Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I just returned my iPad 3 to the Apple Store. The reason? A pinkish/rosy white balance, very noticeable in strong natural light but admittedly much less obvious in artificial lighting and/or dark rooms.

This was the second iPad 3 I've had. The first had an even worse tint, and I returned it almost immediately.

I know some of you are itching to hit that Reply button and throw insults my way. Don't bother. I know that I'm fussy. I'm not obsessive, though, and did try to live with the problem for the 14 day period. I just couldn't. When I removed the Smart Cover and saw the pinkish white squares into which I had to type my lock code... It drove me mad.

I've been using TFT screens since they were first introduced -- back when a 15in panel cost thousands of dollars. As a journalist I used to review them for magazines. The problem was always that whites are very stark white, if not blueish. Think about when you first used a flat panel screen -- it was really noticeable compared to a CRT.

There's a theory our eyes are now trained to see blueish white as pure white, thanks to colour profiles on domestic TVs. This might be true, but I promise you with my hand on my heart that my iPad had a genuine pinkish/rosy white balance. I could spot it, but then I'm an expert. Most people aren't.

I got a refund, and now I'm waiting a month or two. I will get one eventually (I'm commissioned to write a book about them, so I have to!). The one I get might be the same, or better. My plan is to buy five of them on my credit card, then choose the best one out of them, before returning the other four for a refund. This is a crazy thing to do but I can't see how I have much choice.


Did you take the time to talk to the Geniuses about the problem? I mean they see literally hundreds of screens so they know good from a bad one. You sound like you've been tortured for 14 days by your screen. My first was was a bit pink so I just took it back to Apple, compared mine to the others they had on display. They said mine was faulty and did an instant replacement with a new one. It was much better, the greys looked grey. It still has an ever so slight warmer tone but I can tell you in photos, skin tones took totally supreme with none of the bluish hues on so called 'perfect' white screens. I also think mine has become a little whiter still over the last week (could just be my eyes). the iPad is first and foremost a luxury 'feel good' deviceso if you're not happy fair enough, return it. My advice to anyone not happy with their devices is to go and talk to Apple.
 
So it was you I was battling with over the DEC Vax systems.....lol. I worked for DEC up in their old Maynard Massachusetts facility (the old wood mill building).

Ha! The Vax in question was in a university and was so slow that it made people almost become murderous! I assume they had too many terminals, or couldn't afford a RAM upgrade.

Sending emails with bang paths! The memories!

----------

Did you take the time to talk to the Geniuses about the problem? I mean they see literally hundreds of screens so they know good from a bad one. You sound like you've been tortured for 14 days by your screen. My first was was a bit pink so I just took it back to Apple, compared mine to the others they had on display. They said mine was faulty and did an instant replacement with a new one. It was much better, the greys looked grey. It still has an ever so slight warmer tone but I can tell you in photos, skin tones took totally supreme with none of the bluish hues on so called 'perfect' white screens. I also think mine has become a little whiter still over the last week (could just be my eyes). the iPad is first and foremost a luxury 'feel good' deviceso if you're not happy fair enough, return it. My advice to anyone not happy with their devices is to go and talk to Apple.

Thanks for the sensible, cogent, helpful reply (and thanks for not suggesting I have mental health issues!).

To be honest, unlike the one you're describing, the display on the one I returned was otherwise perfect. I've really got to emphasise that. I viewed a test card I had on it and it looked great, including grey scales. The issue was that any big stretch of white (on webpages, or Pages documents) had a very slight rosy pinkish tint to it when viewed under natural light. And that was the start and end of the issue for me. My partner spotted the pink tint too, and she isn't a computer person, but somebody else might have never, ever known about it.

To be honest I just don't like being in Apple Stores, and don't like dealing with Geniuses, so I formulated the plan I've already outlined of returning it and getting another in the future. I might wait until the Sharp panels hit the supply chain, providing it doesn't take too long.
 
What? No you're not. You're entitled to accept or decline what the seller is offering. If it doesn't meet your standards, you can not buy it in the first place after making an informed decision, or you can return it.

Many people expect things to be perfect. People have opinions other than yours
 
Many people expect things to be perfect. People have opinions other than yours

Many people have impossible and vague standards and there is no legal obligation which entitles a consumer to a 'perfect product' so defined. There is no moral obligation either.

If I have a product for sale, I decide what I'm selling and the buyer is free to make a choice if they want to buy it or not. If the product doesn't meet a consumer's individual standards for 'perfection' they are not entitled to have the seller produce a product which meets their arbitrary standards.

EDIT: This is not 'just an opinion', it's how laws about exchange and property work.
 
Many people have impossible and vague standards and there is no legal obligation which entitles a consumer to a 'perfect product' so defined. There is no moral obligation either.

If I have a product for sale, I decide what I'm selling and the buyer is free to make a choice if they want to buy it or not. If the product doesn't meet a consumer's individual standards for 'perfection' they are not entitled to have the seller produce a product which meets their arbitrary standards.

EDIT: This is not 'just an opinion', it's how laws about exchange and property work.

You of course are entitled to your own opinion.

I will leave it here as you seem to be getting rather upset.
 
You of course are entitled to your own opinion.

I will leave it here as you seem to be getting rather upset.

Upset? My own opinion? I just stated some facts. Perhaps you could tell me how I am wrong, and why a consumer, 'as a consumer, is entitled to purchase a perfect product'.
 
I can't help but wonder how some people can buy things like cars and houses, given their absolute desire for perfection.
 
True, but I wasn't comparing devices. As mentioned I tried to train my eyes for 14 days to get used to the iPad's rosy pink white balance. I couldn't. Others can't either.

There are some people here with crazy expectations (i.e. those who take iPads into a dark room and look at them askew to spot slight problems) but I'm not one of them.
I notice a slight pink tint on mine, but I'm not sure it's a white balance issue. I suspect it's an unforeseen consequence of making the pixels so small on a relatively large display. I say this because only part of the screen appears pink to my eyes, and the portion that does seems to change with the angle I hold the screen at.

At least for me, it's also only apparent on white screens. Everything else (like the keyboard) looks neutral to me
 
I can't wonder how some people can buy things like cars and houses, given their absolute desire for perfection.

Theory 1: The iPad is incredibly well-made and so close to an 'ideal object' that people get hung up on any perceivable variation or inconsistency, regardless of how irrelevant.

Theory 2: The iPad is incredibly well-made, so far out of the bounds of what most people could conceive of and build themselves, and thus is subconsciously intimidating to people. By finding some kind of fault with it, this dissonance is alleviated.

Houses, on the other hand (along with many other goods), have all kinds of variation (nobody is checking the walls for squareness to thousandths of an inch) and can have all kinds of paint slapped on them or junk strewn around to make it seem comfortable (slovenly).
 
I notice a slight pink tint on mine, but I'm not sure it's a white balance issue. I suspect it's an unforeseen consequence of making the pixels so small on a relatively large display. I say this because only part of the screen appears pink to my eyes, and the portion that does seems to change with the angle I hold the screen at.

At least for me, it's also only apparent on white screens. Everything else (like the keyboard) looks neutral to me

Then wouldn't the iPhone suffer a similar issue? Its pixels should be just as small.

Mine only appears pink on white screens too. And only under certain lighting conditions.
 
Theory 1: The iPad is incredibly well-made and so close to an 'ideal object' that people get hung up on any perceivable variation or inconsistency, regardless of how irrelevant.

Theory 2: The iPad is incredibly well-made, so far out of the bounds of what most people could conceive of and build themselves, and thus is subconsciously intimidating to people. By finding some kind of fault with it, this dissonance is alleviated.

Houses, on the other hand (along with many other goods), have all kinds of variation (nobody is checking the walls for squareness to thousandths of an inch) and can have all kinds of paint slapped on them or junk strewn around to make it seem comfortable (slovenly).

My dad used to manage a car dealership for Honda years ago. They had a lady that would show up every time they got new units in. She'd bring with her, a precise set of calipers. Off she'd go, measuring door jams to find a 4 door that had exactly matching door clearance on all sides. Inevitably she'd find some measurement that was off by half a millimeter or something, so she'd pack it up and wait for the next batch to come in.

I always think of her when Apple launches a new product and I read Macrumors.
 
My dad used to manage a car dealership for Honda years ago. They had a lady that would show up every time they got new units in. She'd bring with her, a precise set of calipers. . .

Did the car cost $499 or more? Apparently when you spend that kind of money on a luxury good no standard is too unreasonable.
 
Then wouldn't the iPhone suffer a similar issue? Its pixels should be just as small.

Mine only appears pink on white screens too. And only under certain lighting conditions.

I think the display being significantly larger has something to do with it. Have you ever noticed that the iPhone 4 looks really weird (really pink and/or green depending on angle) in reflections and through camera lenses? I suspect we're seeing a similar effect with our naked eyes on the iPad. Or maybe it hassomething about it being 264 ppi compared to 326 of the iPhone.
 
I think the display being significantly larger has something to do with it. Have you ever noticed that the iPhone 4 looks really weird (really pink and/or green depending on angle) in reflections and through camera lenses? I suspect we're seeing a similar effect with our naked eyes on the iPad. Or maybe it hassomething about it being 264 ppi compared to 326 of the iPhone.

True. But then everyone should be suffering from this issue, no? Seems like there are those with perfectly white screens and no pink tint.
 
True. But then everyone should be suffering from this issue, no? Seems like there are those with perfectly white screens and no pink tint.

Could be like how some people were able to very clearly see the rainbow effect on DLP TVs while others couldn't see it at all.

Lot of speculation on my part I admit. But it just doesn't seem like the typical white balance issue you see on other devices
 
Calibration App

Why doesn't Apple come out with a setting to where you can fine tune your retinal display to your own liking, or a calibration app. I don't think this would be a very hard upgrade or addition to the next version of software.

:):):)
 
Last edited:
Theory 1: The iPad is incredibly well-made and so close to an 'ideal object' that people get hung up on any perceivable variation or inconsistency, regardless of how irrelevant.

Theory 2: The iPad is incredibly well-made, so far out of the bounds of what most people could conceive of and build themselves, and thus is subconsciously intimidating to people. By finding some kind of fault with it, this dissonance is alleviated.

Houses, on the other hand (along with many other goods), have all kinds of variation (nobody is checking the walls for squareness to thousandths of an inch) and can have all kinds of paint slapped on them or junk strewn around to make it seem comfortable (slovenly).

Theory 3: Apple crusaders tout & praise how perfect & advanced an Apple product can be. After a while, they start to believe these overblown marketing advertisements and owner praises only to find that Apple is really no better than the average electronic consumer manufacturer that are over priced.

----------

Why doesn't Apple come out with a setting to where you can fine tune your retinal display to your own liking, or a calibration app. I don't think this would be a very hard upgrade or addition to the next version of software.

:):):)

If you already haven't figure out, Apple likes to do things their way and not listen to their consumers.
They know what is right for you. Be quiet and obey. ;)

Incremental upgrades...
 
I understand that the person returned his..and I'm sure his reasons are sound. But why post it here? So I will question mine? It's grandstanding at best...and of no use to other readers....

You're incorrect, it was useful to me. I have an iPad with the exact same problem (very noticeable pinkish hue) so it's informative to read a thoughtful post on the subject. I understand the post didn't interest you. There are plenty of posts on this site that don't interest me, so I don't read them. Try it sometime.
 
Theory 3: Apple crusaders tout & praise how perfect & advanced an Apple product can be. After a while, they start to believe these overblown marketing advertisements and owner praises only to find that Apple is really no better than the average electronic consumer manufacturer that are over priced.

I haven't heard many of these crusaders, most of this forum, at least, is rife with shills, FUDsters, and whiners. As for Apple being overpriced, I'd like to see the reasonably-priced tablet which is comparable to the iPad.
 
Why doesn't Apple come out with a setting to where you can fine tune your retinal display to your own liking, or a calibration app. I don't think this would be a very hard upgrade or addition to the next version of software.

:):):)

I half-suspect a future upgrade of iOS might bring a fix for pink-tinted screens. We'll never see user calibration tools as part of iOS, however. There's just no need. OS X includes such a tool, but Macs might be used by people like graphic artists who need as much color control as possible. The iPad is a consumer tool. (Additionally the OS X calibration tool hasn't changed over the last five years, if not longer, so clearly isn't seen by Apple as a hugely important feature.)

As for the technical reasons for the pink tint on iPads, I suspect it's something to do with the angle at which one of the glass sheets or filters within the LCD assembly are fixed to the others or to the chassis. We know from teardowns that Apple just loves glue, but surely glue can't allow the same kind of accuracy as screw fixings.

If the mountings are slightly off (and we're talking a fraction of a millimetre) then I suspect a green/pinkish tint is introduced. This is why pure white screens are so rare -- it's down to chance whether all the planes in the panel are lined up correctly. Most of them in current iPads are very nearly lined up, which is good enough for Samsung/Apple's quality control.

Will this improve? I've no idea. I still believe that the current crop of iPads were rushed out, leaving little room for the engineers to stop and introduce improvements. I'm hoping that as manufacturing demand eases (I suspect it already has), we might start to see better screens.
 
I am on my third iPad myself. The first one was great, but on day 14 one of the backlights died. Exchanged it for one with dust under the screen, however the tint on that one was great also.

Now my third one has a noticeable shift in tint and brightness from side to side, as if the two backlights do not match. I probably wouldn't find it irritating except its not like the first two.

I will most likely exchange it again, but it seems like a gamble at this point. This time I may just ask if they will let me return it, even though I am at day 18.
 
Theory 1: The iPad is incredibly well-made and so close to an 'ideal object' that people get hung up on any perceivable variation or inconsistency, regardless of how irrelevant.

Theory 2: The iPad is incredibly well-made, so far out of the bounds of what most people could conceive of and build themselves, and thus is subconsciously intimidating to people. By finding some kind of fault with it, this dissonance is alleviated.

Houses, on the other hand (along with many other goods), have all kinds of variation (nobody is checking the walls for squareness to thousandths of an inch) and can have all kinds of paint slapped on them or junk strewn around to make it seem comfortable (slovenly).

I think a better analogy would be a digital camera; it's all about the image in the camera and iPad. A couple years ago I purchased a DSLR camera for about the same price as the new iPad. It had a 12M pixel sensor (vs. the 3.1M pixels on the 9" retina screen). If the camera captured images with a pink/green/yellow hue, had an uneven image, or had dead pixels it would be unacceptable. If the viewer screen had any of the same image issues (except maybe a dead pixel) it would be unacceptable.

The first thing I did (and was recommended on the photography forums) was to take test images and painstakingly examine the photos for color accuracy and dropped pixels. Everything was "perfect".

So if camera manufactures can pack >18M pixels in an ares the size of my fingernail, Apple should be able to pack 3M pixels in a 9" area.
 
So if camera manufactures can pack >18M pixels in an ares the size of my fingernail, Apple should be able to pack 3M pixels in a 9" area.

Not the same thing, is it? Cameras just have digital sensors that send the image data to files on the memory card. They don't have to display perfect pictures at that resolution for the human eye to see.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.