People don't tend to keep phones for more than few years. On the other hand, I have LCD computer monitors that I still use over a decade later.
What really kills OLED displays is persistent static elements. These are common for desktop usage: persistent taskbar/dock, desktop wallpaper, window buttons, tiling, GUI elements and HUDs in gaming. All of these things significantly increase the chance of getting burn-in within a few years.
OLED fanatics suggest it's all user fault, that people should just use a solid black background for their desktop wallpaper (ugly), have a auto-hiding taskbar (inconvenient) and limit time spent on programs/games (really). Basically rather than using the computer the way you want, you have to carefully handle it like an egg. An expensive egg at that, since OLED displays are still ridiculously overpriced (often costing more than equivalent TVs).
Don't they typically do minor anti-burn in changes during idle, basically having a built-in screensaver?
That's what the display makers claim, in order to avoid too many customer complaints. In reality you're still likely to get burn-in within a few years of monitor use, and when you ask for warranty support you'll get denied claiming "you used the display wrong".
You want reviews from a large number of individuals
This isn't that helpful either. I end up getting lost because of all the different opinions. For example Starfield as a recent example, professional reviews are mostly positive but individual opinions are all over the place. I am left confused.
That's the thing, I personally liked the YouTube homepage! Even with watch history disabled, I found it gave me decent mix of recommendations based on my region, subscriptions and Liked videos. I know many people dislike the YouTube algorithm but it actually worked well for me.
Now that YouTube has disabled my homepage (held hostage unless I turn on Watch History), I am far less inclined to go on YouTube and watch random videos. Which is probably a good thing for me, let's be honest. On the other hand I don't know what YouTube wanted to achieve with this move. I find it hilarious that my homepage is empty now by Google's own choice.
I've noticed YouTube comments have actually become more positive (though still mostly useless). It seems YouTube has implemented some algorithm where it prioritizes "positive" sentiment comments above all. That's why all the top comments on popular videos are generic platitudes.
For example, go on any MrBeast video and read the top comments. They are all praising MrBeast for his videos and hard work. Finding any negative comment is difficult. On the other hand, if you go on a Reddit discussion about MrBeast, you'll find plenty of people complaining about him.
MrBeast is just an example, I'm sure we all have our own opinions about him but that's not the point I'm trying to make. In fact, the same is true for any popular YouTube channel. Even political channels, where you'd expect to see heated debates in the comments, mostly showcase top comments agreeing with the video.
Funny you need YouTube. I have been rediscovering the "Subscriptions" tab recently. It's a chronological view (newest first) of all Channels I am subscribed to, but I actually haven't used it for years.
I've gotten used to the YouTube algorithm, going to the homepage and just finding whatever seemingly interesting videos YouTube suggests to me. However recently, YouTube made the strange decision to disable the homepage for people who disable Watch History. Now my YouTube homepage is entirely empty.
Anyway, going to the subscription tab it's just a massive collection of random channels I've subscribed to over the years. It's too messy to keep my interest, and I've actually been using YouTube less.
Like what?