Local dimming displays aside, it lets outside light into the screen in certain situations. Granted it is a non issue for most, for some people it is not ideal as they require perfectly calibrated displays and I am sure Apple would not want anyone to cover the logo with duct tape to fix the issue.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Will MacBooks ever get the glowing logo back?
- Thread starter Sirious
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Wow. A simple question has generated a lot of invective.
It is possible that Apple does so again. It is solely an aesthetic choice, and in Apple’s “toolbox”, so it may make a return some day.
I would not hold my breath for it, though…
It is possible that Apple does so again. It is solely an aesthetic choice, and in Apple’s “toolbox”, so it may make a return some day.
I would not hold my breath for it, though…
Na na na na na na na na na na na na nah — APPLE!
Actually, they lost power to leakage out the logo. And, sunshine from the logo side would sometimes ruin the user experience from the display side. I would say if Apple wants to do it they should add a small glowing logo to the case not use the display’s backlighting to do it. And allow users who need the power to turn it off. What’s funny is so many newer commercials by Apple show the old style MacBooks with glowing logos even though they haven’t been sold for some time. I suppose that also is to say their products stand the test of time as long as one is willing to pay for RAM upgrades that should be included in these times.
Errrrr wrong.
Please try again.
The already lit backlight provided the glow.
Do not pass to do not collect $200 Apple bucks.
should have our intel MacBook logo illuminate sporadically or pulse during a time machine backup?
that would have been very cool!
Compare the two side by side. I just did with my old MBP and newer MBA. The glowing logo is outdated. I'm surprised it lasted as long as it did.
I liked it but I don't mind the black one on my current MacBook. The change I was saddest about when going from 2014 MacBook Air to 2023 M3 Pro MacBook Pro was that black background that the keys are on instead of being able to see the metal behind them.
I noticed many times when using my two MacBooks with the light in bright areas that light would bleed through the logo thing and be visible on the screen though and that is not great, probably not worth how nice it looked.
I noticed many times when using my two MacBooks with the light in bright areas that light would bleed through the logo thing and be visible on the screen though and that is not great, probably not worth how nice it looked.
I liked having the light up logo because if the dc inverter board that powers the backlight died I could shine a flashlight thru the logo and see a good 6inch diameter circle of the screen. It was helpful for diagnosing if it was the dc inverter board (light dead for good), a dud wire (screen on then suddenly gone after movement, helps figure out if it’s a bad logic board), or if a something else happened. Plus I could run AHT without needing to hook up to a monitor since I always had trouble getting MacBooks to enter clamshell mode on startup.
As for added weakness…I suppose but it wouldn’t add weakness from a drop unless something like a nail gets a direct hit but even then if it could punch out the logo it’d probably break thru the aluminum anyway. Or dent it enough to crack the lcd. That ones just perspective tho. I’d argue that the ultra thin fused glass screens we got now with very thin aluminum backings are more susceptible to damage than the older models were since the backing was also thicker.
You’re also right that it was just light bleed from the screens backlight. No extra power used. But it worked both ways. Don’t work outdoors facing the sun because light will shine thru the logo and it can make the screen center a bit hard to see. Hardly a serious issue tho since I don’t typically try to blind myself when using my Mac. I sure do miss my 2012 MBP and 2010 MB.
As for added weakness…I suppose but it wouldn’t add weakness from a drop unless something like a nail gets a direct hit but even then if it could punch out the logo it’d probably break thru the aluminum anyway. Or dent it enough to crack the lcd. That ones just perspective tho. I’d argue that the ultra thin fused glass screens we got now with very thin aluminum backings are more susceptible to damage than the older models were since the backing was also thicker.
You’re also right that it was just light bleed from the screens backlight. No extra power used. But it worked both ways. Don’t work outdoors facing the sun because light will shine thru the logo and it can make the screen center a bit hard to see. Hardly a serious issue tho since I don’t typically try to blind myself when using my Mac. I sure do miss my 2012 MBP and 2010 MB.
Last edited by a moderator:
it's not a waste of power. they just let the backlight bleed out. did you ever own one?
for a lot of people, part of the value proposition of a Mac is the iconic design.
You proved that yoiur own argument was fallacious right in your own post. Unlike MagSafe, the lit logo was never anything but a cute marketing gimmick that many folks liked the look of. I personally liked it and IMO it was effective, but cute marketing gimmicks tend to age out so competent marketers like Apple tend to discontinue them.
Mac laptops prior to MagSafe had short battery times, so they needed to be plugged in in the middle of work sessions, meaning charging cords were everywhere and frequently tripped over. Those early Macs also had tight power connections, so lots of laptops got pulled on to the floor. And said tight connection also meant that the cables constantly failed near the connection.
Enter MagSafe, which was an absolutely superb engineering solution that everyone loved. But then in 2011 Apple brought Thunderbolt to the world with the USB-C form factor connection and battery operation was rapidly improving, obviating the engineering reasons for use of MagSafe. USB-C is a relatively loose connection in terms of a person or pet pulling a laptop off its table.
As to the SD card slot, that surprised me. Pro photog evolved past slow SD a long time ago, but apparently consumer demand at the lower end is strong for SD. Good for Apple for providing it if folks are asking for it; the SD UHS-II support is a decent port, even if many pros would prefer to see a much faster CF-Ex port.
Today IMO we do not really need MagSafe in our Mac laptops. USB-C is a loose connection, and anyway my max M2 MBP will easily run all day without being plugged in in field locations like other folks' offices, airports, planes, cars, etc. But like you said, consumer outcry brought it back. Good for Apple for listening, and for using the MagSafe re-introduction in its marketing.
I would suggest that derogatory terms like tight-wad Tim are inappropriate. Apple appears to invest large sums in forward-thinking new tech like building their own chips, Apple Vision Pro, etc. Some may want Apple to be making lower priced products (e.g. the constant whining for more base RAM without raise in base price points), but that gets to the question of where Apple puts its money and how Apple price-lines its products rather than existence of a tightwad CEO.
That is the antithesis of "value." The Apple Bat Signal design had no functional utility (nonsensical protestations that it's a "diagnostic tool" to the contrary) and cannot have value. It is a marketing tool, an attractor, that seeks to distract people from making purely value-based evaluations. Is this feature something I will use? Should I pay more for this or for that? Do I need this model or that model? Those are value questions. Twee design baubles like a light-up logo have nothing to do with value. They are distractions from value.
Design can absolutely have functional value: The weight, the shape, affordances to practical need. Here's a simple example: The little wings that used to pop out of the back of the smooth surface of a MacBook Pro power brick. Simple, functional, thoughtful design that helped you wrangle the power cable back when it was captive. Unnecessary now with detachable, standardized USB-C power cables, but back then, It made Apple's otherwise heavy and impractical power adapters more functional without sacrificing the clean, smooth, design-forward appearance. It was part of the menu of little affordances that did, and do, give Apple products value.
People will twist and protest six ways to Sunday to insist that by lurving the precious Apple logo nightlight so very much they aren't also being manipulated by a "cute marketing gimmick" (props to Allen_Wentz). But you were, and you are. Apple is not your friend and wants nothing more than your money. Marketing through non-functional design affordances is one of the many arrows they use to get it. Rather than falling victim to a lay-up, make them earn decisions of value through function, not flash-and-bang nonsense.
Last edited:
A shame the lids are quite so thin- it's the reason for the disappointing web cams.
Since it needs its own light-source for an implementation in the OLED/Mini-LED era of Macbook screens, it's up to the question of how thin they can make such a light, I guess.
I would want to imagine it's up on the table to maybe possibly return.
And yeah, it looked cool.
I would want to imagine it's up on the table to maybe possibly return.
And yeah, it looked cool.
And even for devices that still have a uniform LED backlight, displays have gotten so thin that it would be even more difficult to prevent ambient light from shining through the logo "window."
you wrote all that and I can debunk it by pointing out that you chose a user name cateye and that profile picture vs. simply (functionally) calling yourself user#6502 and leaving the profile photo blank. That is because you like cats and how they look. There's no functional reason to have cats as a profile picture other than you like it. that's valuable to you otherwise you wouldn't have spent the effort (however small) to personalize it.
Just say you don't like the apple logo and so don't want it. End of story. I personally like the aesthetic. It's not anything deeper than that. Just preference for the design. And that to me is valuable.
I would rather have them remove the webcam altogether. It’s not something I ever use but I understand some business people do video conferences. Maybe they could make it an option, but that would be more SKUs that they’d have to manage.
I'd also rather have no webcam than a notch and a poor webcam. I don't even use it for the one purpose it has because it's not good enough! If it was FaceID standard then I wouldn't need an external camera/my iPhone.
Like what you want to like, and don’t let me tell you otherwise, but don’t confuse an irrational emotion with quantifiable value. Your choice to feel emotion toward a hollow corporate brandmark is in no way equal to me, somewhat at random, aligning my message board username around cats. To be honest, it was a bit of an accident. I usually choose a random name/avatar combination. This one I happened to re-use in a handful of places. But if MacRumors told me I had to change it, I would in an instant. A message board name is disposable. It has no value. Just like glowing corporate brand marks.