Just exchanged 2.4 MBP for the 2.53 MBP

I just got it and several issues I had with the 2.4 are now gone with the 2.53.

First of all the keyboard on the 2.53 feels like it is a lot more broken in than the 2.4. (the keys are easier to push and makes typing easier)

Also, the touchpad button is also easier to press. I was thinking that maybe my unit was refurbished but it is not. I checked the serial #s and it's a brand new one.

The screen. Wow. The screen I had on the 2.4 was horrible compared to this one. There is no uneven backlighting on my 2.53. The same google homepage shows even backlighting throughout whereas the 2.4 backlighting was very uneven.

With my 2.4 I always heard a creak noise when I rest my hand on it. I suspect it is from the bottom cover scraping against the unibody itself. Again, not so with my 2.53.

It seems that the quality of the 2.53 is better than the 2.4's. But then again, it's next to impossible to tell.

Just want to say I'm glad I got the 2.53 now.

 

didn't know there were such a big difference, maybe something was wrong with your 1st mbp
I've seen a lot of reviews and there's only differences between the macbook and macbook pro (not between the 2.4 and 2.53 mbp).
Anyway that's great that now you're more satisfied!

 

Hmm I seem to have a similar observation to the OP as well. I have 2 friends with respectively a Macbook Pro 2.4 and 2.53. The 2.4's screen seem to be a bit washed out while the 2.53 looks really nice. Possibly a calibration problem or it was just a coincidence that the 2.4 was using a different (possibly poorer quality) panel?

 

Hm,thats interesting.maybe we should ask our screen SuperMaster/Yoda(or Super Mod PhilFlow ) to investigate this screen mystery ?Anyway,congrats and enjoy your new notebook!

 

Your 2.4 was a Macbook or Macbook Pro?? The screens on the Demo units I saw at the apple shop didn't look good but if I remember correctly they were Macbook Pros with the 2.4 CPU in them. The screens on the IMacs looked much better at the Apple Shop.

 

Well that makes me feel good about my possible purchase of my Macbook Pro.

 

Probably all coincidence. These are all separate components; a different CPU has nothing to do with a screen panel or the quality of a particular unibody's build. You may have simply had a 2.4 with the non-LG panel and a crappy keyboard; the idea that some underpaid worker or a brainless machine spends more time perfecting the 2.53 is likely just a fantasy.

Nevertheless, I'm glad you like your new MBP!

 

2.4ghz or 2.5ghz model doesnt make any real differences, I'm just guessing you just got a bad batch with the 2.4ghz and now a good one with the 2.5ghz.

I had the 2.4ghz to start with and the build quality was the same as my current 2.5ghz, both excellent.

Congrats.

 

I do know there are at least 2 different panels being used in the MBPs, with one being better than the other. (Both still way better than the Macbook screen)

As far as I remember the LG was best. But all information can be found on forums.macrumors.com. Measurements can be found on Notebookcheck.net:

One panel on MBP:
Informations
Maximum 370 cd/m²
Average 312 cd/m²
Black 0.76 cd/m²
Contrast 487:1
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Apple-MacBook-Pro-15-v5-2008-Unibody-9600M-GT-9400M.11973.0.html

Other panel on MBP:
Maximum 331 cd/m²
Average 294 cd/m²
Black 0.34 cd/m²
Contrast 974:1
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Update-Apple-MacBook-Pro-5-1-Unibody-9600M-GT-9400M.12518.0.html

If I would buy a MBP I would make sure I get the latter.

PS. I don't think the panel is related to the CPU. Not all 2.4 GHz MBPs will use the same panel, I believe.

 

So how do you check for which panel you are getting on the 15" Macbook Pros? The better panel is made by LG??

 

Something like: system settings, display, color, calibrated profile, info, option number 13.

Then you see a number, search for that number on Google or forums.macrumors.com

 

If I am buying a new Macbook Pro in Hong-Kong I doubt the salesman would be happy to unbox a new Macbook Pro for me to check the display type

 

I'm still now sure how to check. All I can find is system profiler and all I see is graphics/displays but there's no number for the display.

 

I don't have any Mac at the moment, but you need to go to system settings, display. It's where you can calibrate your display. Then you have to choose the profile 'calibrated display', info or details.

If you don't see the profile, do a quick calibration first.

 

Oh okay, I see. It's system preferences > display > color > open profile > #13. Awesome I have the LG screen (00009C84). It explains the fact that I was almost blinded when I had it at full brightness.


Here's some more information on the different panels:
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1802551&tstart=0
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=597234

 

Thx for clarification Phil I knew you would find the truth!

 

Interesting stuff. Thanks for those links. But the biggest difference isn't in the brightness. Both score above 300 cd/m which is very bright.

As far as I know it's the LG screen that has amazing contrast and black levels. So you can count yourself lucky.

Unfortunately not everyone in those threads knows how to spot high contrast and good blacklevels.

Edit: found some more info. The one with the highest contrast is actually the Chi Mei. N154C6-L04 (Hersteller) APP9C85 (Monitor-ID).
http://www.notebookcheck.com/Test-Update-Apple-MacBook-Pro-5-1-Unibody-9600M-GT-9400M.12189.0.html
http://www.google.com/search?q=N154...&rls=org.mozilla:nl:official&client=firefox-a

But either way, both screens are very good. I personally prefer highest contrast screens though.

 

As long as there's no yellow tone I'm happy. My previous laptop, a Sony SZ650 had horrible yellow/greenish horizontal lines and I had to get the screen replaced.

 

My new 2.53 has the 9c85 screen. THe screen looks beautiful to me and I like it. Then again, I'm not very picky when it comes to screens as long as it's bright and doesn't strain my eyes.

And yes, the processor probably has nothing to do with it.

If I had the 2.4, I would have upgraded the ram and hard drive anyway. That would have cost me $250-300 anyway, and with the aftermarket ram I run the risk of it freezing and not working. Might as well spend an extra $200 and get the higher end one with all the upgrades installed for me, and no risk of freezing. This is more the reason why I switched.

 

I second this, I've compared and the LG (9c84) is much more vivid and the blacks are very very black while the whites are pure white as snow.

 

I haven't noticed any of these issues with my 2.4 GHz MacBook Pro, it's flawless. I'm surprised to hear that things are that much better for you on the 2.53 GHz unit, perhaps it's just the luck of the draw.

For the record, my unit has a 9C85 LCD panel (and it looks amazing).

 

Which one comes with the more yellowish background and no so snowish white? Want to know which screen to avoid.

 

Chi Mei - APP9C85.

 

I've got the 9C84 panel, the LG. I wouldn't trust NotebookCheck for measuring contrast ratios. I remember reading somewhere that the panel had a 700:1 contrast ratio, which is excellent compared to 250:1 on some budget laptops, and the 500:1 average on practically every other laptop, and Dell's LED 600:1 average.

 

I wouldn't say avoid but the C84 is the LG panel with relatively lower contrast. Chi Mei - APP9C85 is the panel with higher contrast rate. High contrast rate means the difference between white and black is bigger. But frankly any panel with a real life contrast rate of over 400:1 has good contrast. And there's a lot more to a panel than contrast rates. For a full review of the screens check the links on the first page of this thread.

Also keep in mind that there are differencews between indivdual panels. One C84 screen look better than the next C84 screen.

That is probably what LG/Philips specifies. There can be large differences between what manufacturers specify and what is measured in real life.