Ask HN: Why are monitors matte and laptops glossy and not the other way around? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Why are monitors matte and laptops glossy and not the other way around?

It boggles my mind why the thing that's meant to sit in one dark spot is protected from glare and the thing that's meant to be carried around is not. Is there any reason for this?

I understand that mobile phones have glossy screens to be more scratch resistant (although I'd still prefer a matte phone), but why laptops? Even MacBook Pro used to have a matte screen option 10 years ago but now all you can do is either buy an ugly screen protector or hide from the light.

View on HN

Glossy screens look better in ideal conditions. The matte screen diffuses the light (that's how matte works) a bit and reduces the contrast and it looks a bit blurry.

On phones, capacitive screens use a glass layer. Apple extended the glass layer to the laptops because it looked better (probably because matte screens looked worse than phones). Before them the screens were matte. Of course, everybody copied Apple and introduced glossy screens, because when looking at a glossy and a matte screen next to one another (in a shop) the glossy will win. And of course, everybody introduced glossy screens without the anti-reflection coating that Apple uses (cargo cult), so it made everything worse.

There was a time period when you had to really search for a non-glossy screen. Now it's a bit better, you can find them, but the touchscreen ones will always be glossy, and I did not yet see an OLED without glossy screen (could be because they are more fragile, although folding OLEDs do exist, so it's not clear).

I've never seen an apple laptop with an anti-reflection coating that worked. I think that's just marketing. Sit in a well lit room and you stare at yourself on anything besides a 90% white background.

Wait, is this why they push minimalist, tons-of-white-space design?

I had a late 2009 MacBook Pro with matte screen, the one with the "ugly" silver bezel around it. It was the last model ever that offered a matte coating. It was fantastic. I used it for over 8 years and even after the first retinas came out I still preferred my old matte screen. Then they reduced the glare but still... I think even better DPI and contrast don't make up for the fact that you're staring at your own face all the time. And it really puts a strain on your eyes as they need to constantly "filter" the focus.

I hate glossy screens.

> I hate glossy screens

I cringe when someone shows me something on their laptop and the screen is imprinted with keyboard finger cheese.

That model still had the sculpted silver keys? That was, by far, my favorite laptop keyboard: I still have a 15” ‘08 MBP that I boot up occasionally.

Agreed,I liked that the silver keys, silver body and bezel, almost invisible logotype made the screen the main focus. That matte screen was fantastic. In bright situations, everything around is also bright and reflective, but with matte, nothing reflected in the screen. It was great.

At the time, I was a designer and it allowed for total focus on the work. By far, my favorite laptop experience.

OLED is less bright, so it makes sense they would take all the nits they can get by not adding a matte layer.

Generally matte or antireflective screens are easy to find in the business laptop segment.

This seems like a possible explanation of the recent trend away from choices of screen finish.

Not sure why Apple would do this though, since they largely compete with themself.

Another annoying aspect of screens is not bright enough during bright daylight and not dark enough in darkness.

Lenovo has matte touchscreens. Thinkpad Yoga for example.

Glossy screens on laptops long predate anything that Apple did.

Here's a group test of glossy screens from March 2007, you know.. before the iPhone was released:

https://www.pcworld.com/article/129979/article.html

Glossy screens became popular for watching DVDs on laptops from the mid-2000s

Consumers love glossy displays. Colors look better, the screen looks brighter, and they are easier to clean.

I used to do volume specs of laptops for a big enterprise as a side duty. The glossy displays became a thing ~2005. If you had a spec that incorporated brightness, glossy would always win.

Grousing about Apple is always fun, but I’m sure they would happily charge you $500 for an enhanced matte panel if anyone cared about it... nobody does.

Many developers prefer matte screens because it makes text easier to read and puts less stress on the eyes. Many designers and gamers on the other hand prefer glossy screens as they look more vivid.

As a developer, I could not use a glossy screen for the life of me. Thankfully there are many laptops with matte screen. I keep an up to date collection of them on Product Chart:

https://www.productchart.com/laptops/sets/1

I made a show HN when I created it for the first time. Let me find it ... ha! 5 years ago:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10197939

Unless we discover a type of glass that lets light pass in only one direction, this divide between matte and glossy screens will probably continue up to the day we all wear VR headsets.

>Many designers and gamers on the other hand prefer glossy screens as they look more vivid.

I work at a company that amongst other things sells mid-high end monitors (mostly to photographers and graphic designers) for people who need the colours to be true (we distribute monitor-calibrators and colour systems). We also have Imacs that we look after for a customer in the office right now, and some cinema displays. We happened to be moving some stuff around recently and I was stuck by the texture differences between cinema displays and Imacs versus the lovely soft displays on say an Eizo or high end Benq.

I can only say it is all about looks rather than function for any machine with a glossy display.

I don't think my Thinkpad is as glossy as a MBP

Perhaps this thread should be titled, 'Why are Apple monitors shiny"

As a MacBook Pro using dev I’m forced to use a glossy screen and hate every second of it.

If I wanted a mirror I would’ve bought one.

My previous gen mbp 15 had a gorgeous matte screen which I love.

It’s sad to have to choose between macOS productivity and being able to see what I’m working on.

I'd say this is the product of brand dna, targeted audience and a bit of randomness. I think a good glossy screen with this special coating which makes reflections barely visible and if, then they are deep purple such as on MacBooks, is on par with matte screens. Latter try to avoid the reflection by blurring them which might work here and there better but at the end of the day it's a matter of taste since this matte blurs coming from reflections are also annoying.

Non-coated glossy screens or with a cheap coating are clearly inferior in this regard.

Coming now to other motivations, a glossy screen at the point of sale: A Macbook with a glossy screen in a shiny Apple Store is just way more impressive and will trigger more impulse buys. It's like a jewel or expensive watch sparkling in all its glory at you. Glossy screens go also seamlessly to the edges or in other words, there is no bumpy plastic edge which just looks more like a slick and polished product. In contrast, ThinkPads are more of an enterprise product and not in need to trigger impulse buys + need to signal "hey I am workhorse for professional users" => matte screen. But be aware that Lenovo puts glossy screens on very similar specced Yoga models which target consumers and are found at the point of sales. Those models have also more showy aluminium cases while the Thinkpads have also beautiful cases but their beauty is more of a subtly beauty which needs longer to lure buyers into a buy (if they aren't loyal ThinkPad users already). To drive this even further, Lenovo recently introduced alu-cased Thinkpads and a new subbrand "Thinkbooks" to target really any user out there. So, matte or glossy is more about demographics and their value system and beliefs than about functionality.

Last advantage which most forget: High-dpi screens have eg way crisper fonts on glossy than on matte, hence are overall sharper, eg code or a terminal on a 300dpi glossy screen is just incredible (check out 4K 13-14 inch notebooks or Dells 8K 32 inch).

Incredible in a dark room. I had to put a matte cover on mine to see other than my reflection.

Matte screen is a major factor when I buy laptops and monitor as I spend a lot of time in text editor, articles, ebooks.

However, it is difficult to read if I bring my laptop outdoor in the cafe last time, during BC period (Before Coronavirus).

In addition to laptop and 20inch matte lcd monitor, I also have 43inch TV that I use to discuss design with my partner. It's good for short term, but I still prefer my matte screens for long usage.

Another thing, why are almost all laptop screens 16:9, making me scroll my work and webpages vertically... while most tablets are 4:3 where I watch movies? It's back asswards.

The physical dimensions of a laptop screen are constrained by the physical layout of the built in keyboard. So unless you can design a clever keyboard that is longer than it is wide...

Hmm, why not just make the palmrest taller.. Jurassic era laptops had 4:3 1024x768 resolutions.

On the topic of keyboards, is it just me who can't stand numpads on laptop keyboards, whenever I use them my hands feel weird being off-center..

Count me in. I love 15" Thinkpads. The keyboard with numpad pushes the main letter pad offside. Also the demarcation of the main keyboard and the numpad is non existent making typing a terrible experience. That was a deal breaker for me and now I have to use only 14" laptops.

Otoh, my sis who does subtitling finds the numpad essential to use the laptop. So different strokes for different folks.

All laptops were 4:3 until about 15 years ago. Memory may be short but it can be done.

IIRC from the days when glossy became popular, matte screens scatter incoming and outgoing light, but glossy screens reflect incoming light and transmit outgoing without scattering. So in a showroom the glossy screen looks better - blacks are blacker and colours are brighter. It's the same effect as TVs having a showroom mode that jacks up the brightness and contrast.

Why this didn't happen to monitors I'm not sure. Perhaps monitors are more often purchased online based on comparing specs, but laptops are more of a fashion item since we managed to make computers pervasive in society.

Why do you assume a desktop monitor is meant to sit in a dark spot? Desktop monitors are used in all sorts of environments.

I don’t know if this is what OP meant but glossy screens can still be glare resistant (like smartphones screens or new macbooks).

I think what OP is asking is why aren’t monitors adopting the glossy finish of modern laptop screens?

Because it's like staring into a mirror all day.

Latest Lenovo Legion laptop series, for example, have matte screen. There are also anti-glare screen sticker, but it blocks some of the light and makes colors look dull. Just look for laptops with matte screen.

My Legion 5's screen is delightful.

Glass is easier to clean/maintain and less delicate compared to matte panels, and is therefore more mass market friendly. A matte screen is easily scratched by the wrong cleaning utensils.

You can move a laptop away from sun light, but eventually a monitor will have some amount of glare, unless it is nowhere near a window

There are 3 kinds of screens:

- glossy (glass): vivid, easy to care for, susceptible to reflections, cheaper.

- matte (anti-glare): colors not as strong, can be comfortable. Worst in bright sunlight.

- anti-reflective: colors almost as vivid as glossy, difficult to care for, costly. Not really difficult (warm water and soft cloth) but more difficult than the general public can do. Used on high-end displays/TVs.

You can tell the difference between anti-glare and anti-reflective as one has more texture/grain vs smooth. Also when looking at the reflection of a point source of light, the anti-reflective will dim the point, the anti-glare will spread it out like a ball, which is why it washes out in bright ambient light.

For a high resolution mobile screen only glossy and anti-reflective would give a good image in wide range of lighting (assuming you can shuffle to avoid reflections). Care and cost prohibit anti-reflective.

My preferences are anti-reflective for home monitors, glossy for laptops, phones, tablets.

My laptops has always been matte screen until my current MacBook Pro. Never gain. After this I am going back to non-Apple laptop.

(To clarify, Glossy screen is part of the reasons, but there are tons of thing I hate about macbook pro)

Much easier to move my seat at a coffee shop than move my desk at BigCo

For people who are stuck with a glossy screen: I don't know what the author is talking about with ‘an ugly screen protector’. A matte protector worked great for me: I slapped it on the 13" screen right after buying the laptop, and it's been there for eight years, zero problems with it. The whole thing with a protector is that it's transparent, so personally I'm looking at the picture on the screen, not the film.

The same reason monitors and TVs have the blue levels turned up high - it looks better against competitors in a showroom to the average consumer.

Screen Coatings section of this reddit post may be related although it does not directly answer why it is the case.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Monitors/comments/gyii6k/gaming_mon...

You're really only stuck with a glossy laptop display if you insist on buying one from Apple.

Some of the flashier models from the Apple wannabe manufacturers are starting to go glossy or have a glass overlay, especially if they have a touchscreen, but the vast majority of laptop displays are still matte.

E.g. All Thinkpads and Dell XPS models are available with matte displays

Glossy from Apple actually works and is mostly superior. I am using one now and there's very little that bothers me about in terms of reflection. There are other manufacturers making glossy laptop screens and they are mostly terrible.

Having used both, I can tolerate Apple's glass overlay, but I don't prefer it.

But credit where it's due... it is nice to be able to take a damp rag to it, vs. having a mild heart attack any time someone gets their fingers a little too close while pointing at something.

I often dream about a laptop with an e-ink display.

There are e-ink displays with colours, and there are e-ink displays with acceptable (to me) refreshrates (around 30hz). I'm not aware of any display that has both, but surely it will come.

Thing is, I don't think anyone will build a laptop with such a display, cause everyone is into selling sexy looking mirrors.

> There are e-ink displays with colours, and there are e-ink displays with acceptable (to me) refreshrates (around 30hz)

30Hz? Where?

Those cool epaper demos are almost always full of lies and half truths. A lot of them are actually just an lcd with an extra matte layer. I'd only trust what you can easily buy today to actually exist.

I have a pair of HP Elite monitors which are glossy in my home. As far as I know they don't make these any more, but I've been using them for over ten years and I've resisted upgrading to bigger because I enjoy the gloss so much.

Technology isn't good enough to have a matte display that is also bright in all conditions.

Hopefully Apple's micro-etched matte tech from the Pro Display XDR makes its way down to consumer machines.

HP ZBook is available with matte screen. I think Thinkpads, too. Recent Dell UPxxxx desktop monitors are glossy, but the XPS laptops are not available in matte.

Thinkpads are matte. I prefer it to the MBP's gloss.

All non-touchscreen XPS models I've seen were matte.

I wasn’t able to get a 4K display without opting into the touchscreen, which I despise and immediately disabled.

my guess:

- laptops are purchased by consumers and are shiny and modern looking. Personally I think glossy sucks, but it's like buying a shiny clean car when you see it in the store.

- monitors meanwhile, are very large and will not fall "in your shadow" so to speak. You will see everything behind you. Even with a matte screen, I have to turn off lights behind me to see dark ares on the screen, like when watching a movie.

I've had one dell and two asus and all of them had antiglare screens

My Lenovo has a matte screen.

It doesn't look pretty compared to a macbook, but it's much better on the eyes in a lit room.

+1, I went form mac to Thinkpad. It's got better usability all round.

I'm surprised that people seem to overwhelmingly prefer the Apple aesthetic compared to Thinkpads. The red and black design and keyboard make for a better overall experience and look in my view.

Glossy screens have better contrast and matte screens cause less eye strain.

The user can easily adjust a laptop or seating position by a couple degrees or so to avoid most reflections. Unless of course they have made a spectacularly poor choice of where to sit in the first place, in which case a matte monitor won't help much either.

By adjusting the screen, the user is forced to sit in a constant position. This is bad for user's physical health.

Rather, I explained it differently based in user IQ/experience Vs choice of screen in comments...

But that’s not true though. A moment’s thought makes it clear.

It is simple. Glossy looks glorious compared to matte. Truth is - Generally speaking, matte is good for eyes. On average, those who buy Laptop vs those who by buy Desktop, we can see difference in IQ/Experience.

Poor IQ people go for glossy, Good IQ people go matte. So, manufactures are forced to release more and more glossy laptops. Certainly, Apple played a big role in pushing glossy. Please forgive, I don't want to insult people with Laptop. I too have one glossy Laptop and two matte Desktop. It is a cruel joke for me!.

Reading this gave me a feeling of being superior.

Good IQ people - imagine that!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com