logoalt Hacker News

userbinatortoday at 1:58 AM4 repliesview on HN

The Internet seems rather reluctant to explain what exactly "pixel cleaning" does, but based on the vague useless "explanations" I could find, I suspect it's a sort of "flat-field correction" where it calibrates the pixel drive current to darken the less worn and/or brighten the more worn ones so it eliminates the burn-in effect. This obviously leads to a vicious cycle where more worn pixels are driven harder and hence wear faster...

IMHO OLED is a planned-obsolescence dead-end anyway; LCDs can last literally decades, maybe with a backlight replacement, but OLEDs are designed to fail in a few years. I have a few (rather expensive) pieces of test equipment with OLEDs that became unreadable after only a few years and had to be replaced (fortunately with a regular LCD, and some firmware patching), while others with old-school CSTN/TN LCDs are still fine.


Replies

p1neconetoday at 2:50 AM

If OLEDs are 'designed to fail' they've certainly gone about it in a very roundabout way - there would be much easier ways to do planned obsolescence if that was actually the goal of display manufacturers.

show 1 reply
UltraSanetoday at 6:42 AM

OLEDS have two HUGE advantages over LCDs

Extremely accurate and vivid colors due to their low black level.

And VERY fast pixel response times, 0.01ms to 0.03ms compared to 1ms to 5ms for the fastest LCD gaming monitors.

some_randomtoday at 2:17 PM

Is is possible that some technologies could have longevity trade offs and not be "planned obsolescence"?

p0w3n3dtoday at 5:41 AM

Pixel cleaning sounds little like blinker fluid to me...