Oh dear, jimmies appear to have been rustled
PS. LG have also given out new sets or replaced the panel for burn in so that point is pretty moot.
On their website, they have advertised their OLED TVs as being free from burn in or/and not being a "permanent" issue so if they do refuse, you simply show them this:
https://www.lg.com/us/experience-tvs/oled-tv/reliability
Since when is using your TV the same as always considered abuse?
LCD is without a shadow of a doubt more long-lasting than OLED, and you can even see that from the guy who got burn in from watch MOVIES with subs. Or is having subtitles on also "abuse"? There's people who have shifted their TVs around when they upgrade so they still get use (10+ years). For OLED this won't be possible unless you like watching the TV with marks in it. So while for people who discard their TVs after upgrading once every 3-5 years burn in might not end up being a problem, it certainly doesn't mean it has a long life or as long of a life as LEDs generally.
The real question is, why is it so hard to admit OLED isn't a perfect technology but which has weaknesses as well? I really don't get it.
You're missing a very important part.....
To me 6+ hours of CNN/Sky EVERY day
AND a stupid high oled light setting (i.e. brightness) is not "normal" usage. Recommended luminance setting for SDR calibration is 120 nits (which is iirc, is between 20 and 35% OLED light setting depending on the model), the ones who are having burn in the most often along with heavy news channel usage have their oled light level set to 80+%
Again, I have yet to see a post from someone with normal usage report any issues....
Got a link to that subtitles burn in post? Most OLED Tvs, at least LGs iirc have a feature where things like HUDs, subtitles/text, banners i.e. news have their brightness reduced compared to the rest of the image.
Want to know what I find even funnier with regards to that rtings burn in test/comparison, people are so determined to prove burn in is an issue that will affect "most" people yet they haven't noticed how awfully LCD's panel uniformity has aged:
VA fairs better than the likes of IPS but again, it depends on the model, a lot of VA panels in the past have aged much worse than the IPS screen there.
Yup and in 10 years time, chances are people's LCDs will have aged in terms of uniformity, reduced brightness or/and developed a fault like most tech. these days.
Where did I say OLED is perfect? I don't consider any TV to be perfect, for me it is very much a pick your poison, OLED - "potential" burn in, not as high brightness (not really an issue for me though as I find a lot of HDR content to be overwhelmingly bright a lot of the time), "potential" vertical banding in near black scenes or........ LCD, - grey blacks, poor viewing angles, halo'ing + blooming (and for myself, the way the motion is handled is awful)........ I chose the TV which would annoy me the least in real world usage.
And before people say blacks don't matter or you can't notice it in certain light etc. etc. You can and several people who have seen mine compared to their plasmas and QLED etc. have all immediately noticed the blacks and contrast ratio that goes in hand with it, it makes a substantial difference to IQ and a number of "key" scenes such as those in oblivion, it's one of those things you have to see with your own eyes (and in a "normal" environment with proper calibration settings, not in a shop with bright overhead shop lighting and vibrant/store preset mode....) EDIT: And again, you don't need to be playing HDR content to see true blacks etc.
Essentially what gets me is people who have never had, let alone seen OLED (other than in a shop) go on the internet and read about burn in affecting OLED and think that most users are going to face the issue then they jump on the bandwagon going around saying about how it is a huge issue when in reality for 90% of people, it isn't, I don't know what it is? Justifying their LCD purchase?