Free Technology Newsletters
» All 33 InfoWorld Newsletters
Technology & Business Daily
 
InfoWorld
 
   

Apple's Cold and Fuzzy Dead Pixel Policy

By Ed Foster, Section The Gripelog
Posted on Mon May 22, 2006 at 12:34:21 AM PDT

As we recently saw, a number of manufacturers have some pretty horrendous dead pixel policies, claiming a display can have as many as 17 defective pixels without warranting an exchange. But several readers have now pointed out an even worse policy might be that of Apple, not because of the number of allowed pixels but because of its vagueness.


One reader went searching for Apple's policy after finding a dead pixel on a 17-inch Studio display he had just purchased. What he found was this "pixel anomalies" document that, after going on and on about how a bad pixel never hurt anybody, concludes:

"If you suspect your display contains a high number of pixel anomalies, take your Apple product to an Apple Authorized Service Provider for closer examination. There may be a charge for the evaluation."

So not only was the reader highly unlikely to get a replacement, he could be charged for asking for one. "Apple's policy is very unclear, as it does not put any limit on how many bad pixels it might think are acceptable," the reader said. "Not only is their policy extremely subjective, but you have to take the equipment to an Apple representative who might charge you for the evaluation even if they conclude you don't have enough bad pixels for their warranty."

Fortunately, that reader didn't need a defect-free monitor, but other readers are in situations where dead pixels cause them much more grief. "As creative director, I made the decision to get 30" Cinema Displays for my hard working staff -- five of them in total," wrote another reader. "They are a great conversation piece. One arrived with four dead pixels -- always on and glowing bright white. Not much compared with the 2560x1600 resolution, but they are clustered dead center in front of the eyeballs! Try doing fine retouching on an image when you know those four &^^$&^$% pixels are there. Apple told us it's an acceptable number. For $13K we expect NO DEAD PIXELS! Apple even treated me like an idiot for suggesting it might be their problem. Still, they are nice to look at from far."

Another reader with several defects on a 20-inch Cinema display was initially reassured by Apple that even one dead pixel was grounds for replacement. "Wow, I was relieved - what a high-quality product, thought I," the reader wrote. But when he checked up on the status of his case a few days later, it was a different story. "Now I'm stuck in a tedious runaround between the reseller telling me they can't do anything, Apple reps telling me SIX different answers to my 'so how many dead pixels are allowed?' question, and, furthermore, getting no real answers to any of my questions. I asked where my monitor was made. They don't know. I asked them who could tell me, they don't know. I asked them why I paid a triple-the-market price as opposed to competitors for an Apple display, thinking they would hold to their quality. And guess what. Nothing. I'm beginning to believe everything we buy these days is a sham. What is the manufacturing cost of these monitors? It must be low, if other companies can sell similar monitors for hundreds less. Who wrote this 'Industry Standard? Who decided that it was okay for a single dead pixel to hit the shelves? It's ridiculous!"

So which is worse, a dead pixel policy that sets an arbitrary number of required defects, or a totally arbitrary policy like the one Apple seems to have? Manufacturers often say that these policies need to be flexible, so for example a couple of glowing red pixels in the middle of the display would warrant replacement whereas a dozen hard-to-see defects on the periphery might not. But Apple's refusal to state a policy is obviously not about being flexible - four bright white pixels in the middle of a $2,500 screen should be considered a defective product in anybody's book.

And it's interesting to note that Apple's "pixel anomaly" non-policy applies not to only to flat panel monitors and laptops but iPods with color displays well. So more and more customers are likely to find themselves confronted with the glaring fact that the Apple logo on the device they paid such good money for doesn't mean what they thought it did.

< Only Clairol Knows For Sure | The Badware Watch List >


Display: Sort:
Apple's Cold and Fuzzy Dead Pixel Policy | 89 comments (89 topical) | Post A Comment
13K for one screen?[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#1)
by wantobe on Mon May 22, 2006 at 06:21:48 AM PDT

Ed, are you sure that's $13K for one screen? I read the guy's comments as that he spent $13K total for 5 screens. It's still an atrocious policy, but don't add an atrocious price for a 30" screen to the problem.

Rob Miles
--
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary and those who don't.
[ Reply to This ]


Thanks, good catch[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#2)
by Ed Foster on Mon May 22, 2006 at 08:24:17 AM PDT

Rob: Yes, that's a typo. I've changed it now.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


We can offer the dress 2006_style #024[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#114)
by Anonymous User on Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 06:52:23 AM PDT

Discount prom dress, cheap prom gown,beautiful short prom dress and quinceanera dress for sale, low price quinceanera dress and affordable plus size prom dress online shop. Sweet discount quinceanera dress,lovely prom dress and prom gown for your prom, we sale many discount prom dress, quinceanera gown and quinceanera dress. wedding dress discount wedding dress Bridal gowns wedding gown discount wedding dress wedding gown dress discount wedding dress discount wedding gown cheap wedding dress wedding dress blog french wedding dress Usa online wedding dress shop offers western western wedding dress and designer wedding dress, our best wedding dress and designer prom dress will make you very pretty, pretty prom dress and bridesmaid dress is very gracy. Buy cheap prom dress, discount prom dress from prom dress factory wholesale prom dress. Oil paintings portrait oil paintings famous oil paintings Oil paintings wholesale portrait oil paintings Oil paintings gallery sale oil paintings, oil painting reproduction, our high quality art reproduction, oil painting for sale, hand bags and discount handbags,we can make plus size dress,such as plus size prom dress. Famous art painting shop - masterpiece Oil Painting, oil painting reproduction, hand made oil painting on canvas,best oil paintings at lowest price. Oil painting for sale, wedding dress 2008 canvas oil painting and french wedding dress

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


55555555555[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#113)
by Anonymous User on Sat Aug 16, 2008 at 05:14:17 AM PDT

Free YouTube Downloader | YouTube to iPod | YouTube on PSP | YouTube to MP3 | YouTube to MP4 | YouTube to 3GP | YouTube to AVI | YouTube to MPG | YouTube to WMV | YouTube to DivX | YouTube to MOV | YouTube to WMA | YouTube Ripper YouTube to iPod | YouTube to iPhone | YouTube to PSP | YouTube to Zune | YouTube to MP4 | YouTube to Apple TV | YouTube to 3GP | iPod to PC Transfer

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


Statistics[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#3)
by Anonymous User on Mon May 22, 2006 at 12:50:06 PM PDT

I'd be interested which models get dead pixels. i have personally bought 2 Samsung 204Ts (20.3") and a Hyundai 17", all with no dead pixels...

[ Reply to This ]


dead pixels happen[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#4)
by JimB on Mon May 22, 2006 at 01:15:54 PM PDT

Apple dosn't own an LCD factory- they get what they get from their suppliers. I wish Apple had an arbitrary number policy rather than the arbitrary one they have now, as at least you know what you are buying when you have a set defect rate.

[ Reply to This ]


Dead Pixels - what frequency?[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#5)
by Anonymous User on Mon May 22, 2006 at 04:23:07 PM PDT

Granted, dead pixels in the center area of a screen are a problem for the those that get these monitors, but what is the real magnitude of the issue? It would seem that if it is a very low percentage of the monitors the manufacuturer would, or should, replace them with a smile. If, on the other hand this is a problem of more than just a tiny percent of the LCF monitors, maybe the thing to do is have the vendor unbox it and plug it into a working system before the customer will accept it. If the vendor is unwilling to do this be a good capitalist and take your business elsewhere. It wont take to many customers doing this for the vendors to lean on the manufacturers for better QC, tighter tolerances and a more definitive dead pixel policy. The computer software and hardware industries have had some poor customer relations ideas for years and these ideas are spilling over into manistream consumer products. It is past time to stop these consumer and customer unfriendly policies by filing class action suits and getting the attorneys general to enforce the existing laws to protect consumers.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


shop TigerDirect![ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#9)
by Anonymous User on Mon May 22, 2006 at 08:09:18 PM PDT

Direct quote from a TigerDirect customer service e-mail in response to my pre-sales query:
Here at TigerDirect we consider ANY bad pixels to be a manufacturer's defect, and covered under our 30-day defective exchange policy.
I bought my 213T from TigerDirect about five minutes after I read that response. I suggest getting a similar guarantee in writing from your reseller (whoever it might be) prior to making any purchase.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


TigerDirect's defect policy - look closely[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#20)
by Anonymous User on Tue May 23, 2006 at 02:48:42 PM PDT

We have a local store nearby in Raleigh, NC, and I get their ads in my email. I have been interested in their Syntax/Olevia LCD TV's frequently advertised thusly, but the one big "showstopper" for me is that those always have the disclaimer that any warranty problems are handled directly with the manufacturer. So even though I can buy and pick it up locally, it becomes a long-distance support issue immediately without TD's policy being relevant (as I read those disclaimers).

I would definitely follow one of the other poster's suggestion to have the one I would be getting tested in the store just before putting down my money. Or I would not put down my money.

ROC

[ Parent | Reply to This ]



You can always take it back to the store...[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#22)
by Anonymous User on Tue May 23, 2006 at 09:14:09 PM PDT

As much as most stores would rather not deal with it, if you buy retail, you can take it back. Someone complains? Dispute the charge. Retailers have more to lose with a few credit card disputes than with dealing with a return.

Here's one thing most people do not know--retailers usually have some sort of agreement with the manufacturers/wholesalers that allows for x-percentage of a product to be bad. So, if the contract stipulates that there won't be more than 5% defective widgets, the retailer receives 100 widgets, but only pays for 95. If less than 5 products get returned, the retailer comes out ahead (usually throwing away the defective products, not sending them back). More than that and the retailer screams at the source--but doesn't come out behind. Ever wonder why retailers offer "open box buys" on returns? They're not losing money on them as it's pure profit!

[ Parent | Reply to This ]



Rely on retailer to ensure quality of purchase[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#17)
by Anonymous User on Tue May 23, 2006 at 02:27:28 PM PDT

I believe this is good advise. The problem is when a person orders directly from Apple. I was once an Apple enthusiast in creative services who claimed they would have to tear my Mac from my cold, dead hands. Because of Apple's consistent terrible customer service, I have converted to HP and run all graphic programs on Windows (slow) OS and bear with inferior graphic display. Apple, get back in touch with your customers!

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


yes[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#107)
by maderikapapa on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 02:59:50 AM PDT

出会い出会い系サイト出会い喫茶出会い掲示板ナンパ出会いカフェ人妻出会い無 009;系サイト優良出会い系攻略 完全無料。アダルトビデオアダルト動画アダルトアニメアダルト画像アダル 488;サイト無料DVDアダルト風俗サンプル無料風俗優良アダルトサイト比較海 806;。人妻画像人妻パラダイス知合い人妻援護会人妻コレクション風 439;告白。熟女画像東京熟女掲示板動画熟女ビデオおまんこオナニーエロ画像エロフラッシュアニメ 456;ロ動画エロゲームエロ漫画無料エロサイト。エッチ画像エッチ動画エッチ小説写真エッチ 450;ニメエッチ0930。セックスアナルセックス画像セックス動画セックスフレンドスワッピングSEX写真セックスボランティセ 483;クス体位東京セックス仕方 SEX。おっぱい画像おっぱい村長おっぱい楽園掲示板お 387;ぱい命おっぱいゲーム。巨乳動画巨乳画像アイドル巨乳 522;示板風俗。セフレ募集セフレ掲示板セフレ画像掲示板セフレの作り方出会い無料素人セフレ。童貞狩りエロ漫画童貞狩り童貞喪失童貞オークション素人童貞逆援不倫パートナー不倫出会い人妻不倫不倫を楽しみたい方にはお薦め 154;妻画像など満載出会いサイトを楽しむならココ無料出会いで一緒に遊ぼう出会いはLOVEアゲインで決まり

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


APPLE OFFICIAL DEAD PIXEL POLICY[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#111)
by Anonymous User on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 07:49:30 PM PDT

I was looking around on the net and found this. Its a direct screen shot from Apple servers on their dead pixel policies. http://bayimg.com/eAkmlAaBc Enjoy

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


fvbh[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#119)
by Anonymous User on Wed Oct 22, 2008 at 07:25:51 AM PDT

SEXlink1

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


fgbb[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#121)
by Anonymous User on Thu Oct 23, 2008 at 10:03:22 AM PDT

,ff,,,f*f不倫

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


gfdd[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#124)
by Anonymous User on Sat Oct 25, 2008 at 11:50:17 AM PDT

出会,,,ff,,素人

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


fgkk[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#126)
by Anonymous User on Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 10:04:12 AM PDT

,fff巨乳熟女

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


fdmm[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#129)
by Anonymous User on Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 11:04:03 AM PDT

,ffff"f,,ff,,童貞

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


fbvd[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#131)
by Anonymous User on Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 01:22:59 PM PDT

童貞,f*ffff`

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


gfmm[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#133)
by Anonymous User on Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 09:05:22 AM PDT

,fff^,f不倫

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


fdgg[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#135)
by Anonymous User on Fri Oct 31, 2008 at 01:00:58 PM PDT

SEX,ff,,おっぱ,,

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


ffgb[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#137)
by Anonymous User on Sat Nov 01, 2008 at 11:09:44 AM PDT

不倫熟女,fff風--

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


fkoo[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#139)
by Anonymous User on Sun Nov 02, 2008 at 12:46:55 PM PDT

,ff,,SEX逆援

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


okmm[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#141)
by Anonymous User on Mon Nov 03, 2008 at 11:10:20 AM PDT

不倫童貞ff',

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


jdhh[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#143)
by Anonymous User on Tue Nov 04, 2008 at 08:03:43 AM PDT

,f*f熟女,fff

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


mkoo[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#145)
by Anonymous User on Wed Nov 05, 2008 at 01:18:08 AM PDT

人妻,f*f,ff,,

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


gfbb[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#147)
by Anonymous User on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 02:16:04 AM PDT

,fff^,f熟女

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


fvbb[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#149)
by Anonymous User on Sat Nov 08, 2008 at 03:44:02 AM PDT

人妻,fff不倫

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


ggfd[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#151)
by Anonymous User on Sun Nov 09, 2008 at 06:50:25 AM PDT

,fff^SEX逆援

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


fgbb[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#152)
by Anonymous User on Mon Nov 10, 2008 at 02:14:28 AM PDT

童貞,f人妻

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


fdii[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#154)
by Anonymous User on Sat Nov 15, 2008 at 10:24:14 PM PDT

,fff^熟女,,-<sup>TM</sup>,fff^<*"</a>

[
Parent | Reply to This ]


dsko[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#155)
by Anonymous User on Sat Nov 22, 2008 at 12:06:24 AM PDT

,f,ff,,出会,,

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


Never Seen A Dead Pixel[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#6)
by Anonymous User on Mon May 22, 2006 at 05:38:04 PM PDT

I work in a corporate IT dept. that is 100% Dell, and I've never seen a SINGLE dead pixel on the HUNDREDS of displays that we've received from them. This is on 17", 19" and 20" LCDs and notebooks of all sizes. Knowing this, I would absolutely demand replacement of panels that had a single dead pixel on delivery. This would be particularly true if it was on my home system!

[ Reply to This ]


Dead pixels are not usually obvious[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#10)
by Anonymous User on Mon May 22, 2006 at 11:29:33 PM PDT

I find it much easier to believe that you simply don't notice dead pixels (most people don't unless they put their faces right up the monitor as you often do when retouching a photo) than you configured hundreds of LCD monitors not a single one of which had a dead pixel. Often you can hardly make out a dead pixel at all unless the background behind it is a uniform colour that happens to be extremely contrasty with the dead pixel's colour.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


Fitness for purpose.[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#7)
by Anonymous User on Mon May 22, 2006 at 05:56:42 PM PDT

I don't know what the laws are in the US, as I'm an Australian citizen. But over here, two relevant clauses in the law that the manufacturer cannot escape are that the goods be of "merchantable quality", and that they be "fit for purpose".

If I bought an LCD with several always-on white pixels clustered near the center of the screen, I'd be asking for a replacement. As soon as Apple were to start giving me the run around, I'd be quietly mentioning those two terms. I'm willing to bet that they'd backpedal at a rate sufficient to put Lance Armstrong to shame.

If they wanted to make life hard for me even after that, I'd be more than willing to take it to the Small Claims Tribunal. Especially on a screen costing around four thousand dollars Australian ...

[ Reply to This ]



Apple has more than dead pixels[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#8)
by joep42 on Mon May 22, 2006 at 06:03:55 PM PDT

My Gateway's (2) have no dead pixels. Apple and Steve Jobs have always been an arrogant bunch spending to much time trying to bring down Bill Gates & Co. and making over priced PC products based more on making a fashion statement than doing serious computing. While they have a small but near zealot following, they never have been able to get more than 8 or 9% of the PC market share. Now Apple's once top notch quality and top notch customer support and satisfaction are mere vestiges. Too bad, because if it weren't for Apple's arrogance, they could have been a top competitor in the Win/Intel market. Just think what it would be like if OS X could run on a Gateway, Dell or HP. As for the dead pixels, shame on them.

[ Reply to This ]


Apple is Terrific to Me[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#13)
by Anonymous User on Tue May 23, 2006 at 11:16:14 AM PDT

The original post said, "I'm beginning to believe everything we buy these days is a sham." Then you add, "Now Apple's once top notch quality and top notch customer support and satisfaction are mere vestiges."

Obviously, you have not got your hands on Apple's new MacBook. www.apple.com/macbook/macbook.html That thing works like a dream; is far, far superior than PCs so far as I can tell, and I have been fixing PCs for years; has a stable operating system based on UNIX, and allows the owner to use the computer creatively, not maintain the computer in an ever dwindling spiral until the OS has to be reloaded to solve the numerous problems.

I realize you may be enamoured of the knowledge you have gained constantly fixing PCs, but think of the possibilities of a computer that just plain works and doesn't get in your way. Then go down to your Apple store and give Apple a try once again.

Suggestion: Now that the MacBook is out, buy Apple stock.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


Consider yourself lucky[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#18)
by The Masked Marauder on Tue May 23, 2006 at 02:37:50 PM PDT

Suggestion: Now that the MacBook is out, buy Apple stock.

And while you're at it, buy stock in companies that make thermal paste. Whoever assembles the MacBook for Apple has a bad habit of drowning the CPU with too much thermal paste, causing it to overheat:

http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=2946&review=Apple+MacBook http://davidsmalley.com/blog/archives/2006/05/08/apple-launches-idamage-control-over-macbook-pro-ove rheating/ http://techreport.com/onearticle.x/9889

This is not exactly what I call "top-notch quality". More is not better when it comes to thermal paste, a fact that anyone who is experienced with computer assembly can testify to. How these MacBooks slipped past quality control without being caught is beyond me....

[ Parent | Reply to This ]



LG, no dead pixels[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#11)
by Anonymous User on Tue May 23, 2006 at 05:29:22 AM PDT

I just bought an LG 19" monitor. Concerned I might have problems with dead pixel "policies" I got it at Best Buy. If you have any problem, they will exchange it. And while we know the floor staff has "no authority" to make these kinds of statements, if you ask them about what you should do if your monitor has dead pixels, they will openly tell you to bring it back and they will exchange it.

Incidently, the monitor I bought had no dead pixels.

I think these policies are unacceptable to the consumer. A display should have NO dead pixels. I don't care if it's 6.9 million transistors or not. That's a manufacturing and quality issue. If you can't manufacture flat panel displays with 100% operation, you should not be in the business of building them (and I'm referring to the panel manufacturers, not Apple, etc). Apple and the other panel builders should REJECT the bad panels when they receive them, but they don't care. They just foist the junk onto the public and say "it's OK". If the public continues to accept garbage, the manufacturers will continue to enforce policies such as this. Would you accept a car with ANY defects? I think not. You have to vote with your dollars.

[ Reply to This ]



It occurs to me that Apple would do well[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#12)
by Anonymous User on Tue May 23, 2006 at 10:31:55 AM PDT

to accept returns on the defective monitors and simply put them back on the shelf. The vast majority of users don't know to look for dead pixels and would have a hard time finding one if they did know what they were. That way, you keep the knowledgeable customers happy, while the less knowledgeable ones are happy anyway because they don't care or don't know any better. For those saying that one dead pixel is a travesty and that all companies should guarantee 100% working pixels: Get real. Very few things in life are 100%. Antibacterial soap doesn't kill 100% of germs. Condoms are not 100% effective. If something worked 100% of the time, it would be so expensive that the "one-dead-pixel discount" would be so attractive that you'd forget all about that gleaming white dot in front of your eyes. There's a point at which it's not in a manufacturer's best interest to fine tune the production process because the incremental return of eliminating one more dead pixel is not in line with the cost to eliminate it. But this is all predicated on foisting dead pixels on consumers who don't know any better while pleasing those who do. Sad to say, but that's the best way to go about it.

[ Reply to This ]


With an appropriate label (and discount)[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#19)
by The Masked Marauder on Tue May 23, 2006 at 02:43:12 PM PDT

It occurs to me that Apple would do well to accept returns on the defective monitors and simply put them back on the shelf.

Add "and sell them as used." To sell a returned item as new constitutes fraud.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]



No it doesn't.[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#21)
by Anonymous User on Tue May 23, 2006 at 06:14:56 PM PDT

Ever been to Best Buy and seen that one item on the shelf that has packing tape around it instead of shrink wrap? It's still being sold as new, provided the box isn't damaged and everything is brought back. They could still sell them as new as long as the person returning didn't use it for a couple weeks THEN decide to return it.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


Try this one then...[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#26)
by Anonymous User on Wed May 24, 2006 at 08:46:40 AM PDT

Totally unrelated to the original post, but on the topic of Best Buy and Fraud...
We recently bought a 37" LCD TV from Best Buy.  The day after we got it home, the speaker started buzzing, so we called BB to see about making an exchange, due to the original unit being defective.  They didn't have any more of the model I had chosen in the area, and said it would take 2 weeks to get a replacement from the warehouse, and that we should just keep the defective one until the replacement arrived.
2 weeks pass, we take the defective unit back, fill out the forms stating that the speaker was messed up, and recieve our new tv.

About a week after that, we recieve a phone call asking if we recently purchased a new tv.

Apparently Best Buy not only opted to sell the tv that we returned as defective, after 2 weeks of use btw, as new (the woman that called had no idea we returned it as defective), but they sold it with a large sticker on the side that listed my name, address and phone number!

[ Parent | Reply to This ]



HA! That's just dumb.[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#27)
by Anonymous User on Wed May 24, 2006 at 12:33:00 PM PDT

Best Buy should have known that NO ONE in their right mind would keep a TV that buzzed and that they should've sent that one back. But for the monitor situation, most people just won't notice dead pixels so I think there's little harm in putting it back on the shelf. I have a pretty crappy early-generation Envision flat panel that I thought for sure must have dead pixels, but I looked really hard and couldn't find anything.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


LCD TV in Market[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#105)
by Anonymous User on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 03:46:40 AM PDT

If we think world without entertainment,it's nothing.In today's scenario the Cheap LCD TV has been taken the good place in the mode of entertainment.Can they hold the market?

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


Defective LCDs[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#14)
by Anonymous User on Tue May 23, 2006 at 11:32:54 AM PDT

Having worked in several semiconductor plants including LCD manufacturing in South Korea, I know that testing of all semiconductor products including LCDs is conducted at several stages of manufacture. Much of the testing is automatic. Some testing is conducted by a trained operator. Defective elements on a chip can often be repaired or compensated for in the manufacturing process. Those memory elements that cannot be compensated for on an individual chip on a large wafer are trashed. LCD screens are different from memory chips in that an uncompensated failure of an element on a memory chip renders the chip useless while LCD screens, which receive only input and no output, can be accpeted with a few defects. However, LCD screens that have known so-called acceptable defects are downgraded and sold on the open market as less than prime product. LCD testing procedures reveal all defects at the time of manufacture but they of course do not reveal subsequent defects due to infant mortality and/or burn-in. Other manufacturers buy the raw screens from the original manufacturer and then incorporate and package them into the products we buy. If Apple's LCD offering has an abnormal number of defects, it can only come about because Apple is purchasing LCDs from a manufacturer who is using downgraded LCD components as a cost cutting measure. If Apple is aware of a high number of defective screens, then they are purposefully trading on the once noble Apple trademark to steal from their customers by charging high premium prices for downgraded junk. There are labels for people and organizations that build a business on that philosophy but I refrain to use them because this is a "family" site.

[ Reply to This ]


Don't they have a 2 week return policy ?[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#15)
by Anonymous User on Tue May 23, 2006 at 11:33:55 AM PDT

I believe Apple has a 2 week no questions asked return policy ( I used it when the Mini first came out ) They can charge a restocking fee, but in my case they didn't. I just told them I didn't like it. So if it's got dead pixels on day one, just send it back and say you don't like the shade of titanium it is "oh, it had bad pixels" ?

[ Reply to This ]


Apple Service Manual Policy[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#16)
by Ed Foster on Tue May 23, 2006 at 02:14:43 PM PDT

A reader has kindly sent me the page from the Apple service manuaul for the 23-inch Cinema display. It tells Apple service reps to replace the display if there are eight or more always bright pixels, 11 or more always dark pixels, or a combination of 16 bright and dark pixels. Presumably even more bad pixels are allowed on the 30-inch Cinema, since it has a larger surface area, so our reader with the four bright white pixels is a long way from getting a replacement. -- Ed

[ Reply to This ]


For the market[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#23)
by TonyK on Wed May 24, 2006 at 05:09:33 AM PDT

Apple is shooting for with these monitors (usually the high-end graphic shops), any pixels with issues will be a problem.

As a digital photographer, I rely on a GOOD display to color correct. Any pixel (dead or hot) that is bad will cause me some issues in retouching.

Now think about the vidoegraphers, working with moving images. As their subjects traverse the screen, those pixels come more in to play.

It is wrong for manufacturers to tell customers to accept less than perfect merchandise. If a car manufacturer were to say, or its hitting on 3 of 4 cylinders, its okay, there were be BIG news stories, law suits, etc.

Maye a different anology is order. Roofs. They are big. Just like big LCD monitors. So is it acceptable to have 8 to 16 holes in the roof if the majority of the roof does not leak? I don't think so. It comes to suitability of purpose. A roof is meant to protect a home from the elements. Leaks would not be tolerated. Big LCD monitors are meant to be viewed. Hot and/or dead pixels interfer with that, especially if they are clustered in one area.

Too bad the people in charge of protecting consumers are not leading better.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]



Still a pretty poor analogy[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#25)
by Anonymous User on Wed May 24, 2006 at 06:18:41 AM PDT

If you take the percentage of pixels failed as compared to the number of pixels on the screen, it would be more like having 1 square centimeter of defective roof rather than 8 or 16 shingles.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


screw off this is a reply not a new thread[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#33)
by Anonymous User on Fri Jun 09, 2006 at 02:13:16 AM PDT

1 square centimetre of leaky roof is enough to be a major nuisance, especially if it's fifty pinpricks in each room rather than a 1-cm by 1-cm hole in a single spot you can put a single bucket under.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


Perhaps...[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#24)
by Anonymous User on Wed May 24, 2006 at 06:06:06 AM PDT

The standard should be conspicuousness. If malfunctioning pixels near the center are obvious at a glance, it's considered defective. Otherwise grade them A, B, or C, with C having malfunctioning pixels that are fairly obvious (but no obvious ones near the center), B having only unobvious ones (and maybe none near the center), and A having none. A device builder may then incorporate only grade A panels into their higher end equipment, especially anything used by experienced image/video editors, B panels and leftover As in consumer displays, and C panels in things like iPods and such where the display's role is generally not as a source of entertainment or beauty but merely as part of the device's interface.

On the other hand, even if you do retouching and other fancy graphics manipulations, any modern application lets you zoom, scroll, reposition windows, etc. in order to move a particular bit out from under a bad pixel while you work on that particular bit.

Infant mortality was mentioned, and is addressable simply by operating and stressing the screen panels for a while (say, with split cable originating from a cheap Windoze box running a screen saver). At the end of some period of time, most of the pixels that were doomed to die in infancy will have done so, and the display as it is at that point has most/all the dead pixels it will ever have during its service lifetime. It is at that point that it is appropriate to grade the displays, reject the D grade (obvious there are bad pixels near center), and sell the A, B, and C grades to device builders who will use the panels. The latter can buy the grades they need in the proportions they need to build the particular devices they build.

[ Reply to This ]



Sell Dead Pixel Monitors as "Blems"[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#28)
by joep42 on Wed May 24, 2006 at 05:05:43 PM PDT

I agree that a rating system is needed.

In the tire industry, one can get a reasonable discount on new tires if they are "blems" - the sidewall lettering or whitewall is not up to the quality standard expected by the manufacturer. The tire is perfectly safe and usable, and the manufacturer is honestly pointing out that the tires have blemishes and therefore are being made available at a reduced price.

Too bad this touch of honesty escapes Apple.  All LCD monitors should have a rating as the reader suggests and be priced and discounted accordingly - depending on the number and location of the dead pixels.  My goodness, they get enough money for them - you would think they would not only do this, but they would burn them in also. If within the first 60 days the number of bad pixels increased over the rating, then the manufacturer would be obligated to replace it with a new one of the same or better rating.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]



I agree, this is a pretty good system.[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#29)
by Anonymous User on Thu May 25, 2006 at 07:27:40 AM PDT

Do LCD makers actually hook up the monitors and do burn-in before they leave the plant?

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


15 was enough[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#30)
by Anonymous User on Thu May 25, 2006 at 10:47:52 AM PDT

Speaking as an Apple customer, four bad pixels weren't enough.  

Apple shipped my G4 PowerBook (this is about two years ago) with four bad pixels and refused to do anything about it.  When the laptop later developed a host of other issues and was going back for service anyways, they replaced the screen (along with the main board, power inverter, and a few other odds & ends).  At that point, more pixels had failed bringing the total to 15 always-bright subpixels (mostly blue & red, though a few ended up grey somehow).

Fortunately, the new panel was MUCH better than the original -- no bad pixels, much brighter, must more uniform lighting.  T'would have been nice if they'd gotten it right the first time.

I'm glad to say my new MacBook Pro was pristine at the time of purchase.  Of course by this time I'd learned.  I went to my local Apple Store instead of ording on-line and refused to leave until I'd powered the unit on & checked for any problems.

[ Reply to This ]



Buy from top rated retailers only[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#32)
by Anonymous User on Mon Jun 05, 2006 at 01:21:39 PM PDT

When I read something like this I just say DUH! to myself. Buy ONLY from retailers who have a 100% no questions asked, no hassle return policy. 1 dead pixel = 1 return for full credit or exchange. Case closed.

[ Reply to This ]


1 dead pixel vs what[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#34)
by Anonymous User on Thu Aug 10, 2006 at 05:08:46 AM PDT

2-3 years ago when big LCD screens were very $$$$, people in the creative bussiness used trinitron CRT displays. I still have one 21' myself. Those displays had two wires runin