iPod touch Ipod Touch 32GB Dead Pixel

[ilovebananas]

For EDGE100

There is an international document relating to pixel defects. It is available for all to view on ISO's website. It can be considered legally enforceable. So Apple are not being "arbitrary". Two dead pixels are within spec.
Sorry if you don't agree but look it up, it exists so live with it. Just because you haven't checked what the industry standard (backed up by ISO) is, that is not a reason to then reject it.

 

[Edge100]

There is an international document relating to pixel defects. It is available for all to view on ISO's website. It can be considered legally enforceable. So Apple are not being "arbitrary". Two dead pixels are within spec.
Sorry if you don't agree but look it up, it exists so live with it. Just because you haven't checked what the industry standard (backed up by ISO) is, that is not a reason to then reject it.

The ISO document refers to a certain build quality; it has nothing, as far as I can tell, to do with a legally enforceable contract law tenet.

I would be willing to accept this explanation if Apple prominently posted the ISO standard to which each of their products are held. At least then I would be able to make an informed decision. But if I'm making the purchase without knowing this information, then Apple can't come back with "well, you agreed to this when you bought the product"; I didn't!

Sorry, but if I get a dead pixel, it's going back.

 

[ilovebananas]

All sales are made implying that both parties agree to adhere to any relevant laws and standards in place. If you are ignorant of them/don't agree, then don't buy.
The company I work for just had a guy like you who wouldn't accept that a 40" (1080p) lcd could have a dead pixel. Do the math, the screen is 99.9999998% perfect (accepted as 100% )
He tried to take it to court, guess what? After speaking to his "lawyer" he never came back. Imagine his lawyer told him he would loose!

 

[Edge100]

All sales are made implying that both parties agree to adhere to any relevant laws and standards in place. If you are ignorant of them/don't agree, then don't buy.
The company I work for just had a guy like you who wouldn't accept that a 40" (1080p) lcd could have a dead pixel. Do the math, the screen is 99.9999998% perfect (accepted as 100% )
He tried to take it to court, guess what? After speaking to his "lawyer" he never came back. Imagine his lawyer told him he would loose!

Only if a reasonable person would know the laws and standards in place. Apple knows that most people don't know the laws and standards, and they know that a "reasonable" person wouldn't; granted, ignorance of the law is no excuse, but Apple is still obliged to state its specs up front.

I see the situation as exactly analogous to return policies. The store has an obligation to inform the customer what its policy is, or at least to make the information accessible, such that a reasonable person could easily access the information.

A reasonable person cannot be expected to know esoteric aspects of consumer law; Apple has an obligation to inform its customers.

I'd like to see a test case on this.

 

[FishStik]

I shelled out a lot more than $500 for my iMac and I have three stuck pixels. But I'm not crying to Apple about it. It doesn't matter how much you pay for it, because dead pixels are just a fact of life in the LCD world.

You can't compare dead pixels on an iMac to dead pixels on an iPod. An iPod's screen is a lot smaller than an iMac's (last time I checked). Since there are fewer pixels on the iPod's screen, dead pixels would be more bothersome than on a big screen like the iMac's.

I say if it really bothers you, don't just "deal with it". You are the customer. You made the purchase, so you shouldn't have to put up with out-of-the-box defects. I'm guessing it does bother you since you made a thread and asked for help to fix it. Contact Apple to see if they will help you (their customer service is decent), and if they won't, return it to Amazon and buy another one. You'll lose a few bucks, but if you think it's worth it, go for it.

 

[aethelbert]

You can't compare dead pixels on an iMac to dead pixels on an iPod.

Sure you can. The ratio applies across the entire line of products. More pixels=more dead pixels. Whatever the resolution of the screen, there will always be a chance of getting dead pixels. My point was that it doesn't matter how much you pay, dead pixels happen.

 

[FishStik]

OK, you said your iMac (which contains 1,764,000 or 2,304,000 pixels) had three dead pixels. e12a here said his iPod touch (containing 153,600 pixels) had five dead pixels.

Wait, more pixels = less dead pixels?! Oh well, dead pixels happen. I guess I'm just unlucky. [/sarcasm]

 

[ilovebananas]

agreed Apple should let you know their policies.
They do. If you ask them they can show you. Obviousely it isn't possible to display everthing in big easy to read print on the walls of the store. If they did every store on the planet would just be an ugly mess of posters and signs. All a retailer has to be able to do is supply you with their terms upon request. You are free to ask before you buy or after. This applies to all retailers not just apple. If you buy from say Amazon, they don't load a screen before you checkout showing you their policies. You can go to the appropriate link on thier site and find them yourself.
Ignorance is not an excuse. If you sell an item for a friend and it turns out he stole it, you are still an accessory after the fact. Even if he didn't tell you it was stolen!
Also receipts or invoices always mention that sales are made subject to terms and conditions.
If you get home and see this, don't use/open goods until you have asked what they are.

I agree with other posters that a macbook screen is totally different to an ipod screen. However as stated, the rate of defects remians the same. Basically it is that 2 pixels in every million are allowed to be dead or imperfect.
So on a low res Ipod screen (153k pixels) 1 would be ok, but 2 would be pushing it. On a macbook (just over 1 millon pixels) 3 (maybe 4) would be ok.
a few dead pixels on a screen (that can't be seen at usual viewing distance) are a lot less of a pain than the old CRT problems (screen bowing, geometry errors, magnetisation....)

 

[Grentz]

akonradi, a lot of the info you are spewing is very very incorrect in the actual industry. Just FYI

The company I used to work for distributed LCD panels in TV, PC Monitor, and Portable DVD player form and thus we had to know the ins and outs of dead pixels.

The fact is it is more aggravating on a small device with a low resolution (native res. does matter cause native res is related to the pixels in an LCD) as there is less screen area and less pixels so they stand out more.

It also is a false fact to assume you have to get dead pixels, by far MOST LCDs do not have dead pixels especially smaller ones as there are less pixels to get damage and have an issue during distribution or shipping (which is when most issues occur).

Also QC checks should and many times do cover dead pixels, the issue is many dead pixels happen during packing, distribution, and shipping and thus the problem is almost impossible to remedy with before checks (this is also why there are many dead pixel policies out there).

Saying they are so hard to spot is also a lie, pixels stuck on stand out very easily on lower res screens like the ipods. Pixels stuck off are better and pixel stuck to a more muted color are better, but on small screens you usually can still tell. and once you know where they are your mind goes to them.

I do not see why the iPod Touch should have so many occurances of dead pixels though...unless apple is cheaping out with a cheap manufacture for the displays.

 

[Edge100]

agreed Apple should let you know their policies.
They do. If you ask them they can show you. Obviousely it isn't possible to display everthing in big easy to read print on the walls of the store. If they did every store on the planet would just be an ugly mess of posters and signs. All a retailer has to be able to do is supply you with their terms upon request. You are free to ask before you buy or after. This applies to all retailers not just apple. If you buy from say Amazon, they don't load a screen before you checkout showing you their policies. You can go to the appropriate link on thier site and find them yourself.
Ignorance is not an excuse. If you sell an item for a friend and it turns out he stole it, you are still an accessory after the fact. Even if he didn't tell you it was stolen!
Also receipts or invoices always mention that sales are made subject to terms and conditions.
If you get home and see this, don't use/open goods until you have asked what they are.

I agree with other posters that a macbook screen is totally different to an ipod screen. However as stated, the rate of defects remians the same. Basically it is that 2 pixels in every million are allowed to be dead or imperfect.
So on a low res Ipod screen (153k pixels) 1 would be ok, but 2 would be pushing it. On a macbook (just over 1 millon pixels) 3 (maybe 4) would be ok.
a few dead pixels on a screen (that can't be seen at usual viewing distance) are a lot less of a pain than the old CRT problems (screen bowing, geometry errors, magnetisation....)

The requirement for you to seek out specs is not infinite; you can't, for instance, be expected to seek out the tolerance spec for every single chip in an iPod Touch, for instance.

Apple posts the specs for its Cinema Displays; one could make an argument that, in this case, the consumer should be aware of them because they are prominently displayed on the website.

Not so for the other products (at least the ones I checked). Even the iMac specs at apple.com/imac do not include anything that would lead the reader to know the dead pixel spec.

Bottom line: Apple has to make a reasonable effort to inform its potential customers as to the operating specs of its products, and the customer has to be reasonably aware of those specs. For some specs, Apple does just this. For others, including its dead/stuck pixel spec (which is related to the ISO spec), it does not. Thus, the customer cannot be expected to know this.

One dead pixel: get an exchange.

 

[aethelbert]

The fact is it is more aggravating on a small device with a low resolution (native res. does matter cause native res is related to the pixels in an LCD) as there is less screen area and less pixels so they stand out more.

very true

It also is a false fact to assume you have to get dead pixels, by far MOST LCDs do not have dead pixels especially smaller ones as there are less pixels to get damage and have an issue during distribution or shipping (which is when most issues occur).

I'm not saying that you always get them. But getting one or two is the least of your worries when other screens have even more than that.

Also QC checks should and many times do cover dead pixels, the issue is many dead pixels happen during packing, distribution, and shipping and thus the problem is almost impossible to remedy with before checks (this is also why there are many dead pixel policies out there).

Yeah, they don't always happen when the LCDs are made. But, if a company were to have a quality control system where every LCD gets checked and all dead pixels rejected, costs would rise in very high levels. The thing is, though, that they do happen quite often and rejecting every problem, no matter how small, would make everything cost a lot more. This is also why there are policies in place to allow exchanges after a certain amount of dead pixels.

Saying they are so hard to spot is also a lie, pixels stuck on stand out very easily on lower res screens like the ipods. Pixels stuck off are better and pixel stuck to a more muted color are better, but on small screens you usually can still tell. and once you know where they are your mind goes to them.

The resolution or size of the screen has nothing to do with how easy they are to notice. It's the density. For instance, finding a dead pixel on a 3G iPod nano would be much more difficult than finding one on a 160x160 screen of the same physical dimensions.

And for your second part there, that's why I always suggest that people just not even look for them. If you don't know that you have one, then you're not likely to be bothered by it.

I do not see why the iPod Touch should have so many occurances of dead pixels though...unless apple is cheaping out with a cheap manufacture for the displays.

When you produce displays is such large numbers, quality will begin to slip. This applies in matters like this as the LCD is not the main cost factor of the device, and the manufacturer will try to keep the costs as low as possible. I mean, if you're manufacturing TVs, the main focus is the screen. So of course you'll be seeking quality, often at a higher cost.

 

[ilovebananas]

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1721?viewlocale=en_US&locale=en_GB

This link took me less than a minute to find. It clearly states that Apple (and everybody else) can't guarantee that you won't have a dead pixel.
It is applicable to all apple products (including ipod,iphones)
It is vague but does highlight the fact that it is possible. It will be evaluated on a case by case basis but one pixel will very rarely be accepted as reason for exchange.

Under a minute via google (apple pixel defect). This is what Apple can produce upon demand and is also available in my local apple store as a leaflet at the Genius Bar.
Not hard to find. Average Jo can find it no problem.

 

[Edge100]

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1721?viewlocale=en_US&locale=en_GB

This link took me less than a minute to find. It clearly states that Apple (and everybody else) can't guarantee that you won't have a dead pixel.
It is applicable to all apple products (including ipod,iphones)
It is vague but does highlight the fact that it is possible. It will be evaluated on a case by case basis but one pixel will very rarely be accepted as reason for exchange.

Under a minute via google (apple pixel defect). This is what Apple can produce upon demand and is also available in my local apple store as a leaflet at the Genius Bar.
Not hard to find. Average Jo can find it no problem.

It doesn't matter; the onus is not on me to find this information.

Apple posts detailed specs for most of the components of their computers/devices. They post operating specs like max and min temperatures, max altitudes, etc; esoteric things that most people will never look at, but which is READILY available (and by that I mean right there in front of your eyes when you look at apple.com/macbook/specs.html, for instance.

Why does Apple post things like minimum temperature specs for the very few people who would consider using their Macbooks at <-13F, but not the ISO specs for their screens, which affect every single Macbook user? Moreover, they post the specs for the cinema displays, but not for any other product. Odd, unless they know that people buying displays will tend to be more litigious about this issue, and therefore Apple is simply covering their asses for the displays, but could care less for the other products.

The end user does not have an infinite requirement to dig for information that the company is willfully withholding. They could post the specs if they wanted to, but they dont because MOST people wont make a fuss, and those that do will be put off by the ISO specs that Apple quotes. Only a very few people know their rights as a consumer, and one of these rights is not being held accountable for details of purchase that they were not aware of or should reasonably been aware of. And the fact that Apple posts the specs for the displays but not for other devices suggests that it is not impossible for them to give the consumer this info. THEY choose not to, so I shouldn't have to dig for that info.

Sorry, but no matter what the ISO standard says, unless Apple makes that information widely available to its customers BEFORE purchase, I'm not going to be held accountable for following the spec.

 

[boone51]

You can't be serious...

Akonradi, are you joking on here? It really seems like you're telling people that stuck pixels ona 3.5 inch screen are just something people should accept. I think it's been stated on this thread several times already...if it's a screen 30+ inches, dead pixels are STILL not good, but you can live with them... that logic DOES NOT apply to a screen smaller than 4 inches, though. Every single one of those pixels is critical to the experience...
I have just opened my third touch. I have to keep going back becuase I get the wrong size...first was 8 (one dead pixel...unacceptable)...then I got the 16 (not one dead pixel anywerhe to be seen)...and now I've jsut upgraded it to the 32...Now , not only do I have dead pixels, but I can tell you without a doubt that the screen is washed out in comparison tothe 8 and 16gb models. You can tell me it's not or that I shouldnt complain about it, but what you think about my product means exactly squat to me, the consumer who just shelled out almost 600 bucks for an mp3 player. This little guy should be perfect. There's no two way about it. And if you think that by me, the consumer, demanding perfection for an expensive high end electronic item is HURTING the industry, you should really evealuate just how far up Steve's Job's a$$ your head is.

 

[aethelbert]

Akonradi, are you joking on here? It really seems like you're telling people that stuck pixels ona 3.5 inch screen are just something people should accept. I think it's been stated on this thread several times already...if it's a screen 30+ inches, dead pixels are STILL not good, but you can live with them... that logic DOES NOT apply to a screen smaller than 4 inches, though. Every single one of those pixels is critical to the experience...
I have just opened my third touch. I have to keep going back becuase I get the wrong size...first was 8 (one dead pixel...unacceptable)...then I got the 16 (not one dead pixel anywerhe to be seen)...and now I've jsut upgraded it to the 32...Now , not only do I have dead pixels, but I can tell you without a doubt that the screen is washed out in comparison tothe 8 and 16gb models. You can tell me it's not or that I shouldnt complain about it, but what you think about my product means exactly squat to me, the consumer who just shelled out almost 600 bucks for an mp3 player. This little guy should be perfect. There's no two way about it. And if you think that by me, the consumer, demanding perfection for an expensive high end electronic item is HURTING the industry, you should really evealuate just how far up Steve's Job's a$$ your head is.

This has nothing to do with Apple or any other company for that matter. It doesn't matter how small the screen is, there will always be some ratio of dead:good pixels. If my screen is ten kilometers diagonal and there's one stuck pixel, that means that for every so many pixels something will show up imperfect. So if one makes enough 3.5" screens, the ratio should be the same. If you actually want to hunt down dead pixels and whatnot, be my guest, but it's just a flat out waste of time. My logic applies to a screen of ANY size, like it or not.

 

[bbbensen]

After reading all of the posts, I think you should just sell the darn thing on Ebay and buy a different brand of MP3 player with all the whining you are doing.


There is no reason why you should go after just Apple. Sure, they arent perfect, but you can get dead pixels no matter the brand. Hardly any company will take something back just for one little pixel.


My iPod Touch has a dead pixel. I dont like it. But I deal with it. I barley notice it unless I look for it.

Like so, so many people have said, stop your complaining, and sell it if your that hurt.

 

[boone51]

Roid Rage

Yeah, I'm not sure. Somteimes I read back over my posts and wonder who wrote them. I wasn't trying to freak the hell out. I don't think there should be dead pixels ona 3.5 inch screen. Luckily, my local Best Buy totally agrees with me. I have a 32Gig now with no dead pixels and I love it.

Let me just say, Apple is a great company and they've consistenly helped me out when I've asked for it. I get the stuck pixel per square inch theory, I just don't think it should apply to a 3.5 inch screen. If you do, and you have one, and you're cool with it, by all means, tell people to suck it up. I couldn't live with that, so I returned it. Love what I have now. I'm sure that means next week they'll drop the price by 100 bucks and add gps, camera, and a retinal scanner, but hey, that's life with electronics.

Anyway, not trying to bash. I don't mean to sound like I was attacking anyone, especially by calling them out by name. Please excuse me...

 

[ageha]

It doesn't matter; the onus is not on me to find this information.

Apple posts detailed specs for most of the components of their computers/devices. They post operating specs like max and min temperatures, max altitudes, etc; esoteric things that most people will never look at, but which is READILY available (and by that I mean right there in front of your eyes when you look at apple.com/macbook/specs.html, for instance.

Why does Apple post things like minimum temperature specs for the very few people who would consider using their Macbooks at <-13F, but not the ISO specs for their screens, which affect every single Macbook user? Moreover, they post the specs for the cinema displays, but not for any other product. Odd, unless they know that people buying displays will tend to be more litigious about this issue, and therefore Apple is simply covering their asses for the displays, but could care less for the other products.

The end user does not have an infinite requirement to dig for information that the company is willfully withholding. They could post the specs if they wanted to, but they dont because MOST people wont make a fuss, and those that do will be put off by the ISO specs that Apple quotes. Only a very few people know their rights as a consumer, and one of these rights is not being held accountable for details of purchase that they were not aware of or should reasonably been aware of. And the fact that Apple posts the specs for the displays but not for other devices suggests that it is not impossible for them to give the consumer this info. THEY choose not to, so I shouldn't have to dig for that info.

Sorry, but no matter what the ISO standard says, unless Apple makes that information widely available to its customers BEFORE purchase, I'm not going to be held accountable for following the spec.

They cannot post any specs because they're shipping the products with different displays from numerous manufacturers.