Thank you for enlightening me how consumer electronics are manufactured. All those years running an embedded design company I thought it was Santas Elves putting our stuff togetherSorry but IMO that's just BS. Utter BS.....no matter how elegantly put. To assert that my OLED material is compromised and others are not which results in a burn in after two long years....coincidentally the same as many others...is a far stretch. So what happened specifically? The calibration of the substrate sprayer head became out of whack with the exact same uncalibrated measurements as 5% of others? That's statistically almost impossible. Sorry....even though I never worked at an OLED manufacturing plant....I did work as an industrial controls engineer for a good part of my life and from my experience....most solid state processes that rely on any type of cell or organic technology is very, very consistent when it comes to operating life as well as failure rates.
The bottom line is that according to Occams Razor...there is a major problem with burn in when using an OLED screen for television viewing and I believe the more mainstream these become....the more we will hear about the issue unless they fix the current technology. Is it scientific? No....just common sense. Anyway...that's my take and you disagree. But I won't gamble another $2500 on the chance that you are correct.
Since LGD closely guard how they've achieved commercially viable mass manufacture of large form OLED panels I can't enlighten you how variation can occur. Neither you nor I know exactly what their manufacturing process entails and how they've managed to overcome the hurdles others couldn't (aside from using WOLED they still had significant yield issues).
What we do know is yields have always been an issue for large form OLED panels. Accurately and consistently depositing the OLED material to the substrate has long been cited as one of the key issues. Thermal evaporation is efficient for small form panels, I believe they still use a mask to create distinct charge conducting and charge blocking layout when manufacturing smaller panels. The variations and defects inherent with mask patterning are tolerable on small panels. But they present a much bigger issue with large form panels (pun intended). So here's a publicly known example which induces variance in panels.
Whatever process LG use is likely to have compromises and therefore result in variance between panels. As otherwise they wouldn't have had to resort to WOLED. If they could accurately and consistently deposit OLED material to the substrate 100% of the time they could produce RGB panels.
I've already cited other examples of panel variance. Many users have posted 5% slides and not a single one looks the same. The same is true of DSE with LCD panels and hot spots due to uneven backlight diffusion across the panel. These are not your run of the mill products using refined manufacturing techniques. They are pushing the envelope here. The tolerances are far far smaller. Otherwise every man and their dog would be churning them out. The processes and products you worked with will have had similar issues in the early years. Over the years changes will have been made, new techniques adopted to reach a level of consistency which to your eye seems 100%. Because the variances are no longer perceptible for that particular application. That is clearly not the case at this point of large form factor OLED panel production.
Depositing and encapsulating an Organic material susceptible to heat, UV light, Oxygen, moisture in a pattern which requires ~25m distinct charge conducting channels with sufficient inter sub pixel charge blocking (to prevent leakage) in a small area is not the same as evaporating an even layer of material on some substrate. The latter has become trivial, whereas the former is at the cutting edge of mass manufacture and pushing the boundaries of existing techniques.
Another example of panel variance/defect is the discoloured central square that some users panels have developed. LG have admitted in some instances the substrate/OLED material had not cooled sufficiently prior to calibration. As a result the lookup tables were set incorrectly. Without their acknowledgement and explanation none of us could have guessed this variance could occur. Did your years of experience as a controls engineer give you foresight of this potential issue? No it didn't, because you're experience does not provide you sufficient expertise to conclude there is no possibility of variance between panels.
Since we've moved on to common sense analysis now, I'll enlighten you what my common sense tells me. LGD have churned out millions of panels. If they were all as susceptible to burn in as you've concluded from your single experience, I'd expect hundreds of thousands if not a million plus to have suffered burn in by now. Where are all those disgruntled customers? Moreover, why would every major manufacturer bar Samsung be putting these panels in their flagship displays. Let alone increasing production?
My common sense tells me it's highly unlikely they are as susceptible to burn in as your common sense tells you. But as I said, time will tell. If you're correct, we'll see millions of customers crying foul before long, right?