Seeing others say their OLED decks, more commonly the LE ones, have a dead pixel made me check my LE deck for one and sure enough I got a dead pixel. If I never checked I probably never would notice it in regular gameplay. Now all I do is fixate on that dead pixel now. I’m really contemplating whether this warrants setting up an RMA when everything else is fine with the deck.
Don’t hesitate to exchange it. You paid for a fully functioning unit and are owed one. These manufaturers are used to exchanges for all manner of things and have systems to refurbish and resell units like yours after the return.
According to the ISO standard, it needs more than 1 pixel to be considered faulty screen. Some companies do replace it, but others don’t because they don’t have to.
Glad to see someone is getting some positive recognition for bringing some logic into the conversation.
They’re wrong, though. ISO doesn’t describe an allowable number of dead pixels. It describes bins for defects, and puts screens into classes based on the number of defects.
To be a class I ISO compliant screen, there need to be zero defects. Any defect will mean it’s faulty. A class II screen may contain some defects, though. It really depends on what the manufacturer considers acceptable, and that’s often class II, but that’s a manufacturing decision the customer doesn’t necessarily have to agree with.
Yeah but consumer products most of the time are not in the class I.
It’s like with CPU silicon lottery. Some could be Overclocked very high, but some can’t. If you want guaranteed bigger speed buy the higher grade product.
Higher possible OCing is completely different from having a screen with 100% working pixels or not. Your CPU not reaching the advertised clock speeds would be a better analogy.
But having 100% of the pixels is not advertised either. I hate this approach, but this is the approach companies taking
They list a resolution, which contains a number of promised pixels.
Neither is “all buttons work” advertised but that’s expected.
The difference is that a CPU will always perform as advertised. If something is broken, it’s sold as a lesser part without that something. You won’t get a 13600K with one defect core. The defect is hidden in the disabled cores.
With screens, a flaw is always visible, so that strategy doesn’t work. That’s why communicating the class of a screen may not be a bad idea. People know the worst case scenario ahead of time, or can pay more to get better, because a flawless screen does constitute a higher value and production cost in a tangible way.
Only if you can actually buy another limited edition.
I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect a fully functioning screen. ISO standards exist for a reason, but at the same time they shouldn’t be hidden behind. They’re not some universal truth, just a (manufacturing) standard.
If manufacturers want to bin screens more efficiently, and there’s a lot to be said for that in terms of economics and environmental impact, that’s fine, but they should be up front about what to expect. It being hidden in the terms and conditions somewhere what they consider a good enough screen isn’t enough.
The Deck is a fairly cost optimized product and this could be one of the trade-offs you make, but it should be clear ahead of time. That way consumers know what they get, and can pick other devices with higher standards if they want, probably at a higher price.
Yeah I feel like people who try to justify defects are just people who took a manufacturing 101 class at their local night school and want to show it off.
The whole point of ISO is that it minimalizes defects, but defects do still occur and they’re still the manufacturers fault
Otherwise Boeing could say “yeah, our faulty plane crashed and a bunch of people died. But our company is still within the 6th standard deviation from the mean so it’s all okay 👍 nobody is allowed to be mad at us”
Not everyone is going to consider one dead pixel a defective product.
What limited edition lmao