Macbook Retina display vs. 95% gamut matte display

[flobber238]

Has any owner of a 95% matte display had a chance to look at the macbook retina laptop? I'd very much like to know how they compare, particularly in terms of colour richness, accuracy, and other colour-theory-related words.

I do video editing and photo editing, as well as gaming and all that, and am choosing between these two options. I'm trying very hard not to think about the cost difference and just about the products themselves. Obviously I would have more performance with a Vortex II with a lower cost though.

So like I said, has anybody had a chance to compare? Either by poking your head around the door of an Apple store, or if you are very silly and own one of both!

What I want you to say, by the way, is that the 95% matte display is much better and I should get that! But that is because I want a 7970m. Shhhhhh!

Much appreciated; thousands of pounds potentially lie in this comparison!

 

[Meladath]

The macbook pro retina display, while it has a very high res, is actually very poor statisticly, do research you will find that it only covers 72% NTSC colour space. While I personally cannot compare the two side by side, I highly recommend not buying a MBP, until the technology to have screens at that resolution at that size is well and truely sorted. As it stands now apple has just slapped a high res screen onto a laptop, charged an extra £600 and hoped idiots *cough* I mean people who buy apple products won't actually look into it.

 

[dangro474]

2880x1800 in a 15.6" display.

Sounds perfectly logical.

Still I suppose it would come in handy should i decide to view a 1" squared section of the ascreen through a magnifying glass at a 3k x 2k res image.



Guys I heard you can copy and paste on iPhones now?

 

[PlasticTastic]

"Guys I heard you can copy and paste on iPhones now?"
^copied and pasted, and posting, from my iPhone
Lol in all seriousness, apple products bigger than your hand (everything but the iPod/iPhone) are just terrible overpriced **** that there is no need to spend your money on. As the 2 posters above me said, the high-res screen is just pointless. The full-hd that pcs offer is by far enough. Also it is a terrible screen. I had a look at one in an apple store, and the colours seemed majorly un-saturated. I've also seen my friend's PCS Optimus II. Even though he's spilled coffee on it multiple times, it still looks better.

 

[flobber238]

Hey Dangro, considering it looks like you have a 95% and a 72% NSTC display, how do they compare? After all the Retina has about 72% NSTC as well. Where and when does the extra colour space make a difference?