×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Apple Faces Lawsuit For Retina MacBook Pro 'Ghosting' Issue

Soulskill posted about a year ago | from the but-it's-very-trendy-ghosting dept.

Displays 195

redletterdave writes "Apple is facing a potential class action suit in San Francisco's California Northern District Court after an owner of its MacBook Pro with Retina display accused the computer company on Wednesday of 'tricking' consumers into paying for a poor-quality screen, citing an increasingly common problem that causes images to be burned into the display, also known as 'image persistence' or 'ghosting.' The lawsuit claims only LG-made screens are affected by this problem, but 'none of Apple's advertisements or representations disclose that it produces display screens that exhibit different levels of performance and quality.' Even though only one man filed the lawsuit, it can become a class action suit if others decide to join him in his claim, which might not be an issue: An Apple.com support thread for this particular problem, entitled 'MacBook Pro Retina display burn-in,' currently has more than 7,200 replies and 367,000 views across more than 500 pages."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

195 comments

They should sue LG instead (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43186993)

LG was the manufacturer of the defective screen

They should sue LG instead of Apple

I am no apple fanbois, it's just that if the defective part came from LG, why not home in to the manufacturer, instead of the seller?

Re:They should sue LG instead (5, Insightful)

roc97007 (608802) | about a year ago | (#43187027)

LG was the manufacturer of the defective screen

They should sue LG instead of Apple

I am no apple fanbois, it's just that if the defective part came from LG, why not home in to the manufacturer, instead of the seller?

Not to take sides, but I think the answer is, because it's not the buyer's job to solve problems in the seller's supply chain.

Re:They should sue LG instead (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187071)

Even more specifically, the plaintiff has no purchase relationship with LG, and therefore no standing [wikipedia.org] to file suit. He purchased the Macbook from Apple, so he does have standing to sue Apple. Apple can then pass the costs of the lawsuit, by suing LG.

Re:They should sue LG instead (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43188249)

Exactly. Apple: Think different /sues LG

Re:They should sue LG instead (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187079)

Also, LG could claim in a suit that their screens are not defective, that Apple did not follow the correct installation requirements for the screens. The consumer had no interaction with LG, and LG has not direct responsibility to the consumer. Any claim should be with the manufacturer that the consumer dealt with.(Apple)

On the other hand, I default to believing that class action lawsuits are frivolous. I haven't seen how bad the burn in is, and I have not heard the specifics of what causes the burn in.(Is the consumer doing something stupid?)

Re:They should sue LG instead (4, Insightful)

roc97007 (608802) | about a year ago | (#43187135)

On the other hand, I default to believing that class action lawsuits are frivolous.

Enh.... I will go so far as to posit that many (perhaps most) class action lawsuits are frivolous. They seldom serve the consumer (that jeans lawsuit netted me 67 cents. yippie.) but sometimes serve to make ignoring real problems costly for the vendor, which I believe is a good thing.

Re:They should sue LG instead (1)

MightyYar (622222) | about a year ago | (#43187189)

Vendors prefer the class action. They defend a single lawsuit instead of thousands, and you are a member of the class unless you proactively opt-out. It really cuts down on legal costs.

Re:They should sue LG instead (5, Informative)

femtobyte (710429) | about a year ago | (#43187323)

What really cuts down on legal costs is having millions of potential plaintiffs who each, for the ~$50 of damage done to them, are not willing to go through the bother of even small-claims court (except for a tiny number, who can be paid off a couple hundred bucks on an individual basis). Can you cite any examples of companies being swamped by "thousands" of individual lawsuits over small-cash issues? --- because in the real world, that never actually happens. On the other hand, class actions frequently allow a too-small-for-individuals-to-bother case to get serious, top-notch legal representation, and take a big chunk of cash from the company (as they deserve for mass-screwing-over their customers). This is why all the big pro-corporate-interests media/political loudmouths (aside from the small fraction of them working for law firms) shout so much about "tort reform!" and try to push through legislation *weakening* class action abilities --- megacorporations overwhelmingly prefer to keep their I'm-bigger-than-you legal advantage over private individuals.

Re:They should sue LG instead (2)

tragedy (27079) | about a year ago | (#43188551)

I'm curious what installation steps would prevent screen burn-in from happening? Only installing in devices that automatically blank for one second of every five, maybe? Also, what would the consumer be doing that's stupid? Not running a screen saver once or twice a minute?

In this day and age, consumers expect screen burn in to no longer be an issue. Once upon a time it was the consumers issue to deal with because the CRT technology was still fairly primitive, but the problem was largely solved over time, so the problem re-emerging is seen as a step back. Modern operating system interfaces are full of fixed-position graphical elements. Screens that suffer burn-in easily are unfit for the purpose of the modern GUI.

Re:They should sue LG instead (1, Informative)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | about a year ago | (#43187371)

Lawyers sue the one with the most money. If you sexually harass someone at your workplace, they will sue your employer, not you. You don't have any money to be worth a lawsuit (nothing personal meant there). However, your employer, will probably have enough money to entice a lawyer to go after it.

Re:They should sue LG instead (2)

Algae_94 (2017070) | about a year ago | (#43187043)

And the consumer is supposed to determine what part is defective (fairly easy in this case) and who made the defective part? That's not how things work. Consumer has an issue, they raise it with the manufacturer (Apple). Apple can talk to LG if they have a problem with the parts LG sent them.

Re:They should sue LG instead (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187063)

And the consumer is supposed to determine what part is defective (fairly easy in this case) and who made the defective part?

Then how do the lawsuit claim

The lawsuit claims only LG-made screens are affected

Re:They should sue LG instead (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187105)

It's Apple's fault still because they shipped it as is. They could have tested the phone and discovered the problems and NOT ship the phone along with a refund of hte money but they didn't. I'll doubt they even allow the phone to be return for "repairs" to change the display out.

It may be LG crappy screen but it's Apple who shipped it to the customer and is ultimately at fault. It's Apple choice if they wished to find fault in LG but this issue and that issue are different and will require two different lawsuits.

Yes...you kind of are an Apple Fanboi (-1, Troll)

tuppe666 (904118) | about a year ago | (#43187099)

LG was the manufacturer of the defective screen

No its all Apple. Apple make *nothing*; They design [perhaps] Apple products but famously they are manufactured in places like Foxconn [often by rioting workers....or small children] , from other companies components [because they don't do those either]...this does not excuse Apple for releasing a poorly tested, poor quality product [ironically allegedly to punish Samsung]. Its their brand embossed proudly on the rear, that is worthwhile at a massive mark-up to its hungry fans....now if it had been an LG laptop [which would probably be an awful lot cheaper] with a defective screen, that would have been a different matter, but Apple do not escape deserved criticism for re-badging products manufactured from other companies components [at an incredible mark-up no less]. Personally I think your better of buying a [Google]Pixel which has a great screen, unlike Apple that truck customers...Even Linus Agrees, although he prefers [GNU/]Linux on it.

Re:They should sue LG instead (0)

whisper_jeff (680366) | about a year ago | (#43187343)

I am no apple fanbois, it's just that if the defective part came from LG, why not home in to the manufacturer, instead of the seller?

Because LG doesn't have a massive cash horde of billions and billions and billions of dollars that greedy lawyers plus moronic greedy citizens have their eyes on.

They should get their displays from Samsung (4, Insightful)

Tough Love (215404) | about a year ago | (#43187787)

They should get their displays from Samsung. Oh wait, they can't, they burned that bridge.

Re:They should get their displays from Samsung (1, Informative)

node 3 (115640) | about a year ago | (#43188403)

Um... You do realize they do get their displays from Samsung, right?

Re:They should get their displays from Samsung (1)

idunham (2852899) | about a year ago | (#43188541)

One or the other's trying to end that, from what I understand. Or at least make it a bottleneck/reduce reliance on Samsung.

Re:They should sue LG instead (1)

rsierpe (2678773) | about a year ago | (#43187793)

Man, LG sold you the screen? when you buy Apple or whatever brand you prefer, you are NOT buying the hodgepodge of component brands inside, you are buying Apple, because of design, alleged superior quality, etc. I have an old Vostro 1500 Laptop, and when I bought it, it was not a procession to Nvidia to pay for Video, Hynix for Ram, Foxconn for MoBo and so on. I went and paid Dell what they asked for their bundle, and I don't give a piece of crap if their components are externally manufactured or produced in-house, and neither should you or anyone, because, where will it stop? on some lost mine where silice is clawed from earth? They sold it, they are to be made responsable for whatever failure or crappy components are inside. Besides, it is not some chinese no-name but a premium brand, which is supposed to be top notch. It is crappy? change it, it's Apple problem, not buyer's.

SOUIX TOYOTA !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187077)

Toyota pays up for anything !!

Mildly annoying (4, Informative)

addie (470476) | about a year ago | (#43187085)

I bought the retina MacBook right after it was released (I'm using it right now) and it's the best computer purchase I've ever made - flame all you want, but I had the money, and it suits my needs.

I definitely have the screen ghosting problem, and noticed it relatively early, specifically when switching to the widget dashboard which has a dark grey background. However it has never, ever interfered with my work or entertainment. I'd call it a mild annoyance at worst.

If this guy wants to sue, then power to him. I suppose he's standing on principle. But I'll pick more serious issues in my life to worry about.

Re:Mildly annoying (2)

hsmith (818216) | about a year ago | (#43187177)

Oddly, it seems more of a software issue to me. It will "ghost" for a bit then disappear. It is bizarre and annoys the shit out of me.

Re:Mildly annoying (2)

theVarangian (1948970) | about a year ago | (#43187265)

Oddly, it seems more of a software issue to me. It will "ghost" for a bit then disappear. It is bizarre and annoys the shit out of me.

My Samsung flatscreen TV does this too. It ghosts app windows and desktop icons etc. The ghosted app windows stay on screen even when I flip from my media center PC to a separate live TV feed so it must be an issue with the TV hardware. Restart the TV and everything is fine... for a while. It doesn't annoy me half as much as the growing dark spot that's eating it's way across the display. I'm not buying a Samsung TV again.

Re:Mildly annoying (2)

Pinky's Brain (1158667) | about a year ago | (#43187767)

It could be a bug in the overdrive system, which can carry over state between frames inside the hardware.

Re:Mildly annoying (1)

zippthorne (748122) | about a year ago | (#43187885)

Why do we even have "over drive" systems in digital displays? The signal is digital and has a specific pixel size, as does the screen. If those sizes match, why scale the signal to larger than the screen size for the dubious benefit of chopping off bits of it?

Re:Mildly annoying (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43188167)

Well, they are dubious, but since you don't seem to understand what the term means they're probably dubious for different reasons to those you have in mind.


http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/06/lcd-overdrive-gets-explained-lamented/

Re:Mildly annoying (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43188513)

Properly done, an overdrive system driving a display can decrease response time. Say you have pixel A that in the first frame is all black. Then the next frame it needs to go to a light gray. You can get a faster response out of it by feeding it full voltage for a very short period to get it to flip faster. It might take 2 full frames to get the pixel to the right color by just feeding it the proper voltage to flip, however feeding it a false initial voltage could get the pixel to turn prior to the next frame.

Re:Mildly annoying (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187181)

That's okay. It's an okay computer for browsing the net, chatting to good looking friends over video, finger painting, and playing a popular 2D game. Good for you.

But some people need a computer that they can create on. Programming, design, control of the interface.

Most of us at Slashdot are content to pay less to have more control over our hardware. Not everyone is interested in computers, and if it's just for simple net browsing, Facebook and Twitter, then a MacBook's an okay (albeit expensive) choice.

Re:Mildly annoying (1, Flamebait)

addie (470476) | about a year ago | (#43187219)

Spare me your condescension, you don't have a clue what I do for a living nor what I use my computer for.

I bought the computer I wanted to buy and it serves my needs very well thanks. Did you also buy the one you wanted? Yes? Great. Now we're both happy.

Re:Mildly annoying (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187513)

someone is awfully pissy after spending the day looking at their own pictures on facebook

Re:Mildly annoying (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187557)

Exactly what was the point of creating a post just to say "I bought a computer and it is okay. Also, it has the problem mentioned. But I don't care." Why do that? Attention?

Re:Mildly annoying (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187633)

Much like the attention to harp on about how the poster is an imbecile who doesn't do anything productive with his system -- because it doesn't fit with Neckbeard AC's view on how anything apple is crap, and everything Google is god. Grow the fuck up.

Re:Mildly annoying (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187875)

No where in this thread was Google mentioned except by you. Quit bringing up the same tired arguments and try actually being part of a new conversation.

Re:Mildly annoying (-1, Troll)

Lumpy (12016) | about a year ago | (#43187299)

I have far more control over my macbook than you do with your $199 wing wang wong china special. Good luck getting some of those nasty chipsets working with linux in the cheap-o laptops out there.

Re:Mildly annoying (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187517)

yea those nasties like intel, nvidia, amd and s3 that all work fine

way to be both racist and a fucktard at the same time, that must have taken effort

Re:Mildly annoying (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187839)

S3... bahahahaha! Oh you were serious?

Re:Mildly annoying (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187565)

I have far more control over my macbook than you do with your $199 wing wang wong china special. Good luck getting some of those nasty chipsets working with linux in the cheap-o laptops out there.

Enjoy your $1500 Taiwanese made junk Mactard.

Re:Mildly annoying (2)

Tourney3p0 (772619) | about a year ago | (#43187575)

You're confused. It wasn't the $199 Wing Wang Wong China Special that had problems working with Linux. It was the Retina Macbook.

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=apple_mbpr_linux&num=1 [phoronix.com]

Re:Mildly annoying (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187597)

no u have less control.
if u buy a 200 laptop, u can trash it and get a new one for 200$.
U cant get your overpriced apple laptop, thats also made in china, fixed for that much.
Ur gay apple OS and system, which has a million security flaws, and probably has steve jobs ghost code, breaking ur balls and ur bank, and apparently ur screen.
that being said, the screen is probably just a cheap monitor from lg that apple overcharges for on their products. Its not lg's fault as it , and apple new the screen sucks, but they purchased it from them anyway so they could market retina nonesense, and make profits.
if u buy any apple products, ur a douche

Re:Mildly annoying (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43188371)

Says the unemployed and uneducated idiot... Come back when you have some money little kid.

Re:Mildly annoying (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187817)

I have far more control over my macbook than you do with your $199 wing wang wong china special

So, leaving aside the casual snobbery, you decided to throw in something that comes across at the written equivalent of a "fingers-to-make-slanty-eyes" Chinaman stereotype? Nice one...

That aside from the fact that Apple probably contract "Wing Wang Wong" (cough) to make their Macbooks in the same factory anyway. (^_^)

Re:Mildly annoying (2)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187429)

But I'll pick more serious issues in my life to worry about.

Such as people suing Apple due to a screen defect?

Sorry, but ghosting in modern LCD's should simply not happen. Considering the Retina Display is one of the main selling points of the device, the guy has a point. The computer itself is great, but the models with the LG screen obviously have issues. It is a fallacy to ignore one issue simply because others do not exist.

Re:Mildly annoying (1)

SenseiLeNoir (699164) | about a year ago | (#43187589)

I am no apple fanboi, but I bought one of the 15inch retina macbook pros for work reasons.
  It has an lg screen.

Now don't get me wrong, I have a lot of frustration with this machine. Its the only machine in the last 2 years I have had to force turn off by holding the power button due to some weird osx issue. However I have never experienced the ghosting issue? Maybe it doesn't affect all?

Re:Mildly annoying (5, Interesting)

twilight30 (84644) | about a year ago | (#43187835)

I have one as well, and the original screen was an LG (purchased a week after they launched the computer, but not delivered for another month). I heard about this defect in the above-mentioned thread about two weeks after launch, but didn't notice anything for about 6 weeks after receiving it. Then the trouble started.

Exchanged for another screen - except it was another LG. Which promptly developed image retention after two weeks. This time, Apple Store 'geniuses' made out with a bullshit test that it was 'normal' and 'expected' - to which I pointed out that the Samsung equivalents had no such 'normal' ghosting at all.

Fought with the fuckers for 3 weeks. Finally, I had to threaten to return it for a full refund off my credit card when they finally gave in. I kept pointing out that a laptop costing over $3k Cdn has no business exhibiting such behaviour, and that otherwise I actually was very happy with the computer besides this one issue. They finally replaced it with a Samsung-manufactured screen - and this was back in September; totally flawless screen since the final replacement.

The clincher? You just have to ask them if they would be happy with an expensive machine that showed this shitty display themselves.

The computer itself is really a dream to use now. And yes, it's the best purchase I've ever made as well. Despite all the bullshit to get there.

Re:Mildly annoying (1)

lexman098 (1983842) | about a year ago | (#43187915)

It's not about how it effects functionality. The car analogy would be buying a really expensive brand new car which comes with a nice dent. It doesn't effect performance or comfort, but who in their right mind would be satisfied with that?

Re:Mildly annoying (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43188531)

I actually have an exact car analogy. Toyota/Lexus in 07/08 had a slight defect affecting their 3.5l v6 engines. Not all were affected, but I've seen enough on forums to know that the symptoms got cleared up in 09. They even issued a TSB! Anyways, upon start of the engine being cold the engine sounds clacky - like a diesel. Under acceleration it's much worse; idle on no load is ok. I took my car in specifically for this - they stated "normal operation". From milage of other forum members, it doesn't appear to affect longevity of the engine - however I wanted it noted on the car's service records just in case.

All said, I'd buy another one - but I'd definitely be on the lookout for that "feature" again....

Re:Mildly annoying (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187943)

Hey thanks for sharing. Does the Mac come with anti-virus? A friend told me that apple products have a very high chance of becoming infected with AIDS.

Re:Mildly annoying (1)

thegarbz (1787294) | about a year ago | (#43188113)

You clearly have money to spare.

People's tolerance to hardware faults are proportional to the value and effort they put into acquiring the hardware. I used a screen with multiple dead pixels out of the box for years. This was the early days of LCD. No big problem though. I then bought an NEC SpectraView monitor for well over $1k and it had 1 dead pixel, straight to the NEC distributor I went, and then when they said it's not a warranty call I went to our ombudsman and eventually got it replaced.

If a $200 screen ghosts, big deal. If a $2000 macbook pro ghosts it's a very big deal. ... For me.

From this I can conclude you are either incredibly placid, or rich enough not to care.

Meanwhile, on Infinite Loop... (5, Funny)

Java Commando (726093) | about a year ago | (#43187087)

“Oh snap-- Looks like our alternate panel supplier is a bust! Now what?!”

“Let’s submit another lawsuit against the guys who build the good panels!”

“Good idea!”

Harm done? (1)

Anubis IV (1279820) | about a year ago | (#43187107)

From what I recall, Apple was replacing at least some of the screens for laptops exhibiting this issue. Assuming that was their standard policy (which, admittedly, may not be a safe assumption), then doesn't the fact that Apple has addressed the issue in a reasonable way right from the start undermine the lawsuit? I was under the (perhaps mistaken) impression that demonstrable harm of some sort had to have been done. Of course, IANAL, and I can't find evidence that Apple was replacing them for all customers reporting the issue, though there are several anecdotal reports of several Apple Geniuses doing so for customers.

Burn in is NOT Ghosting (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187131)

Image burn in and ghosting are NOT the same thing. Ghosting is where images bleed into the next frame. Giving the ilusion of a ghost leaving a fading trail as it moves. Burn in is permanent, ghosting is 1 or several frames.

From TFS I can't tell what they're refering to, because it mixes both terms, and article is TLDR;

Re:Burn in is NOT Ghosting (4, Informative)

addie (470476) | about a year ago | (#43187167)

From someone who owns and uses a MacBook retina daily, I can confirm that it is definitely not image burn. The ghosting happens when switching between bright white and dark grey backgrounds, and fades over the course of 10-20 seconds. It's noticeable, but only barely.

Re:Burn in is NOT Ghosting (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187941)

Thank you sir. Your medal is in the post. You are hero of this nation. Faggot.

Re:Burn in is NOT Ghosting (2)

1s44c (552956) | about a year ago | (#43187231)

Image burn in and ghosting are NOT the same thing. Ghosting is where images bleed into the next frame. Giving the ilusion of a ghost leaving a fading trail as it moves. Burn in is permanent, ghosting is 1 or several frames.

I don't claim to be an expert but I thought ghosting was a faint image a short distance to the right of the real image caused by a sharp bend in a co-ax cable which creates a faint out of phase repeat of an analog TV signal.

Maybe both effects are called ghosting. Neither are anything like this modern equivalent of phosphor burn in.

Re:Burn in is NOT Ghosting (4, Informative)

Tr3vin (1220548) | about a year ago | (#43187439)

Ghosting is often used to described the blur caused by pixels slowly transitioning from one state to the next. What is happening here is more along the lines of "image retention" than ghosting. A static charge can "preserve" the state of the pixels in some of the cheaper IPS panels. It isn't permanent like burn in but it is annoying and a much slower transition than the typical ghosting. It is funny that it has taken this long for the issue to gain attention. I'd seen the very same issues with their cinema displays a few years ago. Never understood how artists could swear by Apple if the colors don't transition correctly.

Re:Burn in is NOT Ghosting (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43188169)

The reality distortion field is fading.

Seeing double on your Retina? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187173)

You need the all new iDrop!

CRT Burn in is now LCD Retina Glacouma (1)

junkfish (460683) | about a year ago | (#43187183)

Old CRTs had burn in because they were steadily being zapped with electricity, how does an LCD have burn in? I can't seem to figure it out. They need a diferent term. Since it is a retina display, how about glacouma?

Re:CRT Burn in is now LCD Retina Glacouma (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187213)

Mac OS X should come with some screensavers.

Re:CRT Burn in is now LCD Retina Glacouma (4, Informative)

macs4all (973270) | about a year ago | (#43188321)

It comes with several; however, even though I'm a dyed-in-the-wool Apple user, and have been since 1976, I have also been an embedded designer for over 3 decades. And as such, I think I can safely say that this is a clear case of a vendor (LG) that never should have been approved as an alternate source. Apple has been replacing the panels/machines of anyone who complains. The problem is that the Samsung panels that Apple can use don't have as high of a contrast ratio, and a slightly warmer white-point; so some consumers are unhappy with that, too... Fortunately, it seems like the fear of losing the business to another "glass" supplier (like Sharp), has made LG fix the issue. So, if you buy a rMBP NOW, it likely won't have the issue.

Re:CRT Burn in is now LCD Retina Glacouma (1)

jtownatpunk.net (245670) | about a year ago | (#43187315)

They already have a different term. It's called image persistence. Google can help you investergate in depth.

Re:CRT Burn in is now LCD Retina Glacouma (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187405)

It's spelled "glaucoma".

Re:CRT Burn in is now LCD Retina Glacouma (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187499)

LCDs have lazy pixels. OLEDs, however, have burn-in as well.

Re:CRT Burn in is now LCD Retina Glacouma (2)

macs4all (973270) | about a year ago | (#43188397)

LCDs have lazy pixels. OLEDs, however, have burn-in as well.

That's a BIG 10-4!!! One recent product design I was working on was an industrial motor controller/drive.For the design refresh, I desperately wanted to switch out the venerable 7-seg LED display with a nice graphical OLED display. Had a nice long-life (75 k hrs.) amber monochrome OLED display picked out, was nice and bright, cost was reasonable, display fit in the package, things were looking good...

Unfortunately, these displays typically would be showing a static image for LOOOOONG periods of time. OLEDS had a big time problem with burn-in, and the usual workaround (walk the displayed image slowly around in a small grid of pixels) was simply an attempt to smear the damage over a wider area.

The LCD vendors, however, produced displays that exhibited NO burn-in (but were deemed unsuitable by management, because they weren't nice, lambertian light sources, like LEDs). But I digress...

Is it permanent or slowly decaying? (1)

Jimbookis (517778) | about a year ago | (#43187209)

I have seen Dell LCD's exhibit burn-in (monitors made 7+ years ago). My plasma TV gets a bit of a logo or 4:3 ghost image but it's not permanent and does fade. I guess it's a hysteresis or long time constant decay of some sort. So, is the burning on the Macs persistent or an annoying but temporary issue?

Re:Is it permanent or slowly decaying? (1)

addie (470476) | about a year ago | (#43187245)

Mildly annoying, only appears on dark greys in specific circumstances, and fades after 10-20 seconds. From my perspective, it's really nothing to get worked up about.

Oh BooHoo (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187227)

Awww...Apple fanbois and others with too much money and not enought brains -

boo hoo, boo hoo

Only LG? Not Samsung? (3, Interesting)

erroneus (253617) | about a year ago | (#43187263)

PLEASE please PLEASE let it be that the Samsung displays are just fine while LG displays are not. I really want to see Apple squirm over this issue.

It's not that I'm "Anti-Apple" here, but just the way we saw that it is clearly wrong for the music publishers to sue their customers, I see it as pretty damned stupid for Apple to sue its suppliers.

Apple sells things which are made of a whole lot of other things. When Apple started suing the supplier of their component things, they are attacking a part which they depend on. It makes me think of a bridge attacking the pillars it sits on. I just want to see incredibly stupid behavior rewarded.

Re:Only LG? Not Samsung? (2)

ohnocitizen (1951674) | about a year ago | (#43187345)

Apple does this with more than just screens. I have the MacBook air. The same product purchased by two customers might have two different hard drives under the hood. If the components differ in performance or reliability it makes total sense that customers would be upset. It would be worth it to see Apple take a hit on this issue, since it seems to be a general business practice, and frankly, false advertising.

Re:Only LG? Not Samsung? (3, Interesting)

erroneus (253617) | about a year ago | (#43187811)

Not only that, a frequent argument used by Apple and Apple fans is that the quality of Apple gear is much higher than that of the typical PC. While I will not argue that point when it comes to the Mac Pro and all that -- their case designs are outstanding if not simply sexy -- the variable quality of devices within speaks differently. Fortunately, i have not experienced any of the problems others have with Apple gear beyond the cyclical obsolesence problems where Apple not only renders software obsolete, but their hardware as well.

And that's a problem when the same vendor controls both the software and the hardware isn't it? And isn't this what Microsoft is attempting to do with their secure boot crap?

Re:Only LG? Not Samsung? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187829)

Or rather, I would think we want that situation to show that Apple's jihad against Samsung is misguided in that they choose against a superior product in order to continue to be pissy.

Re:Only LG? Not Samsung? (1)

thegarbz (1787294) | about a year ago | (#43188125)

PLEASE please PLEASE let it be that the Samsung displays are just fine while LG displays are not.

Yes [youtube.com]

It seems that current Macbooks which shipped with Samsung displays are unaffected.

LG Specific issue? (4, Informative)

Kaenneth (82978) | about a year ago | (#43187303)

I have an older LG brand 24 inch monitor, I fell asleep with Dragonball Z paused, and Goku's hair outline burned in...

Now it's just a huge dark smudge in the middle of the screen, and it's relegated to the 'laundry room computer'.

It's my understanding that it's caused by overvoltage applied to force faster response times. That is, if it takes 10 milliseconds to switch a pixel from 0 to 1, you can max out the pixel (black to white transition) in 5 milliseconds by forcing double the normal 1 voltage down the line. allowing them to advertize faster response times (advertized response time is why I bought that model...) at the cost of product wear that won't accumulate until after the normal warranty expires. The brighter pixels literally burn out, not burn in.

Re:LG Specific issue? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187773)

Not sure what the worse part is: that you were watching Dragonball Z, or that you have a computer in your laundry room. Or was it buying something from LG in the first place ?

Re:LG Specific issue? (2)

thegarbz (1787294) | about a year ago | (#43188137)

Note this is not actually burn-in which is a permanent phenomenon, but rather ghosting which is a temporary issue. Probably still just a case of drive circuitry not behaving properly as your burn-in case.

Apple products are a lottery now. (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187349)

Apple products are *all* a lottery now.

It has been this way for several years. The only thing unaffected by their use of multiple part sources is the systems without displays (Mac Pro and Mac Mini).

When I bought an iPhone 4S, I returned it four times. The first two units had a horrible yellow tint to the display, the third was blueish, and the forth was slightly green. The fifth unit was blueish as the third, but less so- most people wouldn't notice it so I decided I simply didn't care at the time.

When I bought an iPad 2, there was horrible backlight bleed on the first two units. The third had a yellow tint (yet again), and the forth was once more slightly blue-shifted, but since the backlight had no bleeding or strange artifacts I decided to keep that one too.

Then I bought a Retina MBP... Same thing. Returned the laptop four times. The first four units ALL had LG panels and exhibited the ghosting issue. It wasn't permanent- it faded after time, but that time span was often some multiple of 10 minutes. You could "burn in" that display just by looking at the same thing for 5 minutes, then it'd take many more minutes for the effect to fade away. The only other time I have ever encountered this issue in the history of computing was when I left something on a Viewsonic LCD (a VX924 if I'm not mistaken) for more then 24 hours without a screensaver. That display had some crazy burn-in when I closed the simulator program (from the static UI elements), but it faded away afterwards.

Frankly, I'm tired of this crap.

I used to buy Apple because I'd get a top-spec product that was flawless OOTB. I had no problems paying for a premium because stuff "just worked". Well, that's no longer the case in both situations. Products OOTB are a total lottery, be prepared to return it many many times to get a "pristine" product (I wouldn't care as much if they didn't charge an arm and a leg for this stuff and market it the way they do). OS X no longer "just works", but "kinda works". There's a lot of broken stuff in the core, and even more half-baked and ill-concieved features bolted on top.

So I'll be voting with my wallet from now on. My next laptop will be a Lenovo. My next tower will likely be an HP, Lenovo, or Dell workstation. My next phone will probably still be an iPhone since the iOS app store is a huge chunk of my monthly income, and I'm sure I'll need a Mini to target iOS through Xcode.

Otherwise, fuck Apple.

I'm so sick and tired of their "we are perfect and we offer the best experience out there!" bullshit. This is no longer true and they are going to get fucking wasted in the market unless they get their shit together and start offering the same level of quality and commitment to ALL their products (not just the iOS crap) as they used to before the iPhone. I'm hoping they get hammered in court because they deserve it for these shenanigans. If you're going to sell one MBP with the same SKU as another, it better have the same damned parts or equivalent in performance.

Customer casualties in Apples war against Samsung (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187379)

This is particularly obnoxious as Apple began sourcing hardware from suppliers other than Samsung due to their ongoing war on Android. As always, the only ones who suffer as a result of these religious wars are the customers.

Not sure it's the panel. (4, Interesting)

Jason Pollock (45537) | about a year ago | (#43187381)

I've noticed this burn-in. However, I've noticed something else about it that makes me believe that it is not necessarily the panel itself. I've been playing World of Warcraft in a window, and when I move the window, the ghost moves with it - it maintains it's position relative to the top of the window, not the top of the screen. This would indicate to me that it isn't the display which is ghosting, but something further up the rendering chain.

Re:Not sure it's the panel. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43188133)

I've seen burn-in that was somewhere upstream of the display on a laptop. I got the laptop second-hand (broken screen), and it displayed a ghost image of a gdm login screen when connected to my television.

This is hard to get solid data on... (2)

seebs (15766) | about a year ago | (#43187453)

I followed some of the threads on this on MacRumors. Problem: A lot of the users there will automatically and unquestioningly attack anyone who suggests that an Apple product is imperfect in any way, or pick a random third-party to indict.

My experience has been that, in general, basically all IPS displays are subject to temporary ghosting effects. I have never used an IPS display which did not get some degree of these effects. iPad 3 and 4, with their shiny high-res IPS displays? Ghosting. My NEC monitor from a couple years back? Ghosting. HP IPS display? Ghosting. I've never seen an IPS display that didn't show any of this at all. Certainly, some are more obvious than others -- my NEC display which is a few years old has always had relatively severe ghosting, as does my iPad 3, while my shiny and somewhat newer HP display has less.

But it's always there, and I don't think it's that big a deal.

Re:This is hard to get solid data on... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187905)

Who the fuck are you? You don't know shit. Have you even ever used an apple product in your life?

Re:This is hard to get solid data on... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187989)

It's true all IPS displays suffer from ghosting (especially compared to TN) - which is why they use feed forward/overdrive to eliminate as much of the effect as possible. What it sounds like to me is that the LG response time compensation is not functioning as well as the Samsung counterpart.

I had an LG screen, replaced with Samsung (5, Informative)

Falc0n (618777) | about a year ago | (#43187533)

As soon as I received my MBPr I started testing to see if it had ghosting issues and if it was an LG screen. Sure enough, both were true. I returned it, and referenced the specific part number 661-7171 (that was the samsung screen) to replace it with. My local apple rep obliged and I had a nice new Samsung screen. Re-ran the stress test and it cleared.

That was 6 months ago, haven't seen a ghosting issue since.

Not the first Macs to have this (2)

blindbat (189141) | about a year ago | (#43187625)

I have two 24" iMacs with burn in issues (now given to my wife and kids). My computer has two 24" Dell displays that are flawless. No more "all in ones" for me.

You gets whats you deserve (0)

mcmonkey (96054) | about a year ago | (#43187737)

A retina is a thing for detecting images, not displaying them. Describing your camera or an element of your camera as a retina makes sense. Describing your display as a retina makes no sense.

That the people who thought "retina display" was a good thing sold displays that are less than good does not surprise me. That the people who purchased a "retina display" could tell the difference does.

Perfect Solution (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187821)

Apple should bundle XScreensaver.

Yo steve (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187893)

The cap gun went off.

all you idiots fail to realise that this ghosting is supposed to make the macbook pro cooler as now you can ghost ride the screen while you look at gay porn.an apple a day keeps the doctor away but leaves your asshole sore.

all you cum guzzling apple faggots. my samsung galaxzy brings all the girls to the yard because android linux gangstas for life mother fuckers.

BURN!

iPad2 ghosting (1)

DigiShaman (671371) | about a year ago | (#43187927)

My iPad2 suffers the same problem. The URL bar will get burned into the screen. Eventually it will fade away, but it's real annoying. I'm not sure it has anything to do with the fact these MacBooks are Retina based. If anything, it's the formulation and process they are using to make the screens.

Apple's been playing about with other fuckery too (3, Interesting)

twilight30 (84644) | about a year ago | (#43187935)

Couple of observations:

- Apple reset the number of views in that thread about 6 months ago. Plenty of discussion about this in the thread itself. So 367k views really only means, '367k views since whenever it was reset'

- The atrocious customer service many of the complainants on the thread received coincided with the arrival and brief stay of John Browett, a British national and former head of Dixons, a particularly terrible UK computer / consumer electronics chain. Browett on arrival at Apple immediately started implementing a number of changes that reduced morale and positively fucked the chain's plummeting reputation for customer service. He sucked so badly, that he was summarily fired at the end of October along with Scott Forstall: http://www.cultofmac.com/198726/why-scott-forstall-and-john-browett-got-fired-from-apple-today/ [cultofmac.com]

- Apple quietly took out the LG screen (part number 661-6529) from their supplies of replacement displays sometime in late summer / early fall. The only replacements you can get from Apple now are Samsung parts (661-7171). I confirmed this myself with an Apple authorised 3rd-party supplier as I did not trust Apple to be honest about their supply situation after they fobbed me off initially with a 2nd LG display that developed IR.

- However, their plants in Shanghai are still assembling retinas with the LG screen (see thread for confirmation of this) - why, I don't know; maybe they have supplies to use up.

Re:Apple's been playing about with other fuckery t (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43187967)

It's because LG screens have more HIV than Samsung screens and apple users just can't get enough AIDS.

Re:Apple's been playing about with other fuckery t (-1, Troll)

twilight30 (84644) | about a year ago | (#43188023)

Thanks, cunt.

Re:Apple's been playing about with other fuckery t (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43188237)

Your reply looks really funny to someone that has AC comments hidden. :-)

Anonymous because Apple. (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43188031)

I manage an Apple Authorized Service Provider. Apple have an Image Persistance Test (it's part of a NetBoot diagnosis tool; can't just post the test online, sorry) - it displays a black and white checkerboard, tells you to look away for five minutes, beeps after the five, and if the pattern is still visible then we replace the display at no cost.

There is no external difference between LG and Samsung parts. Hell, we don't just replace the LCD; the entire display clamshell is replaced. This has been common with Apple for years, not just with displays but also parts like SSDs and hard disks.

If this person is really having ghosting problems, maybe he should visit a service provider or Genius Bar before launching a lawsuit.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...