Nano-texture display

[Neil J. Squillante]

Is the nano display on the MacBook Pro better or the same as the one on your Studio Display? Thanks for the photo.

I stopped by my local Apple Store to answer my own question. I looked at the same web article and the same Word document on both the 14-inch MacBook Pro and Studio Display as my main concern is text. I set brightness to the middle range. The nano display on the MacBook Pro looked sharper than the nano display on the Studio Display. Perhaps it's because of the pixel density (254 ppi versus 216 ppi). Both do an impressive job of eliminating the mirror effect that overhead lights or sunlight can cause. I'm in the market for both so I'm leaning towards the nano display for the MacBook Pro and the standard option for the Studio Display since I don't have a glare problem at my desk.

 

[AirpodsNow]

If you've been happy with MacBooks before, I'm sure you'll be happy with the non nano texture screen. Its the same screen as before.

But, if you've had matte screens before (e.g. PC monitors, pre-retina Macs, etc.), and miss the non-reflective surface you know what you're missing. You do give up some "pop" but depending on how you use your machine maybe its worth it.

Apple has an extended return period at the moment - maybe see if you can find one with matte in store to check out (maybe even a demo iPad Pro for comparison) and see if you think its doing a return?

Yeah, I remember getting the iPad Pro m4 and was shown the nano screen, it was better but not so much money better (got the base model and the nano was only available on a higher storage model).

My major concern is the practicality and maintenance, I remember the 6k xdr monitor was said that it’s difficult to clean. I wouldn’t want it to be difficult to clean.

Indeed, I’m coming off a 16” M1 Pro and the screen was fine. That’s good enough. I got the 64gb max model and a nano screen would have just pushed it beyond 4k. So I think I will be contend with it )(hopefully!)

 

[blicked]

Work in graphic design for mostly print. Stopped by my local Apple store to check out the nano screen - AMAZING. Total game-changer. I couldn't distinguish any lack of image clarity, and I'd call any reduction in contrast or color accuracy to be negligible. Ordered a 16" with the nano.

 

[richinaus]

I stopped by my local Apple Store to answer my own question. I looked at the same web article and the same Word document on both the 14-inch MacBook Pro and Studio Display as my main concern is text. I set brightness to the middle range. The nano display on the MacBook Pro looked sharper than the nano display on the Studio Display. Perhaps it's because of the pixel density (254 ppi versus 216 ppi). Both do an impressive job of eliminating the mirror effect that overhead lights or sunlight can cause. I'm in the market for both so I'm leaning towards the nano display for the MacBook Pro and the standard option for the Studio Display since I don't have a glare problem at my desk.

Thanks for doing this. I haven't managed to see it in real life yet.
I was thinking the same as I didnt like the nano on the studio display [due to reducing sharpness] and thought it was not too essential as I can position the screen where there is no glare. So I sent the nano studio display back and got the standard.
A laptop is a different game though and good to hear it looks sharper which would be my main concern

 

[jb333]

Oh great, I was just going by comments here not actual experience. Good to know this if it's the case.

why are they preferred for content creators?

 

[nostradumbass]

why are they preferred for content creators?

Use ChatGPT it will answer all your bot like questions 😛

 

[Macintosh101]

Apple Store is not a good place to get a potential purchase viewing, in my opinion. Viewing and using at home (or work) will give one a much better view of user results.

This was absolutely my experience with the nano texture on the iPad. I really disliked the nano texture when i saw it in the Apple Store and got the glossy version. It was only when I saw nano texture iPads out in the wild that I changed my mind and bought it (and returned the glossy one). Since then I’ve been totally converted. I want this display on all my devices now.

 

[Madhatter32]

Like others here, I went to the store and compared the a MPB 14" nano-texture display to a glossy display. I have worked on laptops with a both matte and glossy in the past. My assessment is that the visual quality of the matte screen is excellent. There's an ever so slight shading with the matte vs glossy but the contrast and color vibrancy was excellent for a matte screen. For me, the was little to no sacrifice to perceptable resolution -- at least with typical text. If you stare at a screen for long periods of time (especially in an office environment), I think the matte screen will be great for reducing eye strain if that is an isssue for you. Matte screens generally are easier on the eyes. If you like to watch movies or work with video, the glossy screen is ever so slightly crisper/brighter.

I asked the Apple representative about the cleaning cloth. He advised me that I could use the silk-like/smooth type of microfiber cloth commonly used in optical care -- not the beefy microfiber cloths that can dig into the screen with some pressure. Being a wearer of glasses, I do understand the difference -- I think.

I liked both screens and am still on the fence if the glare reduction is worth $150 -- mostly because I am a cheapskate.

 

[Macintosh101]

Hi all, picked up my Nano texture MBP today and have been using it all afternoon. Bear in mind I still have a M1 MacBook Pro with a glossy display to compare it to. I'm also a heavy user of the Nano texture display on the iPad Pro and love it.

Impressions: the nano texture on the MBP is stunning. There is no discernible difference between using the nano display and my other MBP with a glossy display - in terms of clarity, color, etc. Its feels exactly the same, only minus the reflections and glare. It's an engineering marvel.

Very interestingly there is a clear difference in light diffusion between the MBP Nano and the iPad Pro Nano screen . When I shine flashlight on the iPad Pro's Nano Texture scren, it is hardly visible, but it is much more visible on the MacBook Pro Display (and also a warmer tone), so clearly there are some differences in how the Nano Texture has been engineered here. I'll post photos when I get the chance.

 

[Adult80HD]

Hi all, picked up my Nano texture MBP today and have been using it all afternoon. Bear in mind I still have a M1 MacBook Pro with a glossy display to compare it to. I'm also a heavy user of the Nano texture display on the iPad Pro and love it.

Impressions: the nano texture on the MBP is stunning. There is no discernible difference between using the nano display and my other MBP with a glossy display - in terms of clarity, color, etc. Its feels exactly the same, only minus the reflections and glare. It's an engineering marvel.

Very interestingly there is a clear difference in light diffusion between the MBP Nano and the iPad Pro Nano screen . When I shine flashlight on the iPad Pro's Nano Texture scren, it is hardly visible, but it is much more visible on the MacBook Pro Display (and also a warmer tone), so clearly there are some differences in how the Nano Texture has been engineered here. I'll post photos when I get the chance.

I don't have the nano iPad but I do have an M3 Max 16" that I can put right beside my 16" M4 Max (work expenses, so not me just having two very new laptops!). I'm with you, it's amazing and just so much more of a delight to use.

 

[Macintosh101]

Just an update on this part:

"Very interestingly there is a clear difference in light diffusion between the MBP Nano and the iPad Pro Nano screen . When I shine flashlight on the iPad Pro's Nano Texture scren, it is hardly visible, but it is much more visible on the MacBook Pro Display (and also a warmer tone), so clearly there are some differences in how the Nano Texture has been engineered here. I'll post photos when I get the chance."

The Nano texture display on the MBP is less effective than on the iPad Pro. It shows reflections more and is less good at diffusing the light (which maybe why it appears to have so little tradeoffs.

For example if I have a lamp on in the room - I can see this lamp reflected on the MBP screen (in a very warm, orangey tone), although less so than than glossy display would. In contrast, this same lamp is hardly visible (if at all) on the iPad Pro screen with Nano Texture.

 

[DHagan4755]

this same lamp is hardly visible (if at all) on the iPad Pro screen with Nano Texture.

Fascinating. I wonder if has something to do with the OLED panel vs. the mini LED display?

 

[Macintosh101]

Fascinating. I wonder if has something to do with the OLED panel vs. the mini LED display?

Good shout... that could be it, as the iPad Pro has essentially a dual OLED display, one stacked on top of the other.

 

[PO2345]

Interested to hear more reviews on the nano texture. Marques B. said on his podcast it looks great out the box, but he's concerned on the maintenance of it, because of his experience with this on XDR's, they dont wear well, if anything touches it, dust touches it, if you use any cleaning cloth besides apple's, its super easy to get marks on it & permanently become scuffed, so he doesn't want to recommend to consumers unless he can see how it is 6 months now or how it holds up etc.

 

[Macintosh101]

Interested to hear more reviews on the nano texture. Marques B. said on his podcast it looks great out the box, but he's concerned on the maintenance of it, because of his experience with this on XDR's, they dont wear well, if anything touches it, dust touches it, if you use any cleaning cloth besides apple's, its super easy to get marks on it & permanently become scuffed, so he doesn't want to recommend to consumers unless he can see how it is 6 months now or how it holds up etc.

This hasn't be my experience with the iPad Nano Texture screen, so maybe they've improved the tech?

 

[alchemistics]

Nano texture on the MBPs is not a coating but edged into the glass, therefore the consensus is that durability is not worsened.

Please, can someone post side by side comparison of text glossy vs nano texture with a macro / closeup.

 

[nostradumbass]

Hi all, picked up my Nano texture MBP today and have been using it all afternoon. Bear in mind I still have a M1 MacBook Pro with a glossy display to compare it to. I'm also a heavy user of the Nano texture display on the iPad Pro and love it.

Impressions: the nano texture on the MBP is stunning. There is no discernible difference between using the nano display and my other MBP with a glossy display - in terms of clarity, color, etc. Its feels exactly the same, only minus the reflections and glare. It's an engineering marvel.

I'm feeling very jelly.

 

[nostradumbass]

Please, can someone post side by side comparison of text glossy vs nano texture with a macro / closeup.

Reading distance is all you need. That's how Apple measure 'retina' resolution.

 

[alchemistics]

Reading distance is all you need. That's how Apple measure 'retina' resolution.

No, I mean a closeup image where we see the exact (negative) effect on constras / sharpness on small text on a pixel basis

 

[nostradumbass]

No, I mean a closeup image where we see the exact (negative) effect on constras / sharpness on small text on a pixel basis

But why? In UI design something is only a 'negative' when a user notices it at reading distance or beyond, not close up where most people lose their ability to focus anyway.

 

[alchemistics]

But why? In UI design something is only a 'negative' when a user notices it at reading distance or beyond, not close up where most people lose their ability to focus anyway.

It certainly does have an effect even at reading distance, even though less with this newest texture. It also really depends on the individuals eyesight capacity.

Matte screens also always add a ever so slight texture to uni colored areas such as white or light gray.

Please leave my right to request the detailed closeups for such an analysis, for whatever reason you arguing not to.

There will be an anti-aliasing effect specially visible on very small text, the smaller this effect the sharper it appears.

 

[AdmiralKirk]

I went with standard display on mine in the end. I don't work outside and have never experienced an issue with indoor reflections.

Also I prioritise crisp text and vibrant colours over anything else. There are enough threads in this forum alone complaining that nano introduces a degree of "fuzziness", particularly on white backgrounds, and it seems even apple accept that there is a trade off with nano in that you are trading no reflections for screen quality to some degree.

If I was working in an office with a lot of light or outside, then nano is a no brainer. Otherwise I don't see the benefit in paying an additional £150? 🤷‍♂️

 

[Nismo73]

When I took a peak at them while picking up my base M4 14, I saw some color difference on the redwood trees. (Or I guess they're sequoias?)
I'm good with the regular screen since I just use mine around the house.

 

[nostradumbass]

It certainly does have an effect even at reading distance, even though less with this newest texture. It also really depends on the individuals eyesight capacity.

Matte screens also always add a ever so slight texture to uni colored areas such as white or light gray.

Please leave my right to request the detailed closeups for such an analysis, for whatever reason you arguing not to.

There will be an anti-aliasing effect specially visible on very small text, the smaller this effect the sharper it appears.

I use the Studio Display with nano with macOS, Windows and Linux. Each OS handles text anti-aliasing their own way. None of them show any visible issues on a 27 inch display so on a 14 or 16 inch display I don't understand what errata you expect to see.

 

[ctjack]

Below m4 is nano and pro is glossy.
I can not really tell the difference except a little tint on it like gentle bmw stoplight tinting. But probably not visible on a pic. Pardon for macro quality - my 15 pro is worse than 15pm of spouse.

At angle pictures - camera was not getting close to screen, but contrast drop and purple fringe can be seen at an angle.