I think you're fooling yourself if you believe that ANY laptop/notebook computer's going to have acceptably good color right out of the box. No one, to my knowledege, has ever said that one would. In fact, the word 'usable' has so many meanings to so many different users that the word 'adjustable', or 'customizable' might make more sense in this context, considering the vast array personal preferences, not to mention the vast array of consumer output devices through which a typical neophyte and consumer-level user's iPhoto file will pass.
Yes, there are a lot of people using iPhoto and Aperture, and they should at least know enough to be able to set up their monitor/displays for basic printing purposes, a process so simple these days that printer manufacturers are trying to get rid of the 'computer' step of the printing process altogether, pushing the insanely 'un-great', paper-wasting method of inserting your camera's SD card directly into the printer (usually a flimsily constructed life-support system for draining expensive ink cartridges), a process so basic that six-year olds, working in groups of 4 or 5, after a sugary mid-morning snack, . Simple technical literacy enough to effectively use either program is plenty sufficient to do so. To expect less of these new owners/users is foolish,as I've taught second-graders how to do so; I certainly expect adults to be able to catch up with *these 'lil whippersnappers!;^)
I've gotta clear something up right now, concerning the relative value of the Apple software System Preferences color calibration control panel... my son, who' in first grade, and has pretty much taught himself the basics of Macs on his own, refined the color display on his older sister's MacBook (2.4 Ghz Unibody), solving what he calls 'way too big Reds' on the family's networked Epson R2400 using his eyes and the Apple software to do the ('Expert' tab) basic color-calibration on a new Apple 'notebook' (I still use them on my lap just fine, with no singed legs), is adequate to produce a flexible method towards perceptually accurate color output. To get pretty good results 'out of the box' with simple photo prints is a matter of luck, not reasonable expectations. Just because, however, your UMBP has colors that don't look good 'right out of the box', or your UMBP's display doesn't yet seem to react well to Apple's System Prefs color calibration (remember- 'Expert' tab ONLY), doesn't mean your UMBP's junk and needs a new display, although many here will screech that it's no good as a product unless its colrs are 'spot-on' right out of the box. There's a HUGE market for color-calibration devices, and the push is 'down-scale' ever more, every day, with this equipment, and a LOT of it is being sold to Mac owners, and it's NOT because they have marginal equipment that's somehow fundamentally lacking in basic capabilities.
The next level up is quite a steep step; hardware calibration to which I've been referring is the
first step, not the last. I'm referring to professional, color-critical image editing, publishing, etc., all uses to which no notebook computer should be reasonably expected to be the sole source of output files; rather, a well-calibrated notebook with an the hardware to reproduce printed and viewed with any reasonable degree of accuracy at all is only a component in a larger CMS ecosystem. In other words, anyone expecting to print a 4/4 coated color magazine from Quark, Illustrator and Photoshop files to a Heidelberg press off of a notebook computer is delusional. That said, a simple puck and 50 MB of good software, for example the GMB Eye-One Display is all you need to get WAY closer to no more 'too big Reds, or 'Blues', or 'Magentas', et al... the next step, how to properly calibrate to an ICC CMS standard both your acquisition (scanner, etc.) and your output devices (printers), is the next step, and a full-lown CMS that encompasses the ICC output profiles of specific devices, like your printers' vast offset 6-color press, the step after that.
One final word- the notion many here on this forum seem to hold, that 'because I have this issue, ans some others here have that
sameor similar, issue that it must be a defective, recall -worthy product line, or that hundreds of thousands of other users of these same products must be experiencing these same issues as well is wrong. The folks on this forum have sought out this place to communicate about, well, issues and questions with and about their Macs- it's not a cross-section of ALL Mac owners' product experiences, or the results of some nationwide Mac Owners Poll, or even an accurate microcosm of all MacBook Pro owners, for example- it's more like a microSYSTEM, where specific kinds of users gather with similar users and talk about very specific types of issues and experiences, some of which they share, some of which they do not. But to conflate THIS place with the rest of the MacBook Pro kingdom is a mistake, and a common one hereabouts. Remember that MOST users out there do NOT have such issues, whatever reinforcement for your issue you might find here- you, and the rest of us, are a small group, not the subjects of a national forum of all Mac users, or even any more than a
few Mac users... don't let your perceptions of the rest of the Mac world become 'MUG'ed' (sorry- couldn't resist) =^D
Best,
Charlie