Comment by craftkiller
12 hours ago
> it's not what those content creators say
Quoting one of your videos: "After 21 months, seeing these artifacts is certainly annoying". If I spend $3k on a monitor, it should _not_ be annoying after 2 years.
Also "If your primary monitor use case is productivity, you likely have up to 3 years of decent usage under normal conditions before burn-in starts to become a concern". I almost exclusively use my monitor for productivity, and it definitely needs to last more than 3 years.
> Pixel clean cannot run if the monitor is constantly receiving signal.
True, but pixel clean works by burning-in the rest of your (sub)pixels so that they are evenly burned. Therefore what you are seeing in that photo is permanent degradation of those (sub)pixels. The clean will smooth it out so it doesn't look bad, but those pixels will never be as bright again. That portion of their life is spent. It is an unavoidable part of how OLED works.
I agree that emissive displays are the future. But OLED is not the way to get there.
> Quoting one of your videos: "After 21 months, seeing these artifacts is certainly annoying". If I spend $3k on a monitor, it should _not_ be annoying after 2 years.
Why are you insisting to spend 3k? I've already said that 1k is enough. Also he said "but generally speaking it hasn't been a noticeable problem in most tasks". In the same productivity scenario, with a gray background, IPS backlight bleeding would've been even worse (unless you win the lottery and there's little to no bleeding). RTings showed this on many monitors (unfortunately they paywalled everything due to AI [1]).
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DshOOs39vA
> It is an unavoidable part of how OLED works.
True.
> OLED is not the way to get there.
I'm not a screen scientist so I'll refrain from making a statement like this. I don't have anything to add. I guess we'll see how it pans out in the future.
Edit: I bought my FO32U2P mostly to reduce eye strain. 4k 240hz with nice colors is also a very neat upgrade.