Thinkpads Forum

I was so disheartened to see how bad the T420 display is. The viewing angles are terrible. Tilt the lid so that the bottom part of the screen is focused and the top part of the screen becomes a blurred washed out mess. Images are so washed out that they almost appear black and white.

I'm probably going to have to return it. It's sad though because every thing else about the box is great. But the display is crucial as it's what you stare at the whole time your on the computer.

I have a T60 and its display is among the best I've seen. I assumed I'd be getting something similar if I got another Lenovo. I guess I was wrong.

Tried calibrating it?

Pics?

Yeah.

After searching web I realized my T60 has IPS. Lenovo has been unable to find suppliers for this. That's why the displays suck now. Man they are really bad. I can't believe people put up with these crap displays.

I'm assuming if everyone returned them then it would force the industry to supply IPS displays.

Consumers generally don't understand the difference between TN and IPS beyond what is pushed into their minds via marketing. In addition, consumers don't really find it beneficial enough to spend that much money for what is in their eyes a slight benefit, and hence, a market for cheap TN's exist. That said, the X220 has an IPS offering.

The 14" segment has historically had worse displays than their 15" counterparts.
Some of the previous generations had panels with different qualities from different manufacturers. Maybe find out which company made yours (AUO, LG, Samsung, etc) and post it here for future reference?

Do you have the HD (1366x768) or the HD+ (1600x900) display?

When I was shopping for my T510 last year, I read somewhere that the HD+ display appeared to be better than the HD, but I don't know if the same is true for the 14" inch models.

I have been using the T510 as my main machine and I have been pretty satisfied with the HD+ screen, and this is coming from (what else?) a T60 with the flexview screen.

But then, perhaps I just have really high tolerance for bad screens, considering that I am typing this post on an X40.

Colonel O'Neill wrote:Consumers generally don't understand the difference between TN and IPS beyond what is pushed into their minds via marketing. In addition, consumers don't really find it beneficial enough to spend that much money for what is in their eyes a slight benefit, and hence, a market for cheap TN's exist. That said, the X220 has an IPS offering.

I should have been more clear in my follow-up post:

The poor quality of the T420 display is NOT a result of it lacking IPS. I felt compelled to post here because the quality is significantly worse than a standard non-IPS display. I would be perfectly happy if the quality of the display matched what I see when browsing notebook computers at my local Office Max or Best Buy. It's way below average quality. I was expecting the T420 to have IPS quality because of my experience with my T60. But I don't HAVE to have IPS quality to be satisfied with a display.

Colonel O'Neill wrote: The 14" segment has historically had worse displays than their 15" counterparts.
Some of the previous generations had panels with different qualities from different manufacturers. Maybe find out which company made yours (AUO, LG, Samsung, etc) and post it here for future reference?

How do I find out who made the display? Could you describe how I go about this?

georgelam wrote:Do you have the HD (1366x768) or the HD+ (1600x900) display?

I have the HD+ (1600x900). Hence, why I thought I was getting something comparable to the display on my T60 (which is a GREAT notebook). But like I describe above, a display can satisfy me fine without IPS.

I believe the issue stems from the fact that they're now using the T420s display in the regular T420 (which help cut down on weight). The T420s display is about on par with the T410s, which we all know to be pretty bad.

Something like MonInfo would provide information.

I should also clarify : the 14" (T400, T410, T400s, T410s, T420, etc) segment has generally had worse displays than their 15" counterparts, even when only considering TN panels.

Also:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/lenovo- ... ences.html

What make/model panel do you have?

I have the AUO one, and honestly it's not bad -- it's better than the WXGA+ panel in my T410.

corisin wrote:Yeah.

After searching web I realized my T60 has IPS. Lenovo has been unable to find suppliers for this. That's why the displays suck now. Man they are really bad. I can't believe people put up with these crap displays.

I'm assuming if everyone returned them then it would force the industry to supply IPS displays.

LOL! You have kept your T60 too ong. This has been going on for years now.

Keep you T60 up and running or lose it.

Just found out all Apple Mac notebook computers have IPS displays. I find it hard to believe Lenovo can't offer more IPS displays.

Is the X220 the only offering from lenovo at the moment that has IPS?

What? No? They're TN.

I think the only laptops out there that have IPS are the HP DreamColors and the X220.

T420 LCD being bad is nothing new with Lenovo. It's just that now it's 16:9 and still bad.

One consolation may be occasional IPS displays in the Thinkpad lineup but not for all.

Apple's LCD's are TN's but they have better specs. At least they give you more though at a higher price point than Lenovo.

I spoke with two different Apple representatives. Was told IPS is on ALL notebook displays out now.

Looking at Macs vs PC at Best Buy, the Macs easily had better looking displays. viewing angles strong at all angles. Plus when I saw that OS X only costs $30 for a single user license I realized how much a rip off Windows is. I'm thinking of going Mac.

Again, they're TN like the rest of us. You'd see it on marketing items everywhere if they made the transition to IPS. They are better TN panels though, albeit strangely calibrated out-of-the-box for that unnaturally vivid and oversaturated look.

Remember that OS X is supposed to be Apple-device only, which means they can simply offload part of the cost onto the hardware.

If only the T420 display was as good as the Apple Mac TN display, I'd have no issues with it. I guess it just confirms that I don't HAVE to have an IPS to be satisfied with the display.

The 15.6" T510/T520 HD+ screens are supposedly really good in terms of black level, contrast, and more than adequate viewing angles.

corisin wrote:I spoke with two different Apple representatives. Was told IPS is on ALL notebook displays out now.

In my experience, Apple representatives know astoundingly little about the actual technologies used in their [Apple's] notebooks. In my occasional visits to Apple stores I've been told all sorts of amusing nuggets, including my all time favorite: that Macs are faster because Intel provides them with "special chips". Talk about a massive extrapolation...

At any rate, here's the thing about screens: Apple's laptops are marketed towards students, media folks, etc. Those are the people that make up Apple's primary target market, and as such their displays are selected so as to provide something suitable for their intended uses (movies, photos, etc.) ThinkPads are geared towards business users, software developers, etc. For these people, wide viewing angles, low black levels, etc. matter comparatively little. They're nice to have if they were free -- but they're not, so instead Lenovo puts the money that could be spent on a better display towards things that the target market does care about: good support, excellent chassis design, close-to-reference internal designs, and powerful chips.

While the current crop of Apple displays are indeed nice TN panels, it wasn't too long ago (2008) that they were shipping some fairly poor CMO panels in their MacBook line. As a Mac user at the time, and a frequent visitor to the MacRumors forums, it is quite amusing now to see the parallels between the sky-is-falling complaints about ThinkPad screens and the complaints about the MacBook panels of the day. In both cases the displays were "the worst" and a clear sign that $MANUFACTURER had "lost their way", had started "cheaping out", was "diluting the brand", etc. Just saying...

corisin wrote:I spoke with two different Apple representatives. Was told IPS is on ALL notebook displays out now.

Looking at Macs vs PC at Best Buy, the Macs easily had better looking displays. viewing angles strong at all angles. Plus when I saw that OS X only costs $30 for a single user license I realized how much a rip off Windows is. I'm thinking of going Mac.

Those Apple reps have their info wrong. Their displays are 6-bit TN though generally with better color gamut and viewing angle than most LCD displays.

If Apple were selling 8-bit IPS, it would be included in their marketing material to claim additional superiority of their hardware. No such info is included so the LCD in Apple notebooks are IPS.

You can easily tell whether the display is IPS is by getting larger than 170 degree viewing angles horizontally and vertically. None of MBP displays do that so they are TN.

ThinkRob wrote:They're nice to have if they were free -- but they're not, so instead Lenovo puts the money that could be spent on a better display towards things that the target market does care about: good support, excellent chassis design, close-to-reference internal designs, and powerful chips.

Sounds like usual price discrimination to me. Having to pay more for better works out by making it more efficient, I suppose; you get what you need/want (and hence will pay for) and not too much more.

I suppose the best thing OP can do with the T420 is to calibrate it properly. It's just a theory, but it's possible that artificially reducing the gamut might artificially boost viewing angles, with obvious repercussions. (Based on the observation that extreme colors tend to shift first.) Can't do much about black levels, but excessive contrast between light and dark areas is harsh on the eyes.

Colonel O'Neill wrote:Can't do much about black levels, but excessive contrast between light and dark areas is harsh on the eyes.

Are you saying it's better on the eyes to have a low quality TN display because there is less contrast? I thought having a higher quality display was better for your eyes.

corisin wrote: Are you saying it's better on the eyes to have a low quality TN display because there is less contrast? I thought having a higher quality display was better for your eyes.

From everything I've read, much like the "reading with poor light will kill your eyes" old wives' tale, there is no evidence that low-contrast TN panels cause any health problems.

Sounds like usual price discrimination to me. Having to pay more for better works out by making it more efficient, I suppose; you get what you need/want (and hence will pay for) and not too much more.

I think it's more allocation of resources. Apple hardware tends to have a lot more put into the physical aspects (shiny case, high-end panel, etc.) than the actual computational bits (they typically lag behind a good bit in terms of CPU, chipset, and GPU.) Software is full of tradeoffs (time/space, space/maintainability, development time/run time, etc.) and hardware is no different.

ThinkRob wrote:Apple hardware tends to have a lot more put into the physical aspects (shiny case, high-end panel, etc.) than the actual computational bits (they typically lag behind a good bit in terms of CPU, chipset, and GPU.) Software is full of tradeoffs (time/space, space/maintainability, development time/run time, etc.) and hardware is no different.

Apple puts a fair bit into the emotional/psychological too. Have to maintain their image of being the underdog versus big bag Microsoft

corisin wrote:Are you saying it's better on the eyes to have a low quality TN display because there is less contrast? I thought having a higher quality display was better for your eyes.

Too much contrast is irritating. Especially considering a number ThinkPadders like to run their display at 12-13, it'd get really annoying. Consider reading really bright white text on a really dark black background. The other way around is better, but still irritating. (Imagine the whole overdone bloom effect in first-person shooters *cough*crysis 2*cough*.)

You don't want high contrast, but you want to read what's on the display. Writing with a black pencil on a paper gives you a very deep black value. As an example, the kindle does not even have any backlight, but it's ink has a low black value, so you can read the kindle even without backlight.

I thought the Kindle, being a reflective only display, was from the start intended to capture and reflect light, which makes text visible without a backlight at the cost of color.

Colonel O'Neill wrote:I thought the Kindle, being a reflective only display, was from the start intended to capture and reflect light, which makes text visible without a backlight at the cost of color.

E-Ink displays (btw these were developed by Sony, this is not an Amazon invention) were indeed designed to reflect the light (just like the regular paper), not to emit/filter one. However, this feature is not related to lack of color, it is only current technical limitation of such kind of screens; there are demo color E-Ink screens but with lower reflectivity/brightness (with the same contrast though), and there are demo color screens based on other similar technologies.

Apple screens are, in general, glossy which surely means a different set of compromises ?

amardeep wrote:Apple screens are, in general, glossy which surely means a different set of compromises ?

Yes, they have a different set of compromises. I had a gloss screened acer for about 6 months at one time - If the system was on battery, I could not focus on the screen, only on the reflections (and it was a cheap plastic screen - distorted reflections )(for comparison, I can use both my T41 and T61 in direct sunlight). I ended up replacing it with a T41 at that point, since I had killed the screen, motherboard and the keyboard wore out, I decided that it was not what I needed . The macbooks are the worst for reflections that I have never seen - that is a huge reason for me to probably never get one (along with the crappy-feeling keyboards and the palm rest that cuts you ) (and yes, I know that you can get the 15" systems with a matte option, but I like my 14" and smaller). Aside from the fact that I like the thinkpad look and feel, the glossy screens found elsewhere are the real deal breaker for me (I am far sighted, so it strains my eyes to read through the glossy coating.

ssd_thinkpad wrote:You don't want high contrast, but you want to read what's on the display. Writing with a black pencil on a paper gives you a very deep black value. As an example, the kindle does not even have any backlight, but it's ink has a low black value, so you can read the kindle even without backlight.

When comparing a cheap TN to an IPS I find that I can have the backlight much lower on the IPS and still see everything clearly. One of my major complaints on poor LCD displays is how dependent they are on using the backlight. I hate backlights! and I hate glossy screens. One of the major reasons I look at Thinkpads instead of other models/manufacturers is because I get a matte screen.

Do you guys think if OLEDs ever come to notebooks this will solve the display problems that TN displays present?

Do you guys think if OLEDs ever come to notebooks this will solve the display problems that TN displays present?[/quote]


Scientific fact it would instantly cure all problems anyone has with LCD. Viewing angles are a simple matter of how a pixel emits its light. TN throws it all 0' forward, and any deviation changes what you see, where as IPS throws it around more evenly (think, shining a flashlight into a fisheye, as opposed to a zoom lens), OLED is akin to just having the lightbulb emitting with no lens or limits.

OLED theoretically has NO viewing angles. but in practice, the oled i've seen implemented on phones is at least on par with IPS.