Funny how when retina displays were announced, everyone was claiming how innovative Apple was and didn't want to give any credit to Samsung and LG. And now that there are some defects, folks want to assign the blame to Samsung and LG?
You fanboys can't have it both ways.
LOL
Interesting...but can you cite a reference that states Apple is actually using binned parts? This is the first I've heard of this.
While I agree with your challenge for corroborating evidence, "binning" has been around for a long time. Intel doesn't build wafers with "3.0 GHz" CPUs and other wafers with the same CPU at "2.4 GHz".
After they're built and tested, some run faster and some run slower and are put in the corresponding "bins". Similarly, although all the chips are meant to be quad-core - some only have two or three fully functional cores, and are put in the "dual core" bin. Some don't have all of the cache working, and are put in the "Pentium" bin (once called the "Celeron" bin).
"Binning" is not a bad thing - it's a useful tool to lower overall costs by selling less capable chips for less, and more capable chips for more. If you buy something with a "binned" chip with some of the cores or memory disabled - you're not buying damaged goods. You're getting a deal because the silicon vendor is selling silicon with certain features disabled - but it is fully functional for the advertised set of features.
If Intel sells a CPU with 8 MiB of cache for $300, and a CPU with 4 MiB of cache for $200 - do you care if the 4 MiB $200 CPU is cut from the same wafer as the $300 CPU, but has been discounted because some of the cache has been disabled due to defects?