PDA

View Full Version : Got my PB Back from Dead Pixel Repair


MrMan112
May 13, 2005, 07:04 PM
They replaced the display on my 15 inch PB... only one problem... the new display has one large, very noticeable dead pixel in the center of the screen... This is compared to the 40 or so dead pixels I had on the old screen. They were all very difficult to see. I usually only saw them when watching movies... :(

Cold_Steel
May 13, 2005, 07:18 PM
Dude that sucks especially when its right in the middle.

I have one slightly off centre but I find that when I turn my desktop background to a light colour then you cant see it.

Why is it that apple seems to have so many dead pixels with their laptop screens whereas PC manufacturers have very little to none.

2 out of 3 macs i have owned have had a dead pix, 2 out of 2 PC laptops ive had have been perfect?


Also, apple wont fix a screen with les than 3 dead pixels? True?

Matt

MrMan112
May 14, 2005, 07:49 AM
I think its more like 6-8 dead pixels = no repair

James Philp
May 14, 2005, 07:52 AM
you can try rubbing the screen on a laptop but i doubt it will help. This doesn't work on a iMac G4 - i have one kinda upper-left, sucks :(
You can barely notice it unless you're closer that 1' away, but still.

aussie_geek
May 14, 2005, 08:06 AM
My 20 inch Cinema Display has a dead blue pixel pretty much in the centre of the field. I have tried the 'massage' technique over the last week or so since it has appeared with no luck. :o

Are you sure it's dead or stuck pixels (http://compreviews.about.com/od/multimedia/a/LCDPixelDefects.htm) ?

The massage technique may work for stuck ones but it may not work for dead ones...

Good luck!


aussie_geek

capone2
May 14, 2005, 08:38 AM
my 17' PB had no dead pixels, or apple calls them weak pixels, not dead?? anyway my computer had a whitespot sent it out for repair to texas of course. it comes back with 6 bad pixels i cound't believe it. Go back to the genius bar sent it out again and comes back with one bad pixel. this one was big and it was red which i had not seen on the other ones. This morning i wake up and now its no longer red on light background you can only see it on dark backgrounds!! I was told by the last genius i saw they can fix themselves, so maybe mine will and maybe yours will too.

im thankful its just one!! but in the center of the screen!! :(


PB 17" 1.5GHZ-1GBram

devman
May 14, 2005, 08:48 AM
Dude that sucks especially when its right in the middle.

I have one slightly off centre but I find that when I turn my desktop background to a light colour then you cant see it.

Why is it that apple seems to have so many dead pixels with their laptop screens whereas PC manufacturers have very little to none.

2 out of 3 macs i have owned have had a dead pix, 2 out of 2 PC laptops ive had have been perfect?


Also, apple wont fix a screen with les than 3 dead pixels? True?

Matt

Well, you and I are not a statistically valid sample. FWIW 3 PBs, 5 iBooks and 3 Cinema displays and not a single dead or stuck pixel on any of them. But, my first 30" ACD did have some stuck pixels and one dead pixel but it was replaced and the replacement is perfect.

Technically, the replacement bar is 4 pixels within a square inch. But Apple have often done replacements when that measurement has not been met. It depends on numbers of pixels overall and where they are and how well you make your case and how well the tech suports you, etc.

aussie_geek
May 14, 2005, 08:50 AM
One thing I have learnt about dead pixels is not to look for them. If it is blatantly obvious you have one then fair enough. Use the pixel checking apps with caution!!

The only way I found out about my dead pixel on the 20' was by the Pixelcheck app. I wouldn't have known otherwise.


aussie_geek

Maxiseller
May 14, 2005, 10:19 AM
*s*******

The thing is, why don't you just telephone Apple up and scream down the telephone? I know it may sound a little extreme but their contract with you was that they would repair your Powerbook screen. That hasn't happened.

Personally however, I would put up with it. I had a Ti Powerbook with dead pixels all over the place. Eventually replaced it with an iBook and had absolutly no problems whatsoever. It's all a matter of taste. If you're not happy, make a big enough fuss and I promice they will do somthing about it. It might take a few hours on the telephone and a sore throat but at least you'll have got rid of the proverbial puss filled bubo!

Chrispy
May 14, 2005, 11:35 AM
*s*******

The thing is, why don't you just telephone Apple up and scream down the telephone? I know it may sound a little extreme but their contract with you was that they would repair your Powerbook screen. That hasn't happened.

Personally however, I would put up with it. I had a Ti Powerbook with dead pixels all over the place. Eventually replaced it with an iBook and had absolutly no problems whatsoever. It's all a matter of taste. If you're not happy, make a big enough fuss and I promice they will do somthing about it. It might take a few hours on the telephone and a sore throat but at least you'll have got rid of the proverbial puss filled bubo!

He is right. I had 4, count them, 4 powerbook in a row with dead pixels. It was a load of crap and I had to call Apple both times and eventually yell at someone. I don't know why this is a problem with the powerbooks more than it seems to be with the iBooks. I have had 3 ibooks and many friends with them and none of them have had the pixel problem. The wost part was one of the powerbooks was a custom ordered 12" and they were trying to tell me "there was nothing I could do about it". They then lied and said every manufacturer has the same limit on dead pixels so I called Dell... and of course they will return with even one! Soooo I got the guy's name at Dell and called Apple back and spoke with a supervisor and FINALLLLY got them to let me return it. I now no longer own any apple laptops... :(

MacTruck
May 14, 2005, 12:13 PM
I will attest to the pixel problem. I have owned the following powerbooks:

G3 Pismo 400 x 2
G4 Tibook 400mhz
G4 Tibook 1ghz x 3
G4 1.67ghz x 2


ALL HAVE HAD A BAD PIXEL on the screen. Luckily, on the last 1.67ghz I got I tapped it several times and it went away. It was a flaky pixel that would come back now and then but has not resurfaced. I currently have that one and a Tibook right now and the tibook has a bad pixel but is not that noticable. The 1.67ghz on was way noticable, bright blue.

Maxiseller
May 15, 2005, 08:42 AM
It's a strange problem really. I mean, heck, they're not cheap computers are they?

The situation will probably change anyway with continual refinement of the technology, and of course the higher resolution screens that we're all hoping for with the introduction of G5 Powerbooks!!

(Please, don't hit me!)

YS2003
May 15, 2005, 09:50 AM
So far I have been lucky. All of my Apple equipment do not have any dead/stuck pixel. 15" Ti & Al PBs, 12" Al PB, 20" ACD, and 23" ACD. The only LCD with dead pixel is LG 24" LCD TV which has about 3 dead or stuck pixels around the center of the screen.

matticus008
May 15, 2005, 04:22 PM
It's a strange problem really. I mean, heck, they're not cheap computers are they?

The situation will probably change anyway with continual refinement of the technology, and of course the higher resolution screens that we're all hoping for with the introduction of G5 Powerbooks!!

(Please, don't hit me!)

It's not a strange problem. Each display has hundreds of thousands of multi-component pixels. Most of them are in working order. Even 40 dead pixels on a 15" PowerBook equates to 0.0036% of the total. That's fairly impressive quality control if EVERY PowerBook had 40 dead pixels. Most don't have any at all. The manufacturing process is difficult with these delicate pieces being produced in such tremendous numbers. Testing them all out and taking measures to eliminate bad pixels by a more stringent construction routine would have a very noticeable effect on prices. If fewer people were to buy LCDs because of greater expense, then the companies would have to have even higher prices to recoup the cost.

The industry found a sweet spot providing the best quality for the lowest price. As technology improves, companies have to decide between investing in flawless displays or providing continually lower prices. With the actual instance of dead pixels so low, most people would prefer lower prices. Obviously, when you get a display with any dead pixels, you're unhappy, and if there are several, you should attempt to get a replacement. But one or two isn't going to hurt.

It doesn't really matter how expensive the machine is. People already complain about the high prices of LCD panels, and it simply isn't cost effective to make perfect displays. You also can't necessarily test them individually and select only the perfect ones for your company. Not only would this require additional time and money, but it would also fail to detect lots of dead pixels, as they can fail after being manufactured as well.

bohrsatom
May 18, 2005, 02:53 PM
It's not a strange problem. Each display has hundreds of thousands of multi-component pixels. Most of them are in working order. Even 40 dead pixels on a 15" PowerBook equates to 0.0036% of the total. That's fairly impressive quality control if EVERY PowerBook had 40 dead pixels. Most don't have any at all. The manufacturing process is difficult with these delicate pieces being produced in such tremendous numbers. Testing them all out and taking measures to eliminate bad pixels by a more stringent construction routine would have a very noticeable effect on prices. If fewer people were to buy LCDs because of greater expense, then the companies would have to have even higher prices to recoup the cost.

Sorry man but I had to register just to reply to this post. Don't believe what the electronics companies are telling you, it's just poor quality control.

My current compuer is made of hundreds (if not thousands) of components, if one of those went wrong then my computer would cease to function correctly (and probably not even POST). My TV is made from hundreds (if not thousands) of components too, as is my car and various other pieces of electronics around the house. If the motherboard, graphics card, memory, sound card, etc etc makers can make 100% perfect pieces of hardware, jam packed full of components that work as per the specification then why can't the people who make TFTs/LCDs do the same?

"The cost" of more stringent quality control would be very little to the consumer. Even they say that (according to your post) - making them in tremendous numbers means that any additional cost would be minimal per unit (perhaps a few dollars or whatnot). And as for "having to raise the prices because fewer people are buying them" then that's just plain old economics. If they wanted more people to buy them then they could improve production techniques and lower the price.

However they don't need to do that. They can get away with sub-standard manufacturing because their PR departments have some good excuses and the paying public are happy to accept them.

Norouzi
May 18, 2005, 05:09 PM
My current compuer is made of hundreds (if not thousands) of components, if one of those went wrong then my computer would cease to function correctly (and probably not even POST). My TV is made from hundreds (if not thousands) of components too, as is my car and various other pieces of electronics around the house. If the motherboard, graphics card, memory, sound card, etc etc makers can make 100% perfect pieces of hardware, jam packed full of components that work as per the specification then why can't the people who make TFTs/LCDs do the same?

Ok, I just had to reply to this portion of your post. Just because all of the hardware that you own works 100% dosen't mean that every piece of equipment that has ever been made by that company works 100% of the time. Everything can't be perfect no matter how much quality control a company does things will not be perfect. All the Mac's I've owned have worked perfectly I've never had to send any of them in for even one repair. I've never had to call Apple once. Do I assume that this means that everything Apple makes is 100% perfect and will never have a defect no of course not. And neither will anything else I buy, be it computer, TV, Car, Stereo.

TreeHugger
May 18, 2005, 05:15 PM
I think I have 2 or 3 dead pixels. none are especially large or noticeable unless against a white background. Do the pixels have to be in the proximity of each other for apple to honor their warranty?

Dont Hurt Me
May 18, 2005, 05:20 PM
Dead pixels should be illegal, They outlaw everything else why should dead pixels be exempt? Hate to make a plug but why not, NEC- 2 monitors Lcd with 0 dead pixels. Manufactors should be required to ship good monitors. Congress here is your chance for more paper. :eek:

bohrsatom
May 18, 2005, 05:53 PM
Ok, I just had to reply to this portion of your post. Just because all of the hardware that you own works 100% dosen't mean that every piece of equipment that has ever been made by that company works 100% of the time.

Well no. But if my TV/car/graphics card/motherboard had a faulty component then they would fix/replace it. That wouldn't happen with my LCD.. that has to break some sort of threshold of brokenness before they accept it for replacement under some PR mumbo jumbo instead of just acknowledging that the component is broken.

eva01
May 18, 2005, 06:30 PM
i would call up apple and tell them that they sent you a defective display after fixing it, and they best fix it now, before something more comes of it.

Abstract
May 18, 2005, 09:07 PM
It's not a strange problem. Each display has hundreds of thousands of multi-component pixels. Most of them are in working order. Even 40 dead pixels on a 15" PowerBook equates to 0.0036% of the total. That's fairly impressive quality control if EVERY PowerBook had 40 dead pixels. Most don't have any at all. The manufacturing process is difficult with these delicate pieces being produced in such tremendous numbers. Testing them all out and taking measures to eliminate bad pixels by a more stringent construction routine would have a very noticeable effect on prices. If fewer people were to buy LCDs because of greater expense, then the companies would have to have even higher prices to recoup the cost.


But are we comparing LCDs and everything else in production, or Apple's LCDs vs every other company's LCDs? If we're comparing them to the industry standard, 40 stuck pixels in each LCD is horrid, as no other company has that many dead/stuck pixels on average. If we're talking about CPU yields, then sure, dumping 30% into the bin because they don't work well is normal. So yes, 40 stuck pixels is a very low percentage of the millions of pixels on your screen, but its still not up to snuff compared to the rest of the industry.

matticus008
May 18, 2005, 09:59 PM
My current compuer is made of hundreds (if not thousands) of components, if one of those went wrong then my computer would cease to function correctly (and probably not even POST). My TV is made from hundreds (if not thousands) of components too, as is my car and various other pieces of electronics around the house. If the motherboard, graphics card, memory, sound card, etc etc makers can make 100% perfect pieces of hardware, jam packed full of components that work as per the specification then why can't the people who make TFTs/LCDs do the same?
Actually, it's not. Motherboards and CPUs are all tested in the factories, as are monitors. They are not tested comprehensively--this is why you still have motherboards that don't POST, capacitors that swell, cars with bumpers with a 2cm gap on the left but not the right, and any number of small manufacturing defects. Statistically, these occur in higher percentages than dead pixels. You're also forgetting fault tolerance in components, such as circuit traces, that are simply not present in more simple devices (the individual pixels of an LCD). Those manufacturers aren't making flawless products; they're making products with more transparent faults or show-stopping faults that are marked off as simply "bad."


"The cost" of more stringent quality control would be very little to the consumer. Even they say that (according to your post) - making them in tremendous numbers means that any additional cost would be minimal per unit (perhaps a few dollars or whatnot).
No. Checking more units costs more money than checking a random sample of units. The extra cost for quality control in this case is astronomical. Let's say that a worker has 10,000 pixels to test before installation into the monitor and it takes him 3 hours. Now, let's up the quantity to 20,000 pixels. It still takes just as long to check them individually, so the QC costs have now doubled because the worker needs to be paid for 6 hours. Once a dead pixel has been installed in a display, that's it. You can't replace the individual pixel units without replacing the entire panel, meaning that each pixel has to be checked individually PRIOR to installation (at a sensibly great expense). You can't throw away 99.999% flawless panels because of two dead pixels out of a million. The consumer has to suck it up and deal with it or buy a premium monitor that is guaranteed not to have dead pixels. But who offers such a product?


And as for "having to raise the prices because fewer people are buying them" then that's just plain old economics. If they wanted more people to buy them then they could improve production techniques and lower the price.
This is exactly what's happening. The manufacturers offer cheaper panels with better specs than they did a few years ago, but without major reductions in the number of dead pixels (the number is statistically insignificant anyway). Consumers have spoken. Price is more important than perfection, say the masses.

matticus008
May 18, 2005, 10:05 PM
But are we comparing LCDs and everything else in production, or Apple's LCDs vs every other company's LCDs? If we're comparing them to the industry standard, 40 stuck pixels in each LCD is horrid, as no other company has that many dead/stuck pixels on average. If we're talking about CPU yields, then sure, dumping 30% into the bin because they don't work well is normal. So yes, 40 stuck pixels is a very low percentage of the millions of pixels on your screen, but its still not up to snuff compared to the rest of the industry.
I agree completely. But 40 pixels was an arbitrary number, and certainly not Apple's average. But if the industry average WERE 40 pixels, it would still be (statistically) better than most other areas of production. I have no idea whether Apple performs above or below average for the LCD industry, but it seems that they're about average to me.

It's annoying to us because it's like a keyboard with a missing letter or a chipped dining table, but that's life. Nothing manufactured today in quantity produces a consistently perfect product.

Bad_JuJu
May 20, 2005, 02:26 PM
The issue about dead LEDs in LCDs vs say the HW on your motherboard is that these LEDs are micro (really freakin small) in size (hence the thin / light nature of a flat panel) ---- being micro (and of course micro-connections ect)they are more susceptable to damage from impacts - flexing - temperature changes - etc.

And yes the transitors in chips are really freakin small too - but they are on a nice solid silicon substrate --- not spread accross a huge screen.


Over time they will get better -- my old ThinkPad at Intel had 2 dead leds down in the corner - IMHO it should be 3 dead leds for a replacement - or only one or 2 if they are in the middle of the screen.

So everyone if basically rolling the dice when they buy an LCD - especaily on a notebook at they are mobile and will recieve more shocks and temperature changes.

I'm going to buy a 12" PB and just hope it works out -- In fact I do have to say that I believe Apple is sacrificing reliability for style on their iBooks and PBooks --- I just went to IBM and checked the price of their latest ThinkPads and they are comprable to the the PBooks in price --- but the ThinkPads are built like freakin tanks -- most importantly - their LCD screens are re-inforced with an "L" shaped edge to reduce flex and also fit against the laptop body when closed.

wide
May 20, 2005, 02:40 PM
you can try rubbing the screen on a laptop but i doubt it will help. This doesn't work on a iMac G4 - i have one kinda upper-left, sucks :(
You can barely notice it unless you're closer that 1' away, but still.

actually, it will work on an iMac G4 (or any LCD display) so long as it is no dead but "stuck", which means the pixel is in working order but just needs to be set into place properly. if it didn't work on your imac G4, your malfunctioning pixel is most likely dead and not stuck.

i would definately try this method of rubbing the malfunctioning pixel and the area around it. use an eraserhead from a pencil (a new, clean one). my bet is that it will work. just be careful though, if you fix it, there is always a change that it will un-set itself if you push too hard.

if it starts to blink while you are rubbing it, carefully apply a little more pressure until it stops blinking and displays solid color.