Why isn't AR treated glass more common on monitors?

[MagnaMagicBtu]

Instead of using Matte coatings which reduce image quality and make everything look dull, why isn't AR treated glass laminated to the LCD panel used instead? even on very high-end $1000+ monitors have Matte coatings. Not even a $2000 monitor has AR treated glass except for the Dell UP2715k and the new Apple computers and they aren't very good AR coatings, they don't reduce reflections nowhere near as much as these more advanced, more modern AR coatings.

I would gladly pay an extra $200 for an advanced AR coating like what you see in the photos below. Better glare reduction than Matte with the charity of a Glossy without the glare.

Example:
Matte vs Glossy vs Glossy with AR

AR treated glass vs regular

 

[zone74]

Cost.
It's expensive to laminate the display panel to a sheet of AR-coated glass.

Most screens either have a matte film directly applied to the panel, or a sheet of glass with a matter film applied and an air gap between the two.

I wish more displays used it too, because it looks so much better.

 

[OP20]

I also would pay the extra 200$ but big companies don't like money... errrr niche markets.

 

[NamelessPFG]

Wow, I haven't seen AR coatings that good since the days of FD Trinitrons. No wonder so many of us hate glossy finishes that look like staring into a mirror - there's no good AR-coated glass options!

I also would pay the extra 200$ but big companies don't like money... errrr niche markets.

Quite the opposite, actually; they just want to put that $200 per unit into their pockets while still charging you the higher price, because yay for profit margins!

Sickening, isn't it? That's what the whole AHVA G-SYNC gaming monitor market feels like right now.

 

[aeliusg]

$200 wouldn't cut it. If image quality was the primary concern of the industry we wouldn't still be using LCDs.

 

[baii]

Apple drop the laminated thing on new iPad and no one(almost) complained.

Hey, people are happy they can get a iPad cheaper.

 

[ZeqOBpf6]

It's an awesome trick but one that is, as far as I know, still stupidly expensive. To give you a sense, to do a watch crystal/ "glass" is about $80. Now consider the size of the two surfaces in question and you can see how it may double the cost of even a high end monitor.

Also, from what I've been told by the people that do this sort of thing on a smaller scale, the bigger the object, the WAY harder it is. It doesn't scale linearly at all.

Another item I would love to see have this: Inside of my windshield, so I don't see my damn dashboard when the sun hits it.