It may sound good on paper, but monitors usually last me 10 years or so. Granted, those that do don't come with more than 3 years warranty either.

Good, they one upped ASUS (2 years) and matched Dell. I wonder when LG will decide to include it. I guess manufacturers are slowly realizing that people aren't quick to spend $900+ on a monitors if it is susceptible to burn-in that isn't covered by warranty.

Ah yes, MSI the same company whose policy believes a handful of stuck/dead pixels does not qualify for replacement. I'll believe their generous new warranty when I see it in practice.

ChomiqGood, they one upped ASUS (2 years) and matched Dell. I wonder when LG will decide to include it. I guess manufacturers are slowly realizing that people aren't quick to spend $900+ on a monitors if it is susceptible to burn-in that isn't covered by warranty.

It's usually "limited warranty", so I'd like to see the fine print first. My Dell monitor (LCD) came with some dead pixels, but they replaced it, no ifs and buts.

Fwiw, instead of making a fuss about the warranty period, I would much rather manufacturers emphasize more the anti burn-in measures they implement. For TVs, it is commonplace these days to have 3 layers of defense: slight picture shift, logo detection (that will dim static, bright elements on the screen) and some periodic maintenance they perform from time to time. I have read monitors have implemented at least some of these, but the info is rather hard to come by.

There's Acer, Samsung & Benq(?) who offer 5 years monitor warranty on some models, at least during the last year's sale around Oct-Nov. It's a huge selling point for some!

bugIt's usually "limited warranty", so I'd like to see the fine print first. My Dell monitor (LCD) came with some dead pixels, but they replaced it, no ifs and buts.

Fwiw, instead of making a fuss about the warranty period, I would much rather manufacturers emphasize more the anti burn-in measures they implement. For TVs, it is commonplace these days to have 3 layers of defense: slight picture shift, logo detection (that will dim static, bright elements on the screen) and some periodic maintenance they perform from time to time. I have read monitors have implemented at least some of these, but the info is rather hard to come by.

MSI actually does that:

If I'm spending 1000+ on a monitor I want it to last longer than 3 year's they need to price these things accordingly or offer at least 7yr warranty. My first oled TV got burn in after 2 year's my second one after 3 my new TV is mini led, oled is flawed technology and when the warranty repairs start rolling in and those out of warranty get replacement panel quotes at nearly the cost of a new monitor we'll see how well they sell after word really gets out. I love the picture but it wasn't worth 1500 a year.

Broken ProcessorIf I'm spending 1000+ on a monitor I want it to last longer than 3 year's they need to price these things accordingly or offer at least 7yr warranty. My first oled TV got burn in after 2 year's my second one after 3 my new TV is mini led, oled is flawed technology and when the warranty repairs start rolling in and those out of warranty get replacement panel quotes at nearly the cost of a new monitor we'll see how well they sell after word really gets out. I love the picture but it wasn't worth 1500 a year.

You must be doing something wrong (most likely setting brightness too high), my almost 4yo LG CX has no burn-in whatsoever. And according to rtings, the C1 is already better in that regard.

bugYou must be doing something wrong (most likely setting brightness too high), my almost 4yo LG CX has no burn-in whatsoever. And according to rtings, the C1 is already better in that regard.

The thing with TV's the usage is subjective. Watch a lot of news channels with those red bars and watch your TV screen shit itself in no time. Run your screen to bright? I don't but what's the point in owning an oled if you need to run it dim making HDR pointless you buy something and expect to use it. Why give an option on the standard settings if it breaks the TV. And don't believe for one second that any oled is immune to burn in.

Broken ProcessorThe thing with TV's the usage is subjective. Watch a lot of news channels with those red bars and watch your TV screen shit itself in no time.

That is precisely what rtings tests. It barely shows some burn-in on the CX and nothing on C1. And they test at max brightness afaik.

Broken ProcessorRun your screen to bright? I don't but what's the point in owning an oled if you need to run it dim making HDR pointless you buy something and expect to use it.

Those are different. In SDR, you're supposed to keep brightness in check (it doesn't look natural anyway if it's too high). HDR will go beyond that, but will not keep 1,000 nits in front of your eyes all the time.

Broken ProcessorWhy give an option on the standard settings if it breaks the TV. And don't believe for one second that any oled is immune to burn in.

Because it matters what you do with it. Having the option to jack up brightness doesn't mean you should run at max brightness all the time. And the mandatory car analogy: do you get into your car, press the pedal to the metal and then complain to the manufacturer their cars are accident-prone?

OLEDs seem good for people who only consume media and never dare to work on their computer, always turn the screen off when going to the toilet or to get some tea, never use the full brightness and so on... and buy a new one often. While I fully understand taking care of one's things, OLED you need to babysit like a Lemming, otherwise it will destroy itself.
A few years ago my (then) wife got a Thinkpad X1 with an OLED screen. After three months of working for 4-10 hours a day, she saw work everywhere - on photos, movies, every website, like paranoid schizophrenia. The screen was replaced only to be trashed after the next three months, after which she requested a laptop with an LCD. Not long after, the OLED option was discontinued from the whole lineup.
I always say that OLED is a manufacturer's wet dream, a product with built-in planned obsolescence. Made to work just long enough for the warranty period to end.

TahagomizerOLEDs seem good for people who only consume media and never dare to work on their computer, always turn the screen off when going to the toilet or to get some tea, never use the full brightness and so on... and buy a new one often. While I fully understand taking care of one's things, OLED you need to babysit like a Lemming, otherwise it will destroy itself.

Not true at all. At least OLED TVs have screen savers that cannot be turned off, so that takes care of a lot of baby sitting. And there's a big difference from "don't use max brightness all the time" and "never use max brightness". Max brightness is too bright for comfortable use anyway.

TahagomizerA few years ago my (then) wife got a Thinkpad X1 with an OLED screen. After three months of working for 4-10 hours a day, she saw work everywhere - on photos, movies, every website, like paranoid schizophrenia. The screen was replaced only to be trashed after the next three months, after which she requested a laptop with an LCD. Not long after, the OLED option was discontinued from the whole lineup.
I always say that OLED is a manufacturer's wet dream, a product with built-in planned obsolescence. Made to work just long enough for the warranty period to end.

Either that model used a problematic panel, or your ex cranked the brightness too much. Probably the former, a few years ago OLED monitors weren't that great.

bugNot true at all. At least OLED TVs have screen savers that cannot be turned off, so that takes care of a lot of baby sitting. And there's a big difference from "don't use max brightness all the time" and "never use max brightness". Max brightness is too bright for comfortable use anyway.

You still have to babysit OLEDs though. RTIngs recommends running a screen refresh every 2 hours to prevent temporary retention and reduce long term retention.

bugYou must be doing something wrong (most likely setting brightness too high), my almost 4yo LG CX has no burn-in whatsoever. And according to rtings, the C1 is already better in that regard.

This is equivalent to Apple saying you are holding your phone wrong.

You can't tell customers that the way they've been using their monitor / TV for decades is suddenly the wrong way to do things. This isn't a customer problem, it's a limitation of the technology.

evernessinceYou still have to babysit OLEDs though. RTIngs recommends running a screen refresh every 2 hours to prevent temporary retention and reduce long term retention.

Then how come I don;t do that with my TV and it's not suffering from burn-in? And since I'm wfh since 2020, my TV is on a lot (I need some background noise).

evernessinceThis is equivalent to Apple saying you are holding your phone wrong.

You can't tell customers that the way they've been using their monitor / TV for decades is suddenly the wrong way to do things. This isn't a customer problem, it's a limitation of the technology.

See my car speed analogy above. Highest level was never meant to be sustained, it's harmful. Cars aren't limited to 85mph, but aren't supposed to be driven at top speed all the time. Why would monitors not being limited to 120 nits mean that they're meant to sustain much more than that? (And yes, for decades people have been using monitors wrong, burned their eyes out, only to conclude the monitor tech is harmful. But that's another discussion.)

I'm not saying OLED is already as reliable as LCD (I have a feeling it is, but I won't make that assertion having not tried an OLED monitor), I'm only saying OLED has made significant strides since the early "omg, burn-in!" days.

bugIt may sound good on paper, but monitors usually last me 10 years or so. Granted, those that do don't come with more than 3 years warranty either.

But those old monitors don't have burn-in to worry about. Both my Dell Ultrasharps from 2012 are going strong. Not a chance in hell I'm paying $2K+ for a 4K OLED with only 3 years of warranty on burn-in. I'll rather use mini-led for now. Bare minimum warranty I'd accept is 7 years for burn-in.

bugThen how come I don;t do that with my TV and it's not suffering from burn-in? And since I'm wfh since 2020, my TV is on a lot (I need some background noise).

Who knows, could be any number of variables from content displayed to brightness used to usage pattern to just plain luck. That's why sample sizes of 1, aka anecdotal evidence, isn't super great when providing general recommendations. It doesn't inform us of the broader reliability of a product.

bugSee my car speed analogy above. Highest level was never meant to be sustained, it's harmful. Cars aren't limited to 85mph, but aren't supposed to be driven at top speed all the time. Why would monitors not being limited to 120 nits mean that they're meant to sustain much more than that? (And yes, for decades people have been using monitors wrong, burned their eyes out, only to conclude the monitor tech is harmful. But that's another discussion.)

I'm not saying OLED is already as reliable as LCD (I have a feeling it is, but I won't make that assertion having not tried an OLED monitor), I'm only saying OLED has made significant strides since the early "omg, burn-in!" days.

The average person spends 50.6 minutes driving per day in the US and less in many European and Asian countries. That's before considering that they will not be traveling full speed through any of that due to traffic signals, other vehicles, ect. Cars are designed with that in mind.

That's where the monitor market and car market are completely different. Monitors have to be designed with 8+ hours of continuous use in mind at any brightness setting the user is allowed to set. Customers expect that as a bare minimum because that's what's been provided for decades now. As I pointed out earlier, if OLEDs can't do that it's a problem with them specifically. It's not up to the rest of the market to change to accomodate. Regardless of whether people are burning their eyes out or not it's up to the monitor manufacturer to accomdate customer expectations and concerns. At some point OLEDs will have to achieve a near zero burn in chance if they want to reach the top panel slot, especially for bright work environments that require higher brightness.

Also 120 nits is pretty low, I calibrate mine to 130 and that's considering it does make it hard to view during bright days but it's a decent compromise so I don't kill my eyes at night. Generally 100 - 150 is recommended for editing work but most people likely use a higher brightness than that. If a user is indeed maxing out their OLED brightness that's again a limitation of the panel. Might be full speed for some OLED panels but for LCD that's not even breaking a sweat. In your analogy it's akin to OLED's barely being able to go the speed limit in the first place.

bugSee my car speed analogy above.

Your car analogy is flawed any way ~ it's more akin to was the car stable/safe to use when it's running at max speeds or even slightly lower!

evernessinceThe average person spends 50.6 minutes driving per day in the US and less in many European and Asian countries. That's before considering that they will not be traveling full speed through any of that due to traffic signals, other vehicles, ect. Cars are designed with that in mind.

So are monitors. Yet people expect to just crank up the brightness, with no consequences.

evernessinceThat's where the monitor market and car market are completely different. Monitors have to be designed with 8+ hours of continuous use in mind at any brightness setting the user is allowed to set.

If you can't wrap your head around HDR requiring high brightness levels that are neither expected to be sustained, nor applied across the screen... then yes.

evernessinceCustomers expect that as a bare minimum because that's what's been provided for decades now.

Not really. The "burn-in" term has been coined back in CRT days where setting too high a brightness and using static images were causing... wait for it... the phosphorus to burn up, imprinting the image on your screen. It's also why the screen saver was invented.

I have an EIZO 21" 4-3 monitor with a 10,000 hour warranty. In the power button setup, I can access 'number of hours' the monitor has been "on". I got spoiled on 16-9 screen 27"sony & acer mons.
Actually the eizo at 21" is as 'tall' as the sony/asus, just not as wide!

5 years or 30,000 hours (3 years for LCD Panel module)

21.3 inch

L985, L997 S2100, S2100-M

tabascosauzAh yes, MSI the same company whose policy believes a handful of stuck/dead pixels does not qualify for replacement. I'll believe their generous new warranty when I see it in practice.

Yeah. I'm somewhat sure, this "inflated" warranty comes at some cost. Might be the list of "some" "exceptions".

OLEDs suffer from "you're holding it wrong" (tm Apple) syndrome. Fundamental flaws that are somehow blamed on the user. 3 years is nothing for a monitor.