Hey all,
So I've decided it was time to retire my old and dying U2312HM and U2311H monitors. Which haven't had a bad run.
Now I regularly lurk around reading the forum and read reviews that the resident expert here posts on TFTCentral, so I'm not unaware of the varying problems that seem to have plagued the industry recently!
Anyway, so I eventually settled on 3xU2417H thanks to Dell's brilliant warranty (having personally used it twice before I can attest it's really easy).
Problem being to get what I'd call 3 decent quality monitors has been nothing short of a nightmare. In total it took me 7 monitors to get 3 of acceptable quality (1 being practically perfect).
Considering this is supposed to be a "premium" line I'm quite shocked really.
The rough breakdown of faulty monitors is the following:
Monitor 1 = 2x dead/missing pixels next to each other
Monitor 2 = 4x stuck pixels of varying colours varying places around the screen
Monitor 3 = Horrible backlight bleed in the bottom and top right corners
Monitor 4 = 1 dead pixel and 2 vary lazy pixels in varying places around the screen
The 3 I've eventually settled on are OK! 2 of them have very minor bleed in the bottom right which I'm guessing is to do with the control panel and 1 of them is practically perfect.
Another point to note is that the factory calibration is basically a load of rubbish. Out of the 7 monitors 5 have come with default set red/yellow/blue tinting, 1 of them severe enough that whoever calibrated it must likely have some sort of visual impairment..
Now I knew this might be challenging ahead of time and as much as I'm not proud of it I used a certain rainforest due to the ease of return.
The questions being here is why could I buy monitors that used to come faultless first time and required next to no calibration to what must be the panel lottery about 5/6 years later.
Now I know 2 monitors is a small sample size, but those monitors were also used where I worked. And it was very rare to see one that didn't look right!
Is monitor QA now practically non-existent or is it due to poorer panels being punted the average consumers way due to the fact we accept them?
This also makes me wonder how you average e-tailer such as OCUK is affected. I imagine quality of monitors leading people to return more frequently can't be very beneficial for them..
Does anyone have any thoughts on how we got to this point? Or better yet, if anyone knows of any tech moving forward which might resolve these issues!
So I've decided it was time to retire my old and dying U2312HM and U2311H monitors. Which haven't had a bad run.
Now I regularly lurk around reading the forum and read reviews that the resident expert here posts on TFTCentral, so I'm not unaware of the varying problems that seem to have plagued the industry recently!
Anyway, so I eventually settled on 3xU2417H thanks to Dell's brilliant warranty (having personally used it twice before I can attest it's really easy).
Problem being to get what I'd call 3 decent quality monitors has been nothing short of a nightmare. In total it took me 7 monitors to get 3 of acceptable quality (1 being practically perfect).
Considering this is supposed to be a "premium" line I'm quite shocked really.
The rough breakdown of faulty monitors is the following:
Monitor 1 = 2x dead/missing pixels next to each other
Monitor 2 = 4x stuck pixels of varying colours varying places around the screen
Monitor 3 = Horrible backlight bleed in the bottom and top right corners
Monitor 4 = 1 dead pixel and 2 vary lazy pixels in varying places around the screen
The 3 I've eventually settled on are OK! 2 of them have very minor bleed in the bottom right which I'm guessing is to do with the control panel and 1 of them is practically perfect.
Another point to note is that the factory calibration is basically a load of rubbish. Out of the 7 monitors 5 have come with default set red/yellow/blue tinting, 1 of them severe enough that whoever calibrated it must likely have some sort of visual impairment..
Now I knew this might be challenging ahead of time and as much as I'm not proud of it I used a certain rainforest due to the ease of return.
The questions being here is why could I buy monitors that used to come faultless first time and required next to no calibration to what must be the panel lottery about 5/6 years later.
Now I know 2 monitors is a small sample size, but those monitors were also used where I worked. And it was very rare to see one that didn't look right!
Is monitor QA now practically non-existent or is it due to poorer panels being punted the average consumers way due to the fact we accept them?
This also makes me wonder how you average e-tailer such as OCUK is affected. I imagine quality of monitors leading people to return more frequently can't be very beneficial for them..
Does anyone have any thoughts on how we got to this point? Or better yet, if anyone knows of any tech moving forward which might resolve these issues!