Sony Recants on Dead Pixels (Sort Of)

Ayaress writes "As reported on Gamestop, Sony will now warranty PSP units suffering from dead pixels. Sony still insists that dead pixels are a common problem in all LCD displays, saying "A very small number of dark pixels or continuously lit pixels is normal for LCD screens, and is not a sign of a malfunction," and asks that PSP owners use theirs for at least a week or two, to see if it still bothers them. User who encounter, "persistent and aggravating dead pixels," are instructed to contact Sony customer support, and will be allowed to mail in their PSP to recieve a unit with a new screen."

New screen

[nearlygod]

I unit with a new screen does not neccesarily mean a new unit.

not malfunction?

[seanadams.com]

I love it. How are "not functioning pixels" "not a sign of malfunction [reference.com]"?

I've bought well over a dozen LCD montitors from Apple, Dell, and Philips in recent months and I have not seen a single dead pixel on any of them.

This is just a case of Sony reducing cost by widening manufacturing tolerances. It's fine as long as you manage expectations properly.

laptop screen

[phorm]

My laptop screen is 1440x900px. Of those pixels (1296000) in all, they're all healthy.

Similarly, even the cheaper laptops we get in tend to have fully functional screens to start with.

Sorry guys, but dead pixels are not as common as you might want us to believe. Maybe in a poorly designed portable wherein the manufacturer doesn't care so much about quality, yes... but lately other devices seem to have less pixel-problems.

It is a common issue

[Catskul]

Its not as if they are making it up. Virtually all lcd manufactures accept screens with a "few" bad pixels. Look it up [wikipedia.org]

Re:not malfunction?

[Kanabiis Atiiva]

you probably just never noticed a dead pixel on such a large monitor. Dead pixels ARE common with LCD screens. As manufacturing techniques improve, the frequency of dead pixels decreases, but doesnt disappear completely.

Didn't want a blackeye

[Kirby-meister]

I guess Nintendo's stance on the dead-pixel, offering to replace any DS that has a dead-pixel, forced them into this...otherwise it would've been a blackeye for them. Competition is already making the handheld war good for the consumer. It should make this a good handheld war, much like the golden days of SNES vs Genesis...

Too many defects

[Gribflex]

My wife - she works at Futureshop (the Canadian arm of Best Buy) - came home last night to tell me of her hatred for the PSP.

On the opening day, about 17% of the PSPs sold were returned due to defect of some kind. Many of them didn't even turn on.

Yesterday, she had person after person coming into the store complaining about dead pixels. With one guy, she went through an entire crate of PSPs to try and find one that didn't have a dead pixel. No luck. He ended up settling for a PSP that had only one dead pixel - rather than the average 3. One of them had an entire vertical column gone.

From what I'm hearing from my wife, it would be much, much better to wait until revision B before thinking about purchasing a PSP. The ones on the shelves today have far too many defects.

I will never buy Sony again

[John Seminal]

I purchased a Sony Vaio GRX-520 for over $2,000 when other laptops were selling for half that price. I picked Sony because I expected the best quality moeny could buy. But then I got 2 pixels that are always red. I tried to return the unit to Sony to get it fixed, but they would not help.

It is frustrating, to spend twice as much as other options, to get something that turned out to be lower quality. And what really burned me was their non-existent customer service. It took forever to get a human on the phone, only to be told they could not do anything.

Re:They're right!

[tlhIngan]

Dead pixels ARE a common problem in all LCD displays. Why is this written like Sony is the only company saying this?

Not really.

Firstly, the common ISO thresholds for dead pixels typically range about 1 to 3 full pixels, and up to 7 subpixels on a typical 17" (1280x1024) display (note: cheaper brands may go with lesser quality panels - BenQ, will allow up to 7 full pixels and 17 subpixels(!) before considering replacement). Going for the worst (3 dead pixels == 9 dead subpixels) - there are 1280x1024x3 subpixels on a 17" panel or 3,932,160. If 9 of them are bad before returns, that's ~0.0000023 dead subpixels, or one dead subpixel for every 436,906 subpixels.

The PSP has a nice 480x270 LCD, or 388,800 subpixels. There should be no dead pixels at all on a screen this small!

In a more anecdotal sense, I remember when color TFTs came out and it was really difficult to get 640x480 screens with zero dead pixels (this was over a decade ago). Fast forward a few years, and the incidence of dead pixels dropped quite significantly, and these days, getting a monitor with dead pixels and laptops with dead pixels tend to be a rarity. It does happen, but rarely (unless you just happen to be really unlucky).

I'm pretty sure people don't complain of dead pixels on PDA screens (QVGA and higher, including oddball 320x320 and Half VGA, to full VGA) - and the incidence of dead pixels on these screens is extremely low.

On screens that are VGA or lower resolution, dead pixels are such a rarity that honestly, it shouldn't be tolerated.

Typical Sony?

[blueZhift]

This sounds like typical Sony behavior. Wasn't there a problem with the first batch of Playstations overheating that Sony tried to ignore and finally, probably at the nudging of large U.S. retailers, began to address? I'm guessing that retailers like Best Buy and WalMart have enough clout to force Sony to change their position. Afterall, consumers are going to return what they think is defective merchandise regardless of what the manufacturer says. That means angry people at the returns section of Best Buy or WalMart, which means unhappy managers and execs. Since WalMart basically runs the world now, when they complain to Sony, Sony listens.

In Sony's defense though, they usually clear up problems with new products without a year or so of introduction. That's one reason I'm in no hurry to buy a PSP right now.

Consumer Protection Law

[TheMCP]

Check your state's consumer protection laws. In Massachusetts, a store is required by law to give the consumer's choice of repair, replacement, or refund if an item is defective upon purchase... and I think bad pixels could reasonably be called "defective".

So, if you bought a PSP in Massachusetts (or a state with similar laws) and it has bad pixels, take it back. They have to deal with it for you.

Re:not malfunction?

[Phisbut]

you probably just never noticed a dead pixel on such a large monitor. Dead pixels ARE common with LCD screens.

They used to be common for all LCD screen, but today, quality LCD screens have none of them. Where I work, everybody has a 17 inch LCD and nobody has a dead pixel. And it's not because we don't notice it, we test them all, first with a white screen (to see dark pixels), then with a black screen (to see bright pixels).

People shoud stop saying dead pixels are common to all LCD's, that is soooo 1999...

Screen defects not necessarily dead pixels...

[AnyNoMouse]

If you've got a bright pixel (stuck on), then it's definately a LCD defect. Dark pixels on the PSP aren't necessarily LCD problems, though. If you tilt the unit side-to-side you might notice that the "dark pixel" moves across the front of the screen slightly. Apparently, there are defects in the clear plastic in front of the screen that makes some of the pixels appear dead. Add in the gratuitous amount of dust under the screen and it can really look like the LCD's are crap.

I unscrewed the front of the case from mine and blew some air under the cover (didn't take it completely off as that voids the warranty). Some of the sub-pixels I thought were dead turned out to be just dust. The other spots appeared to be in the clear window of the case itself.

I'm not saying this is the case for everyone, but it seems to be the problem with mine.

Re:not malfunction?

[badasscat]

For those who DO have an LCD with a few dead pixels, how annoying are they?

I personally own 4 LCD's with no dead pixels at all, but my wife was using her office laptop at home one day and while we had it I took the liberty of installing some security updates and anti-virus software on it (I could not in good conscience let a Windows PC leave the house without even having Service Pack 1 installed), and it had one stuck blue pixel right at the top of the screen, about 1/4" from the bezel.

I would not have been able to live with this machine. I could not look at anything else but that stuck pixel. No matter what was on screen, my eyes would gravitate towards this one bright blue pixel, and it was clearly visible in my peripheral vision at all times. It was incredibly annoying. It convinced me unequivocably to never again buy an LCD screen (or a laptop) from anywhere without a liberal return policy - preferably 30 days with no questions asked. Unfortunately, that rules out my favorite retailer, Newegg (which has a special policy for LCD screens).

Fortunately, stuck pixels are rare, whatever Sony says. At my last job my entire company had 21" Planar LCD screens - my department had two per person - and not one of them had a single stuck pixel. I'm talking around 300 separate screens. I have never personally owned an LCD with a stuck pixel either. I'm convinced that Sony is just using crap screens to save on costs and then telling everybody there's nothing wrong with them when there very clearly is. (The very definition of a stuck or dead pixel is a faulty transistor - that is a malfunction/defect, however you want to sugarcoat it.)

UK sale of goods act (for anyone buying in the UK)

[Anonymous Coward]

reading some comments that people have been told they cant return dead pixels, here is what the sale of goods act says about faults and your redress, i would advise you to print it out and carry it in your wallet if a store plays hardball --- http://www.dti.gov.uk/ccp/topics1/facts/salegoodsa ct.htm [dti.gov.uk] FACTSHEET and Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs [slashdot.org])

Subject: Sale of Goods Rights, Faulty Goods.

Relevant or Related Legislation: Sale of Goods Act 1979. Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982. Sale and Supply of Goods Act 1994. The Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002.

Key Facts

Wherever goods are bought they must "conform to contract". This means they must be as described, fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality (i.e. not inherently faulty at the time of sale).

Goods are of satisfactory quality if they reach the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking into account the price and any description.

Aspects of quality include fitness for purpose, freedom from minor defects, appearance and finish, durability and safety.

It is the seller, not the manufacturer, who is responsible if goods do not conform to contract.

If goods do not conform to contract at the time of sale, purchasers can request their money back "within a reasonable time". (This is not defined and will depend on circumstances)

For up to six years after purchase (five years from discovery in Scotland) purchasers can demand damages (which a court would equate to the cost of a repair or replacement).

A purchaser who is a consumer, i.e. is not buying in the course of a business, can alternatively request a repair or replacement.

If repair and replacement are not possible or too costly, then the consumer can seek a partial refund, if they have had some benefit from the good, or a full refund if the fault/s have meant they have enjoyed no benefit

In general, the onus is on all purchasers to prove the goods did not conform to contract (e.g. was inherently faulty) and should have reasonably lasted until this point in time (i.e. perishable goods do not last for six years).

If a consumer chooses to request a repair or replacement, then for the first six months after purchase it will be for the retailer to prove the goods did conform to contract (e.g. were not inherently faulty)

After six months and until the end of the six years, it is for the consumer to prove the lack of conformity.

[slashdot.org] Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Q1. What is an inherent fault?
Q2. Do I only have rights for 30 [or some other number] days after purchase?
Q3. Do all goods have to last six (or five) years?
Q4. I know I can demand my money back within a "reasonable time" but how long is that?
Q5. After the "reasonable time has passed", what can I do?
Q6. Is it true that I have to complain to the manufacturer?
Q7. Do I have to produce a receipt?
Q8. Can I claim a refund on sale items?
Q9. Must I accept a credit note instead of a refund?
Q10. What can I do to claim damages or if the retailer will not honour my rights?
Q11. The retailer has claimed that a repair is "disproportionately costly" and insists I accept a replacement as an alternative. Must I accept this?
Q12. Neither repair nor replacement are possible. What can I do?
Q13. What will the "reversed burden of proof" mean for the consumer

[slashdot.org] Q1. What is an inherent fault?

A fault present at the time of purchase. Examples are:
an error in design so that a product is manufactured incorrectly
an error in manufacturing where a faulty component was inserted.
The "fault" may not become apparent immediately but it was there at the time of sale and so the product was not of satisfactory standard.

Re:not malfunction?

[GeckoX]

Size doesn't really matter here, resolution is more important. What's the res and dpi on the PSP? If the dpi is higher than most lcd screens being manufactured, it is entirely possible that the manufacturing process is more delicate resulting in more problem pixels. Not to excuse it, but it could explain why most monitors these days no longer have this issue, and why the PSP display does.

Re:not malfunction?

[Soulslayer]

They don't. Some are for 5, some are for 8, and a couple (like Samsung) gurantee no dead pixels [forbes.com] what so ever.

Re:New screen

[Cowclops]

Yes. The pixels are square no matter what, its just that a 1280x1024 LCD just has "extra" space on the top and bottom (32 pixels on top, 32 pixels on bottom) to make it 5:4. CRTs, on the other hand, are basically always 4:3 and do not have a fixed pixel resolution. If you are one of the n00bs still trying to use a 5:4 resolution like 1280x1024 on a 4:3 display, the only way to not distort everything you see is to leave black bars on the sides while expanding the monitor screen to fill it up to the top. If you're using a CRT monitor at 1280x1024, you are looking at a distorted image. Try 1360x1024 or 1280x960, but please for the love of jebus, stop using a 5:4 ratio.

Re:extended store warranty?

[jalefkowit]

Aren't those things supposed to be for covering you after the manufacturer's warranty expires?

If so, how are they relevant to this? Since you'll know as soon as you boot up your PSP for the first time if the LCD is borked or not.

Normal & malfunction not mutually exclusive

[Rich Klein]

"A very small number of dark pixels or continuously lit pixels is normal for LCD screens, and is not a sign of a malfunction,"

Just because broken pixels are a common occurrence doesn't mean they aren't broken! Hmph.

Re:It is a common issue

[MaineCoon]

The relaxed standards in passing units with dead pixels is a not-insignificant reason for the price drop in LCDs. The cost of an LCD would still probably be 2-3x what it is today, otherwise.