Do you have any dead-pixel on your iBook?

A

AlexN

Guest
Do you have any dead-pixel on your iBook? After carefully inspecting of mine, I'm happy to say, I have none. :biohazard
 
Joined
Feb 8, 2005
Messages
315
Reaction score
6
Points
18
I had one (1) on a new ibook G4 1.2 I used to own. It was very near the bottom and hard to notice unless you were looking for it. None on my 15" PB.

ed724
 
Joined
Feb 18, 2005
Messages
435
Reaction score
13
Points
18
Location
Phoenix, Arizona
Your Mac's Specs
ibook G4 14in
none. praise the apple gods!
 
Joined
Mar 20, 2005
Messages
1,416
Reaction score
57
Points
48
Location
Michigan, USA
Your Mac's Specs
1.67 Ghz 17" PB w/1 GB Ram; 400 MHz PM G4, 366Mhz iBook Firewire, Nano 4GB Black
none on my 17" Inch Powerbook, or my Clamshell iBook
 
Joined
Feb 9, 2005
Messages
2,340
Reaction score
82
Points
48
Location
DFW
Your Mac's Specs
MacBook Pro 13" | MacBook Pro 13" | Mac Mini 2GHz C2D
with the beating that i have given my iBook, i have none.
 
OP
A

AlexN

Guest
I used the Pixel checker to check the screen again, wow, I don't have a single one pixel indeed. That's awesome.
 
Joined
Jun 9, 2005
Messages
632
Reaction score
27
Points
28
Location
My world
Your Mac's Specs
iBook 12" G4, 30 GB, 768 MB RAM. iPod 5G 30GB.
one on red, one on green, on on black and white =( dumb!! but blue is great..
 
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
1,069
Reaction score
59
Points
48
Location
Fort Worth, Texas
Your Mac's Specs
Mac Pro, 8-Core 2.8Ghz, 10GB RAM, 2x1TB HDDs, iPod U2 Edition
imac+ibook+PB= 0 dead pixels... makes me happy
 
Joined
Jan 31, 2005
Messages
304
Reaction score
6
Points
18
Location
dodo island
Your Mac's Specs
ibook g4, 14'', 1.33 Ghz, 60gig, 768ram, Mac OsX 10.4.3
is it true that a screen which remains static is more likely to have dead pixels?...
and that's why we have screensavers.....?
 
Joined
Mar 20, 2005
Messages
1,416
Reaction score
57
Points
48
Location
Michigan, USA
Your Mac's Specs
1.67 Ghz 17" PB w/1 GB Ram; 400 MHz PM G4, 366Mhz iBook Firewire, Nano 4GB Black
chouk said:
is it true that a screen which remains static is more likely to have dead pixels?...
and that's why we have screensavers.....?

Screensavers were important with CRT displays, because a static image could get "burned" onto the display. LCD screens don't have this happen, so screensavers don't serve much of a purpose
 
Joined
Feb 2, 2004
Messages
12,455
Reaction score
604
Points
113
Location
PA
Your Mac's Specs
MacBook
rs2sensen said:
Screensavers were important with CRT displays, because a static image could get "burned" onto the display. LCD screens don't have this happen, so screensavers don't serve much of a purpose
Actually, screensavers have not really served their intended purpose for quite a few years now...even on CRT's. No monitor of any type put out in the last 6-7 years or so, has had the need for a screensaver. In fact, some screensavers can do more damage than good these days. What I mean is that some of the highly graphic intense ones, can to an extent, overwork the display and cause it to (for lack of a better term) have a shorter life span. At the very least, it will use more energy to run a complex screensaver than it would to simply dim the display or turn the monitor off.
 
Joined
May 4, 2005
Messages
44
Reaction score
0
Points
6
Location
jax fl
Your Mac's Specs
iMac g5 1.8ghz 1 gb ram iBook G4 1.2ghz 768 mb ram
i have one. would apple fix it? its annoying.
 
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
1,804
Reaction score
31
Points
48
I'm sure they would, but if your warranty is over, it will be expensive
 
Joined
May 7, 2005
Messages
93
Reaction score
0
Points
6
Location
Singapore
Your Mac's Specs
iMac G5, 17.in screen. 1.8GHz, Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger.
finally some proof that screensavers are superfluous.
 

Shop Amazon


Shop for your Apple, Mac, iPhone and other computer products on Amazon.
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon and affiliated sites.
Top