos don't do anything to demonstrate it.
If I was focused on watching movies, or grading photos in a dark room then glossy would be the way to go.
A glossy Apple Studio Display or iMac (both of which have a decent antiglare treatment despite being glossy) in an office setting for example isn’t too bad.
On the other hand, your average touchscreen laptop (which are always almost-mirrors with no hint of treatment, for some reason) with screen angled up slightly and overhead fluorescent tube lighting or a skylight on the other hand? Borderline useless if the screen isn’t bright enough to outshine the strong glare covering 40-60%+ of the screen.
The nano-texture has less contrast.
"The nano-texture adds a filter-like appearance, resulting in a lower contrast ratio than the glossy panel. That said, there are differing opinions about the subjective appearance of the raised blacks. Some say it's a dealbreaker, while others prefer it, arguing that it looks more like what you would see on paper. The glossy panel produces a deeper, more Google Pixel HDR type of contrast that some find unnatural." — https://www.rtings.com/laptop/learn/apple-nano-texture
A while later I had an idea to mount an iPad to my fridge so that I could check the weather, add things to my shopping list, play music, etc. I bought the rather expensive iPad with Nano Texture screen and it has been amazing to use. There is a big window opposite the fridge, and without the nano texture the glare from behind makes it hard to read what’s on the screen.
Not sure I would enjoy nano texture on my MacBook. For outdoor use I found that Vivid is great to turn up the brightness using the extended range of HDR that Apple doesn’t otherwise allow me to use.
I would never consider a matte display at home because I keep my computers in dark environments like a real nerd.
But never apply it directly on screen. I think it's important to mention you just do not use "some alcohol" but it should be 70% isopropyl alcohol solution.
Btw. alcohol is a very good way to destroy the old glossy screens (non nano texture).
Respectful disagree. My partner's family's go-to surface spray has always been a home-made mix of ~30% methylated spirits to water. That's the only bench spray I've used for 10+ years and I can report it's as effective as any commercial spray, and 10% the price. Just mix it at home and use it everywhere. Kitchen, bathroom, anywhere else. I speak as a clean-freak. It works.
It's also amazing for cleaning laptop screens. I spray it directly on. I shouldn't. I do. I type this on a 5-year-old Macbook Air whose screen has been cleaned countless times using this method. It looks like this. (The moon-surface-like texture at the top is the texture of the reflected wall, above.) https://share.cleanshot.com/bnHrCQDZ
1. Make this mixture in a $1 spray bottle at home.
2. Lock your laptop and press Escape so the screen turns off. Lay it screen-back-down, keyboard open at about 80°, so it sits on the bench.
3. Spray a small amount of this mixture on the screen, directly. But don't be shy. Just don't have the screen be swimming.
4. Wipe carefully with a kitchen towel.
5. Repeat as necessary.
So far the only danger I've found is catching an abrasive particle in the cloth in the wiping process. A pre-wipe can alleviate the issue.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01NCOUY05?th=1
Apparently they're 39.5% isopropyl alcohol. 1 wipe is basically enough to clean 1 laptop screen before it all evaporates. Been using them for over a decade now on my MacBook Airs.
Mild alcohol causing issues for MBP screens was primarily an issue with 2012-2014 "staingate" (due to defects in the coating process).
Lens wipes are only ~30% alcohol and are probably fine assuming correct application, but I guess given how often staingate has appeared as coatings get more complex there's a risk... Unfortunately you either have to tradeoff "contains alcohol but completely clean wipe" versus "alcohol free but using a cloth that might be contaminated by dust/grit".
Maybe you could do alcohol free eyeglass solution (or maybe even ROR fluid) + lens tissue (e.g. kimwipe).
I'll be honest, it has made the writing like 20% better, but the touching about 50% worse.
The feel of the screen is somewhat irritating, though it looks nice when the backlight is dim so I thought I'd go to Apple and check out the nano-texture.
All I can say is that subjectively, I liked it even less.
I have no idea how people can live with nanotexture on iPad screens.
That said, a consistent issue I have with my Macbook Air and my iPad pro is that the "peripherals" touch the screen. My Macbook ends up with oily cubes where the keyboard and its edge has rubbed up against the screen display; and similarly on the iPad I have a perpetual line where the smart folio has its segments.
I thought I had unusually oily hands and started washing more frequently, but that seems to have made the problem worse somehow. :\
Feel free to ask any other questions!
Are you bothered by anything similar on the MacBook?
Works great, I keep it in the padded pocket in my laptop bag next to the computer and the drawing tablet and take it out when I'm sitting in the park.
For outdoor use, I've had some decent success with the app Vivid which hijacks various MacOS abilities to superbrighten your display: https://www.getvivid.app/
> I’ve learned to bring my special wipe when I bring my laptop, and I slip a few rubbing alcohol wipes in there as well.
Not for me then, the extra flexibility wouldn't be worth the loss of convenience; I prefer low maintenance and I work mostly indoors anyway. Still, good to have options, I guess.
In any case, that was a good and helpful review!
Now they can sell you "nano texture" at a premium after getting you hooked on functionally terrible displays (they look pretty in the store though).
My worst experience with glossy displays was when I had to perform some work outside on a sunny day and I comically could not see a single thing. It looked like a pure black square. I laughed, packed up and left, and told my boss it wasn't happening.
There is no worse eye strain that looking at anything that isn't supposed to be on the screen. It's 90% noise.
Def a tradeoff that depends on your lifestyle if you work outside a lot (or want to). It does look nice there in the mountains
How are fingerprints on iPad Pro nano texture touchscreens?
I bought a Paperlike 3 screen protector and it's ok. Not great, not terrible.
https://www.apple.com/shop/product/mw693am/a/polishing-cloth
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Polishing_Cloth
I do not recommend buying nano texture screens without having seen one. I get it that some people won’t be bothered but it’s a big no-no for me. Traditional matte screens are way better.
Works great. I also got a huge one for my TV. Once I learned how to press the bubbles out I was good. The trick is to use a larger bubble to catch the smaller ones and press them out the sides.
umm, anti-glare/matte used to be the norm for LCD. Around 2005-2006 that changed. As laptops became more of a consumer product, and DVD watching was an important usage, the glossy screens became the norm.
https://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.php?t=26396
So, I would call it a massive step backwards! The 2006 MBP had an optional glossy screen, and the 2008 was the first one with default glossy. Around 2012 Apple dropped the matte option altogether.