Slashdot Mirror


Does Anyone Really Prefer Glossy Screens?

An anonymous reader asked a question that I've been wondering about too: "I live in a small southern European country where natural light abounds. This may sound good, but it is a pain when it comes to using laptops that come with a glossy finish, making it impossible to work unless you are doing it in the dark. To make matters worse, since we are a small market, most manufacturers only offer a subset of their product line, and don't allow you to choose any options available in other countries (like matte screens). Buying abroad is not an option since we have our own very specific keyboard layout. Why are manufacturers doing this? Does anyone really prefer using glossy screens for day-to-day activities?"

55 of 646 comments (clear)

  1. Yes by Anarke_Incarnate · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I like them a LOT more than flat screens. I think they are easier to read and more vibrant.

    1. Re:Yes by beelsebob · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ah, slashdot, the place where people will jump in and start talking about dark rooms when the parent poster specifically talked about being sat in front of a tall window.

    2. Re:Yes by trum4n · · Score: 5, Insightful

      i freaking HATE the glossy screen on my netbook. i dont want to look at the lights on the ceiling, i want to see my screen.

    3. Re:Yes by no1home · · Score: 5, Funny

      But I love being able to see the hot girl at the table behind me without looking like I'm staring!

      --
      I hope this comment is well received... I could have moderated instead!

      Persecutors will be violated!
    4. Re:Yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      But I love being able to see the hot girl at the table behind me without looking like I'm staring!

      The one you will never have the guts to ask out? Yeah... Keep on looking at the reflection. That's the closest you will ever get to first base.

    5. Re:Yes by pushing-robot · · Score: 3, Informative

      What, pray tell, makes glossy screens "less accurate"? A matte panel is a LCD with a piece of pitted glass in front. A glossy panel is a LCD with a piece of unpitted glass in front. The pitted glass reduces contrast since it tends to scatter light. Other than that, it's all in the calibration.

      I suspect this myth came about because glossy screens are often used on consumer PCs which are coincidentally tuned for vivid, unrealistic color. Heck, I just ran across a HP whose graphics drivers came preset for "digital vibrance" that made the screen look like a Leroy Neiman painting.

      But claiming that "glossy is less accurate than matte" is about like saying that a frosted glass filter on your camera gives you more accurate pictures.

      --
      How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
    6. Re:Yes by TheLink · · Score: 5, Funny

      > No idea if they did something with them to make them less mirrory,

      Yes, they've been exposed to The Steve's Reality Distortion Field[1]. The recent iphone 4s clearly have not been exposed long enough and need "booster shots", or The Steve was having an "off day"...

      I appear to be immune, as I have a MacBook on my desk and I don't like the glossy screen and their chiclet keyboard (the ctrl key is in the wrong place!). I mostly ssh to it from a Windows 7 machine (horrors! :) ).

      [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tn-YesqzvNk

      --
    7. Re:Yes by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Funny

      The one you will never have the guts to ask out?

      My wife wouldn't like that at all.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    8. Re:Yes by zill · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's what built-in webcams are for.

    9. Re:Yes by Trelane · · Score: 5, Funny

      buy some steal wool

      I think there's a bit of a disconnect between the first and third words here... ;)

      --

      --
      Given enough personal experience, all stereotypes are shallow.
    10. Re:Yes by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 3, Informative

      We all know that once the ring goes on the finger, our libido stops cold.

    11. Re:Yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We all know that once the ring goes on the finger, our libido stops cold.

      Our libido?! I take it you're female, then.

    12. Re:Yes by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 4, Funny

      My wife wouldn't like that at all.

      Then have your wife ask her out.

    13. Re:Yes by eth1 · · Score: 3, Funny

      How to stop the Gulf oil leak?

      Lower a wedding band onto the pipe... it'll stop putting out immediately! :D

    14. Re:Yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why assume he's single?....

      He was posting here...

    15. Re:Yes by Dogtanian · · Score: 3, Funny

      We all know that once the ring goes on the finger, our libido stops cold.

      I like the way that in recent years the old "I can't get laid because I can't get a girlfriend" cliche has been joined by "I can't get laid because I'm married"- without any indication of anything having happened inbetween.

      Slashdotters are the carbon dioxide of the sex world- they sublimate directly from the "no girlfriend -> no sex" state to the "married -> no sex" state with no sign of the usual transitional phase (and its accompanying shagging). :-)

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
  2. Yes. by NetJunkie · · Score: 4, Informative

    Yes, some of us do. I'm using a 27" iMac right now with one. My MacBook Pro also has a glossy screen. I probably use the combination of these two devices 10 or 12 hours per day, or more. Most of my time is spent indoors when working but I use it outdoors as well. Not a perfect solution but just get an anti-glare cover for the screen. Use that outside and take it off inside.

  3. Get an anti-glare overlay by Maximum+Prophet · · Score: 4, Informative

    You might be able to find an anti-glare overlay similar to the screen protectors used for handhelds.

    --
    All ideas^H^H^H^H^Hprocesses in this post are Patent Pending. (as well as the process of patenting all postings)
  4. It probably depends on where you use them by jfoobaz · · Score: 5, Informative

    I can't stand them, but I actually take my laptop with me all the time and can't always pick where I'm sitting in order to reduce glare. If you're constantly at a desk, and have control over the lighting and other environmental factors, they might be fine, but they generally look crappy to me even in controlled setttings.

  5. Absolutely by wandazulu · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I specifically ordered the glossy display on my MacBook Pro; the colors are far more vibrant and the screen brighter. I have not had any issues with glare, though I don't take it outside in the direct sunlight and use it in a room with dim lighting.

    I much prefer it to the matte screens, that always seem dull and fuzzy to me; I had a previous laptop with a matte screen and I always thought it seemed like it was out of focus.

    1. Re:Absolutely by HBoar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It really sounds like most of the people posting here are comparing apples to oranges -- i.e. comparing two different panels, one that happens to be glossy and one that happens to be matte. Unless you are comparing two identical panels, one with a glossy coating, the other matte, you can't draw any conclusions about which is 'better'. Personally, I have a laptop with a glossy screen and a desktop with matte screens. The laptop screen has a dull and washed out look to it, while the desktop monitors have a crisp and vibrant look to them, but this has nothing to do with the fact that one is glossy and the other matte -- the laptop panel is just rubbish.

      I will say that given the choice, I'd always go with a matte panel -- even if it does reduce vibrancy or brightness (of which I am skeptical), I very much value the ability to work in poor lighting conditions without angling the screen. I presume Apple's screens are among the best glossy panels available (you'd hope so for the price...) but I still hate using my girlfriend's macbook pro in a bright environment....

  6. Glossy looks cool in the display line in the store by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Almost all the TVs and Laptop screens and monitors are all use factory defaults that make it look brighter and more colorful than the monitor sitting next to it in the display line in the stores. True color rendition is secondary to them. Ability to work staring at that thing is not in their list of priorities.

    The ten seconds a prospective customer looks at it before the sale is given million times more weight that the several hundred hours the actual customer spends staring at it after the sale.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  7. Glossy screens with polarized glasses are ideal by kriston · · Score: 3, Informative

    Matte actually has an opaque effect when the reflection is bright enough. Oddly enough, the same lighting is not opaque on a glossy screen surface. What's great about glossy is that if you have polarized glasses the reflection can be cancelled out if you're lucky.

    What we really need is a pair of untinted, polarized glasses that allow you to rotate the lenses to cancel out the reflections on that glossy screen, much like a polarized filter on a camera lens can do.

    --

    Kriston

    1. Re:Glossy screens with polarized glasses are ideal by ajlitt · · Score: 4, Interesting

      With my polarized sunglasses on I have to tilt my head at just the right angle to read my car stereo's display or see the screen on my phone. Are there standards for CE LCD polarization or specially polarized glasses intended for this purpose? If not, I'd think there would be some advantage for LCD manufacturers to come up with a common polarization angle so that glasses would work without going through contortions.

    2. Re:Glossy screens with polarized glasses are ideal by TeknoHog · · Score: 3, Informative

      What we really need is a pair of untinted, polarized glasses that allow you to rotate the lenses to cancel out the reflections on that glossy screen, much like a polarized filter on a camera lens can do.

      You do know that LCDs are based on polarization, and using polarized glasses will seriously screw up your view?

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    3. Re:Glossy screens with polarized glasses are ideal by Sockatume · · Score: 3, Informative

      You can't make untinted polarized glasses: blocking most of the polarised light from passing through necessarily makes them dark.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    4. Re:Glossy screens with polarized glasses are ideal by c++0xFF · · Score: 4, Interesting

      My mom went to the gas station once back when the digital pay-at-the-pump systems first came out. But ... the thing simply wouldn't work. After pushing every button she could, she went to the attendant for help.

      Of course, when they went back, everything was working fine.

      It turned out she was wearing polarized sun glasses, which she then took off when she went inside to talk to the clerk.

  8. Classic issue by mattdm · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It looks impressive at the store. That's enough to sway the mass market. Long-term usability is the concern of a few nerds, and the manufacturers don't really care as long as stuff sells.

    This same issue shows up in software user interfaces. Testing -- and reviews -- are based on quick impressions. "Scientific" usability tests try to get subjects with no biasing prior experience, and then measure task performance with a new and unfamiliar UI.

    Unfortunately, interfaces which have a great immediate discoverability are not necessarily the best for long-term use. That's a lot harder to get right -- and if a long-term usability improvement would come at the cost of those at-the-store decision makers, it loses out.

  9. Re:Yes. by beelsebob · · Score: 4, Informative

    I prefer my screen without an anti-glare coating outside. All an anti-glare coating does is turns a specular dot into a diffuse white out, the specular dot can be got rid of by angling the screen, the diffuse white out can't.

  10. Not to mention by Chrisq · · Score: 4, Informative

    Not to mention that its easier to wipe the spunk off.

    1. Re:Not to mention by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Not to mention that its easier to wipe the spunk off.

      I'm not sure what I find more entertaining: This comment, or the fact that it's modded +4 informative

  11. 3M by Philip+K+Dickhead · · Score: 5, Informative

    The sun may be shining, but I think that the ask slashdot folks must live in the dark... :-)

    These are obvious. http://www.visioncarefilters.com/products_3M.html

    There are my favourites; the privacy polarized filter. No glare, and the fellow next to you in 12D quits craning his neck to read your Slashdot postings.

    --
    "Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
    1. Re:3M by epp_b · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Isn't it ironic that we now buy products, specifically to reduce the LCD viewing angle to nearly zero degrees, after all this time spent on developing LCDs with greater viewing angles?

    2. Re:3M by CrackedButter · · Score: 4, Funny

      The 90's called they want their website and products back.

    3. Re:3M by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 5, Funny

      The 2010's called, they said fuck you.

      (Man this decade is a real asshole already, and it's not even 7 months old yet!)

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    4. Re:3M by oDDmON+oUT · · Score: 3, Informative

      These are obvious. http://www.visioncarefilters.com/products_3M.html

      If you decide to go this route, remember Google (or the SE of your choice) is your friend.

      Took 3 seconds to find a 3M Model PF 17.0, listed on the site above for $104.05 at B&H for 56.50.

      --
      Some days it's just not worth
      chewing through my restraints.
  12. Glossy is a bad name by rnelsonee · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's easier to frame it as a "Glossy vs. Matte" debate, but no one goes out to make a glossy screen. Rather, the high amount of reflections is a side effect of the LCD surface treatment that allows for better color, brighter whites, and darker blacks.

    So really it should be "Good-looking-screen-but-with-reflections vs. Not-as-good-looking-without-as-many-reflections"

    1. Re:Glossy is a bad name by TarMil · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So really it should be "Good-looking-screen-but-with-reflections vs. Not-as-good-looking-without-as-many-reflections"

      Which can be efficiently summarized as "Glossy vs Matte".

  13. didn't ask the right people (was: Re:Yes) by beh · · Score: 4, Insightful

    if you ask people whether anyone likes guns at an NRA convention, you'll get one result -- if you ask at a pacifist convention, you're likely to get a strongly diverging result...

    Many of the slashdot crowd will be people that work with a lot of text (source-codes, DB dumps, shells, ...) - for many of us, the matte screen is the better choice.

    On the other hand - for many people primarily using their laptops to access Facebook, consuming multimedia content, ... the more vivid colours of the glossy screen have a higher appeal...

    So - for the slashdot crowd, what split between those groups do you expect to find here?

    Now look at the general population? I'll bet you, the split will be the other way around... And - for people not using computers quite as much, how much easier do you think it will be to sell them a computer with a 'vibrant'/'vivid' display?

    What's right for most of us, may not be the right thing for most people out there...

    What I found a bit surprising, though - for a professional photographer friend of mine, matte is the screen of choice as well - for less glossy, but apparently more accurate colour representation...

    1. Re:didn't ask the right people (was: Re:Yes) by ryantmer · · Score: 3, Funny

      my matte screen at work makes putty look abysmal

      I'm confused by this statement. Are you implying there is a type of screen with which PuTTY doesn't look abysmal? (For the record, I love PuTTY. But let's be honest...)

      --
      Whatever it is, it's notablog.
    2. Re:didn't ask the right people (was: Re:Yes) by mdielmann · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think the matte vs. glossy discussion doesn't have any bearing on the vivid vs. drab comparison. I have a 97% gamut matte screen at home. It's incredible for movies - or anything else. My work laptop is somewhere between 70 and 80% gamut, and also matte. It's just not as vivid. I've also seen a number of glossy screens, but they haven't been as vivid as my home monitor.
      I think the conflation is caused because newer screens can have higher color gamut, and can be glossy. But the two have little or no relation from everything I've seen. And given the choice, I'll always go with matte.

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
    3. Re:didn't ask the right people (was: Re:Yes) by pz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This is true. I do not have a good glossy screen.

      Because they don't make such a thing.

      Agreed. The laptop manufacturing world is slowly understanding something that has been well understood in the fine art world for decades.

      1. glossy surfaces are horrible because of reflections, but allow the finest details to be visible of the item behind

      2. matte surfaces diffuse the reflections and so eliminate that annoyance, but at the price of ultimate available resolution

      3. optical anti-reflective coatings on glossy surfaces fix both problems, but are heinously expensive

      If you have the funds, you take option 3; otherwise you try and find a good option 2, and if resolution is hyper important and you can't afford the good glass, then you take option 1 and control the lighting.

      With laptops, controlling the lighting is not possible for the general case (or is undesirable, because, frankly, who wants to always sit facing the brightest light source in the room?) so option 1 is a poor choice, and thus mostly option 2 has been used up until recently. I'm wating for option 3 -- glossy screens with multi-coated surfaces. I'd gladly pay extra (I do so on my prescription glasses, even sunglasses). If the laptop maufacturers follow the footsteps of so many fields before them (including the fine art world alluded to above), we should see coated screens in a few years, initially with a premium pricetag.

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
  14. Don't sit with your back to the window by djsmiley · · Score: 3, Informative

    Unless you've got a house where three walls are all glass ( in which case stfu and stop moaning already ) just simply turn by 45 degrees, if this doesn't work then turn again. Continue this until you find a place which works.

    It's what I did in my office, and now I never get screen glare, as the sun rises and sets to the right of me. (*Can't be bothered to figure out what direction I am facing).

    --
    - http://www.milkme.co.uk
    1. Re:Don't sit with your back to the window by Hatta · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's what I did in my office, and now I never get screen glare, as the sun rises and sets to the right of me.

      You rotate your desk 180 degrees over the course of the day?

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  15. BUY A REPLACEMENT KEYBOARD by Auroch · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Import one. Then buy a replacement keyboard, they're usually 0-screw 1-plug replacements.

    --
    Quartz Extreme and Core Image. Are there any other real reasons to spend all that money on generic hardware?
  16. Glossy vs. Matte: False Dichotomy by KonoWatakushi · · Score: 3, Informative

    Neither are optimal, and people should not be so polarized on the issue; there is a better option. It is called an anti reflective film, and you will find one on every piece of quality camera optics or eyeglasses. The goal of this film is to make lenses invisible, in order to transmit as much of the light as possible. (Which is more or less the antithesis of glossy. Matte is also reflective, it merely diffuses the light, though still degrades the image.)

    Anyway, the default state of my glossy MacBook was nearly intolerable. Fortunately, I came across an aftermarket AR film, the Nushield DayVue. It is less than ideal and painful to install properly, but it is a clear improvement. (For best results, there must be an AR film stack on each surface, but the interior surfaces are not accessible in this case.)

  17. Agree by MBGMorden · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I agree with the submitter. Not sure what the hell is going on in the monitor market. We had to deal with glares for years on CRTs, and then we finally move to LCD's which eliminates the problem entirely. I figured screen glare was dead for all eternity - and then someone decides "HEY GUYS - we figured out how to make the LCD screens glare too!".

    To me it seems as beneficial as introducing a charging cord that you can connect to your wireless mouse at all times so that the battery never dies. It's truly one of those /facepalm things I can't believe someone actually did.

    It wouldn't be so bad except that all the budget laptops are doing it. Seems if you want a matte version you're going to have to pay extra. Given how little I use my laptop, I ended up going with the gloss version there (and just suffer with having to turn out ever friggen light in the hotel room while use the computer). On my desktop though I did specifically track down a matte display - I couldn't take the gloss on a daily basis.

    --
    "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
  18. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  19. GPS on Motorcycle by clyde_cadiddlehopper · · Score: 3, Informative

    I had the same issue using a GPS on my bike ... the glossy screen was a pain in outdoor light. Solution: matte-finish film applied to the glass. Cost was under $10, probably a lot more for a 15" (38 cm) laptop display.

    --
    Obi-Wan: "I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were sudden
  20. Deal killer by massysett · · Score: 4, Informative

    For me a glossy screen is an absolute deal-killer. I once had a MacBook (the white, plastic one.) There were things about it that took some getting used to--I am accustomed to PC hardware running Linux. I could get used to the one-button mouse, the different keyboard shortcuts, and differences in the software like no X11 (at least, not ordinarily) and the Finder. I rather liked the idea of a PC running Unix without having to futz with installing an OS not supported by the OEM.

    But what drove me to sell the thing on eBay was the glossy screen. Gloss makes it absolutely impossible to do any work with any bright light source over my shoulder. I do a lot of work in a terminal, and a black background is just impossible to read. So I switched them to a light background. That actually wasn't easy because the Terminal in OS X at the time (10.4, I think) made it really hard to switch colors--I had to download some sort of plugin to do something that X11 terminals have been capable of for years. Even with a light background, though, it was hard to do work if there was a lamp behind me and impossible to do work if there was a window behind me.

    I complained of this, and some people said "well, just close the blinds" or "sit somewhere else." I now laugh when Steve Jobs said that if you phone is dropping calls when you hold it a certain way, don't hold it that way. Seems responses like that are common amongst the Apple set.

    This was so bad that I sold the thing and now I won't buy a laptop with a glossy screen. That pretty much limits me to enterprise models as nearly all the consumer models have the glossy screen. I think Apple used to have a very expensive MacBook Pro that gave you a choice between glossy and matte but I don't think they have that choice anymore. No more Apple hardware for me.

    1. Re:Deal killer by One+Louder · · Score: 3, Informative

      I just bought a MacBook Pro last week - not only do they offer a matte display, but it also has a higher pixel resolution (1680x1050) than the glossy one on the same model.

  21. Won't work -- LCD's output is polarized already! by Rhys · · Score: 5, Informative

    You don't own polarized sunglasses, do you? Nor does anyone who rated you up. LCDs are already polarized light -- that's how they are able to turn pixels on and off. Two polarizations 90 deg out of phase = no light transmission. Put on polarized (sun)glasses and suddenly you have a entirely black LCD from certain angles. Not every angle mind you -- I can see my landscape display just fine, but the portrait one next to it goes jet black with them on.

    Now, I'll admit it lets you see dust and dirt on the display very clearly when you can't see the display itself. That's not really a great selling point...

    Now on an OLED or plasma display you might have something -- problem is you have to match the polarization orientations. So if you tilt your head, suddenly you can't see your screen.

    --
    Slashdot Patriotism: We Support our Dupes!
  22. Next generation, please by itomato · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Diminishing refraction requires a smooth surface (i learned something reading that amateur telescope making book)

    Glossy surfaces reflect higher intensity light sources more readily.

    Polarize or coat the damned things already, so the light inside can come out, but these exterior sources are diffused across the surface.

    Matte has drawbacks, but deepness of black and 'poppy' RGB aren't why I bought my computer. Neither is HD video playback, dammit. If I wanted an entertainment device with a keyboard, I would invent one.

    I have a 'laptop computer' which I use to 'compute' on my 'lap', and I want about 2 million gloss-free, color-accurate pixels to do it with.

  23. I work for an LCD manufacturer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I work for an LCD manufacturer so let me give you some pointers:

    First of all neither of them is best overall. It all depends on what you use it for. It is like having to decide on whether a fork, or a spoon is "best". Forks are great until you are served soup...
    The original poster asked for a screen that works in sunny conditions. In that case matte screens are best.
    Glossy is best in the dark.

    Let me try to explain why.
    Assume that you have a screen with 400 cd/m2 brightness and a 400:1 contrast ratio. That means that white shines with 400 cd/m2 and that the backlight bleeds through with 1 cd/m2 when showing black.
    What manufacturers will not tell you is that you only get a 400:1 contrast ratio in a completely dark room. This is not the intended use case of the display. It is like buying a car that is advertised to make 1000 miles to the gallon... but only in a downhill.

    If the room is even the slightest tiny bit dim your *viewing* contrast ratio will be degraded. The existing ambient light will be reflected from the display surface adding, lets say a mere 1 cd/m2 extra to both the white and black graphics. So now your viewing contrast ratio will be degraded to (white + reflected)/(black + reflected) = (400+1)/(1+1) = 200:1 even in a dimly lit room. When the brightness of the ambient reflected light is in the order of the display brightness itself, then your expensive 400:1 display is degraded to a (400+400)/(1+400) = 2:1 contrast ratio.

    Yeah, you may say, that is why I spent a boatload of money to get the TV with the advertised 1,000,000:1 contrast ratio so I am safe... But all the manufacturer needs to do, is to lower the blackness of the display from 1 cd/m2 to 0.0004 cd/m2 so he gets 400/0.0004 = 1000000:1 CR.
    But still... when the reflected ambient light reaches 400 cd/m2, your expensive 1000000:1 TV degrades to a measly (400+400)(0.0004+400) = 2:1 CR.

    There are only 3 ways to solve the problem
    1) Use only in a dark room
    2) Use a higher brightness backlight
    3) Get rid of the reflected light
    (or 4, get a transflective display like the pixel-qi, but at the cost of poor color graphics reproduction)

    Solution 1 does not apply to the original poster.
    Solution 2 works fine for desktop screens and TVs where you have electrical power available. A high luminosity screen on a laptop will drain your batteries like crazy and will need a fan to cool the display.

    Now to solution 3. There are actually 2 kinds of reflection: Specular and diffuse.
    To reduce the diffuse reflection you use an AR (Anti Reflection) treatment. That is commonly applied to eyeglasses and binoculars.
    To reduce the specular reflection you use an AG (Anti Glare) treatment

    A really good quality (and expensive) AR/AG will reflect only 0.5% of the ambient light. Plain glass reflects about 30% I think. So AR/AG is about 60 times better than glass.

    So comparing a hypothetical display with a plain glass surface, with a good AR/AG display we get the following calculations:
    1) Reference glass display with 400:1 CR that under some hypothetical lighting conditions reflects 400 cd/m2:
    CR = (400+400)/(1+400) = 2:1

    2) AR/AG display that is 60 times better at avoiding reflections:
    CR = (400+400/60)/(1+400/60) = 406.6/7.6 = 53:1

    The difference can be seen here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Glossy-Matte-394-S1.png

    ***The conclusion is simple: To get best results in high ambient light conditions you must buy a matte display.***

    The reason why laptop manufacturers use glossy screens is the following.
    1) Good Anti Glare screens are more expensive to produce.
    2) Anti Glare is a thin film applied to the screen. If you pick an anti glare film up and try to look through it, you will notice that it is hazy. This means that applying an AG/AR will lose you some Distinctness Of Image (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distinctness_of_image)
    This is the reason that manufacturers will claim, in order to justify the choice of glossy screen. Sure it *does

    1. Re:I work for an LCD manufacturer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      A couple more things that I forgot to mention:

      Regarding loss of distinctness of image.
      Back in the day, ordinary scotch tape was transparent and glossy, so using tape to glue something to a paper would immediately show in the light. Now we have scotch tape that is matte. Notice how it appears hazy when you try to look through it, but once you apply it to a paper it becomes transparent, with some slight loss of distinctness of image. So although hazy, nobody would argue that it makes text unreadable... The hazy effect is reduced when distance is small, as explained in the wiki article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distinctness_of_image "The blur induced by a scattering layer increases with the distance between the information and the scattering layer."

      By the way, there are anti glare films that you can buy and glue onto a glossy screen. This will make your laptop anti glare, but the loss of distinctness is a lot worse compared to a screen that is manufactured from the beginning to be anti glare.

      In closing,
      As a professional in the field of LCD screens, I can offer my strongest advice to any laptop manufacturers reading this post:

      Please offer more consumer models with matte displays. There is a big customer demand for cheaper laptops with non-glossy screens.