I’d like to clarify my previous post.
It now sounds likely, based on reader comments and feedback, that in fact, most laptop displays use 16-bit displays, and use dithering to present a fair range of the millions of colors you’re used to on any full-size CRT or LCD display. I would like to withdraw the parts of my outrage that chastised Apple for using displays below the common industry standard.
My original reasoning went like this: my PowerBook display was, and is, superb. My MacBook display had issues that were apparent from seconds into actual use. There were artefacts that carried the same symptoms as dithering often does in lower color ranges. When I heard of dithering being used, and unaccustomed as I was to the actual LCD display specifications for laptops, I drew what I thought was the logical conclusion: Apple is, for some reason, using sub-par displays in their laptops, and the display’s tactics for acheiving more color than they are constructed to naturally produce is the source of my worries. It seems that I was wrong.
However.
I’d like to remind people that my actual observed problem does not go away because the technical ground I had derived to be causing the problem was inaccurate. The menu bar on the MacBook did not retroactively stop looking ‘notchy’. When I brought up certain colors on my MacBook as a sizable block, they did not retroactively stop looking like chess boards. The PowerBook I’m fitted with until my MacBook comes back from service has certainly also not gotten worse since learning that it, too, may be of the same ability to display color.
And, what’s more, the people that nodded knowingly in the comments of my last post have not retroactively had their issues wiped either. There’s reason to conclude that Apple is having a problem with some of its newer displays – be that problems with individual display models being worse than other models, or with broken individual displays. That’s still reason to worry.
Would you mind sharing some examples of the colors that exemplify the “chess board” appearance on your display? My MacBook has a 6-bit display too, of course, but I’ve never found it bothersome.
On the other hand, I guess I have rather low expectations of LCDs in general. Subjectively speaking, I’ve yet to meet one that delivers better picture quality than a good CRT.
By Jim DeVona · 2007.05.21 23:57
If the MacBook still has the problem when it comes back from the shop, I’ll try to document the problem as good as I can.
By Jesper · 2007.05.22 00:03
I’ll have to check this out – wonder if mine has this problem. I use it 98% of the time attached to an external monitor…
By Duce · 2007.05.22 03:40
Just a small correction: I believe it’s 6-bit displays, not 16-bit.
I completely sympathise with your position, Jesper. I’m “satisfied” with my MBP C2D’s display, even though I’ve always felt it was not up to “pro” standards and was rather disappointed when I discovered that the display quality was as average as that on my old G3 iBook — the only real difference being that the MBP’s display was much brighter. In particular, my biggest concern is with the extremely narrow viewing angles on my MBP — if I tilt my head just a little, I can see a significant colour shift.
I think the reason I’m not upset is because I’ve always had low expectations for the quality of notebook displays.
I can understand if people are upset with the display quality. Most (if not all?) current laptop displays are 6-bit, but there are certainly higher quality 6-bit displays out there than are used on the current Apple notebook range. Hopefully the upcoming LED-based displays will correct this.
By gerry · 2007.05.22 10:19
Gerry: The correct answer on 6/16 is: it depends. 16-bit refers to “High color”, which is “thousands of colors”, which is clearly what it’s producing. But 6 bits per color per pixel is 18-bit, which is not quite 24-bit either – especially since 24 bits mean 8 bits per color and “True color” – “millions of color”.
I don’t blame the panels themselves for the viewing angle on my MacBook display – I have attributed that to the nature of the glossy coating. However, if you got the matte coating for your MacBook Pro (which lets you choose – I wanted the matte coating on my MacBook), then it appears that the displays suck even more.
I don’t have low expectations of laptop displays. I do all my work off of it, and even if the MacBook was literally half as expensive as the PowerBook, buying one is still like getting kicked in the nads. You understand that the power is going to have to be slower to be thermally acceptable – i.e. to not also toast your nads – and to not drain the battery, but you still have reasonable expectations of something that sets you back a lot of money.
By Jesper · 2007.05.22 17:54
I have a first gen MacBook, this is part of the output from the SwitchResX Control: Manufactured……..Week 13 of year 2006 Descriptor #2 is ASCII data: B133EW01 V0
And the model info for B133EW01 indicates it is a 262K display: http://www.cn.auo.com/auoDEV/products.php?func=info&product_id=83&items_id=
Yet I’ve never noticed any dithering or banding. Perhaps you got a bad display? Have you tried a different ColorSync profile? After a recent OS update (10.4.8 I think, not sure which one) the ColorSync profile used on the MacBook was updated, but I found it too “blue” so I reverted to a backup I made previously, having heard about this change earlier. I can upload it somewhere if you’d like to try it.
By http://openid.aol.com/powermacx2005 · 2007.05.23 04:30
As I said in the original post, linked from the top of this one, I’ve tried a dozen of ColorSync profiles and different calibration setups. That’s not the problem.
By Jesper · 2007.05.23 06:02