Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Displays Graphics Software

Samsung Announces Zero Dead Pixel Policy 430

Posted by CowboyNeal from the quality-returns dept.
Kez writes "A result for the consumer as Samsung declares any TFT that they sell from today onwards should be guaranteed dead pixel free. Until now, purchasing a TFT has been a gamble, given that dead pixels, while extremely annoying, did not necessarily entitle the consumer to a replacement monitor. Unfortunately, anybody who bought a Samsung TFT before today is not covered by the new policy." Update: 01/01 19:49 GMT by M : The new policy only applies in S. Korea. Suck.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Samsung Announces Zero Dead Pixel Policy More

Samsung Announces Zero Dead Pixel Policy

Comments Filter:

  • Garcon! (Score:5, Funny)

    by UnCivil Liberty ( 786163 ) * on Saturday January 01, 2005 @01:50PM (#11234034)
    "Waiter, there's a dead pixel in my soup!"
    "Terribly sorry sir."

  • Why aren't UXGA flat panel more popular? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 01, 2005 @01:52PM (#11234047)
    Why aren't the 1600x1200 flat panel LCD monitors more popular? Why do people put up with the crappy 1280x1024 resolution with a 20" monitor? Laptops have better resolution than most desktops these days. Very strange.

    • Re:Why aren't UXGA flat panel more popular? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 01, 2005 @02:03PM (#11234102)
      Many people aren't aware that font sizes and pixel sizes are independent issues, and get a bigger display so that the same pixel-size graphics are "bigger". Silly, I know, but the problem is particularly acute on Windows, because of Really Stupid (tm) windows third-party application coders who hardcode pixel sizes everywhere.

      First rule of modern GUI design: Natural Units and Vector Graphics, not Pixels!

      An 8 POINT font should be the same SIZE - 8 points (duh!) - on a 1280x1024 or 1600x1200 display - it should just be a bit clearer on a 1600x1200 display. When I set my document zoom to 100% and hold an A4 sheet up to the display, the A4 sheet on screen better be the same size as the physical sheet, or there'll be a bug report filed!

    • Laptops also have smaller screens than the larger 1280x1024 LCD monitors. I have to set the fonts in my browser to 20 points to just be able to easily read web sites on my laptop.

    • Price... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Kjella ( 173770 ) on Saturday January 01, 2005 @02:05PM (#11234111) Homepage
      ...I was looking at some LCDs recently.

      Good 19" LCD (1280x1024): 4500NOK / 650$
      Good 20" LCD (1600x1200): 8000NOK / 1150$

      Now, that is including 24% VAT and whatnot so forget about comparing them to US prices. But the ratio should be about the same. You have to pay a damn lot extra to get that 1" and additional resolution. We're talking very different price points, and there's no doubt which one is "mass market" and which one is not...

      Kjella
      • Agreed. A few months ago I was looking for something big and cheap and got this [viewsoniceurope.com] for 473 euros.

        I do most of my real work on an old 800x600 laptop, and I find that a bigger screen only tends to be cluttered with more windows. I prefer a smaller screen and virtual desktops, and I wanted a bigger screen mainly for watching videos.

        I think a better resolution would only be beneficial if it was something like 200 dpi or better, at which point you didn't need AA any more.

      • 1200x1920 Vertical (Score:4, Interesting)

        by shirai ( 42309 ) on Saturday January 01, 2005 @07:24PM (#11235507) Homepage
        It's probably too late to get any mod points on this but for any of those late viewers who happen to see this...

        This is something I completely did not expect. I often buy the latest and greatest thing to get an idea for trends and which ones would stick and new ideas for development. A lot of them turn out as busts but the ones that work really pay off. One of my more recent acqusitions was a 1920x1200 monitor.

        It is a Samsung one that can flip into a vertical display mode.

        Well, my intent was to only use it in horizontal mode. In fact, I originally bought the Mac 1920x1200 widescreen but returned it due to connector compatibility problems which they didn't document.

        Anyways, I flipped the Samsung for fun and let me tell you, there is no going back. When writing software, the more vertical space you have, the more lines of code you can see at once. This improved productivity a great deal. I now always leave my monitor in vertical mode and I absolutely love it.

        The funny thing though is I never thought I'd be using my monitor like this. It seemed like a gimmick or at best, useful for designers. And I am actually a graphic designer too (I used to even have a design company) and seeing a full page drastically changes the way you design as well. Anyways, if you are a programmer with cash to spare, this is a great way to improve productivity.

        Ironically, the other great find on producitivity was a rectangular bookshelf (one level but wide with edges and a top) that I mounted over my computer desk. It puts all the books I need access to really close by. I found that having reference books within arms reach, easy to find greatly increased my use of the reference books and also improved productivity. I originally bought this bookshelf just to clean up my area but it turned out to have a great productivity boost.
    • Because the target market (the ones who make the most money) are at an age where they can't see too well and usually only use 800x600 or 1024x768 anyway.

      Me, I just find contrast and response much more important. I still have yet to actually see a < 16 ms monitor, so I don't even know if I still don't want an LCD monitor or not.
    • Jesus what planet are you living on. Hi res laptop screens have only just come into the affordable range for most people. I paid nearly 4K for a machine with a 1600x1200 screen a few years ago. Lower resolution would have been a lot cheaper and I still get higher resolution when I connect it to my iilayma monitor, cos it can handle the graphics card. I have another laptop with UXGA as well now and after 2 weeks a block of 4 pixels died leaving me a nice black dot on my screen. Good quality monitors and grap
    • I agree. It's frustrating somewhat, and only "somewhat" because I wouldn't actually be able to afford one if there was one out.

      I run my 19" CRT at 1600x1200 and know I'm not alone, so can't understand why they would think that no one would want a 19" LCD, a bigger screen, that can go up to that resolution.
    • I have 150% vision, but even on my 21 inch monitor I feel 1600x1200 is too small, and I seriously doubt average consumers knows how to hack XFree and .inf files to get the more decent 1400x1050 resolution.

      With a ridiculous large gap as that between 1280 and 1600 it is no wonder it takes a long time for people to upgrade.

  • Logical step are ... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Moulinneuf ( 844899 ) on Saturday January 01, 2005 @01:53PM (#11234049) Journal
    Logical step are ...

    1) they raise the price of samsung monitor
    2) they wait inspection before applying Samsung sticker to monitor and send those that fail to other brand ...

    • Quite likely... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Kjella ( 173770 ) on Saturday January 01, 2005 @02:17PM (#11234167) Homepage
      ...and you see that in other areas as well, e.g. CPUs. Those who pass the most rigorous stability tests become server chips, the others may (unless scrap) be sold as desktops. Or binned in some other fashion.

      I mean, for many uses an LCD with a dead pixel or five is completely acceptable. For others it is not. I very much doubt they'll throw away a screen with a single dead pixel. It has simply too much value.

      Kjella

      • Re:Quite likely... (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Novous ( 844236 )
        >Those who pass the most rigorous stability tests become server chips, the others may (unless scrap) be sold as desktops.

        That's so incorrect, I almost lost some intelligence. High-quality processors (server ones) have to meet a higher level of stability, yes. But the ones that don't, simply aren't used. They aren't sold at a lower clock rate or at all for that matter. Or do you think Opterons somehow magically fit into Athlon FX boards? Or that a 3200 XP is just a really good 1900 XP?
        • Yes it's incorrect, but it's not far wrong. The 2.0 Ghz through 2.6 Ghz P4s for example are all the same chip. They take the chips and label them at the highest clockspeed they are stable at.

        • Re:Quite likely... (Score:3, Informative)

          by TheRaven64 ( 641858 )
          The grandparent was guilty of oversimplification, rather than inaccuracy. Most CPUs for a small range of clock speeds are usually exactly the same die. The ones that pass tests are rated at the full speed, the ones that pass the tests when underclocked are rated at a lower speed, and the ones that don't pass the tests at all are thrown away. Often, at the start of a new run there is a higher yield of the higher performance part than there is demand and so some of the higher performance models sold as low
    • What they do is keep the good ones in Asia and send the ones with the dead pixels to the U.S.

  • Nice but where?` (Score:5, Informative)

    by Daath ( 225404 ) <(kd.redoc) (ta) (pl)> on Saturday January 01, 2005 @01:55PM (#11234062) Homepage Journal
    I can't seem to find a samsung source that says this? But it is very very nice, and about time, I think! Nowhere else do you buy products that are slightly defect (and still very expensive!)...

    • Nowhere else do you buy products that are slightly defect (and still very expensive!)...

      Everything has design and manufacturing tolerances. The ball bearings I just installed in my bicycle hubs are probably out of round by a few microns or more, but thats all. If they were perfectly spherical, they might roll marginally better, with less wobble in the wheel. The difference is not enough to make me want to track down better quality bearings (ie, $1 bearings instead of $0.05 bearings).

      Same for your monito

      • Exactly ... and if there IS a defect, it can be more or less annoying depending on where it is. I own a Nikon D70 camera and I got one with no dead or stuck pixels (that I have seen so far). A friend bought one when he found out how much I love it, and his has a stuck (green) pixel in the lower center area of the rear display. It's more annoying there than it would have been if it was off to the side, or if it was red or blue instead (since our eyes are more sensitive to green, it stands out more). We are n

    • Re:Nice but where?` (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Viceice ( 462967 ) on Saturday January 01, 2005 @02:48PM (#11234300)
      I don't know about you Americans but my side of the Pacific, we haven't had LCDs with dead pixels for a while now.

      Customers started getting pissed off at dead pixels, and when buying an LCD monitor, they would demand that they be shown the monitor plugged in before they pay for it.

      As a result, stores here will have their staff open each box before delivery and test, and reject monitors that come with dead pixels.

      So it's been years since i've seen a monitor with a dead pixel in a store for sale.

      • Re:Nice but where?` (Score:3, Insightful)

        by mkro ( 644055 )
        I don't know where you live, but it is not West- or Northern Europe. Yes, customers get pissed off by dead pixels, but because of the production costs of LCD displays, their only option is to pay more for a guaranteed pixel perfect monitor. That is why it is called "pixel policy".
        A dealer calling their distributor every time he gets a LCD with pixel faults, will get very very tired, as mostly warranty is handled by the manufacturer directly, not the distributor. If the dealer yells and screams enough, the

  • is it possible? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by hdd ( 772289 )
    i never had a 15"+ lcd without a single dead pixel.
    • I agree they're common but my laptop, Nintendo DS and 17" LCD all have no dead pixels.

      Though I had to go through three DSes for a friend [was a present] before I found one without a dead pixel [they exchanged them without hesitation] and my brothers new laptop had a shiny red pixel at the bottom [which they replaced without question either].

      The trick is to shop retail. They usually have very decent replacement policies [specially BestBuy/Futureshop] and keep your receipts and boxes.

      With LCD monitors I a
    • I have a 15" widescreen and 17" LCD and both dont' have dead pixels. Or am I just lucky?
    • I've had my Cornea MP704 17" LCD for a couple of years and still don't have a single dead pixel.

      It has been an excellent monitor, I'd definitely buy a Cornea again.

    • I have a Powerbook G3 and a 17" Samsung SyncMaster 770. Neither one has any dead pixels. In fact, I don't recall ever seeing a dead pixel on any monitor. YMMV, I guess.

      To be fair, though, the PBG3 was refurbished and the SyncMaster was a floor display at CompUSA. It's not likely QA's gonna miss a problem the second time or that they're gonna leave a display with dead pixels on the showroom floor.
    • Yeah, I bought a 16" Sharp a couple of years ago (which I still use) and it has been perfect. Course, it was about $900, but it was cheapest I could afford back then which did 1280x1024. (WTF would ever buy a screen that only did 1024!?)
    • i never had a 15"+ lcd without a single dead pixel.

      Just bought a 21.3" LCD a month ago. 1600x1200 with zero dead pixels.

      Brand? You guessed it - Samsung.
    • You sig is wrong.
      Got to:
      ipod [apple.com]
      It says under the features section:
      "Play MP3, AAC and Apple Lossless"

  • I'll Never Understand... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 01, 2005 @01:56PM (#11234068)
    Why anyone would ever actually believe that you couldn't return an LCD (or laptop) with a dead pixel. This is a manufacturing defect, plain and simple. Every customer expects there will be NO dead pixels, so my guess is that proving to a court of law that a dead pixel is a de facto breach of various implied warranties (and probably express warranties that come with the unit as well) would not be difficult.

    Any decent credit card will likely supply the consumer with enough tools to reject a charge for such an item, if refused. Further, if pushed, I sincerely doubt any company would believe that they could win in a case where they're trying to foist an obviously defective monitor on someone by claiming that the defect is really bad enough to be a defect. Right. Most states provide a damages multiplier for unfair business practices such as this. This means if push actually did come to shove and you had to go to small claims court, you'd get double or triple your money back.

    My guess? Samsung realizes the above to be true, and is trying to play this to their advantage.

    • Re:I'll Never Understand... (Score:5, Informative)

      by Nossie ( 753694 ) * <IanHarvie@4Devel ... ent.Net minus pi> on Saturday January 01, 2005 @02:14PM (#11234146)
      I have to agree with you here...

      In the UK atleast and if you buy online we have a legal right to return any bought product before 14? days have passed with no questions asked, as long as its still worth selling.

      I have a 20" HP LCD which has no dead pixels... 1600x1200 of pure sexyness..

      But I'd feel robbed if I thought I'd paid the money for that and got more than say 3 dead pixels in conspicuous places.

      I laugh at Sony's PSP dead pixel policy and honour Nintendo's 0 tolerance offer...

      woopy do how many pixels there are on a monitor -- it does not give companies the right to sell faulty products. If they cant sell them perfect they shouldnt be selling them at all.

      In the uk I think I can legally return any product by law if I'm not happy with what I bought... but I also think you *need* to kick up the shit in the showroom you bought it from to do so. (trading standards would come down on them like a ton of bricks) And bad publicity usually makes any store stand down.

      Rather than making it up to the consumer to put their own money up front to ensure satisfaction.. I believe it should be law that you recieve (for the same price) a product in the same condition someone else could. Because if I can get a TFT with no dead pixels... why the hell should I buy another that might?
      • For a time some stores put up signs saying that you could expect dead pixels.. that lasted about a month, because everyone just went to the stores that didn't have such signs instead.

        I've never seen a dead pixel in a monitor, and I've been through a few (setup an office with 75 of the things)... maybe it's just in the UK that we don't put up with such things... they ship all the duds to the US :)

      • Re:I'll Never Understand... (Score:5, Informative)

        by Richard_at_work ( 517087 ) on Saturday January 01, 2005 @03:37PM (#11234510)

        In the UK atleast and if you buy online we have a legal right to return any bought product before 14? days have passed with no questions asked, as long as its still worth selling.

        Yes, this is called the distance selling act, you have up to 14 days to signal your intention to return the product citing the aforementioned act, and you are responsable for carraige charges. The goods have to be as new for this to apply.

        In the uk I think I can legally return any product by law if I'm not happy with what I bought... but I also think you *need* to kick up the shit in the showroom you bought it from to do so. (trading standards would come down on them like a ton of bricks) And bad publicity usually makes any store stand down.

        In the UK you have no inherent right to return something no questions asked, unless as covered under the Distance Selling Act as stated above. If you made this purchase instore, then you are only covered under the Sales of Goods act, or store policy. Basically the Sales of Goods act says you can return an item for refund if the goods are not fit for the purpose they were sold for, not bought for (common mistake, they have to be sold for a purpose and fulfil that purpose, they can be bought for any reason at all).

        As most LCT/TFT are sold as Class 2 items, and state so on the box or the unit themselves, certain number of dead pixels are allowed for on the screen, and this does not affect the requirement that the item be fit for the purpose of viewing, IE you cannot return a Class 2 device that is within teh ISO 13406-2 Class 2 limits. Your local Trading Standards office will confirm this.

        The reason this ISO class system was created was because TFT screens were incredibally hard to make without dead pixels, even todays manufacturing lines have a low yield of perfect screens. So you have a choice, accept the possibility of a few dead pixels and get a cheaper screen, or demand a perfect screen and pay more for it. The consumer cant always stamp their feet and demand high quality for low price. A certain level of quality, yes, but not perfection 100% of the time.

    • Re:I'll Never Understand... (Score:5, Informative)

      by cyxxon ( 773198 ) on Saturday January 01, 2005 @02:19PM (#11234179) Homepage

      There are several classes for TFT displays which precisely state how many defective pixels the display may have. The ISO standard for this is 13406-2 [fsc-pc.de]. Most displays sold today do not belong to the no-dead-pixel-at-all class, so customers cannot whine. It usually clearly states on the box somewhere with the other technical data to which class a certain modell belongs.

      So no unfair business tactics at all.

      • Re:I'll Never Understand... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Stealth Potato ( 619366 ) on Saturday January 01, 2005 @03:56PM (#11234615)
        ...so customers cannot whine.

        Ah, but they can, and do. If the customer is pissed off about the dead pixels in their display, you'd better believe they'll let the retailer know about it. In almost all electronics stores I patronize, you could just take the monitor back for a refund, even if it wasn't actually defective. Retailers would rather not buy items that get taken back all the time, so manufacturers have a motivation for improving display quality.

        It is the very act of "whining" that drives improvements in both product and service. If manufacturers could get away with foisting crappy products on everbody, you'd better believe they would (see: Microsoft :P), and Samsung's new policy never would've happened. It is only because customer whining can have a tangible impact on profits that these companies realize they have to work harder to stay competitive.

    • LCD's get dead pixels. It's a simple fact. It's not something that they can control, and it would be silly to reject a 20' moniter because of one dead pixel. You would never ever win a case in court because you had 1 dead pixel out of about 1.3 million that are on a 1280x1024 screen.
      • It's not silly at all to reject a defective product. My company's policy is to issue purchase orders for anything with a LCD that clearly state the vendor must supply a defect-free product, or the purchase order is void. If you don't like our terms of busness, you don't have to sell to us.
    • Why anyone would ever actually believe that you couldn't return an LCD (or laptop) with a dead pixel. This is a manufacturing defect, plain and simple.

      I think you are looking at this the wrong way. The manufacturing process is about yield. Whenever new technologies come out, the process is not perfect or even cost-effective. Over time efficiencies will occur because new lessons are learned, new manufacturing techniques are used, etc. In the case of these displays, there were a few options. One - guarantee
  • I've been wanting a nice big LCD TV but was not going to blow four grand on a TV and have to deal with a few dead pixels. Now I probably will.

    I know it makes them more expensive because it's hard to get zero defects with LCDs but I'm guessing Samsung's manufacturing process has gotten to the point where cranking out perfect displays happens far more often than it used to.

  • And their "zero dead rat" policy.

  • Crazy questions (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mr_Spook ( 458791 ) on Saturday January 01, 2005 @02:01PM (#11234088) Homepage
    Given that there's undoubtedly still going to be a few monitors produced with dead pixels, are they going to supply thier otherwise worthless screens to other vendors for sale at a discount? And then would the consumer ever see these savings?

    Further - how hard will it be for them to weasel out of the "no dead pixel" policy? After all, should something happen during shipping or in the hands of the retailer, are they going to let themselves be held responsible for damage that they may or may not have had anything to do with?

    Perhaps I'm being overly skeptical on the last part there, but questions are made to be asked, after all.
    • >are they going to let themselves be held responsible for damage that they may or may not have had anything to do with?

      AFAIK unless you make a deliberate sabotage, dead pixels are entirely a product of manufacturing imperfections. if it were handled so badly as to break transistors (?) then there'd probably be other damage to it as well.

  • dude (Score:4, Informative)

    by hdd ( 772289 ) on Saturday January 01, 2005 @02:03PM (#11234097)
    when did we start linking news to some random forum?

    P.S. does anyone else think op is trying to bring that forum down...

    origin of the news, have no idea how trustworthy it is: http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200412 /200412300018.html [chosun.com]

    • The submitter has a hexus.net email address. I think it's more likely that he is trying to drive traffic to the forum rather than bring it down.

    • Re:dude (Score:4, Informative)

      by katharsis83 ( 581371 ) on Saturday January 01, 2005 @05:53PM (#11235184)
      The Chosunilbo is the largest and oldest newspaper in Korea. The website you linked to was the English online version of the paper.

      If it's in there, I'm pretty sure it's solid; they don't just publish random crap.

  • Samsung has been consumer friendly (Score:5, Interesting)

    by sdo1 ( 213835 ) on Saturday January 01, 2005 @02:04PM (#11234105) Journal
    Although we're talking about slightly different technology here, I've got a Samsung DLP TV. Although they haven't stated it in writing as such, from what I can gather they've been extremely good to people who have experienced "dead pixels" on their DLP sets. I haven't had any problems at all with mine (find wood, knock, repeat), but I know some people who have had the "light engines" in their sets replaced by Samsung due to dead pixels. With getting fixed pixel technology off the ground, Samsung has been reasonably consumer friendly. It doesn't suprise me that they're taking the high road here as a differentiator from their competition.

    Sony on the other hand has been very stingy with their LCD sets as far as dead pixels go. Apparantly they find some number of dead pixels to be acceptable. I don't know what the threshold is, but I know that LCD sets have a reputation for dead pixels and that Sony hasn't been particularly good about getting it resolved.

    -S
    • but I know that LCD sets have a reputation for dead pixels and that Sony hasn't been particularly good about getting it resolved.

      Well, one thing you have to realize that at normal viewing distances on LCD RP sets single dead or hot pixels are not visible to the naked eye. If you get up to within a foot of the set you can see them, but nobody sits that close. Sony warrants againsts clusters etc. that result in a visble defect in the picture under normal viewing conditions.

      As far as DLP sets, I don't under
    • I'm a confirmed Samsung fan. I bought a nice 19" monitor from them in 2001 or so. With about two months of the end of its warranty, the transform died and it became completely unusable. I'd lost the receipt much earlier, but I decided to take a chance with their warranty support anyway. The conversation went along the lines of:

      Rep: So, when did you buy the monitor?
      Me: In December 2001.
      Rep: Do you have the receipt?
      Me: No, but it had a 24-month warranty, the manufacture date on the back label was "Oc

  • No official source... yet? (Score:5, Informative)

    by prototype ( 242023 ) <bsimser@shaw.ca> on Saturday January 01, 2005 @02:04PM (#11234107) Homepage
    This is nice but so far the only source for this information is Slashdot and the link provided.

    This link here [samsungusa.com] is to Samsungs page on dead pixel policy (last updated 2004-06-18) and has no mention of this "new" policy. It still stands that they won't replace an in warranty monitor as follows:

    • For a 15" Monitor - 7 or more bad pixels
    • For 17" and 19" Monitors -10 or more bad pixels
    • For 21" - 24" Monitors - 17 or more bad pixels

  • Dead pixels are not deadly (Score:4, Interesting)

    by GrAfFiT ( 802657 ) on Saturday January 01, 2005 @02:09PM (#11234125) Homepage
    I currently own 4 15.4" Neovo brand LCD screen I bought for half of their market price. They were discounted by a regional distributor. Two of them have a hot pixel (means always ON) and the two others have a dead pixel. I chosed ones that had this defects at edges, so for most application it does'nt bother at all.

    In fact I used one of the in my kitchen, after all, if a LCD screen get hit, burnt or whatever, I prefer it to be a cheap one. So after all, there is room for nitpickers, and room for smart people.
  • Wake me up when they start selling cheap monitors that display true voxels.

    And with a zero dead voxel policy, too.

  • Dead Pixel Lore (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mscalora ( 226843 ) on Saturday January 01, 2005 @02:12PM (#11234139) Homepage
    I remember that Apple has a dead pixel policy many years ago for the early powerbooks that also would not replace units with only a few dead pixels on the LCD displays. Some 133t individuals figured out how to patch the SCSI/HD driver with some code to fake some (more) bad pixels. Since it was in the HD driver, it ran even if you booted from a floppy. I think they called this the "warranty manager" or something witty like that.

  • The question is (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Zorilla ( 791636 ) on Saturday January 01, 2005 @02:15PM (#11234155)
    will Samsung employees make it difficult to claim this policy, as in having to contact the guy's manager's manager's manager just to get started? I've heard similar stories such as Apple's customer service refusing to return Cinema Displays initially.
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • Only available in Korea (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 01, 2005 @02:23PM (#11234199)
    The zero dead pixel policy is currently only available in Korea [forbes.com].
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • Wait a sec, can't you just buy a monitor and take it back (usually before 30 days) anyway? If the shop asks just make something up!?
  • It's getting ridiculous when you buy a screen and you're told that if you want to return it, it must have X amount of dead pixels, not just one or two.
    On a side note I have a 15" Samsung 570vTFt that's 3 years old with zero dead pixels. Wonder if their policy will only cover their Samsung branded stuff and not the stuff they manufacture for other people?

  • Warning about Samsung LCD monitors (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Dystopian Rebel ( 714995 ) on Saturday January 01, 2005 @03:01PM (#11234350) Journal
    In general, when shopping for an LCD monitor, look for low power-consumption, small screen-pitch (less than or equal to 0.26), and at least a three-year warranty.

    But before you buy a Samsung LCD monitor, get your hands on the repair manual (PDFs can be found if you are good at using Google). In the parts diagram, ensure that the LCD screen and the screen controller circuit-board are SHOWN separately and can therefore be PURCHASED separately.

    I am stuck with a Samsung TFT 770 whose screen is perfect but the screen-controller board has failed. They are considered by Samsung to be ONE part, although the LCD screen is worth over $600 and the screen-controller is likely worth $15.

  • Philips (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TummyX ( 84871 ) on Saturday January 01, 2005 @03:12PM (#11234402)
    Until now, purchasing a TFT has been a gamble, given that dead pixels, while extremely annoying, did not necessarily entitle the consumer to a replacement monitor

    Whatever. Philips have been offering a zero dead pixel guarantee on all their DVI monitors for years. They only cost $20 - $50 more than the cheapo analogue ones and here in NZ they also come with a 3 year on site warranty.
  • I know that Apple LCD displays are supposedly Samsung/Philips made.

    Other posts have indicated that Philips has the "zero dead policy" as well.

    I wonder if this applies to the pixels in an OEM display - say LCDs sold to Apple for laptops and Cinema Displays.

  • So what do they do with dead pixel monitors: (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rsidd ( 6328 ) on Saturday January 01, 2005 @04:01PM (#11234641)
    junk them?

    I'd consider that wasteful. I'd be happy to buy a monitor with say 10 dead pixels at halfprice or so.

    Recently, here in India the LCD of my laptop (bought in the US) went bust. HP replaced it for about US$350 (it was out of warranty), and the replacement has a pixel that's permanently red. Initially I found that annoying but now I don't even notice it. Very possibly they knew it was defective and that's why it was relatively cheap: I believe replacing a laptop screen costs at least $1000 in the US (and this one is a very good 1400x1050 15.3" screen), and that's not counting labour, I remember being told (by CompUSA, I think) that it costs $200 just to get someone to open the laptop and look at it if it's out of warranty.

    If I'm right and it was cheap for that reason, I don't see why they can't formalise the process and sell "defective" monitors cheap. There could be quite a demand.

Slashdot Top Deals

Love may laugh at locksmiths, but he has a profound respect for money bags. -- Sidney Paternoster, "The Folly of the Wise"

Close