Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Dead Pixel on my new 17" iMac - options?

CalGrunt said:
All I'm saying is that Apple should clearly state in their advertising that 5 or less dead pixels does NOT constitute a product as being defective, but to tell us their stance on this AFTER we already purchased the product is not playing on the up and up. Why doesn't Apple do this? It's obvious......... it would cost them sales.
Click to expand...
Why would Apple put their dead-pixel policy in their advertising when Sony, Dell, Acer, IBM, (basically, .. nobody else) doesn't?

Each one of those companies puts out "luxury models" that can be more expensive than an Apple PB.
 
QCassidy352 said:
True, but it's interesting that you would describe a product that is completely useable as "defective." I would say that "defective" describes a good that is unusable, or the use of which is seriously impaired. One dead pixel in no way makes a screen approach that standard.
Click to expand...

Hehe. That made me smile :)

Wouldn't a product that's 'defective' be a product that exhibits a 'defect'?

Is a stuck-pixel a defect? I'd imagine so.

I would hazard a guess that for every screen with a stuck pixel that gets noticed, and whose owner requests a return, there's probably a whole bunch more whose stuck pixels go unnoticed or whose owners don't mind.

Especially with the G5 being an 'all-in-one' -- no chance of replacing the screen separately to the whole system -- I would hope that Apple would be a little more generous in their returns policy. Indeed, it seems like they have been by authorising the return.

I'm planning on buying the Dell 2005FPW for my Mac Mini and PC to share. It uses the exact same LCD panel as the Apple display. I'll be sure to buy using a credit card (thus assuring me the right to return), and will confirm with Dell that I may return the screen if unhappy.
 
You all are certianly free to get all in a huff about a dead pixel.

That being said- Last year I bought my first Mac, an iBook G4, and it has a dead pixel in the middle (horizontally) of the screen, 1/4 of the way up from the bottom. It's a fairly prominent location for a dead pixel. I notice it about once a month. Honestly, if it bothered me, or detracted from my computing experience, it would have returned it. But it doesn't. I am so enthusiastic about what a great computing experience Apple has put together, I wouldn't want to cost Apple more money for a problem I basically never notice. Anyways, that's my take.

Keep in mind, if you ditch Apple and go with some other company, you may well buy the next day shipping, and get a computer whose monitor has a dead pixel anyways!

Finally, what's all this buisness about Apple not dealing with BTO machines? I upgraded the HD size, and got BT and AE for the iBook, and they were happy to help me at the Apple store when my HD died. They even shipped it to be repaired for me.
 
CalGrunt said:
Here's a view from a little different perspective.

Being that most of here have read about monitors having dead pixels and yet many other reports of no dead pixels whatsoever, I would imagine that, for most of us, if we ordered a new iMac or notebook, and we finally got it in our hot little hands, and with much excited anticipation, we unpacked our new baby, plugged it in and looked at the screen, and when the screen lit up we looked at it and found, lo and behold.........NO DEAD PIXELS !!! Our screens are perfect............and guess what? We didn't have to pay a premium for our perfect screen without any dead pixels !!!! And ya know why? Because some complacent schmuck got his computer with dead pixels but accepted it without returning it as defective............Thank God for them, because if it wasn't for them, I would have had to pay a higher price for my flawless LCD.

Just a little different view of the same argument, no?

The way I look at it is this. If two LCD manufactures advertised their LCD's. One manufacturer clearly stated in their advertising that customers may receive a flawd LCD with dead pixels and that if the dead pixel count was below 5, they had to accept said product, for it falls withing the manufacturing tolerances. That LCD cost 500 bucks.

Another LCD manufacturer said in their advertising that they will guarantee that their LCD's will not have any dead pixels and if you received one that did, they would exchange it, no questions asked...........and that LCD cost 10% more, hell, lets even say it would cost 15% more. For me, I would GLADLY pay an additional 10 to 15% more to buy something from a manufacturer that will stand behind the quality of their product. Wouldn't you???

All I'm saying is that Apple should clearly state in their advertising that 5 or less dead pixels does NOT constitute a product as being defective, but to tell us their stance on this AFTER we already purchased the product is not playing on the up and up. Why doesn't Apple do this? It's obvious......... it would cost them sales.

Some are more sensitive to this dead pixel issue than others. We all have different expectation levels and different tolerances for things that are not perfect. So fine, if you can pay top dollar for a computer and accept a flawed LCD and live with it, great...............but don't get on someone else's case who find themselves unable NOT to stare at that dead pixel.
Click to expand...

That encapsulates perfectly the view that I and many others share. Well done for a well crafted response. I would just expand it a touch to say that not just Apple, but EVERY computer manufacturer should clearly state their pixel policy in their advertising and the fact they don't is I am sure entirely down to the reason you describe.

Vanilla
 
aristobrat said:
Why would Apple put their dead-pixel policy in their advertising when Sony, Dell, Acer, IBM, (basically, .. nobody else) doesn't?

Each one of those companies puts out "luxury models" that can be more expensive than an Apple PB.
Click to expand...

Fine, don't put it in the advertising. But then don't tell a customer who has already purchased a computer and is dissatisfied because his new monitor has a few dead pixels that he can't return it for an exchange because Apple considers any monitor that has less than 5 dead pixels is not defective.

If, in fact, Apple is standing behind their product and doing the exchanges, great. They don't need to make a disclaimer in their advertising. But, if they are not going to honor an exchange without a 15% restocking fee, then they better well darn put it in their advertising, because from a legal standpoint, they are putting themselves at risk, and believe me, using an example of what other manufactures are doing or not doing, will not be considered as a valid defensive argument.
 
The official Apple policy is found at http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=22194

Many Apple products use active-matrix LCD panels, including the iMac (Flat Panel), iBook, recent PowerBook computers, and Apple Cinema displays. In addition to being slim and light, active-matrix LCD technology provides customers with many visual performance advantages when compared to traditional cathode-ray tube- (CRT) based displays, such as increased brightness, sharpness, and contrast ratio.

Active-matrix LCD technology uses rows and columns of addressable locations (pixels) that render text and images on screen. Each pixel location has three separate subpixels (red, green and blue) that allow the image to be rendered in full color. Each subpixel has a corresponding transistor responsible for turning the subpixel on or off.

There are typically millions of these subpixels on an LCD display. For example, the LCD panel used in the Apple Cinema HD display is made up of 2.3 million pixels and 6.9 million red, green, and blue subpixels. Occasionally, a transistor does not work perfectly, which may result in the affected subpixel being turned on (bright) or turned off (dark). With the millions of subpixels on a display, it is quite possible to have a low number of faulty transistors on an LCD. Therefore, a certain number of subpixel anomalies is considered acceptable. Rejecting all but perfect LCD panels would significantly increase the retail price for products using LCD displays. These factors apply to all manufacturers using LCD technology--not just Apple products.

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



If I remember correctly Samsung are the only LCD maker with a zero dead pixel policy.
 
Fireburst said:
The official Apple policy is found at http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=22194


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

Apples policy is only available if you KNOW where to look for it. It is not stated anywhere in their advertising.

So you buy a new computer, you have no idea what their policy is, you have a few dead pixels, you are concerned, so you take it to an authorized repair center or an Apple Store, and THEY MAY CHARGE YOU FOR AN EVALUATION OF YOUR BRAND NEW FLAWED LCD???? What a crock !!!!!!!

If this happened to me, they better not charge me. They should gladly exchange my computer for one that doesn't have any dead pixels, and not only not charge me a dime, but apologize for the inconvenience of me having to bring my brand new computer back to them.

Charge me for an evaluation???? That's an insult !!!!
 
I think you can sometimes unstick pixels and even bring them back to life sometimes by massaging them with a soft rag.
 
CalGrunt said:
Apples policy is only available if you KNOW where to look for it. It is not stated anywhere in their advertising.
Click to expand...
Cal,

(insert any LCD seller here)'s policy is only available if you KNOW where to look for it. They don't state it anywhere in their advertising.

With the exception of Samsung, right or wrong, Apple's dead pixel policy appears to be right in line with the rest of the industry (Sony, Dell, IBM, etc). Unadvertised or not.l
 
CalGrunt said:
So you buy a new computer, you have no idea what their policy is, you have a few dead pixels, you are concerned, so you take it to an authorized repair center or an Apple Store, and THEY MAY CHARGE YOU FOR AN EVALUATION OF YOUR BRAND NEW FLAWED LCD???? What a crock !!!!!!!
Click to expand...
Again, Dell, IBM, etc would all do the same thing.
 
aristobrat said:
Again, Dell, IBM, etc would all do the same thing.
Click to expand...

Aristobrat, I don't understand why you keep bringing up other manufacturers. Just because they are doing something doesn't make it right. I'm not buying a Dell or IBM, but if I were, I would have the same issue with them.

If, by chance, some customer really got a hair up their butt and decided to take Apple to court on this, there is no way that Apple could use what any of their competitors are doing in the market place as an excuse to do the same thing. It's that old "two wrongs don't make a right" logic that comes into play here.

But again, I'm not purchasing a Dell or an IBM. I could care less how they*market their products. But being that I am purchasing a Mac, I care very*much how Apple would deal with me as a customer who desires to return a flawed LCD monitor.

Not that Apple would do this, but are you implying that if I buy a brand new computer at a premium price, and I take it home and notice a few dead pixels, or even just one, and I return it to Apple for an exchange, that if they want to charge me a 15% restocking fee, and/or charge me for an evaluation, that I should accept it just because Dell and IBM do the same thing?
 
I'm not here to say what's right or not. I'm merely pointing out that you seem to be taking indignant exception to Apple's pixel policy, which seems to be in line with how the rest of the real world works. You can either adjust your expecations accordingly, or ... sue, I guess. Although with as long as companies have been selling LCDs with the occasional stuck pixel, I'm pretty sure that's been tried before.

Perhaps an eMac? No LCDs there.
 
aristobrat said:
You can either adjust your expecations accordingly, or ... sue, I guess. Although with as long as companies have been selling LCDs with the occasional stuck pixel, I'm pretty sure that's been tried before.
Click to expand...


Nope, I don't have to adjust my expectations, nor do I have to sue. I have total confidence that I will be able to speak to someone within Apples organization and appeal to their business ethics and be able to exchange my iMac, if it so happens to be delivered with a dead pixel or two.

I also disagree that it's been tried before, regarding having this thing go through the courts. It would be totally asinine for a large company to allow something as trivial as this go through the courts..............nope.......they would satisfy a complaining customer and exchange their computer before they would ever allow it to escalate to that degree.

Nope, I don't think the courts have ever seen this issue, but if they did, I have no doubt that the manufacturer would lose. You can't hold a customer responsible for knowing a policy if it is not clearly posted where customers can see it, without having to search for it. If you're going to charge a 15% restocking fee, or if you're going to charge for an evaluation on a brand new warranted product that a customer receives that has some flaws, then you better state so in the small print under your advertising and clearly state what constitutes a defective monitor and what doesn't constitute a monitor being defective.

And the ONLY reason that I am specifically indignant to Apples pixel policy is that I am in the process of buying a computer from them. And again, I could care less what the policies are at Dell or IBM, because I am not purchasing a computer because I am not purchasing a computer from either Dell or IBM.

Ok........off my soapbox now. Nothing more really to say about this subject. I think I've beaten the proverbial dead horse.
 
Update...

I just came back from the Apple Store with a new 17" iMac (they just got them in today--I know because I called everyday looking for them). It's perfect. No dead pixels, and all the problems I had on the other unit are no longer problems. The data is transfering in firewire mode as we speak and I will be returning the defective iMac on Monday (via the shipping label I was e-mailed).

All's well, ends well. :)
 
Wow, interesting thread. I'm with AppleFreak, even one dead pixel would drive me nuts, but I count it a miracle that they're willing to let him swap the machine. I switched to Mac's three years ago after using PC's for nearly 20 years. I probably owned at least 30 PC's (desktops and laptops), from a variety of manufacturers, but most of the desktops were Dell and most of the laptops were IBM Thinkpads. My personal experiences with these two manufacturers generally were positive. Quick telephone access, polite and competent telephone service reps, next day onsite service (at a cost far less than what Apple charges for AppleCare), etc. I've had exactly the opposite experience with Apple. I love the design of the machines, and I really love OS X, but my customer service interactions have been miserable. While I know many people here will say my experiences have been atypical, they are real.

The only stuck pixel I've ever had was on my first Mac, a 1 ghz TiBook. Naturally, Apple refused to do anything about it, but was surprised me was the callousness of the service tech I spoke with. His attitude was: tough luck and if you don't like it, go buy a Dell. I've had a half-dozen or so problems since then, and it's been a hassle to get Apple to accept responsiblity for anything (including a defective power adapter that began to smoke); it's as if you have to fight them first. Eventually they fix stuff, but not without a fight. The iPod defective battery class action settlement is typical Apple, IMHO.

I see Apple service rated highly in different magazines, like Consumer Reports, but from hanging out on Mac forums for the past few years I've developed a theory that Mac users generally are very loyal and will defend Apple to a fault. As an example, I reguarly see iBook and PowerBook owners talking about how with their $249 AppleCare, they sent their machine off to Apple and had it back in...4 or 5 days! With both Dell and IBM, I had laptops fixed onsite the next day at least four times, and it didn't cost me $249 for a three-year warranty. Mailing back a laptop for service (covered by a warranty that cost $249) and waiting 4 or 5 days strikes me as a complete joke.

Given the relative price of a typical Mac relative to a lowly PC, I think one dead pixel is one dead pixel too many.
 
Im getting a 1550$can 23" monitor next week, if there is any dead pixels I'll return it immediatly at the store. If they refuse that I'll send it to apple. Its outrageous to pay so much for something that can be defective.
 
Like my new iBook (which got replaced with one dead pixel), I would say it's DOA. Get a new one! Tell Apple how annoying this dead pixel is and keep complaining.
 
I agree with applefreak, a dead pixel in an apple brand computer is not tolerable.

I've had a few monitors with dead pixels, they were some cheap 17".
But thats where the difference is.

Apple monitors aren't cheap, neither are apple computers. So I would assume they would have a better stuck pixel policy. Maybe even a no-dead-pixel policy?? It appears this isn't so. A bit ironic considering they are known for quality...

For comparison, at the moment I've got a dell inspiron 9300 with a 17" 1920*1200 lcd. No dead/stuck pixels, thats the way it should be. All of my 2304000 pixels are working properly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back