A few dead pixels don't bother me, but what is odd is that I haven't heard of anyone receiving a Retina Macbook with any dead pixels at all. With a lot of displays, occasionally somebody gets one, so I thought I'd see if any of you all have noticed this (or if Apple's quality check is really that good).
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Does anyone's RMBP have dead pixels?
- Thread starter Xcelerate
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not necessarily, since Apple pays more for these displays, the quality standards will be higher. My iPad never had a dead pixel.
I would imagine that the quality control is really high right now since these are a new model of display, probably from a new production process, and they're going into pretty expensive products.
That may even factor in to why these machines are so hard to get right now. If they're having to discard/recycle half of the display panels that are produced at the factory it will take them a while to catch up with demand.
That may even factor in to why these machines are so hard to get right now. If they're having to discard/recycle half of the display panels that are produced at the factory it will take them a while to catch up with demand.
Overall, they don't. Officially, I believe it's 3 dead pixels that are considered acceptable. They won't replace a display with 3 or less unless they happen to be in particularly bad spots (right in the center or directly over an interface element for the user). In practice, of course, sometimes they will replace a display if the customer complains anyways, but that's their official policy, from what I remember.
EDIT: Meant to add that this may not apply to the retina displays, but nothing has been published yet about them.
jW
I really hope this is the issue with the new displays, when I got the iPad 3, I had a HUGE issue with dead pixels on the display, paying $1000 for the top of the line iPad is one thing (and still unacceptable), but I would expect a $3.5K laptop screen to be pixel perfect, otherwise, it would be ridiculous.
If you look at the Catleap monitors being sold, you will notice they are the "A-" quality. They are the same panels that go to Apple, but Apple gets the "A+" panels. So in general, the panels that Apple gets have a very good chance at being "perfect". You of course pay about 3x more at retail for that panel.
That's a bad expectation to have.
Buying devices with more expensive components does not necessarily imply that more money goes into the quality assurance (this *may* be the case, but it's far from guaranteed). It means more money goes into more expensive components, that's all. Their defect rates are exactly the same by default (unless Apple compensates).
So a $130 iPod nano has the least chance of dead pixels just because it has a lower number of them, everything else being equal.
It really baffles me when people expect a more expensive upgraded model (i.e. more RAM, bigger SSD, faster CPU) to be more reliable or less failure-prone than the base model. They're just more expensive components, that's all.
mine as well. and as was noted above, the pixels on the retina are 25% of the pixel size on "standard" MBP, meaning that a single dead pixel, even in a somewhat central location, may not be obvious.
Well that's quite a leap.
You have magically deduced that the higher price of the panel is most certainly due to reliability and not anything like lets say ... Performance?
If each quadrant of the panels has .1% chance of having a dead pixel.
P(No dead pixels) = .999^4
!= 4*P(No dead pixels in one quadrant)
As you can see that as resolution increases the chances of getting a faulty panel increases exponentially. This is why they can pump out millions upon millions of high density LCDs in the <4" form factor but so high density displays that are larger.
Correct, you'd need to have at least two right next to each other. I guess if you put your nose up to the screen when you conducted the experiment you might be able to spot dead pixels.
No! A dead pixel bright red on the middle of the screen is surely noticeable! when I pay so much for a notebook it must be perfect, on the first 14 days ( here in Italy you have 14 days to return it on an online purchase) i always deeply test it!
A dead pixel could even lower your resale value, check your display and if it has one return it.
As other people already said: I could accept a dead pixel on a 400$ notebook, on a 2500$ no way...
This is my opinion.
Sorry for my English
You'd need a cluster of four dead pixels to even see them right? This is the new retina display yes? Unable to discern pixels on account of 4x the density? So you'd need a magnifying glass to even know?