I don't think this has anything to do with LCDs, since microLED doesn't use LCD, unlike miniLED.

Yeah the names are confusing here. I actually had to edit my post after I realized I used “MicroLED” when I meant “MiniLED” so I’m not sure if you saw that one. If so, sorry!

For those who are mercifully unfamiliar: MiniLED is different than MicroLED. MiniLED means a backlight panel with more addressable “zones” due to use of smaller and more densely packed LEDs. It’s arguably more of a marketing term for high-resolution LED backlighting, but the impact of this incremental improvement shouldn’t be overlooked - it’s very effective for most applications.

MicroLED on the other hand is like OLED in that each pixel is a single addressable unit that emits its own light, but differs in that it’s essentially using an actual grid of semiconductor-style LEDs, where OLED manufacturing uses something totally different IIRC.

It's definitely incorrect to say that backlit LCD screens don't wear out.

However, it's definitely correct to say that quality OLED screens wear out much, much faster than quality backlit LCD screens.

And as always, garbage-grade screens [0] fall to pieces much, much faster than good ones.

You might also be interested in this follow-up report that was published about a year later than the link you posted: <https://www.rtings.com/tv/tests/longevity-burn-in-test-updat...>.

Also interesting is a video that RTNGS made a little while back that I cannot currently find where they took some of the TVs from this test with failing screens that looked SUPER bad in the pictures, and showed them in the video with moving pictures, asking the question "So, hey, can you spot the problem?". For some the answer was an obvious "YES", but for others, no, not at all.

[0] Like dreadfully thin edge-lit ones: <https://www.rtings.com/research/thin-lcd-tvs-break-faster-un...>

Yeah just like OLED, the LED backlight on a LCD doesn't last. I just recently swapped out the backlight on my ~10 year old TV with a $30 new one off aliexpress. Way brighter again, and way less color accurate. At least it doesn't need to be ewaste now.

I don't think that's true, certainly not in my experience. My LG OLED has burn in for something that's rarely on the screen.

Maybe I don't use tvs the way most people do. But the most pessimistic lifetime estimates for my use case on a 30,000 hour panel is 41 years. I don't really see a television as something to pass on to my heirs so that seems like a solved problem for non-commercial use.

I've had televisions fail but it has always been a connector or capacitor that I could replace with a sautering iron and about 46 minutes of disassembly/re-assembly

~45000 / 7 hours per day = 17 years.

17 years ago was 2007 - I can’t remember every TV our family had since 2007, but it was more than one or two, for sure.

The failure points for LCDs are usually not the panel itself (the most expensive part), unlike with OLEDs.

We've put up with gray for black since 1950s when the first CRTs were sold. Not sure why you stopped in history for LCD. LCD was an improvement just like LED/OLED was the next improvement over LCD.

No, it doesn't include everyone.

My daughter loves to put a beautiful image on her iPad and make it stay like a picture frame for hours. She’s a kid, she doesn't care if pixels burn out, and if I try to prohibit it, it will just happen more often.

For me, OLED is better, sure.

Or if you know, you want to maintain any level of brightness over a greater than a 10% window. I have OLED's and MiniLED on my desk. Each excels in a different area. The OLED can't even get close to the MiniLED's HDR performance, whilst the MiniLED gets close enough to the OLEDs strength for 95% of content. Save for motion, OLED reams LCD in motion. I just wish I could have everything in the one panel but alas we are just not there.

I'm hoping we see major bumps to OLED on the desktops brightness over the next few generations of panel as it's still early days to be fair.

For now, it's likely ill keep both on my desk. OLED for darker tighters only supplying the occasional highlight, MiniLED for everything else including titles calling for large and sustained brightness values.

OLED brightness still hasn’t quite caught up, and many of the bright LED backlit LCDs have great color gamuts, and supposedly almost true black:

https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/best/bright-room

Anyway, if you have a big window in the room where your TV is, brightness probably should be the deciding factor.

There's a qualitative difference between an integer upscale and actual LCD pixels at native res, especially at low resolutions. The glow and shape of the individual pixels makes edges a little softer without looking blurry, and anything taking advantage of subpixel rendering doesn't look quite right when upscaled.

The defects can stay. In my oblivious opinion they should just drill holes in them.

I bought a 42 inch TV for just under $300 AUD a few weeks back. I would suspect the panel isn't even the most expensive part any more on a TV, logistics for that thing have to be one of the biggest parts nowadays.

How hard is it to get an LCD panel professionally cut with holes in it?

No, but the LCDs in more recent laptops and devices are doomed to a similar fate, on 40-year or less timescales, and the world has literally forgotten how to make a more durable display. There's like one active manufacturer of CRTs left, and they only cater to military applications like fighter-plane HUDs (and charge an arm and a leg), which means the standard for display technology longevity has gone down.