Slashdot Mirror
LG's UltraFine 5K Display Becomes Useless When It's Within Two Meters of a Router (9to5mac.com)
The LG UltraFine 5K Display was designed in part by Apple to work with the New MacBook Pro and as a replacement for the Thunderbolt Display, which was discontinued late last year. According to 9to5Mac, the display apparently wasn't designed to work next to routers as it will flicker, disconnect, or freeze computers when it's within two meters of a router due to electromagnetic interference. The Verge reports: In emails to 9to5Mac, LG acknowledged the problem -- which LG says isn't an issue for any of its other monitors -- noting that routers "may affect the performance of the monitor" and that users should "have the router placed at least two meters away from the monitor" to avoid issues. Once the monitor was moved into a different room away from the router, 9to5Mac says the issues subsided. Despite the fact that it's insane to require a router to be far away from what is likely the main computer in your home, there's been no indication that LG is working on a fix for the issue, which may be more troublesome.
Both my mom's basement and womp rats aren't much bigger than two meters, you insensitive clods!
users should "have the router placed at least two meters away from the monitor" to avoid issues
This reminds me of the uuencode bug in Outlook that made the body of the email invisible if the message started with "begin ". The solution on Microsoft's website back then was to use "start" or "commence" instead of "begin" when writing an email.
lucm, indeed.
Perhaps they don't have proper shielding? or is this a USB-C cable related problem?
Somebody should experiment by covering it up in various ways and see where the problem is. Start with the cable... since USB-C seems to have not been well thought out.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest it's the hotspot doing it.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Given the amount of money and time poured into these products, you'd think they'd have done proper EMI susceptibility at some point. It's moderately expensive, but easy enough for LG to afford.
If I owned one of these, I'd have to be pushing for them to take it back - there's bound to be other devices that trigger the problem than routers.
A thousand pounds of wood moving at 300 feet per minute. Don't get in the way.
Otherwise it might cause the monitor to go into an infinite boot loop.
The FCC requires that all consumer equipment not cause interference, so I guess LG will have to fix the problem.
The reviews are pretty funny on Apple's site. http://www.apple.com/shop/product/HKN62LL/A/lg-ultrafine-5k-display
For $1000 I'd be pissed too if my Romper Stomper Bomper Boo Magic Monitor didn't work thanks to interference.
I wonder if the manual states that you should not place it near a device that produces electromagnetic radiation. I would assume that this device complies with FCC and there is no radiation being emitted which would violate the FCC terms. Failing when the device is near an EMI source might be OK per FCC rules but it looks bad... I would imagine they did full EMC compliance testing. At the company I work for, EMC testing is a big deal. We spend several weeks testing for radiated and conducted emissions, radiated and conductive immunity (the test this monitor might fail), transient on power, ESD, etc etc etc.... Also, I wonder what type of router makes it fail more, in other words, is it more susceptible to the GHz range radiation or the MHz radiation. Or if the router is plugged to the same outlet or if the cables go near them (that would point more to a conducted immunity issue). This is really interesting... I have the impression that it is rare that consumer electronics are THAT affected by EMC.
When did we start calling wireless access points "routers"? Oh, sure, I know lots of consumer routers have access points built in, and maybe I'm just being pedantic, but come on already. We already use the word "router" for something and we already had a perfectly good word for "access point". I had to dig through three articles before I learned what the actual problem was.
"Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
Because non-ionizing radiation causes cancer in your world? Did your mom make you skip Physics class along with skipping the vaccinations, little snowflake?
There are two reasons this doesn't run afoul of the FCC rules on harmful interference.
First, "routers may effect the monitor". The monitor isn't *causing* interference, it's having problems because the *router* is causing interference with the monitor (which the monitor isn't protected against). The "accepting interference" clause means LG (or their customers) can't sue whoever is causing the interference.
Second, it's actually perfectly legal and normal for your wifi to interfere with mine (or with my monitor) because we're both on the same level, the third-level priority called "unlicensed". What an unlicensed evice may NOT do is interfere with users at the "primary" or "secondary" levels, which are licensed levels. A secondary user, such as a mobile phone operator, may not cause harmful interference to a primary user, such as an ambulance service.
We are having a competition to send people to Mars, and one TV company still hasn't figured out proper shielding? One thing for sure, their thumbs aren't blocking reception!
This is Apple, where everything just works. And they eliminate future competition from within.
Gotta give a hand to Timmy and his electricians at Apple Inc.
Hahahhaa
In new Chinese year of Rooster, the most correct Feng Shui location for illustrious LG monitor is diametrically opposite the WAP when WAP in same room. If your abode is too small to for this most beautiful solution, retire WAP to original box of delivery and borrow most fine neighbors internet connection.
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
My router is next to my cable modem, which is next to the cable TV coax outlet in the family room behind the TV. When I had DSL, it was next to my DSL modem, which was next to the wall phone jack. Neither of these were located anywhere near my main computer (den/bedroom). That's why they invented Ethernet cables and WiFi - so your computer doesn't have to be right next to your router.
Ohhhhhh, wait, I get it. They're testing this with a Macbook Pro, which doesn't have an Ethernet jack, so they're using WiFi. And to assure maximum WiFi speed they're putting the router as close as they can to the MBP. Well, RF interference from things which are designed to broadcast RF (like routers) has always been a risk. I remember the picture on an old CRTs wavering if it came too close to a walkie talkie. Maybe you should ask Apple why they removed the Ethernet jack - the technology designed to prevent this type of problem - from their "Pro" system, forcing you to choose between an annoying dongle or risk of RF interference.
If the problem lies in the router being 2 meters away, just put the router _6_ feet away!
I would be more worried about cancer if your router is that close to your monitor.
You are more likely to get hit by a meteor than you are to get cancer from your router's RF.
The display doesn't become useless within two meters of a router - the display renders a router within two meters useless (if I read this correctly).
I misread the summary. Didn't catch on until I read TFA.
IMO, they just can't be trusted at this point.
Tim Cook has to go.
Listening to or watching Jill Stein also causes cancer, if you watch her speech over wifi it causes super cancer.
The two-part warning label described in FCC 15.19(a)(3), “This device complies with part 15 of the FCC Rules. Operation is subject to the following two conditions: (1) This device may not cause harmful interference, and (2) this device must accept any interference received, including interference that may cause undesired operation.” Must be placed on the exterior of the product, however may be placed in the manual or on the exterior of the packaging if the product is smaller than 4”x4”, or roughly the size of the palm of your hand. This label is required for all products.
It's a safe bet the router has nothing to do with the TV problems.
Ok I don't know what's your deal or why you're nibbling on that useless point but here's what they say:
In emails to 9to5Mac, LG acknowledged the problem — which LG says isn’t an issue for any of its other monitors — noting that routers “may affect the performance of the monitor” and that users should “have the router placed at least two meters away from the monitor” to avoid issues.
Now the use of double quotes and the fact that they cite an email from LG is enough to put an end to this argument, unless you're really just trolling.
lucm, indeed.
How is that different from ahy other politician?
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
I seriously doubt a router has jack shit to do with a damned thing.
Elsewhere I read that LG recommended a simple workaround. Just put your wireless router in a Faraday cage and your LG monitor will work fine when it's nearby the router.
Although they recommend a certified LG brand "Wireless Router Faraday Cage" that they will be launching soon, I understand that Monster Cable will also be announcing one that works better -- something to do with the gold content and balanced geometry apparently.
Why is there an "insightful" mod and why isn't it "-1"? If I wanted insight, I wouldn't be reading
Go stick your head in a microwave oven, or stand next to a military radar, then get back to me once you die of cancer.
Don't worry, I'll wait.
You are holding it wrong, you are placing it wrong, you don't need a headphone jack, you don't need sd card and standard usb ports... get the gist?
You won't die of cancer from either of those, (unless the radar is putting out something else in addition to the detection radiation) you might die from your brain boiling or lead poisoning, but not from cancer.
I get to deal with weird stuff like this at work all the time. Based on the behavior, I'd guess there's a clock and/or data running at a harmonic of the wifi data. Freezing seems to indicate it's coupling into the core of the LCD controller board, which again I would guess is a timing violation or data corruption. Where it's coupling in is a bit hard to determine without further testing. It could be the video cable, could be the power cable (not likely), could be the LCD panel itself acting as an antenna, or an interconnect cable that is poorly shielded or just the right length to couple in wifi. It could also be power supply ripple caused by a feedback loop getting energy coupled in, though if that's possible then there's not enough timing margin to begin with.
I suggest a number of tests to narrow down details of the source:
- Test 2.4GHz and 5GHz independently. Test each wifi channel independently.
- Try a different length cable. Try a different brand cable. Does this monitor remain on with nothing connected? If so then try it with no cable, or no PC at the end.
- Try different antenna angles. Try different TX power levels (at what level does it start).
https://tech.slashdot.org/stor...
Based on those results I'd have more recommendations.
If someone wants the real root cause, feel free to send me one and I'll debug it (though it will probably require disassembly).
Although with him it's more like 15m.
As someone who has produced a few products sold around the world I can't see how this monitor reached the retail selves. To sell you generally need to pass immunity and emissions compliance test to FCC or CE standards depending on the market. Emissions means you don't transmit signals above a specified levels and immunity requires your products are not affected below a specified level. The levels vary with frequency and standards but generally the immunity threshold is several magnitudes higher than the emissions thresholds for non-transmitting devices. The WiFi device is an intentional radiator so is allowed higher emissions levels, at it operating band, but immunity levels for the monitor should be able to handle it easily.
It sounds like a clear failure of the LG monitor and if the nature of the failure reported is correct it sounds like it is not up to standard for immunity. Assuming the problem reported is in the USA then it will be the FCC standards that apply. If I was an owner of an affected LG monitor I would be demanding a copy of the immunity compliance test report. The test report will document what power level was used for the WiFi frequencies and these can be compared with the legal limit for WiFi devices.
Bottom line is this should never happen on modern products. I know my teams have spent many hours modifying product designs to ensure compliance before we release to market. If LG have not done this then they need to step up and fix the problem at their expense, before the FCC demand a product recall.
This should be WAP, WiFi, Wireless Access Point, or even Wireless, NOT router. A router is typically a device that routes 2 or more networks and that is all it does. While a WAP can do routing is not a router it does more. Router is not the correct device and is confusing. I doubt my Cisco 2921 or 4431 Router would do anything to this monitor.
Is anyone else bothered by the fact that TFS only says "router" over and over and never "wireless router" or "wifi router"?
Or does this problem actually apply to wired-only routers?
You are more likely to get hit by a meteor than you are to get cancer from your router's RF.
Are you saying that there's no chance at all, or did you mean meteorite?
So if I switch on Internet Sharing on my MBPro or start tethering on my smartphone the screen goes belly up? Did anyone ever use that monitor at LG before shipping it? Really?
That's so "it compiles, let's ship it" mentality
There are two rules for success:
1. Never tell everything you know.
So, based on the summary, it sounds like this monitor experiences unacceptable interference when placed within two metres of any device that looks at layer 3 headers and chooses a forward path based on those headers. Weird.
So if you enable routing on a windows laptop, does that count as a deal breaker? What about IP tables on Linux? Does that kill this monitor?
You'd think someone writing a summary for a slashdot article would know what fucking wifi is, but I guess not.
I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
It's not just the aesthetics, though that's a big part of it. Apple overbuilt a lot of their peripherals, even though they could've made them much cheaper. But they weren't flimsy and I don't recall a time where interference was a problem. We don't know if Apple would've made a better monitor today, but past experience makes me think that they probably would've. User experience out of the box is (used to be?) priority one, and it's what's kept so many of us loyal for so long.
LG to their customers: "You're routing it wrong".
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
To make up for what I assume they forgot to put on the inside of the back cover? Or do people just need to wrap some around the cable? What obvious and standard part of a monitor or cable did they forget?
Why the lead poisoning? Yes, your head will heat up (and if you are lucky it will explode and make a nice mess for someone to clean up. See 'Infinite Jest'). But what does lead poisoning have to do with it?
The more people I meet, the better I like my dog.
Because military might inject you with bunch of lead?;)
When say a Ham radio operator starts operating on 2.5 Ghz at high power. The ham has legal priority. Too bad, so sad
LG screwed up
-- 73 de KG2V For the Children - RKBA! "You are what you do when it counts" - the Masso
Read it again, paying careful atttention to the part after the comma:
(2) this device must accept any interference received, including interference that may cause undesired operation.
It says that while interference may cause "undesired operation" (the device doesn't work right due to interference), you have to accept that as part of using unlicensed bands shared with other users.
It does NOT say "must never exhibit undesired operation". It says the device may exhibit undesired operation, and you have to accept that fact.
I was working with a customer on an issue with their new Sceptre 14" CRT monitor some years back. The thing just would not sync. It looked like the scrambled signal you would see when you were trying to watch HBO and you didn't have a subscription (or one of those descramblers you got out of the back of a truck somewhere). After hours without success we called Sceptre support. After describing the problem they advised us we needed to point the monitor due North to align with the Earth's magnetic poles. Once we got off the floor from laughing I went about determining due North and swivel the monitor thus. The picture cleared.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
It's really hard to get hit by a meteorite. They're really heavy.
Getting shot by the MP who knows you shouldn't be fucking with their radar unit?
Fuck off, troll. Or retard. Pick one.
Disconnect, by Devra Davis.
The next thing that will be "pollution" and have demonstrations against it will be Radio Frequency Interference (RFI), such as cellphones and WiFi nodes.
You really do not want such things in your house. It's like radium glow-in-the-dark wristwatches or medicines containing lead salts and tobacco. (Which were real things!) ;-)
And, a radio transmitter can foul up -any- electronic device, if it's close enough. Shielding just makes it have to be closer to go bad.
Just off the top of my head:
1) I've NEVER heard of a data cable standard which could have cheap cables burnout the expensive equipment at either end. It should be IMPOSSIBLE for a damaged or cheap USB 3 cable or power supply to burn out any gear; the protections should exist on the devices but not to the point that apparently we need today in this new standard. Yes, I realize some people have made USB1/2/3 adapters which run AC or tasers into the connection-- that doesn't count as reasonable. (but such things should be sold given how many publicly accessible ports exist out there; there ought to be extra products to address unreasonable situations.)
2) No color coding or shape or anything between thunderbolt, HDMI, usb 3, or whatever other thing they find to jam over that plug. So my USB cable won't work for thunderbolt because it's not an active cable-- how do I know if it's an active cable? or a thunderbolt port? a tiny logo that hopefully hasn't rubbed off. just great.
consumers can FIT SQUARE PLUG INTO SQUARE HOLE and FIT ROUND PLUG INTO ROUND HOLE.... a young age... even chimps. Now we have to read tiny logos to figure this out? OK- let me get this clear... you make a NEW plug which can be upside down to help consumers... but you make this plug have 3 major variations on how it can be used which the consumer has to memorize?!
3) security. thunderbolt is basically an external PCI connection. I shouldn't care about security for it. But USB devices are trusted all the time they should be checked and protected... That is another topic-- but now my USB and thunderbolt ports are the SAME and it's confusing. So... we'll have fake USB devices which exploit thunderbolt...
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news