4 ms·

> Then there's the infamous panel lottery when buying a monitor from certain unscrupulous companies You mean like Apple using two different LCDs in retina MacB

> Then there's the infamous panel lottery when buying a monitor from certain unscrupulous companies You mean like Apple using two different LCDs in retina MacBook Pros, with the LG model being junk?

tomp 12y ago
I can't tell if this is sarcasm (in which case it deserves a downvote, plus it's a bad sarcasm), or if it's true (in which case you should've included a source/explanation.
- dopamean 12y ago
  There was a situation not long ago with some Macbook monitors going bad and it turned out Apple was getting the panels from Samsung and LG and it was the LG ones going bad. I'm not sure if there was much scandal around it though.
  - nnnnni 12y ago
    Plus, the colors/gamma were weird on one of them... You have to install a special color profile or else the contrast would be really screwy.
- jychang 12y ago
  It's true, but it doesn't apply in this case. Here's the backstory: When Apple released the retina MBP in 2012, they had 2 suppliers for the 15 inch retina screen: Samsung and LG. To be fair with Apple, isn't gaming the system by giving earlier review models better quality screens. More likely, this is to ensure that instead of relying on one supplier, they can diversify their screen manufacturing so they don't get screwed if one manufacturer has production difficulties. At the time, I had purchased a retina MBP with the LG screen that summer. (You don't know what screen you will get when you buy it). The LG screen, as it turned out, had very bad burn-in problems. After complaining to the Apple store a few times, they finally relented and switched it out for me to the better Samsung screen. The customer service at the time wasn't the best, since Apple should have gone "This is a real issue, if you can show proof of screen burn in on your LG screen, we'll immediately replace it for you" rather than try to brush it under the rug. However, it wasn't a malicious case of screwing over customers after sending better units to reviewers.
  - Curmudgel 12y ago
    The problem is that consumers could not know whether they were buying a defective product or not, even if they knew about the problem. Two different products were sold without any means of differentiating them, which is inexcusable. It would have been very easy to construct different serial numbers for the different models. It could have been as simple as adding an A or B or adding something to the tiny print on the back of the laptop or and the packaging.
    - sigterm 12y ago
      To what end should hardware manufactures be required to inform their customers of component changes? One big advantage of Apple products compared to other competitors is that there are very limited number of decisions for average consumers to make. It will cause huge amount of confusion if a new model name and change list is generated each time any of the thousands of components in an MBP changes.
      - mikeash 12y ago
        It seems to me that focusing on component changes is completely missing the point. The real problem was not that Apple had two subtly different versions of their MacBook Pro with no way to tell them apart. The real problem was that Apple was shipping seriously defective hardware. Imagine if Apple hand standardized entirely on the defective LG panels. That eliminates the "panel lottery" complaint, right? And yet the actual problem, in terms of what you get when you buy one, is worse, not better. Manufacturers need to ship products that are fit for purpose and that perform as advertised. As long as that's maintained, swapping components shouldn't be a problem. If swapping components affects that, then it's the bad products, not the swapping, that are the real problem.
        sigterm 12y ago
        I totally agree with you. For this particular article, if there is a clear and comprehensive specification on how the drives should perform (IOPs, latency, BW, etc), the problem will be resolved immediately with no controversy. The comment I was replying to implied that Apple should provide a means for customers to distinguish the products, which I do not believe is a realistic solution because swapping components is quite common in hardware world.
- Curmudgel 12y ago
  It's not sarcasm. A class action lawsuit was filed in March 2013. It seems that LG screens on a certain model(s?) of a 15.6 inch Retina MacBook Pro suffer from burn in, and that there is no way for a consumer to tell whether the screen was manufactured by Samsung or LG before buying the laptop. http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/macbook-pro-retina-lg-class-action-suit-started/ http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/macbook-pro-retina-lg...
  - grapeshot 12y ago
    It's not just the retina Macbook screens, the image retention issue affects basically every LG IPS laptop panel manufactured before 2013. It's just that Apple wasn't using the IPS panels until the Retina.

> Then there's the infamous panel lottery when buying a monitor from certain unscrupulous companies You mean like Apple using two different LCDs in retina MacBook Pros, with the LG model being junk?

tomp 12y ago

I can't tell if this is sarcasm (in which case it deserves a downvote, plus it's a bad sarcasm), or if it's true (in which case you should've included a source/explanation.

dopamean 12y ago
There was a situation not long ago with some Macbook monitors going bad and it turned out Apple was getting the panels from Samsung and LG and it was the LG ones going bad. I'm not sure if there was much scandal around it though.
- nnnnni 12y ago
  Plus, the colors/gamma were weird on one of them... You have to install a special color profile or else the contrast would be really screwy.
jychang 12y ago
It's true, but it doesn't apply in this case. Here's the backstory: When Apple released the retina MBP in 2012, they had 2 suppliers for the 15 inch retina screen: Samsung and LG. To be fair with Apple, isn't gaming the system by giving earlier review models better quality screens. More likely, this is to ensure that instead of relying on one supplier, they can diversify their screen manufacturing so they don't get screwed if one manufacturer has production difficulties. At the time, I had purchased a retina MBP with the LG screen that summer. (You don't know what screen you will get when you buy it). The LG screen, as it turned out, had very bad burn-in problems. After complaining to the Apple store a few times, they finally relented and switched it out for me to the better Samsung screen. The customer service at the time wasn't the best, since Apple should have gone "This is a real issue, if you can show proof of screen burn in on your LG screen, we'll immediately replace it for you" rather than try to brush it under the rug. However, it wasn't a malicious case of screwing over customers after sending better units to reviewers.
- Curmudgel 12y ago
  The problem is that consumers could not know whether they were buying a defective product or not, even if they knew about the problem. Two different products were sold without any means of differentiating them, which is inexcusable. It would have been very easy to construct different serial numbers for the different models. It could have been as simple as adding an A or B or adding something to the tiny print on the back of the laptop or and the packaging.
  - sigterm 12y ago
    To what end should hardware manufactures be required to inform their customers of component changes? One big advantage of Apple products compared to other competitors is that there are very limited number of decisions for average consumers to make. It will cause huge amount of confusion if a new model name and change list is generated each time any of the thousands of components in an MBP changes.
    - mikeash 12y ago
      It seems to me that focusing on component changes is completely missing the point. The real problem was not that Apple had two subtly different versions of their MacBook Pro with no way to tell them apart. The real problem was that Apple was shipping seriously defective hardware. Imagine if Apple hand standardized entirely on the defective LG panels. That eliminates the "panel lottery" complaint, right? And yet the actual problem, in terms of what you get when you buy one, is worse, not better. Manufacturers need to ship products that are fit for purpose and that perform as advertised. As long as that's maintained, swapping components shouldn't be a problem. If swapping components affects that, then it's the bad products, not the swapping, that are the real problem.
      - sigterm 12y ago
        I totally agree with you. For this particular article, if there is a clear and comprehensive specification on how the drives should perform (IOPs, latency, BW, etc), the problem will be resolved immediately with no controversy. The comment I was replying to implied that Apple should provide a means for customers to distinguish the products, which I do not believe is a realistic solution because swapping components is quite common in hardware world.
Curmudgel 12y ago
It's not sarcasm. A class action lawsuit was filed in March 2013. It seems that LG screens on a certain model(s?) of a 15.6 inch Retina MacBook Pro suffer from burn in, and that there is no way for a consumer to tell whether the screen was manufactured by Samsung or LG before buying the laptop. http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/macbook-pro-retina-lg-class-action-suit-started/ http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/macbook-pro-retina-lg...
- grapeshot 12y ago
  It's not just the retina Macbook screens, the image retention issue affects basically every LG IPS laptop panel manufactured before 2013. It's just that Apple wasn't using the IPS panels until the Retina.