Bad Pixels

Why are any bad pixels acceptable? Why is the guarantee of having zero bad pixels considered an added feature with an additional cost?

I’ve heard the argument that LCD screens have over a million pixels so having a ‘few’ bad pixels is too much to expect from regular quality control. But if that’s true, why doesn’t it translate into other products:

• If your new hard drive has a few bad sectors, it’s defective.
• If one bit of your new RAM is corrupt, it’s defective.
• If your new keyboard has a blank key, it’s defective.
• If you car’s new paint job has a small scratch, it’s defective.
• If your new suit has a hole in it, it’s defective.
• If your new painting has a smudge, it’s defective.
• If your new furniture has a ding, it’s defective.
• If your new windshield has a crack in it, it’s defective.
• If your soup has a small hair in it, it’s defective.
• If your new book is missing a few words, it’s defective.

The LCD is the window of the computer’s soul. On average it is used more than any other human interface on a computer.

So why is even one bad pixel in an LCD considered acceptable?
Why is it the consumer’s problem and not the seller’s problem?




BTW, I got my new Sager NP9280 from Xoticpc.com this week and it has a stuck pixel. Aside from that, everything (the laptop and their support) has been 100% perfect. But I can’t help but feel disappointed.

 

A bad pixel on a $2000 laptop is definitively not acceptable - can you return it for a full refund?

 

The good thing is that is wasn't $2000. It was $3000.
I'm going to London for work (from NY, USA) and bought it so I could have a desktop substitute. So no time to return it.

 

It's wierd. My stuck pixel seesm to come and go. Right now it's gone.
I hope it stays gone.

But I still believe in my statement about bad pixels.

It comes back everytime

 

The stuck pixel isn’t there when I first boot up but always re-appers once the laptop is warmed up. Then it shows up even when I restart. It also seems to get brighter the longer each session of use of the laptop.

Anyway, I mentioned it to the support people (along with another issue) and here is what they said:

Here is my response:

I probably sound like a whiner but I find this whole industry practice with bad pixels and LCDs to be total BS.
Can anyone think of another retail product component that has such a wide (and accepted) margin of error in quality control?

 

Actually, many printed books (especially gaming books) do have typos and missing words. For gaming books, this is typically dealt with by use of errata sheets printed in later volumes or available online, but for mass-market novels and such-like, you generally just have to put up with it.

Or for a rather off-beat example, consider light-bulbs. Most light bulbs operate perfectly, but there are also a not insignificant number that burn-out as soon as installed.

For what would probably be a closer example, a few scratches in your new car's paint job (as opposed to a new paint job on an existing car) would probably not be enough to consider the vehicle "defective".

 

I do not agree,
The OPs $3000 notebook is equivalent to a $100,000 car.
If you have the smallest scratch on a $100K car, it's defective.

 

You're also not constantly having your attention drawn to a small scratch on your car while driving, whereas a dead/stuck pixel on your laptop can repeatedly draw your attention while in use.

 

In the strictest sense, yes, you are right. But try to exchange that car for another one because of those few scratches, and I think you'll end up with the same situation that the OP is in here. They'll probably just hand you a marker of touch-up paint (just like the OP was suggested the dead pixel utilities) and tell you to use that.

 

If you missed it, I said $100K car.
If you buy a Porsche 911 Turbo, and it has a small scratch, I'm sure they will call it defective.

But I have never had such a car, so I can't really say for sure.

What I can say is I used a notebook with a dead pixel for a year, and I never really was bothered by it.

 

You miss the point. I wasn’t asking if any other products could have defective parts.

But can you pay extra for light bulbs guaranteed to light or books without typos? Do you have to pay for the shipping of the errata pages?

For that $100,000 car with a paint scratch - Sure, the dealer will buff it out or replace the piece that is scratched so it will be as good as new. But will they refuse to do so if you didn’t pay $6,500 (same as paying $200 extra on a $3000 laptop) for the ‘no scratch’ guarantee? Would you be OK with that?

No. It would be considered ludicrous because risk of poor quality control is assumed by the seller/dealer.

It’s not a new technology. It doesn’t happen for cheaper and more expensive products. So why are LCDs given such latitude?

 

That's why it's important to buy LCD products from merchants with a good return/exchange policy, with no re-stocking fees, etc.

 

If you can't find the errata online, then often, yes you have to purchase a different, later supplement in the system that contains the errata for an earlier book. I don't know if you can pay extra for books without typos, as I've never seen anything like that in practice.

To me, a $3000 notebook is more like a $40K-$50K car, but I'm probably still stuck back in the economies of 4-5 or so years ago, when the idea of a (decent) notebook for under $1000 was pretty much ludicrous.

As for LCDs, a little research reveals that they are not necessarily held to such a low standard. Under ISO 13406-2, LCDs are rated into different classes, and the number of acceptable defects for each class are listed. Class I panels are not allowed any defects at all. Class II (which is apparently the most common standard) allows up to 2 hot/dead pixels, and 5 stuck pixels per million pixels. The issue then comes with the fact that companies distribute the cheaper Class II panels, instead of making everything to Class I.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_13406-2

On the flip side, the chances of getting a bad panel is supposedly something around 1%. I guess the question becomes, are you willing to raise the prices of laptops by an amount that would probably be higher than the 0 dead pixel guarantee to force resellers to use the more expensive Class I panels instead of taking that 1% chance?

Also, not helpful in your case because you can't return it and "try again", Xotic usually will let you return a machine within 30 days for any reason, less shipping. You could then re-order the machine and hope for one with a better screen. In this case, it seems that circumstances just conspired against you.

 

It does not make any sense to compare a dead pixel on an LCD to a dead bit on a RAM or a bad sector on a HDD.

RAMs and HDDs should have absolutely no fault in order to operate correctly. That is not true for an LCD. An LCD will still properly work even though it has 100s of dead pixels. It is only a cosmetic issue. (Yes, it may bother you but bad pixels will not crash your apps or give a BSOD in your laptop.)


--

 

Or, zero dead pixel guarantees could simply be the industry standard. If only 1% of panels are bad as you say, then it's not like the manufacturers have much to lose by offering such a guarantee, and prices would have to go up by 1% at most to cover the cost of defects.

 

The LCD is a cosmetic product. Its function is its looks. According to your logic, if your monitor only worked in black and white it would not be considered defective.
And a hard drive can work with bad sectors. The OS will need to mark them and avoid them. Kinda like not looking at those 100s of bad pixels.

 

That's certainly a point that may be worth pushing onto the manufacturers. It should be noted, however, that the $300 no dead pixel policy we were originally talking about does _not_ come from a LCD manufacturer. It comes from a reseller that does not make the panels that they are guaranteeing. In point of fact, many companies do not even offer a no dead pixel policy at all.

Also, if you were given the choice between 2 resellers of the same model computer, and one cost $300 more than the other with included no dead pixel policy, and the other didn't come with the no dead pixel policy, but allowed you to add it if you wished for $300, and in addition allowed you to return the computer for any reason within 30 days (less shipping) no matter whether or not you chose said non dead pixel policy, which would you choose?

 

Tumbaba is like many of us consumers, believing that the "acceptable" dead pixels would never happen to any of us until it happens. So we all snake through the not-paying the extra for the offered-warranty of a perfect screen, just like many of us believing that the extra warranty would be of no good relying on the belief that if the comp lasts 1 year, it will last more than 3 years. And then boom! the day after the 1-year warranty expires the system dies, and we all go ballistic and scream what a lousy product it was.

Sorry, but the LCD of zero dead pixel must be taken up to a higher consumer level and not with the notebook manufacturers, they have no control on the parts, and the offer of the extra $200 is cheap when one needs to get a new LCD and replace it oneself. As far as QA concerns, they probably just turn on and if there is no dead pixel, it is clean, they just cannot burn the screen before assembly.

It is a pain, but it is a game with clear defined rules.

cheers ...

 

As far as i'm concerned, if i pay $3000 for a laptop, it should comes flawless.. if there's even one dead pixel, the company that i bought the laptop from should replace the screen or the laptop... if the company doesn't want to do so , i won't hesitate to complain to the consumer authorities.. after all a $3000 laptop isn't a $2 fruit, which can have been a little squished and we can turn a blind eye... $3000 is a lot of cash...

 

Good question.

LCD manufacturers can for better or worse dictate screen aspect ratio and force us to accept dead or stuck pixels.

It doesn't take too much thought to decide who has the upper hand in the relationship between PC OEMs and LCD manufacturers. Clearly, no PC manufacturer enjoys distributing notebooks with defective screens.

 

I seriously wonder how the LCD manufacturers managed to pull that off. I mean, for TN panels, there's quite a few manufacturers.

It's not like the *VA worlds where there's only 1 manufacturer for each.

 

Probably because of demand. I mean, the demand for LCD TVs is pretty much through the roof these days, and those LCD manufacturers have to supply the LCD panels for TVs, computer monitors, and laptops too. That may also be why they accept the defect rate: they're simply being pushed too hard to supply as many panels as possible, and thus "little" things like QC and bad panels are allowed to slip through simply because the demand is so great. Consider the liberty ships from WWII. The build quality on many of these was poor (due to inadequate training and poor materials), and yet many of them were still produced simply because they were needed.

 

^^ Hit the spot right there Judicator - the defect rate/ratio!

This is everywhere in the consumer world. One doles out lots of money for a product where the defect ratio/rate is almost negligible, but it is still there. Just the chance to get it is very very slim - but the odds is always on the consumers side that a she/he will get it soon or later!

Paying big bucks for a product does not guarantee that you'll get a flawless one, nor does it warrant an automatic repair/replacement when something goes wrong.

Thus - the extra warranty!

cheers ...