Research firm cuts into Sony claims for super-thin TV

From their graph at:
http://www.displa...d_tv.asp
it can be deduced that either the relation is nonlinear or they have significant measurement errors (unfortunately not shown). In either case 1000h seems way too short to predict how the display will act after 17000h (the mentioned differential aging is only present in the last 4 points for example). As it is not stated how many devices were tested, what was the exact protocol and what were measurement errors its really hard to judge how reliable the data really is (this could be in the extended version of the report). So while it's great that someone is checking the manufacturers claims these results should be approached with caution, at least until another 3000h confirm the trend.

considering the QUALITY of the OLED display, brightness and contrast ratio... wouldnt it in fact reach LCD quality after 17 hours? Like... well, it lost half its brightness, but its still as good as a brand new LCD.

From their graph at:
http://www.displa...d_tv.asp
it can be deduced that either the relation is nonlinear or they have significant measurement errors (unfortunately not shown).

That's correct, the relaxation is not linear, it's known empirically from other studies on OLEDs that a stretched exponential is a good fit.

I'm sorry, but a 1000hr test, and the assumption of linearity is just stupid.

DisplaySearch are obviously uneducated morons.