Samsung 226BW A and S series: The verdict (page 9: Samsung’s reaction after the tests)

Samsung’s reaction after the tests

This is of course a delicate arena. It’s not easy to justify such differences in colorimetry, to admit that the press was given pre-calibrated screens while some clients received versions with delirious colors.

We asked them for an official response to publish, a reaction. They had difficulty in finding someone in so little time that could address this issue. And at rate what could they say ? Samsung did fulfil its contract on all of the versions sold, and no where did they write that the 226BW was factory pre-calibrated.

On the monitor’s technical sheet, Samsung claims :

a ridiculous and unreachable contrast ratio of 3000:1, moderated with a much more realistic "700:1 static" right next to it. We measured a ratio of roughly 830:1 on the A and 930:1 for the S. They both live up to this promise.

A response time of 2 ms. Both A and S are good here.

300 cd/m² max : also OK.

a power consumption of 55 Watts. The two models tested are below this figure.

So there’s not much to say and the A series is conform to Samsung’s claims. Finally in the same line of thinking, neither did they say that all 226BWs would be produced by Samsung.

Well, now that we begrudgingly made the excuses for this manufacturer, we do find it truly unfortunate that there are two models under the same name. We tried to limit the damage by placing the profile at your disposition. However, we do feel like we’ve done what should be part of their job. Why don’t they provide a file for A versions with the procedure adapted to your particular OS?