Be that as it may, when the answer is not "zero-pixel-defect tolerance," manufacturers' policies are problematic for consumers. Personally speaking, a red pixel located on center screen drives me crazy. It prevents me from seeing anything else. Just imagine Matrix with a constant red spot or Word with a constant red spot. Whatever excuses the manufacturers give - about how complex the technology is, about how it is impossible to have a zero defect rate or about price wars - should not prevent them from making an effort.

When customers buy products, they don't expect to know everything about the technology or excuse its failings. Nor should they have to distinguish a defective red pixel from a blue, or a lit from an unlit one. A defective pixel is a defective pixel, period. Especially since these monitors, even if they are cheaper than they were, are still very expensive. Refusing to reply or whining about technical difficulties will not do. Nobody would accept faulty components when buying an automobile or a motherboard, both very complex pieces of equipment, just because they were told, "Well you know, sir, you always get flaws with electronics."

It is time to set things straight. If you have recently bought a panel, find out how many dead pixels it takes before its manufacturer will replace it. This is where I should apologize. I was not aware of this defective pixel problem before, but in the future we shall bear it in mind when running tests.

Note to manufacturers:

• If your brand has not been discussed, please send us your answers right now and we'll update the article.
• If your answers are out of date, please send us your new criteria and we'll update the article.