Why glossy? Cuz it's glass dimwhit. You can't do the screen's clarity justice without using glass, buddy, that's the point.
Unfortunate...maybe, but unless you happen to be sitting in just the right spot outside to reflect the sun into your eyes, then it won't really be an issue. It's worth it for the clear screen.
@Bakerdk Newsflash, dimwit! Glass can also be etched to avoid being glossy! And I also don't like glossy displays cause even with dimmed light you see reflections, especially with dark movies.
@Xstream Maybe I'm ign'ant, but wouldn't a matte display on a tablet be one of the worst ideas they could implement? I'm just thinking of the matte displays on some LCD monitors, and how incredibly easily and quickly they would get scratched, damaged, and broken to the point of unusability. I've dropped phones with scratch-resistant capacitive touch screens plenty of times with very minimal scratching. Those same drops would take a matte LCD into the "needs replacement ASAP" realm.
Not to mention capacitive displays need a tough glass exterior to allow a layer of air in there somewhere, unless I'm mistaken on that part?
I'm sorry I misspelled your name, Dimwit. There, is that better?
Your questions was dimwit-ish. It's glossy for a reason. Manufacturers don't do something because it's a waste of time, there's purpose behind design. Why do you think the majority of smartphones today have glossy glass screens? Because they're better than the alternatives. There's a reason what was done 5 years ago isn't done today. Welcome to the now.
Glossy screens have higher clarity and more scratch resistance than etched glass or mat screens. My point is valid. I've had both, and a glossy screen will always show off a nice display better. It's also a premium look. There's no point of showing off this clear technology if you're going to obscure it with a crappy plastic lcd screen.
If you want a matte finish and you don't like clearer screens, then get a thin plastic film to apply, they're everywhere.
@Bakerdk the reason is simpler than that, glossy displays look better on press shots and in shops and they are also cheaper to produce, mirogard (which is glossy in a matter of speaking but also none reflective and therefore used in museums in front of valuable paintings) would probably cost about 10 or 20 times more then just normal glass, but considering that the glass is one of the cheapest components in such a touchscreen that wouldn't affect the price by so much and it would absolutely be worth it.
Your parents must be really disappointed with you. I mean, being that stupid and all...
Either way, what you failed to understand is that:
> Because they're better than the alternatives.
is wrong for one simple reason: they're not better but cheaper to make. Matte screens are like glossy screens except that they have an extra step in their development that makes them matte and are therefore more pricy to create.
Everything else you said is so stupid and pointless (and also wrong) I'm not even going to mention it...
There must be some reason that manf's wouldn't be opting for a superior glass all else equal. Consumers may be generally uneducated and buy what they see on TV the most, but they know glare when they see it.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
why for gods sake is this glossy? the whole point of this display is to be sunlight readable so why would you even think of making it glossy?
@Xstream because they decided to have a touch interface?
@cromulentgeek
so they need it to be glossy so you can better see the fingerprints on it or what is your point?
@Xstream Glass=Gloss, but has more protection and better touch interface. Just get a matte overlay (works reasonably well on my phone).
@Xstream
Why glossy? Cuz it's glass dimwhit. You can't do the screen's clarity justice without using glass, buddy, that's the point.
Unfortunate...maybe, but unless you happen to be sitting in just the right spot outside to reflect the sun into your eyes, then it won't really be an issue. It's worth it for the clear screen.
.
@Xstream I must be in a serious minority for actually liking the glossy screen over the matte.
@dajimmers
no glass!=gloss, if you use the right glass like mirogard
http://www.glsgmbh.de/produkte/470mag2f.jpg
@Bakerdk Newsflash, dimwit!
Glass can also be etched to avoid being glossy!
And I also don't like glossy displays cause even with dimmed light you see reflections, especially with dark movies.
@Xstream
Maybe I'm ign'ant, but wouldn't a matte display on a tablet be one of the worst ideas they could implement? I'm just thinking of the matte displays on some LCD monitors, and how incredibly easily and quickly they would get scratched, damaged, and broken to the point of unusability. I've dropped phones with scratch-resistant capacitive touch screens plenty of times with very minimal scratching. Those same drops would take a matte LCD into the "needs replacement ASAP" realm.
Not to mention capacitive displays need a tough glass exterior to allow a layer of air in there somewhere, unless I'm mistaken on that part?
@Levi
matte displays have been used on pdas for ages, there never was any problem with them, an btw i have never scratched any my screens hat home.
again i don't say they can't use glass but there is glass made especially for being almost none reflective (see comparison link above)
my dell xt2 uses n-trigs duo sense technology which is capacitive and it isn't glossy at all
@Xstream
"any my of screens at home"
@Bakerdk
I think the dimwit is you (considering you even misspelled the word). Ever had a tc1100 in your hands ? the tablet pc with a matte glass screen ?
I did, and I used it outdoors...great stuff and its possible..in fact it was possible like 5 years ago...
@Stormstrike
I'm sorry I misspelled your name, Dimwit. There, is that better?
Your questions was dimwit-ish. It's glossy for a reason. Manufacturers don't do something because it's a waste of time, there's purpose behind design. Why do you think the majority of smartphones today have glossy glass screens? Because they're better than the alternatives. There's a reason what was done 5 years ago isn't done today. Welcome to the now.
Glossy screens have higher clarity and more scratch resistance than etched glass or mat screens. My point is valid. I've had both, and a glossy screen will always show off a nice display better. It's also a premium look. There's no point of showing off this clear technology if you're going to obscure it with a crappy plastic lcd screen.
If you want a matte finish and you don't like clearer screens, then get a thin plastic film to apply, they're everywhere.
.
@Bakerdk
the reason is simpler than that, glossy displays look better on press shots and in shops and they are also cheaper to produce, mirogard (which is glossy in a matter of speaking but also none reflective and therefore used in museums in front of valuable paintings) would probably cost about 10 or 20 times more then just normal glass, but considering that the glass is one of the cheapest components in such a touchscreen that wouldn't affect the price by so much and it would absolutely be worth it.
@Bakerdk
Your parents must be really disappointed with you. I mean, being that stupid and all...
Either way, what you failed to understand is that:
> Because they're better than the alternatives.
is wrong for one simple reason: they're not better but cheaper to make. Matte screens are like glossy screens except that they have an extra step in their development that makes them matte and are therefore more pricy to create.
Everything else you said is so stupid and pointless (and also wrong) I'm not even going to mention it...
^_^
@Xstream It sucks ass, but a coating on top of the glass probably wouldn't be as durable.
Thats an problem inherent to tablets unless they are designed with a leather case to protect the screen.
@Ducman69
mirogard is no coating, it is a special kind of glass. and no i have no business with them but i've seen it and it's staggering
@Xstream Expensive?
There must be some reason that manf's wouldn't be opting for a superior glass all else equal. Consumers may be generally uneducated and buy what they see on TV the most, but they know glare when they see it.