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.

122 of 173 comments (clear)

  1. Problem solved by lucm · · Score: 5, Funny

    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.
    1. Re:Problem solved by msauve · · Score: 2

      In this case "router" actually means wireless access point (some of which also have Internet NAT gateways, which some people call routers).

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    2. Re:Problem solved by msauve · · Score: 1

      "you mean like the people from LG who acknowledged the problem and made this suggestion?"

      Citation needed. Because, the only mentions of "router" by LG in the linked article were obviously parroting the term first used by the person asking for information. Rather than correct them, they just went along.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    3. Re: Problem solved by Z00L00K · · Score: 5, Funny

      How am I now going to do my woodworking?

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    4. Re: Problem solved by arth1 · · Score: 4, Funny

      How am I now going to do my woodworking?

      It only happens with electric routers.
      Use a wireless router, like this one.

    5. Re:Problem solved by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Presumably it's due to high energy transmissions in the 2.4GHz band then... So a computer with wifi card or long range Bluetooth might affect it too. Does it crap out whenever your phone powers up the wifi radio?

      I'm in the market for a 5k display. Can you get Thunderbolt to DisplayPort adapters? Might be able to get one cheap when they have a fire sale if you can live with this issue (or are willing to wrap it in tinfoil).

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    6. Re:Problem solved by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      I agree that is a useful clarification for businesses but for home users. That normally will have a cable modem, router and wireless access point as part of one unit called a router. A normally call it a wireless router mostly because I use the cable modem provided by isp as just as the final gateway and use my one router/access point so I have my own control of my network.
      But the solution to move it past the Display even 2 meters isn't a good answer.
      If someone is going to be using a high end monitor. They will probably also be having a good desktop based gaming system or a high end workstation and may prefer to plug it in directly to the wired part of the "router" for faster and more consistent data speeds. Leaving the wireless for lower end devices such as phones tablets and laptops.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    7. Re:Problem solved by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      which some people call routers

      you mean like the people from LG who acknowledged the problem and made this suggestion?

      Errm, no, it clearly was in answer to somebody calling whatever interacted negatively with the monitor a "router". But hey, not everyone RTFA - but they should when they needlessly nitpick.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    8. Re:Problem solved by Alioth · · Score: 1

      Thunderbolt *is* DisplayPort (precisely, a superset of DisplayPort). Apple computers usually use the mini DisplayPort style connector, but if your DisplayPort display uses a fullsize DisplayPort cable, cheap adapters are readily available.

    9. Re:Problem solved by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      A bit of research shows that the required Displayport to USB-C adapter is about £25.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    10. Re:Problem solved by FatdogHaiku · · Score: 2

      well, that explains what happened to all my "begin starting to commence" messages...
      At least "prepare to standby" messages worked.

      --
      You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
    11. Re:Problem solved by omnichad · · Score: 1

      They're definitely making this an Apple-like product. They match pace with "You're holding it wrong" with their own "You're letting it stand still in the wrong place"

    12. Re:Problem solved by lucm · · Score: 1

      are lacking in critical thinking skills, formal (relevant) education

      Unless you want a career in academia, "formal" education matters only for the first job after college. A good resume and decent real life achievements are much stronger credentials than a document that a school sold you for a small fortune.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    13. Re:Problem solved by lucm · · Score: 1

      Those where the good old days. You could type this in an email:

      begin 644 iloveyou.vbs

      and people who received this in outlook would see an empty message with an empty attachment called iloveyou.vbs. Endless fun!

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    14. Re:Problem solved by FatdogHaiku · · Score: 1

      and in those days nothing warmed your soul like an attached VB script file and that string of text...
      Oh wait, it was pants that got warmed...
      Back then I think the ILOVEYOU was the message subject. But just seeing the two things together would freak most users out and light up the phone.
      Ahh, the good old days when attachments were the boogieman...

      --
      You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
    15. Re:Problem solved by stoatwblr · · Score: 1

      "Presumably it's due to high energy transmissions in the 2.4GHz band"

      The absolute maximum allowed is 200mW anywhere in the world and usually 100mW. That equates to a received signal level of -60dBm even 15cm from the transmitter.

      If the monitor is getting upset at these kinds of levels then it's seriously fucked by design.

    16. Re:Problem solved by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      http://www.dell.com/en-us/shop...

      Dell's dock is pretty nice too, that is what I use with my Asus laptop to deliver 2 displays (mini DP and HDMI, but VGA is also available). This dock should even be able to charge the new Macs through their USB-C charging port.
      $140 at Walmart according to Google, but I couldn't bring up the link so didn't post that one.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    17. Re:Problem solved by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Would you prefer they suggested surrounding the display with aluminum foil?

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  2. Shielding? by bussdriver · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:Shielding? by ddtmm · · Score: 1

      Yep, exactly. They could have done a bit of rudimentary troubleshooting before posting the problem.

    2. Re:Shielding? by fuzzywig · · Score: 1

      Surely it shouldn't have passed it's FCC (and CE etc) certification if it can't handle interference from other devices?

    3. Re:Shielding? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's not USB-C that is the problem, it's Thunderbolt. USB 3.1 supports up to 10Gb/sec through a USB-C connector. Thunderbolt pushes that up to 40Gb/sec. So naturally cables designed for USB 3.1 compliance are not designed to be run at 4x the data rate, meaning you need special cables certified for Thunderbolt 3 use which look the same and have the same connector as USB 3.1 cables do. Even worse you have cheap USB-C cables and adapters that are only designed for 5Gb/sec or even 0.5Gb/sec.

      Naturally Thunderbolt 3 cables very, very expensive. Therefore people will naturally try to use much cheaper USB cables, and often they will work. The whole thing was a disaster waiting to happen.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:Shielding? by Kielistic · · Score: 1

      FCC regulations state the opposite. Regulation in question

    5. Re:Shielding? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      You have a very interesting take on "interference must be accepted"

    6. Re:Shielding? by sabri · · Score: 1

      Surely it shouldn't have passed it's FCC (and CE etc) certification if it can't handle interference from other devices?

      Scrolled waaaaaay to far for this.

      --
      I'm not a complete idiot... Some parts are missing.
  3. Router? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    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'
    1. Re:Router? by msauve · · Score: 1

      When did we start calling NAT gateways "routers?" A router should at least support, oh, a routing protocol like RIP or OSPF. I don't think most of them can even do simple routing between 2 subnets, without NAT.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    2. Re:Router? by PPH · · Score: 5, Funny

      I tried an LG display next to my router. It works just fine, but it gets covered with sawdust pretty quickly. I'm going to test it with the table saw next.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    3. Re:Router? by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      We're not on a teckie website, so they don't know and call any wireless access point a router, like Walmart. Well, it does indeed route, also, but the problem here is its wireless AP function...

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    4. Re:Router? by Dahamma · · Score: 1

      If you want to get teckienical, the problem is RF interference.

      For all we know a cordless home phone, microwave, or cell phone sitting under the monitor could screw it up. In any case, something wasn't properly RF shielded...

    5. Re:Router? by arth1 · · Score: 2

      Yep.

      "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 ."

    6. Re:Router? by is+as+us+Infinite · · Score: 1

      Well, it accepts the interference and then allows it to cause undesired operation, so it looks like it's perfectly compliant.

      --
      Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur. . . . . . . .
    7. Re:Router? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      And to be clear, when they say "accept" they mean "not catch fire", not that it must work properly.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    8. Re:Router? by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      Yep.

      "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 ."

      Well, something is breaking (1).

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    9. Re:Router? by arth1 · · Score: 1

      Well, something is breaking (1).

      No, it isn't. The interference from the access point isn't harmful. It is accepted and causes undesired operation.

  4. This seems strange by mhkohne · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.
    1. Re:This seems strange by lucm · · Score: 5, Funny

      Are you talking about QA? This is crazy expensive. To find this bug they would have had to setup a test environment similar to what end users would have; the price tag for that would have been a one-time expense of a thousand dollars, plus labor. There's just no way either LG or Apple could afford that.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    2. Re:This seems strange by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Given the amount of money and time poured into these products

      Have you ever worked for a big company? It is quite common for product teams to be starved of resources for a number of reasons, often driven by office politics. This was an orphan project dumped by Apple, and I doubt if it is selling well, since no one else is making a USB-C monitor, and this is a 27" monitor, a size that has been available for Macs for 6 years. Every Mac user that wants a 27" monitor already has one, and the extra resolution makes no perceptible difference at that size. If they had actually thought this through, this would be a 30" - 36" 5k monitor that people would actually want to buy.

    3. Re:This seems strange by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "It is quite common for product teams to be starved of resources for a number of reasons, often driven by moron executives"

      FTFY

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    4. Re:This seems strange by lucm · · Score: 1

      I was trying to be clever and make fun of the nonchalance of immensely rich corporations but I apparently failed. Obviously even without getting into the whole EMI thing they should have simply tested their products properly but it seems nowadays quality is optional.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    5. Re: This seems strange by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      It's a question of must accept all interference even if it causes undesired operation.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    6. Re: This seems strange by LeeRyman · · Score: 1

      I have a number of Dell monitors at work which stop working and reset themselves when we use the TETRA site radios in the same room. I wonder how they passed EMI tests.

    7. Re:This seems strange by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      "This monitor comes with so many pixels, you won't even know there are that many!"

    8. Re:This seems strange by Dahamma · · Score: 2

      Where did LG get a pass? It's required to pass RF transmission standards, not "receiving" interference. The law is to prevent products from interfering with other devices or causing harmful radiation, not sucking as a product. That one's up for the tech/consumer review sites to trash it...

    9. Re: This seems strange by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The EU requires EMI testing to be both ways. FCC only requires it to only not transmit.

    10. Re:This seems strange by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Informative

      5k at 27" is actually the ideal size and resolution.

      The de-facto standard for computer displays is 96 DPI. A 24" monitor with 2k resolution (1920x1080) has around 96 DPI. Everything looks about the right size on screen, the size it was designed to look good at.

      If you move up to 4k then ideally you want 200% scaling. Double every pixel. That way things will at least look no worse than a 2k monitor, and vector images like fonts will be nice and sharp. So 4k at 24" is the ideal. All these 27" and 32" 2k monitors require awkward scaling ratios of 175% or 150% and end up looking crap.

      Apple knows this which is why they always go for 2x the old resolution with their "retina" displays. The ideal 96 DPI resolution at 27" is 2560x1440, which doubled gives you 5k. This monitor is the right size and resolution.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    11. Re:This seems strange by omnichad · · Score: 1

      I'm seeing too many Chinese products that don't have the FCC marking

      That only happens when they run out of the fake stickers.

    12. Re:This seems strange by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      Chinese?

      I know all those Asians look the same to you, but China and Korea are entirely different countries.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  5. Don't place it next to your LG smartphone either by JoeyRox · · Score: 1

    Otherwise it might cause the monitor to go into an infinite boot loop.

  6. FCC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The FCC requires that all consumer equipment not cause interference, so I guess LG will have to fix the problem.

    1. Re:FCC by arbiter1 · · Score: 1

      Um seems like the display isn't causing interference with other devices, but being near certain RF signals interferes with the display. So 99.99999999% the fcc rules doesn't apply but still not good PR for LG/Apple for it to do that.

    2. Re:FCC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The monitor isn't causing the interference, the router is.

    3. Re:FCC by bws111 · · Score: 1

      No, it does not. Part 15 means that if your unlicensed device is causing interference with a licensed service, you have to stop using it. Likewise, if someone is interfering with your unlicensed device, too bad. Neither apply here.

    4. Re:FCC by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      The FCC requires that all consumer equipment not cause interference, so I guess LG will have to fix the problem.

      No. The monitor is not interfering. The router is.

    5. Re:FCC by msauve · · Score: 1
      The FCC Part 15 regs require that

      ...no harmful interference is caused and that interference must be accepted that may be caused by the operation of an authorized radio station, by another intentional or unintentional radiator, by industrial, scientific and medical (ISM) equipment, or by an incidental radiator.

      Part 15.5

      They define "harmful interference" as

      Any emission, radiation or induction that endangers the functioning of a radio navigation service or of other safety services or seriously degrades, obstructs or repeatedly interrupts a radiocommunications service operating in accordance with this chapter.

      Part 15.3

      No, your monitor is not a radio device.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    6. Re:FCC by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      The router is interfering. The monitor is being interfered with.

    7. Re:FCC by arth1 · · Score: 1

      No, your monitor is not a radio device.

      Yes, it is. Infrared emissions from the display bleed into the microwave spectrum. But it's not a source significant enough to cause problems.

    8. Re:FCC by msauve · · Score: 1

      Read the definition of harmful interference again. Now tell us how a monitor is a radio as used in that definition.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    9. Re:FCC by fuzzywig · · Score: 1

      What about one device with multiple aerials (as some routers now have)? They can interfere with each other, which is used for beam steering.

    10. Re:FCC by omnichad · · Score: 1

      The FCC rules are not written in scientific language, you idiot.

    11. Re:FCC by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Now tell us how a monitor is a radio as used in that definition.

      If it doesn't comply with FCC rules, it might be. "Any emission, radiation or induction" is a pretty wide definition.

  7. Apple's Site: The Flock AIN'T Happy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    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.

  8. EMC Testing? by pelgv · · Score: 1

    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.

    1. Re: EMC Testing? by Z00L00K · · Score: 2

      Up the stakes with EMP testing for consumer products.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
  9. Router? by Scutter · · Score: 1, Informative

    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?"
  10. Re: Not the only problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Because non-ionizing radiation causes cancer in your world? Did your mom make you skip Physics class along with skipping the vaccinations, little snowflake?

  11. FTC, not FCC, for two reasons by raymorris · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.

    1. Re:FTC, not FCC, for two reasons by johannesg · · Score: 1

      Why does this get an 'informative'? It's plain wrong: consumer electronics are also required to be tolerant against electromagnetic interference.

    2. Re:FTC, not FCC, for two reasons by Beezlebub33 · · Score: 1

      First, it should be "routers may affect the monitor". Second, well, there is no second, because the rest makes sense.

      --
      The more people I meet, the better I like my dog.
    3. Re:FTC, not FCC, for two reasons by bws111 · · Score: 2

      His statement is entirely correct, and you are wrong. The Part 15 statement, which you are obviously misinterpreting, consists of three parts:

      'Complies with part 15' - means this is an UNLICENSED device, and by design all emissions from the device are within allowable limits. No other requirements.

      'May not cause harmful interference' - means that this unlicensed device may not interfere with any LICENSED operation. Even if the device is operating 100% correctly, if it is causing interference with a licensed operation you must stop using the device or face a a fine. This is not a technical requirement, it is a legal one.

      'Must accept all interference' - means that if ANYTHING is causing interference with your unlicensed device, even if it makes the device unusable, you have no legal recourse through the FCC to make the interfer stop. Again, a legal statement, not a technical one.

  12. You're placing it wrong by OzPeter · · Score: 5, Funny

    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?
    1. Re:You're placing it wrong by Imrik · · Score: 1

      What if your neighbors on either side have their WAPs against the shared walls?

    2. Re:You're placing it wrong by worf_mo · · Score: 1

      Tear down said shared walls -- which as a side benefit will improve your Feng Shui-ishness and make your small abode look larger -- and retire your neighbours' WAPs to their original boxes of delivery. Work offline. Less is more!

  13. Why is it insane for the router to be far? by Solandri · · Score: 1

    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.

    1. Re:Why is it insane for the router to be far? by arth1 · · Score: 2

      Ethernet was not designed to avoid the problem of RF interference.

      Well, yes, that was exactly what it was designed to do. The first implementation, 10base5, had coax cables with extra braided shielding precisely for that reason.

    2. Re:Why is it insane for the router to be far? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ... what. That's exactly what it was designed for. What is slashdot coming to? Now I remember why I stopped posting articles. Is it all laypeople now?

    3. Re:Why is it insane for the router to be far? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      My car has a radio and speakers in it too, but that's not what it was "designed to do."

  14. Move the router by MouseR · · Score: 1

    If the problem lies in the router being 2 meters away, just put the router _6_ feet away!

  15. Re:Not the only problem by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

    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.

  16. Summary got it backward? by mmell · · Score: 1

    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).

  17. Oops! Never mind - my mistake. by mmell · · Score: 1

    I misread the summary. Didn't catch on until I read TFA.

  18. Re: Not the only problem by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

    How is that different from ahy other politician?

    --
    If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
  19. Re: poor shielding in the monitor... by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

    Not all products, I still have to see it on a hammer.

    --
    If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
  20. LG has recommended a simple workaround by uncqual · · Score: 4, Funny

    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 /.
  21. Re:lame by Imrik · · Score: 1

    As the GP pointed out, these emails are in response to the complaint. If the person complaining is having trouble with something they refer to as a router being too close to the monitor, it is easier to tell them to move the router than it is to find out whether it actually is a router and then ask them to move it.

  22. Apple bug... by XSportSeeker · · Score: 1

    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?

  23. Re: Not the only problem by Imrik · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

  24. Electromagnetic Immunity by Plocmstart · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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).

  25. Sounds like my froend's kid by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1

    Although with him it's more like 15m.

  26. Compliance failure by ukoda · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:Compliance failure by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      CE and the relevant FCC bits are self-certified. If your product is not an intentional radiator (i.e. it doesn't have any kind of RF transmitter in it) then you can just self-certify that it has the required level of shielding, doesn't accidentally radiate too much and shouldn't catch fire if you put a wifi router next to it.

      You only need to get it externally tested if you are deliberately transmitting, which the LG monitor is not. It is likely that they never bothered to test it, because they have established designs for monitors and the only things unique about this one are the 5k LCD panel and the Thunderbolt interface.

      I'd guess that the Thunderbolt interface is the problem. It's probably susceptible to 2.4GHz interference. It is after all a very high speed, low voltage link. 5k/60Hz requires around 32Gb/sec.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:Compliance failure by ukoda · · Score: 1

      I suspect you are right in this case but it is still inexcusable. I work so a similar size company and if we self certify we still test internally and have records to back up our test. To be fair I suspect it the emissions testing we focus on but I know we specifically test against frequencies know to be used near our gear. For example our marine products are tested near a 25W VHF transmitter etc. Secondly we have reputation to up hold, if customers reported such a thing we would test to reproduce and modify our product for future production, then supply a free modified version to anyone who reported the issue on original product.

    3. Re:Compliance failure by jabuzz · · Score: 1

      Still means that they are selling a product that is not compliant and they need to step up and fix it. Personally if was me I would be ringing up LG and demanding a full refund for a none compliant product while in the meantime informing trading standards (I live in the UK) that LG are selling products that are not CE compliant by their own admission.

    4. Re:Compliance failure by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      99% of compliance is about the emission. Immunity compliance can basically be achieved by a 2 year old with a fun way into electronics diagram. There's little to nothing that requires your device to operate in the presence of interference. There's some regarding permanent damage and damage to other devices but in general the device is probably will within CE and FCC regulations.

    5. Re:Compliance failure by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      It's compliant with the CE/FCC requirements, in that it doesn't explode when the route is near it. I'm not 100% sure about the FCC stuff, but the CE requirements are safety and non-interference with other devices only, it can malfunction (in a safe manner) all it likes.

      But yeah, I'd return it. Laws vary but where I live, if there is a design defect that the vendor can't correct in a reasonable length of time (typically 28 days) you are entitled to a full refund in the first six months, no question. In fact if you bought it mail order and had to pay return shipping that should be refunded too.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    6. Re:Compliance failure by ukoda · · Score: 1

      Yep, you are right. I have only ever had one product fail immunity testing during product development and it was trivial to fix. Emissions is always the harder one with the standards becoming tougher over the years and the number of fast signals increasing in designs. A significant number of our designs need design changes to address emissions before reaching the market.

    7. Re:Compliance failure by adolf · · Score: 1

      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.

      (emphasis mine)

    8. Re:Compliance failure by ukoda · · Score: 1

      That is true for Part 15 but there are other regs, certainly in CE, that specifically spell out that products must operate normally in the presence of defined emissions. Even without EMC reg most countries have fit for purpose consumer laws and any home or office equipment that is not immune to the low power transmitters used by WiFi transmitters would not be considered fit for purpose.

    9. Re: Compliance failure by adolf · · Score: 1

      The FCC doesn't care.

      CE doesn't matter to me in the US.

      It is unfit for the purpose, I think, but that is a matter for consumer protection laws - not bodies that govern RF emissions.

    10. Re: Compliance failure by ukoda · · Score: 1

      The FCC doesn't care.

      True, but they should.

      CE doesn't matter to me in the US.

      True as a consumer. As a manufacture you make for world markets and if you pass CE then FCC is usually easier to pass.

      It is unfit for the purpose, I think, but that is a matter for consumer protection laws - not bodies that govern RF emissions.

      Also true, but EMC compliance gives you a tool to argue your case under consumer protection laws.

    11. Re: Compliance failure by adolf · · Score: 1

      But CE is self certified. I can wipe my ass with it.

    12. Re: Compliance failure by ukoda · · Score: 1

      Self certification does not mean you can do what you like it just means you have taken reasonable steps to verify compliance in house. We have test cambers of the same quality as a formal test houses so why should we waste time and money testing with an external test house? The key here is we are accountable for doing the tests and meeting the standard. If we certify as meeting CE and we don't then we need to be held accountable and put it right. In the case of LG they need to fix their product at their expense, not tell customer to move devices around. Self certification does not give LG a way out of their legal and moral obligations.

  27. Re:Not the only problem by arth1 · · Score: 1

    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?

  28. Rout is any WiFi device, right? by bursch-X · · Score: 1

    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.
  29. This is why people like(d) Apple branded stuff by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 1

    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.

  30. Routing it by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

    LG to their customers: "You're routing it wrong".

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  31. Tape some foil to the back? by sabbede · · Score: 1

    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?

  32. Re: Not the only problem by Beezlebub33 · · Score: 1

    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.
  33. Re: Not the only problem by virx · · Score: 1

    Because military might inject you with bunch of lead?;)

  34. What are they going to do.. by CharlieG · · Score: 1

    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
  35. "Including undesired operation" by raymorris · · Score: 2

    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.

  36. Brings back memories by ArhcAngel · · Score: 2

    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
  37. Re:Not the only problem by omnichad · · Score: 1

    It's really hard to get hit by a meteorite. They're really heavy.

  38. Re:Language continues to die ("router") by omnichad · · Score: 1

    When you write a summary, you summarize the article. That's what the article says. You shouldn't write your own interpretation into the summary.

  39. Re: Not the only problem by sonamchauhan · · Score: 1

    Disconnect, by Devra Davis.

  40. The next pollution... by cwsumner · · Score: 1

    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.

  41. Re:Language continues to die ("router") by cwsumner · · Score: 1

    When you write a summary, you summarize the article. That's what the article says. You shouldn't write your own interpretation into the summary.

    But you should translate it into common language. And I don't think any of us here use that particular language... 8-)

    (What language, You say? ID10T of course.)

  42. Re:Language continues to die ("router") by omnichad · · Score: 1

    Common language says that a wireless router is the general case for a "router". While that's not technically accurate, it also follows the rules you just gave.

  43. Re:Language continues to die ("router") by cwsumner · · Score: 1

    Common language says that a wireless router is the general case for a "router". While that's not technically accurate, it also follows the rules you just gave.

    "Common" is not the same as "popular here", it has to apply to other places and social groups.
    It also has to be a language, which means structure and stability.

    Language drift is something societies have been fighting against for thousands of years, just look up problems the French have had. And of course, we all (except a few) speak Latin, just drifted into different dialects.

    On the other hand, if you are talking to someone that speaks a different dialect, you need to speak their way if you want to be understood.
    If I visit some offices, I do call the PC a "harddrive" and the monitor a "computer"!

    Which means if you are here, you should speak our language, not the one from the coffee shop... 8-)

  44. Re:Language continues to die ("router") by omnichad · · Score: 1

    The summary (and therefore the title) was quoting The Verge. Who is their audience?

  45. Re:Language continues to die ("router") by cwsumner · · Score: 1

    The summary (and therefore the title) was quoting The Verge. Who is their audience?

    I don't know, but if that is what those readers understand, it might be necessary.

    I guess I don't blame them for what is in quotes, but they used it the same way in the summerized portion of the text. And the audience for that is us.

    In fact, they should have put "(sic)" after the use in the quotes! Just to warn people.

  46. I'll bite by bussdriver · · Score: 1

    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...