alt Hacker NewsTwo reasons: Wider viewing angles and light reflection rejection.
Not every TV is used by two people in a room devoid of lighting. Friends will come over, other things will be watched. Some people are very bothered when the ceiling lighting or sunlight from the window "alters" the image.
Enthusiasts are an interesting bunch. Some features loved by others are grave flaws for others. One can't make everyone happy, so matte screens are an acceptable compromise for it, AFAIK.
My old Bravia is matte-ish without "Viewing angle extending layer", which reduces contrast apparently. I'm happy with what I have. It shows moving images, syncs with sound, and is big enough.
> Not every TV is used by two people in a room devoid of lighting. Friends will come over, other things will be watched. Some people are very bothered when the ceiling lighting or sunlight from the window "alters" the image.
> Enthusiasts are an interesting bunch. Some features loved by others are grave flaws for others. One can't make everyone happy, so matte screens are an acceptable compromise for it, AFAIK.
You know what, fair enough. I don't mind these; but I do _hate_ the blurriness that the matte coatings introduce.
Now, I wouldn't call my wife a TV tech enthusiast, but I do know that she's bothered by the reflections occasionally when I don't mind, and I know with her eyesight she straight up physically cannot notice the extra blurriness that the coatings bring.