MacBook Pro, Thousands of Colors

http://mantia.me/blog/macbook-pro-thousands-of-colors/

by ams1 • 17 years ago

231 148 17 years ago

PITA dealing with Apple on this, and the screens should indeed do what they advertise.

Still, since you already knew about 6-bit vs 8-bit issues, why did you not look in the store before buying? The dithering is visible to the careful eye just by looking for it on my 13" Macbook (white, plastic, relatively cheap).

ajg1977• 17 years ago

I'm not sure what this guy is looking for. Regardless of whether the display is 6-bit, or just 8-bit that looks crap, you're still going to have a problem. Unless you're harboring a fantasy that Apple will give you a MacBook with a custom screen as way of an apology.

They've offered you a refund. Take the money and use it to buy the 15" MacBook with a better screen. And this time try checking out the product to make sure it meets your needs before splashing down thousands of dollars.

notaddicted• 17 years ago

I think the point he is making is that if someone were to check the only information available, "millions of colors" on apple's website, is false.

EDIT: and as a side quest, he is trying to get them to admit that their pro product doesn't have pro specs.

GHFigs6• 17 years ago

Define pro.

proee2• 17 years ago

You didn't read the article. He would be glad to upgrade to the 15" MacBook but Apple will not tell him if it's a true 8-bit display.

He's simply wants the TRUE specs on the machine.

eli2• 17 years ago

Yeah, and they don't want to tell him. So...

He can either A) do a google search (which indicates that yes, the 15" does have 8-bit color) or B) Give up on Apple and get a different brand/OS

jonknee3• 17 years ago

If it's so obvious and important to his professional work why doesn't he drag his ass into the Apple store where he bought his MacBook and check out the screens of all available models? This would have been advised before buying the 13" machine, but hey at least he can get a refund. Apple already "misled" him, so why does he care what they say? Walk into the store and check for yourself. Or can he not tell the difference?

9oliYQjP3• 17 years ago

Might sound like a smart ass remark but if he can't tell by looking at the displays in person whether they're 8-bit or 6-bit, then I can see why 99% of laptops on the market use 6-bit panels. I fully understand that when you compare them side-by-side you can see the difference. But I remember looking into which LCD panels were actually 8-bit and I could count the number of laptops (2 years ago) which were using these panels on one hand.

TrevorJ2• 17 years ago

Surprising hardware spec choice given the the market penetration Apple has in the design profession.

cabalamat2• 17 years ago

Indeed. A 6 bit display in 2009 is inexcusible; I had to check the date of the article because I wasn't sure it had been written this millenium

old-gregg2• 17 years ago

If you've been paying attention you would have noticed that the tech goes backwards in the world of LCDs: as time goes on, high-quality LCDs are being displaced by 6-bit junk-panels not only in laptops (there isn't a single one 8-bit LCD laptop available in US right now) but even in desktops as well: 20" iMacs are 6-bit too.

Viewing angles and contrast ratios are shrinking as well, hence the disgusting proliferation of contrast-enhancing glass/film panel covers: it's like forcing every customer to wear permanent sunglasses: just because your panel is junk.

GHFigs6• 17 years ago

All manufacturers use 6-bit displays on most if not all portable models. In fact, the trend has been more use of 6-bit panels, because they can be made larger for cheaper with a lower response time, things which more consumers notice. Last I checked, LG (one of the biggest suppliers) didn't even make 8-bit panels anymore.

axod• 17 years ago

Can the human eye seriously tell the difference? I'd be interested in some stats...

tedunangst• 17 years ago

Is there an output device other than a "pro" monitor with the same range? If the consumers of your work don't have 8 bit displays, how will they know the difference?

It sounds like he was happy with it until he took it apart. If you only discover it's not good enough after checking the part number, I think maybe it is good enough.

Anyway, is there a picture somewhere I can download that will show me how awful my shitty 6 bit screen is? I've been skeptical of "I can see/hear more pixels/sin waves than you" before, but I've also seen compelling proof for some of it.

PS: Why is it 6 and 8 bit, not 18 and 24? It makes me think you're a retard for thinking 8 bits is enough for 16 million colors, but that seems to be how everyone labels it.

zaius• 17 years ago

Just a guess: it's probably 6/8 bits per R/G/B.

tdavis2• 17 years ago

Apple has been using comparatively low-quality panels in their laptops for a while. I ran into an issue like this when researching my 17" Macbook Pro purchase in late 2006. I still ended up making the purchase, but it was indeed a lower-quality screen with very apparent dithering under certain color profiles.

tptacek• 17 years ago

[...] They offered to give me a full refund of my purchase. I suppose this would be fine, if I could go to another Apple retail store and purchase a portable machine of this size that had an 8bit screen. [...]

Here's where I stopped reading. I, too, would like a pony.

eli2• 17 years ago

Agreed.

They don't owe you anything beyond a refund.

wvenable• 17 years ago

Yes, but you can still complain about things they don't offer. There's nothing inherently wrong with that.

padmapper2• 17 years ago

I'm not sure about this - if false advertising (millions of colors) caused him to sell his old laptop with a better screen, then he's still worse off, as a result of Apple's actions.

Then again, I think the whole MBP line has had 6 bit displays for their whole history, so I'm not sure why he's complaining now.

jonknee3• 17 years ago

Alternate headline choice: Man with ability to research decides not to and is disappointed in purchase but offered full refund

jasonlbaptiste• 17 years ago

Alternate comment: How's about commenting on the actual substance and not whining about the headline?

Sure, he's asking for a pony in some ways, but they're making pro machines with displays that don't do what they say or anything "pro" for that matter.

stuff4ben• 17 years ago

I believe that's what his alternate headline was doing. Saves you from also having to read the post unless you liked the constant whining and childish ranting from the blogger.

mhb2• 17 years ago

It's not just the headline. Who makes a purchase decision base on a product being called "pro"? It must be very confusing for him when he visits a supermarket and encounters words all over the place like "new", "improved", "better", "more", "bigger"...

jm4• 17 years ago

That's not entirely fair. The specific information he was looking for is not made available to the public by Apple. He was only able to find the information after getting the model number for the display and checking with the vendor.

There was no way of knowing exactly which display was used without access to a MacBook Pro because that's not information made public by Apple, either. It's an awfully roundabout way of finding out how many colors can be displayed.

In hindsight it's easy to say he could have done the research ahead of time, but think about this: 1) It's called a MacBook Pro and is marketed at more demanding users, i.e. professionals, 2) Apple advertises it as being able to display millions of colors despite the fact that it really only displays 262,144. Under those circumstances, it's probably easy to take a look at the specs on the Apple site and feel confident that it's the right product.

There's still the matter of Apple refusing to disclose which of its products do, in fact, display millions of colors as advertised. At least they offered him a refund in the end, but in my opinion the whole thing sucks. I don't have a problem paying more and getting my money's worth, but they're clearly skimping on parts for products directly targeting the most demanding users.

jonknee3• 17 years ago

He seemed to have very specific requirements, doing a bit of research isn't out of the question. I knew about the color situation (and don't care!), it has been well publicized.

A class action law suit about this issue was filed last year, it's not exactly breaking news.

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=11348

JimmyL4• 17 years ago

>>It's called a MacBook Pro and is marketed at more demanding users, i.e. professionals

Which "professionals"? 8bit color is important to pretty much one professional group: graphic artists/designers (maybe two, if you include people doing video work). For the vast majority of people - "professional" or otherwise - 6bit vs. 8bit color doesn't matter. It looks good, it's fast, it runs what they want. Those are the things that matter.

As a developer, I consider myself a "professional", and my life is fine with 6bit color. My roommate is a screenwriting "professional" and they're fine with 6bit color. Presumably an 8bit color display would cost more, and hence would reduce the number of people who could afford the machine, at the expense of pleasing one small market segment.

Bottom line is that if a feature (any feature) was important enough for me that it would make or break my decision to buy the underlying system, I'd explicitly confirm its existence (in a way more rigorous than "millions and millions", which sounds like marketing-speak), and I'd get reviews from my peers who would have the same interests. In this case, the author did neither.

jmillikin3• 17 years ago

Apple advertises it as being able to display millions of colors despite the fact that it really only displays 262,144.

A 6-bit display is capable of displaying more than 6 bits of color information, using a technique named temporal dithering. For an example, open this image on a 6-bit display: < http://imgur.com/BeVicl.png >. If the display could only display 262k colors, the squares would look identical.

GHFigs6• 17 years ago

they're clearly skimping on parts

This is not clear at all. Every manufacturer uses 6-bit displays, even in most if not all high-end models. This has been true for years. They choose to do so because such displays have desirable properties other than color, such as price and lower response times.

DanielStraight• 17 years ago

I could've written the letter myself in the time it took to read that.

I say write the letter and address it to Steve Jobs. See what happens. It's worth a shot.

Automatt-2• 17 years ago

I agree. I've written to SJ twice and gotten follow up phone calls from the right people within Apple both times.

derefr2• 17 years ago

I would have taken my refund and used it to pay a notebook repair tech (perhaps an Apple one, off-the-job) to swap out my 6-bit display for an 8-bit one.

keltecp11• 17 years ago

Honestly that was just annoying... and yet for some reason I read most of it.

lorax• 17 years ago

He mentions a couple of times about dithering, saying it is "blending nearby colors". I have heard notebook displays also use temporal dithering where they quickly change the color of single pixel and your eye merges it into an intermediate value. (strictly speaking, blending nearby colors could refer to nearby in time, but I think he was refering to spatially nearby)

proee2• 17 years ago

I purchased my first mac last year ( a white macbook, right before the new unibody models came out).

The screen on the thing is a piece of dung. Gradients look terrible.

My acer travelmate from the days of the dinosaurs even has a better screen.

I enjoyed reading about this guys little quest and it's one of the reasons I prefer to keep my distance from Apple.

moe• 17 years ago

MacBook screens have been crap for as long as I can remember, since the days when they were selling PowerBooks and iBooks, long before the first iPod.

I have no idea why the "demanding" Apple audience let's them get away with that but the panels on these things have always had lower contrast and (sometimes ridiculously) lower viewing angles than comparable notebooks, e.g. the sony vaios.

I've done plenty side-by-side comparisons and both problems are fairly obvious even to the untrained eye. For example the RGB color #fefefe is generally indistinguishable from white on MacBook displays. Some of our designers refer to them as WashyBooks and spend time to make sure their palettes are "WashyBook safe".

bodhi• 17 years ago

I suspect that would be a gamma difference with OSX, not an artifact of the screen quality. If you look at windows computers, the lighter greys are generally a bit darker than the same colour on a mac.

thenduks2• 17 years ago

In that case you will need to stay away from all laptop manufacturers that use LG-Phillips panels.

bcl• 17 years ago

Interesting. The Apple MacBook Pro website makes no distinction between the models as to the color support. They all say "millions of colors", and as someone who doesn't deal with colors for a living I would expect them to have identical support.

jimboyoungblood3• 17 years ago

They do- they all have 6-bit panels (as does every virtually every other laptop currently sold)

GHFigs6• 17 years ago

Technically, a 6-bit display can display all of the same colors that an 8-bit display can. What it can't do is display all of them at the same time.

Edit: Why all the drive-by downvoting? This is true to the best of my knowledge.

philwelch2• 17 years ago

I remember 16 color systems that could load different palettes of 16 colors each, too. Doesn't make it a >16 color system.

jhickner• 17 years ago

This is actually kind of an important point. I don't know what you're being downvoted for. The upshot is that you really only notice the 6bit/8bit difference on large, smooth gradients.

CamperBob2• 17 years ago

Because what you stated is completely fictional?

old-gregg2• 17 years ago

I am anxious to see a class action lawsuit against hardware manufacturers claiming "millions of colors" on 6-bit panels. One doesn't need to be a designer/photographer to tell two screens apart: a true 8-bit panel with 16.7M output and dithered 6-bit junk. And don't get me started on lack of standardization for contrast ratios and viewing angles.

Once consumers will see real "262K colors" stickers on their laptops, who knows maybe we'll get back our FlexView screens on Thinkpads.

sp332• 17 years ago

Some people tried to get a class-action going back in '07, I don't think it panned out though. http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2007/05/lawsuit-over-mac-b...

scapegraced• 17 years ago

Ah, the infallible Apple is, in fact, fallible.

buugs• 17 years ago

Wait a second this guy is an icon/ui designer .... Which means he works on computer design so to be realistic most of his customers do not have "millions of colors".

He has a 30 inch cinema display that he can now use for designing and checking colors with the replacement cable but he still would rather rant and rave and call support hours on end rather than just replace the laptop.

SwellJoe7• 17 years ago

Professionals in any creative industry need to be able to see or hear exactly what they are actually creating. This is why audio monitors for recording studios cost a lot, and don't "sound as good" to the untrained ear. Accuracy is what you are paying for. If it is inaccurate in any one direction, the potential for problems during reproduction on client machines (which could be inaccurate in the other direction; doubling the magnitude of the problem) is much higher.

Cheap monitors are bad in many different ways. One cannot predict exactly how it will diverge from what it ought to look like. So, if your source has been designed on a device that is accurate and balanced, you have a dramatically higher chance of it looking or sounding good on the majority of devices.

I think it's a valid criticism of Apple. It is information that is valuable to consumers who work in the design field, and it's information that I would expect to find on the "Tech Specs" section of their site. The fact that they don't provide that information, for quite pricey machines intended for "professional" users, makes me very much less likely to buy their products. But, then again, I'm generally surprised that anyone puts up with the abuse that Apple inflicts on their customers.

jimboyoungblood3• 17 years ago

I don't buy the accuracy argument for a second. By working only on the most expensive, rarified equipment, the only thing you're ensuring is that your own experience will be drastically different from 99.9% of end users.

Imagine if the guy responsible for developing new recipes for McDonalds insists that his "creative work" only be done with organic Niman ranch beef.

derefr2• 17 years ago

> This is why audio monitors ... don't "sound as good" to the untrained ear.

I've never understood this, myself. If it was mixed on monitors, and made to sound good on monitors, then shouldn't it sound best when replayed on monitors?

siukwai• 17 years ago

Maybe I didn't read the article correctly, but if this guy is outputting to another screen, isn't it the video card that's not outputting the colors/resolution correctly, and that has nothing to do with whether the laptop screen is 6bit or 8bit?

wysiwtf• 17 years ago

He doesn't have a color issue with his 30" display (they only sold him the wrong adapter). He's only complaining about the screen on his laptop.

SwellJoe7• 17 years ago

So how does one tell whether a monitor is 6-bit or 8-bit?

jjs• 17 years ago

If you can't tell by sight, then you don't need it.

SwellJoe7• 17 years ago

If I have two monitors side-by-side, one 8-bit and one 6-bit, I'm pretty sure I could see the difference (just like, as an audio engineer, I can clearly hear the difference between high end monitors and consumer speakers). The question is...how do I know, if I don't know? You know?

I have multiple monitors, but the only one that I knew was 8-bit (a high end Viewsonic intended for designers, and from a time when specs were easy to find and very clear and generally accurate, at least on high end devices) has long since left the stable as it was only 19". I'm certain the differences are subtle, as they are in good consumer speakers vs. good studio monitors. But, it'd be nice to know if what I'm working with is altering my perception of things. Particularly as I've just done several thousand dollars worth of design work for print on my new laptop which may or may not have an accurate display. It's just nice to know what I'm dealing with is all.

jerf• 17 years ago

I went a-Googling for that before I saw your message, and here's the best thing I found. (A surprising number of 404s and forbiddens on most test pattern images.) This article [1] has a test image: http://static.photo.net/attachments/bboard/00G/00GkGu-302804... which has a grey gradient across the bottom. Zoom in (Firefox zoom is fine), and then look very closely at the pixels. If you see a dither pattern in most of the cells, you've got 6-bit. If it's smooth and unpatterned, you've got 8-bit.

I have 6-bit, but it's also higher res. Dithering is less of a problem in that scenario. But having seen it clearly, now I understand why you shouldn't do video-intensive work on this sort of display.

1: http://photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00GkGu

jsz0• 17 years ago

Does anyone know the price difference between 6-Bit and 8-Bit display panels? I can't really find any info on it. I've always thought, by comparison, that Macbook displays looked fantastic compared to the HP PC laptops I'm used to using at work. Just as good as the Samsung displays I use on my desktop. I do believe Apple still has their 30 day no questions asked, no restocking fee, return policy though so there's that.

jimboyoungblood3• 17 years ago

I think it's infinite. From everything I've read so far, nobody makes 8-bit displays in 13", 15", or 17" sizes.

fortybillion3• 17 years ago

The main difference is with the technology used in the panel -- cheaper panels (TN panels) generally only use 6 bits for each colour element of the display (Red, Green and Blue), meaning that it is capable of producing a much more limited range of colours (the thousands indicated by the article).

For playback purposes (DVDs, games, etc), most consumers won't notice the difference. For content creation, though, 6-bit panels are a disaster. I've seen cheap panels from Dell that simply could not display colours in the light blue or light yellow range correctly, and light greys not at all.

Wikipedia has an excellent article about the different types of LCD panels available, but the takeaway is basically "you get what you pay for."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lcd_monitor

DarkShikari• 17 years ago

I've noticed a phenomenal variance in LCD quality recently, and 6-bit is the least of the problem.

My Asus G1 has an incredibly good screen--very high-contrast, a near-perfect viewing angle: I can read text as far as 80 degrees to the side or top, where 90 means unable to see any of the screen. It's high-DPI (1680x1050 on a 15.4") as well. Odds are it's a 6-bit TN, and all the research I've done suggests that. But it's amazing despite that.

My company gave me a Thinkpad for personal use. It has a similar size screen. The contrast is abominable; the screen is bright gray when it's black and no matter how much I adjust contrast/brightness I can't make it usable. The viewing angle is atrocious. And yet from what I can tell... it's also a 6-bit TN.

Bits are, IMO, one of the less important problems in LCD panels these days; the overall quality as a whole is suffering greatly in new screens.

ghshephard• 17 years ago

Does anybody know why Apple won't just come out and declare whether the 13" MacBook has 6 Bit or 8 Bit color?

As a side note - this is why I love HN - I remember the class action lawsuit over colors and Apple a few years ago (or at least discussion around it) - but I didn't know what it was over. Now I have insight into the differences in LCD color qualities and get the insight that the 13" MacBook pro isn't _really_ totally Pro.

http://compreviews.about.com/od/multimedia/a/LCDColor.htm

CamperBob2• 17 years ago

Probably because they want to reserve the ability to switch panel vendors or part numbers in mid-production. This isn't uncommon.

wmf• 17 years ago

If it's true that all panels are now 6-bit, that wouldn't matter. Also, specifying a 6-bit display wouldn't prevent them from silently shipping a better one in the future -- Apple has been known to ship faster processors or optical drives than specified.

fortybillion3• 17 years ago

This article seems to indicate the exact opposite; that the new Pro displays (including the 13") have markedly improved colour accuracy.

"Colour accuracy in the three MacBook Pro displays is as right as we've seen in a laptop display, equal to or better than some midrange desktop displays and not that far off the level of colour correctness found in a premium desktop display."

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-10041-...

lutorm3• 17 years ago

Color accuracy isn't so much color resolution. That's like the difference between precision and accuracy, you can have something accurate with poor precision, and vice versa.

fortybillion3• 17 years ago

When dealing with digital content, isn't accuracy what you're looking for? Properly calibrating a display would take care of the precision.

(Unless I'm confused here, which is entirely possible.)

lutorm3• 17 years ago

Regardless of what you think of the dude writing it, saying "millions of colors" is false advertising if it's done by dithering. Why stop at millions, why not advertise billions or trillions of colors? (Though I guess it's limited by the number of pixels on the screen.)

I had no idea about this, and that's the most dishonest piece of marketing from a reputable company I've heard in a long time.

JimmyL4• 17 years ago

There are 8bit portable displays, you know, and Apple should be a company that uses them, especially when they are generally known for great quality products, but instead, they went with the cheaper option, a lower bit display.

Translation: I am unhappy that Apple made a business decision to use a cheaper component that won't affect most users of the machine, but negatively affects my particular use of it.

More broadly, in this day and age I'd also be skeptical of the author's notion that the word "Pro" means it's explicitly designed for "professionals" as opposed to normal people. Look at most advertising - the word has come to mean nothing more than high-end consumer grade. For the most part, if something is made explicitly for professionals in a certain field it will rely on industry-specific promotions/reviews and knowledge to make itself known, as opposed to outright advertising. This is similar to the frequent use of the word "exclusive" in reference to availability - if it was really exclusive, it wouldn't be advertised.

And even if I'm wrong about those two points, when did "professional" come to mean "digital art professional"?

jws5• 17 years ago

Without dithering, 6 bit LCDs produce 191 colors. 8 bit LCDs produce 767 colors. If you want more than 767 colors you will be using dithering.

I think where people get confused here is the naive dithering where a group of 3 pixels (one of each color) are logically grouped together gives your the 252k and 16m numbers, but there is no reason that is the only desirable solution.

Consider sub-pixel rendering of typography. This abandons the traditional groups of 3 pixels and uses alternatives to gain better horizontal spatial resolution. Consider a white, lowercase 'L'. Depending where it appears on my screen it could either be a single white pixel under the naive "groups of three" dithering, or a yellow pixel next to a blue pixel. The catch is that unless I show you the borders of the screen you can't tell which it is.

Fortunately, I have a brand new 15" MacBook Pro under my fingers. Tonight when it gets dark I'll take a picture of a gradient, enlarge it beyond the capabilities of my eyes, and we will have an answer about what Apple does.

jws5• 17 years ago

So far, on large areas I can see a difference between #404040 and both #3f3f3f and #414141 on the new 15" MacBook Pro.

That rules out a naive 6 bit display. I think. The application of color profiles can could cause some regions of to have one-to-one mapping even if there aren't enough output codes available to cover the inputs, but I think with the 4:1 difference I can rule that out.

jws5• 17 years ago

Here is a little web page I tossed up to help people screen LCDs. http://jim.studt.net/lcd-sleuth/

It will make a table with cells whose text is just slightly off of the background. You can stare are them and explore the limits of your visual system and your computer's display. (No one will be able to see all of the text on any statically adjusted display.)

Additionally, on this MacBook Pro I looked at a greyscale gradient which I have used over the past and decided it was poorly distributed, so I ran through the color calibration (expert mode) in the Displays preferences pane. I ended up with a much better distributed gradient, but I introduced hue distortion so I didn't keep it. But there seems to be room for an improved profile.

duskwuff4• 17 years ago

You are confused. "6 bit displays" have 6 bits of color data per channel, and hence can display 2^18 (262,144) colors without dithering. I'm not sure where you're getting 191 and 767 from.

jws5• 17 years ago

I am in no way confused. The three color components of an LCD pixel are not in the same spatial location. Look closely and you will find three rectangular areas, one for each color. The only colors you can make without combining elements are at the 2^6 or 2^8 variants of red, green, and blue. I subtract two because (ok, I am confused, I only subtracted one before) because the blacks are all the same.

philfreo• 17 years ago

So do the 15" and 17" have 6bit or 8bit displays? I keep reading conflicting answers...

cracki• 17 years ago

oh my... just find the nearest apple store and direct your sharp eye at the displayed 15" and 17" macbook pros.

cesare• 17 years ago

Even his old MacBook Pro 17" has a 6bit display.

Moreover, different batches have different monitors.

Manufacturers keep lowering prices (remember how much the Powerbooks did cost?) so they must use cheaper technology, and most people are mostly ignorant about specs anyway.

Glossy screens are another example (they're cheaper to make and they look better at first sight).

9oliYQjP3• 17 years ago

Exactly. I've heard many "graphics professionals" who buy a new MacBook Pro to replace an old one and blame the 6-bit panel for poor colour reproduction. It's not the fact that the panel is 6-bit. They came from a 6-bit panel, although most were under the impression it was 8-bit. The fact is just that Apple is using cheaper displays. It's a crappy 6-bit panel, not the fact that it's specifically a 6-bit panel that's the problem. After all, they didn't complain with the old 6-bit panel they were using.

It's funny to hear some of these guys talk about how they buy the MacBook Pro over the MacBook because of the 6-bit vs 8-bit panel when all of those laptops have only ever had 6-bit panels in them. The Pro just happens to use a better quality panel, that's all. But it's still 6-bit.

jrockway• 17 years ago

According to list-faces-display, I only need 376 colors.

thenduks2• 17 years ago

WOW. I'm finding this hard to believe. So the MacBook Pro 13" doesn't have an 8bit display, that's a little lame, we agree. But, here's the problem. You were in an Apple store and used the laptop and didn't notice. Then you took the laptop home and somehow 'found out' it doesn't support the millions of colors you apparently need (I'm no designer so I have no appreciation for this)... So... go back to the store and do the same 'check' you did for this laptop on a 15" model -- if it passes, problem solved, if not... well, maybe you should just do your designing on your 30" cinema which you now have working after receiving a $70 discount on the adapter (granted a $70 discount - the pain involved in not having it for a week or whatever). /rant

MacBook Pro, Thousands of Colors

Related Stories