this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2023
203 points (94.7% liked)

Technology

60060 readers
2912 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

From improvements in the efficiency of OLED materials to software developments and new testing techniques, OLED burn-in risk has been lowered. OLED monitors are generally a more sound investment than ever—at least for the right person.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


People tend to display static images on computer monitors more frequently than on TVs—things like icons, taskbars, and browser address bars—making burn-in risk a concern.

"Industry chatter," Dough co-founder Konstantinos Karatsevidis told me, showed that burn-in affected "around 5 percent of users" after two years.

The latest models have improved materials and firmware that make them significantly more resistant to burn-in than they were years ago.

Roland Wooster, chair of VESA’s Display Performance Metrics Task Group, told me that physical design changes have also helped.

By counting the time each subpixel is displayed and at what brightness, a "wear level" can be determined for each pixel, using an algorithm to estimate the luminance degradation this can be compensated for.

The companies that make monitors can implement a range of firmware, software, and hardware techniques to help fight burn-in.


The original article contains 656 words, the summary contains 138 words. Saved 79%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!