Apple users return and exchange their perfectly good phones more than a dozen times just for a "Samsung screen".

The annual new iPhone "lottery" event has finally arrived.

The "lottery" here doesn't refer to those giveaways by bloggers saying "We'll draw a brand - new iPhone for everyone!" Instead, on platforms like Xiaohongshu and Tieba, there is a group of iPhone users. They take advantage of Apple's 14 - day no - reason return and exchange policy, constantly returning and exchanging devices, vowing to "draw" an iPhone that shows no color difference, no color cast, has clear fonts, and must be equipped with a Samsung - produced screen panel from Apple.

Currently, the Samsung panels used on iPhones are generally of models "G9N", "G9P", and "G9Q", while those of LG are "GVC" and "GH3". So, just for a screen panel starting with "G9N", they can exchange the device 3 times, 5 times, or even 10 times, 15 times. They'll haggle with after - sales service and outwit customer service representatives.

Some people say this is nitpicking and a waste of time; others say it's the justifiable perfectionism of those who spend thousands of dollars on a phone. Regardless of the stance and right or wrong, is the so - called "Samsung screen" really so excellent that it's worth going crazy over frequent returns and exchanges?

The reasons behind this are far more complex than just "nitpicking" or "perfectionism".

The Driving Force behind Returns and Exchanges

For products like mobile phones, it's normal to return or exchange them once or twice if there are some cosmetic flaws or functional issues. But on the premise that the phone functions normally, to return or exchange it three to five times, or even more than ten times, is it really just for a "Samsung screen"?

Of course not.

In the comparison between Samsung and LG screen panels on current iPhones, it is generally believed that Samsung screens have more accurate colors, don't show color cast at large viewing angles, have more vivid colors, and the fonts are clearer.

On Xiaohongshu and Bilibili, many people have posted real - shot pictures of the display effects of different screens. It can indeed be seen that iPhones with LG screens do appear greener at large viewing angles.

On the other hand, some users have reported that the fonts on LG screens appear blurry, especially when displaying black text on a white background, which has the most obvious contrast; while the fonts on Samsung screens have sharper edges.

Moreover, some users believe that when an iPhone with an LG screen displays a solid color (especially gray at medium to low brightness), uneven screen brightness can be seen, as if the screen is dirty or has "stripes". They think LG screens are all "rag - like screens" and are far less vivid than Samsung screens when displaying colors or pictures.

Now on Xiaohongshu and Bilibili, you can easily find a large number of posts listing the "crimes" of LG screen panels. There are even some accounts that have created a "First - prize iPhone comparison chart", indicating which suppliers of phone components are the best and which are the worst. An iPhone with all the best component suppliers is considered a "first - prize phone", which amplifies users' anxiety.

With all these factors combined, regardless of whether there are real differences in the actual experience of iPhones with different component suppliers, if you really get an iPhone like the so - called "first - prize phone" on Xiaohongshu, you'll definitely feel satisfied.

So, are the statements like "The display effect of Samsung screens is far better than that of LG screens" and "first - prize phones" really true?

The Truth behind the "Screen Lottery"

Unfortunately, from a conclusive perspective, Samsung - supplied screens are indeed better than LG's in most cases. This harsh reality means that some people's iPhones are, in a sense, "second - class citizens".

Firstly, the most noticeable feature for users, "clearer font edges", is fundamentally due to Samsung's exclusive "Diamond Pixel" patent technology. The characteristic of this technology is that under the Pentile layout where red and blue sub - pixels are shared, there are the most green sub - pixels, which are oval - shaped, while the red and blue sub - pixels are diamond - shaped and relatively large.

This arrangement is a Samsung patent, and it has been deeply optimized in terms of "pixel fill rate" and "anti - aliasing". The density of green sub - pixels is the highest, and the human eye is most sensitive to green. Therefore, when rendering text and fine lines, its effective PPI (Effective PPI) is very high, and the text edges are "sharp", giving the sharpest visual experience.

At the same time, to avoid Samsung's patent, other manufacturers have to adopt different "diamond - like arrangements".

For LG, although it also uses a Pentile layout where red and blue sub - pixels are shared, the shape and layout of its sub - pixels are different from Samsung's, and the green sub - pixels are closer to a circular shape.

Ultimately, even with the same PPI, when rendering text edges, LG's arrangement may not be as efficient as Samsung's diamond arrangement in terms of the "combination" of sub - pixels. This may lead to slight "color fringes" (red or blue burrs) or "blurring" at the edges of strokes, making the text seem "blurry" or less clear.

Additionally, what some users describe as "Samsung screens being more vivid" technically corresponds to "excellent screen uniformity" (Uniformity). The opposite of this vividness is the so - called "rag - like feeling" or "yin - yang screen", scientifically known as the "Mura effect".

Mura means "non - uniformity" in Japanese. It stems from the fact that during the complex manufacturing process of OLEDs, it's impossible to ensure that millions of pixels have absolutely identical electrical characteristics.

For example, ideally, when a 1.5V voltage is applied, pixel A and pixel B should emit the same brightness. But in reality, due to manufacturing tolerances, when 1.5V is applied, pixel A may emit 10 nits of brightness, while pixel B only emits 9.8 nits.

When these countless tiny differences accumulate, when displaying a solid color, especially gray at medium to low brightness, it will macroscopically manifest as uneven brightness in the form of "dirty spots" or "patches".

Finally, the issue of "LG screens appearing green" doesn't actually mean that the overall color temperature of the screen is inaccurate. It specifically refers to the uneven green color that appears on the screen when the screen brightness is set to the lowest and it displays dark - gray content in an extremely dark environment.

It's like a dimmable light set composed of red, green, and blue bulbs. When you try to set the brightness to almost zero (displaying dark gray), ideally, all three bulbs should emit 1% of the dim light.

However, because the "luminous efficiency" of green sub - pixels in OLEDs is the highest, at extremely low voltages, it may emit 3% of the brightness, while the red and blue bulbs only emit 1%.

Basically, as the "dominant player" in the OLED screen market, Samsung's manufacturing process and calibration (Demura) technology for the Mura effect are more mature, while LG, as a follower, still lags behind Samsung in these two areas.

Therefore, statistically, the probability that consumers get an LG screen with a noticeable green - screen phenomenon may be higher than that of getting a Samsung screen. For users, it means "LG screens are greener".

The Overlooked Fact

However, compared with the above technical analysis, many people have overlooked a crucial variable: Apple's quality control strategy and the reality of large - scale mass production.

Firstly, as a purchaser, Apple has extremely strict quality control standards. Whether it's Samsung, LG, or BOE, any panels they deliver must first meet the lower limits set by Apple.

This means that the above - mentioned theoretical differences are strictly screened during the production process. In most cases, the differences between these different suppliers are very small. For the vast majority of ordinary users, without a detailed A/B comparison test in a professional darkroom environment, these differences are difficult to perceive.

Especially when you only have one phone and no reference, it's hard for most people to tell the difference in terms of color, clarity, and vividness just by the naked eye.

Secondly, the "screen lottery" exists not only between different brands but also within the same brand.

In large - scale mass production of industrial products, the goal is to achieve an acceptable "yield rate" within the tolerance range, not to create "artworks".

Take the LG GVC panel used in this year's iPhone 17 Pro Max as an example. In the same batch, some users got a "perfect screen" that is vivid and has accurate colors, and even said it's the best of this generation of iPhone 17 Pro Max. At the same time, some users reported that although they got a Samsung screen, there was a slight yellow - green color cast or a "rag - like feeling".

What does this indicate? Sometimes, when users think the screen is not good enough, it may not be due to the differences between suppliers (LG vs Samsung), but simply due to the random quality control tolerances that are inevitable in large - scale production.

Even if Samsung is much better than LG, Apple will probably adjust Samsung to be on par with LG.

So, the "screen lottery" we're discussing today is actually a complex phenomenon caused by the combined effects of minor technical differences and random mass - production quality control tolerances.

The Joys and Sorrows of the "Lottery"

So, going back to the original question: Is it really worth participating in the "screen lottery" to pursue the "perfect screen"?

From the perspective of exercising consumer rights, it seems reasonable. Both Apple's official website and major e - commerce platforms offer consumer protection policies such as "7 - day no - reason return and exchange" and "14 - day no - reason return and exchange".

Consumers can return and exchange products within the rules to select the most satisfactory device, which is reasonable both morally and legally.

Even those "professional players" who buy a dozen devices at once, select the best one, and then return the rest are just maximizing the use of platform rules.

However, behind this "reasonable" behavior, there is a risk that is easily overlooked: Triggering risk - control detection. After all, "no - reason return" is a consumer benefit, not a commercial clause that can be exploited infinitely.

According to a lot of user feedback on online communities like Reddit, V2EX, and Coolapk, it is rumored that overly frequent and consecutive returns within a short period, especially non - quality - related returns, do have a probability of being automatically marked as a "high - risk account" or "abusing the return policy" by Apple's official system, but it's not clear what serious consequences this will lead to for now.

In contrast, the risk - control of e - commerce platforms is more straightforward. A high return rate will significantly affect the user's credit score. Once your account becomes a "blacklisted account", you may fail every time you try to snap up a new product.

Facing the temptation of a "perfect device" on one hand and the risk of having your account blacklisted on the other, how will Apple users make the trade - off?

This article is from the WeChat official account "Blue Word Plan", author: Hayward. It is published by 36Kr with permission.