I’ve noticed similar “mini” news stories trickle out after Apple’s announcements. Does this happen organically, or does PR drop tidbits like this to select sources?
It seems like a very specific thing for a reporter to ask and find out about.
Look at the Tweet (X? Blurp? What do we call them now?) - it's got the spectrum of the panel, comparing previous and newer panels.
If you know what you're looking for in those, you can identify a lot of different phosphor configurations just by the particular shape of the RGB peaks - the older ones have a distinctive multi-peaked red emission that I've seen in various LED bulbs as well over the years.
I doubt Apple mentioned it to anyone. Applying a spectrometer to any new light emitting device is just the sort of thing some people enjoy doing.
They're officially just called "Posts" now. It's a hell of a downgrade from how distinctive the old terms were, no wonder people still call them Tweets.
Community Notes was also set to be called Birdwatch originally, continuing the bird pun theme.
Many people remain fascinated by Apple and the small choices that (traditionally) give their products a sense of careful and attentive design and engineering.
So there's both a supply of people eager to pick their products apart and a market of people eager to hear about all the little details and secrets.
While Apple probably does seed some stories intentionally, as their PR teams are sharp, they don't need to be doing so for swarms of these reports to pop up after announcements and first shipments.
It could simply be the people are now getting their hands on them and testing them for things that Apple didn’t specifically say in their announcements.
Interesting. As I understand it, shifting the red curve to shorter wavelengths, even by a seemingly small amount, would improve visibility. And something I've learned is that red vision varies by a fair amount from person to person.
>Is there vision tests similar to audio tests where they figure out one's individual responses to different wavelengths of light? Super neat.
Unlike consumer audio equipment where you can easily do a frequency sweep to test hearing, you'd need a specialist light source to do the same. Something like a tunable laser. You could probably use a prism to do a similar sweep from a white light source.
Does this mean better motion response times? The M-series MacBook Pro displays have notoriously smeary displays while displaying high-motion content, so this would be a welcome addition.
So far, the answer anecdotally is no, at least not in situations where lit pixels are moved quickly into black areas. In practice, my obnoxious green text black background terminal was kind of gross to scroll, but haven't experimented much with others yet. Playing games has thus far been fine, scrolling in other contexts is fine for practical purposes. Happy to update this if you want after I ruin my new MacBook by experimenting more
Is there more to the thread or just this one tweet/X thing? Response times notoriously suck on MacBooks, it would be nice to see that remedied, anecdotally it doesn't seem like that's happened yet.
Edit: Nevermind, same tweet seems to have been quoted across a bunch of different other news sites. Apparently Blur Busters claims an improvement, I'll try it out and see how it is in some other contexts.
If you're not logged in to Xitter, navigating to a Xeet allows you to view the Xeet, but not the Xomments. Fortunately, there are open-source, self-hostable, privacy-preserving front-ends for Xitter, such as Nitter.
If setting it up yourself is too much work, you can use other public instances. One such instance is called xcancel. Load the Xeet as normal, then simply append "cancel" to the domain name before the period in your URL bar and hit enter :)
No need for workarounds. Only the flagship nitter.net was blocked. Nitter is an open source project and maintains a list of working instances on its wiki: https://github.com/zedeus/nitter/wiki/Instances
Who manufactures their displays? I'm guessing they have more influence in the design or manufacturing than most players, but is this just a matter of them telling Samsung/LG/etc "ok, we're going to use your quantum dot displays now"?
They source from a combination of Samsung, LG, and BOE (Chinese display manufacturer). The way the arrangement typically works is that manufacturers will send Apple preproduction samples and Apple will decide which are worth using for upcoming SKUs. The manufacturer will build out production facilities to meet that demand and whatever specs Apple wants. Apple may also help with investment or R&D to develop products to meet feature roadmap targets and increase supplier competition. It's a very dangerous game for the manufacturers.
Also, from my limited experience with a single OLED screen, it seems that most stuff was created for a certain kind of screen without as much colour fidelity, and now that stuff seems far more...obnoxiously "saturated"?...on an OLED screen.
If you buy a macbook it's supposed to last a long time, but I'm kind of skeptical of getting one right when they release instead of a tried and tested IPS mbp
the pixel response and contrast absolutely are. Battery life is a little worse (especially in bright mode). OLED pixel response is around 100 micro-seconds compared to ~5ms for IPS, and each pixel dims individually allowing for actually good HDR
Doesn’t OLED pixel layout not line up with modern text rendering engines? At least that’s what I believe I’ve read from reports on banding around text on Windows in particular that makes long-running text work a problem.
I’ve noticed similar “mini” news stories trickle out after Apple’s announcements. Does this happen organically, or does PR drop tidbits like this to select sources?
It seems like a very specific thing for a reporter to ask and find out about.
Look at the Tweet (X? Blurp? What do we call them now?) - it's got the spectrum of the panel, comparing previous and newer panels.
If you know what you're looking for in those, you can identify a lot of different phosphor configurations just by the particular shape of the RGB peaks - the older ones have a distinctive multi-peaked red emission that I've seen in various LED bulbs as well over the years.
I doubt Apple mentioned it to anyone. Applying a spectrometer to any new light emitting device is just the sort of thing some people enjoy doing.
> the Tweet (X? Blurp? What do we call them now?)
They're officially just called "Posts" now. It's a hell of a downgrade from how distinctive the old terms were, no wonder people still call them Tweets.
Community Notes was also set to be called Birdwatch originally, continuing the bird pun theme.
Many people remain fascinated by Apple and the small choices that (traditionally) give their products a sense of careful and attentive design and engineering.
So there's both a supply of people eager to pick their products apart and a market of people eager to hear about all the little details and secrets.
While Apple probably does seed some stories intentionally, as their PR teams are sharp, they don't need to be doing so for swarms of these reports to pop up after announcements and first shipments.
It could simply be the people are now getting their hands on them and testing them for things that Apple didn’t specifically say in their announcements.
That's my interpretation too, people start finding out stuff when they get their hands on it, and each has their own interests.
I think Apple does not specify to give themselves flexibility to change. It’s not sure everyone will get the same panel.
Interesting. As I understand it, shifting the red curve to shorter wavelengths, even by a seemingly small amount, would improve visibility. And something I've learned is that red vision varies by a fair amount from person to person.
> And something I've learned is that red vision varies by a fair amount from person to person.
Is there vision tests similar to audio tests where they figure out one's individual responses to different wavelengths of light? Super neat.
It would be cool to simulate different people's vision, not just colour-blindness but the more subtle variations.
>Is there vision tests similar to audio tests where they figure out one's individual responses to different wavelengths of light? Super neat.
Unlike consumer audio equipment where you can easily do a frequency sweep to test hearing, you'd need a specialist light source to do the same. Something like a tunable laser. You could probably use a prism to do a similar sweep from a white light source.
Does this mean better motion response times? The M-series MacBook Pro displays have notoriously smeary displays while displaying high-motion content, so this would be a welcome addition.
> latest Cd-free QD films are very efficient, feature as good or better color gamut and better motion performance
Possibly yes.
So far, the answer anecdotally is no, at least not in situations where lit pixels are moved quickly into black areas. In practice, my obnoxious green text black background terminal was kind of gross to scroll, but haven't experimented much with others yet. Playing games has thus far been fine, scrolling in other contexts is fine for practical purposes. Happy to update this if you want after I ruin my new MacBook by experimenting more
Hmm.
I just set up a 4K terminal (542x143 chars) using the 'homebrew' theme (green on semi-transparent black) and did
prompt% ls -larS RemoteAstrophotography_com-M63-Stellina.zip | awk '{print $5}'
4514072533
prompt% cat RemoteAstrophotography_com-M51-Stellina.zip| base64
... and it is happily scrolling up the screen, lightning fast, way way too fast to read, and responding instantly to CTRL-Q/S. Seems ok to me.
Was phosphor afterglow ever an issue with LCDs? Just wondering
Notebookcheck says no. Their M4 Pro only did 5-10% better than last year which is still bad.
Is there more to the thread or just this one tweet/X thing? Response times notoriously suck on MacBooks, it would be nice to see that remedied, anecdotally it doesn't seem like that's happened yet.
Edit: Nevermind, same tweet seems to have been quoted across a bunch of different other news sites. Apparently Blur Busters claims an improvement, I'll try it out and see how it is in some other contexts.
If you're not logged in to Xitter, navigating to a Xeet allows you to view the Xeet, but not the Xomments. Fortunately, there are open-source, self-hostable, privacy-preserving front-ends for Xitter, such as Nitter.
If setting it up yourself is too much work, you can use other public instances. One such instance is called xcancel. Load the Xeet as normal, then simply append "cancel" to the domain name before the period in your URL bar and hit enter :)
I thought nitter shut down because of the Xitter api changes.
There were some workarounds, most buried in here: https://github.com/zedeus/nitter/issues/983
No need for workarounds. Only the flagship nitter.net was blocked. Nitter is an open source project and maintains a list of working instances on its wiki: https://github.com/zedeus/nitter/wiki/Instances
Who manufactures their displays? I'm guessing they have more influence in the design or manufacturing than most players, but is this just a matter of them telling Samsung/LG/etc "ok, we're going to use your quantum dot displays now"?
They source from a combination of Samsung, LG, and BOE (Chinese display manufacturer). The way the arrangement typically works is that manufacturers will send Apple preproduction samples and Apple will decide which are worth using for upcoming SKUs. The manufacturer will build out production facilities to meet that demand and whatever specs Apple wants. Apple may also help with investment or R&D to develop products to meet feature roadmap targets and increase supplier competition. It's a very dangerous game for the manufacturers.
I love how apple has lots of these silent innovations. They work hard giving us great products.
I don’t care how much they improve the CPUs, not upgrading before OLED
is OLED unequivocally better than IPS?
I've heard that there are screen lifetime issues?
Also, from my limited experience with a single OLED screen, it seems that most stuff was created for a certain kind of screen without as much colour fidelity, and now that stuff seems far more...obnoxiously "saturated"?...on an OLED screen.
I think so, more vivid colors and better blacks and viewing angles. At the risk of burnin.
I'm just worried about the burn in from coding
If you buy a macbook it's supposed to last a long time, but I'm kind of skeptical of getting one right when they release instead of a tried and tested IPS mbp
Make the screen a wear item then.
OLED has been better in every way except longevity since 2018.
6 years later I’m not buying a piece of garbage LCD for $6k
the pixel response and contrast absolutely are. Battery life is a little worse (especially in bright mode). OLED pixel response is around 100 micro-seconds compared to ~5ms for IPS, and each pixel dims individually allowing for actually good HDR
Does a bear relieve himself in the woods?
Doesn’t OLED pixel layout not line up with modern text rendering engines? At least that’s what I believe I’ve read from reports on banding around text on Windows in particular that makes long-running text work a problem.
That depends which OLED panel you're talking about; they're not all the same.
People read text on the OLED screen of the iPad Pro all the time.