Bad News for CRT users...

[The Green Bean]

yes CRTs are gonna be dumped in 3rd world countries much like cigarettes and heroin :/

 

[Zebo]

I predicted this in another thread:

11/30/2004 07:30 PM



Zebo
Lifer

Posts: 14011
Joined: 07/29/2001

Most CRT's suck but the better ones offer a better picture than LCD plus you can view many diff and extended res without distortion or interpolation. Check out the high end diamondtrons as a starting point otherwise get an LCD.

CRT's are a dying tough. They are expensive to make and ship and are heavy and big. Basically I think they will totally die off within 5 years due to lack of demand since only very small segment of population considers thier advantages superior. And in general even the cheapest LCD looks better than 90% of CRTs.


Just look at SONY, probably the all time leader in CRT tech with it's consumer FD trinitrons and it's professional ARTISAN series. All gone now. They don't even make a CRT monitor now and have about 20 LCD's you can choose from.
-------------------------
Athlon 64 overclocking guide.

 

[Zebo]

Hate to be stuck using a POS like the 2001FP if something should happen to my CRT

:laugh::thumbsup:

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: RussianSensation

Originally posted by: cryptonomicon
why would anyone discontinue CRTs? they have superior refresh rates and quality over LCD dont they? sure the average person is gonna pick the LCD, but as a gamer i would always take CRT for the performance... or is there some other kind of monitor i've been out of the loop on?

Yeah but the thing is, are there more "average" people who dont care, or gamers who do?

Some LCDs today make great alternatives to CRTs, so don't be so discouraged. In 2-3 years, when they all get to like 5ms refresh rates and 19 Inch will cost $250, no one will look back.

Besides can you imagine dual-CRT setup? It would take up the whole desk and weigh 100lbs.

BS there are some serious issues you can't ever correct with LCD tech.

1. Response time. Sorry CRT's are 400 times faster than the fastest LCDs "A measured rise time of 35 µs - that is, a response that's about 400 times faster than that of an average TFT"

http://graphics.tomshardware.c...3/lcd_monitors-07.html

2. LCD's lie like no tomorrow on thier advertised response times. They pick the fastest color and use it. The so called 9ms BenQ (which still ghosts BTW) has an average of 22ms accross all color ranges. Everyones favorite dell has worse.

http://graphics.tomshardware.c...ay/20041015/index.html

3. Resolution scaling. It's perfect with crt's at any res but since LCD's must have a fixed pixel number, anything other than Native looks like crap cause it interpolates.


4. Pure black is impossible in LCD cause it has to be on which is grey.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: jiffylube1024

Originally posted by: apoppin


The CRT is NOT dead!

LCD TVs face fierce fight from new tech CRTs

RESEARCH COMPANY Meko said that LG-Philips will show off a shallow depth cathode ray tube (CRT) for TVs, while other giants such as Samsung are also identifying opportunities in the technology.

According to Bob Raikes, MD of Meko, his firm's forecasts show that CRT tech will remain the dominant technology in TVs for Europe. He said: "Even in 2007 we see CRTs outselling flat panel TVs by around three to one".

It's performance that's the key, it appears. Flat panel TV makers, like their counterparts in the LCD monitor business, still need to do a great deal to match the performance of the 100 year old CRT technology.

So there
:roll:

This discussion is about LCD's for computers, not how LCD-TV still hasn't really caught on in the television market. CRT's position is still very strong in the TV market...

So there!

The ONLY ones predicting the iminent demise of CRTs are LCD manufacturers.

EVENTUALLY, the LCD will overtake the CRT(unless the CRT can get really thin) . . . . but it's nowhere iminent.

edit:

need more links?


Take a look at new CRT technology:

Samsung's Vixlim

LG Philips Cyber-Tube



:roll:

Sure those cheap POS shadow masks will be around. That's not what we're talkin here, but instead AG's which cost as much as LCD's now and were 3X what shadow screens were in the old days. IE professional monitors we all like and use. They are disapearing which totally sucks. Cost is the number one issue. Pick up a DP 22" sometime, 40 Lbs of glass, 20 Lbs of lead etc.

 

[VIAN]

Fvck this sucks ass, now I'm forced to buy some overprice POS.

The industry is moving towards LCD's because they are much MUCH cheaper to manufacture. CRT's contain >20 lbs of lead, several pounds of glass and the electron guns required to create the image, as well as tons of power storage capacity (ie capacitors).

Cheaper, I don't think so, why would they cost so much money then?

This discussion is about LCD's for computers, not how LCD-TV still hasn't really caught on in the television market. CRT's position is still very strong in the TV market...

So there!

LCD TVs look like utter crap, why would anyone buy such a blurry POS.

 

[Mem]

BS there are some serious issues you can't ever correct with LCD tech.

1. Response time. Sorry CRT's are 400 times faster than the fastest LCDs "A measured rise time of 35 µs - that is, a response that's about 400 times faster than that of an average TFT"

I`m more interested in OLED technology when it arrives,Sony`s OLED display technology looks good on paper ,link. (Response Time(at 25°C, ON) ~ 0.01 Mil. sec.) .

 

[VIAN]

if any flat screen is gonna make it, it's gotta be the OLED.

 

[imported_Reck]

the new ultra flat crt technology is supposedly better image quality than regular size crts. According to the marketing anyhow.

 

[MadEye2]

Blah.. didn't see the other pages on this thread

 

[BentValve]

Sony is not stopping the production of 21" + CRTs ...only 19" and under , furthermore it will take many,many years before the 19" and < stock is depleated.

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: MartinCracauer
For me the advantages of CRT are:

1) more resolution for the price

2) looks good when not driving at native resolution. Big deal for people who use the computer mainly for work and do casual gaming. They have 1600x1200 on their desktop but don't buy ninja-macho GeForcensensen for their games, so they can't use the game at that resolution.

Also, many application don't support scable fonts and are just not really usable at small dotpitches.

3) Much lower risk of dead pixels. I've only ever seen one CRT, ever, with a dead pixel.


When LCD's have a guarantee - no dead/stuck pixels, or your money back (or at least an exchange), then I'll seriously consider one. But things like Newegg's 8 dead pixel policy....come on.
And yeah, I skipped over that part, about the native resolution thing. I have always run my screens at low resolutions for the desktop: 640x480 for 15", 800x600 for 17", and 1024x768 for a 21". I don't like how everything is so tiny at the higher resolutions. 1600x1200 just looks ridiculous. Granted, everything is still razor sharp on my monitor (Nokia 445Pro), but it's all so damn tiny, and I don't feel like tweaking nearly every app I own to display larger fonts and icons, assuming they even have those controls.
Pixel interpolation makes everything look awful - either blocky or fuzzy.
So I guess I won't consider LCD's for quite some time.

It would be nice though to have something a little lighter. I am in the process of constructing reinforcements for my desk. It's sagging considerably under the increasing weights of a larger and larger monitors and a computer, over a time of about 7 years.

The industry is moving towards LCD's because they are much MUCH cheaper to manufacture. CRT's contain >20 lbs of lead, several pounds of glass and the electron guns required to create the image, as well as tons of power storage capacity (ie capacitors).

Cheaper? Damn, for the amount of money they cost, those must be some absolutely absurd profit margins tacked on there.

It would be kind of nice to see CRT's replaced by something a bit more environmentally friendly. Of course, that opens up a whole other argument - a lot of the things needed to make any electronic components are pretty toxic themselves.

 

[Alptraum]

Originally posted by: BentValve
Sony is not stopping the production of 21" + CRTs ...only 19" and under , furthermore it will take many,many years before the 19" and < stock is depleated.

As far as I know they only make one CRT right now and its a 21", and its $1,799. I also think I heard thats its gonna go soon as well.

 

[JackBurton]

<= Hugs my Sony G500.

I guess I have to get a 22" Mitsubishi really quick before they're gone.

 

[Alptraum]

Originally posted by: JackBurton
<= Hugs my Sony G500.

I guess I have to get a 22" Mitsubishi really quick before they're gone.

I would if you want to stick with CRT. Between my Sony G520p and Mitsu 2040u I think the Mitsu is a better monitor, and I have just about always slightly favored Mitsu over Sony. Though in a thread like this I can't resist saying I think my Samsung 192t is better then both of them

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: RussianSensation

Originally posted by: cryptonomicon
why would anyone discontinue CRTs? they have superior refresh rates and quality over LCD dont they? sure the average person is gonna pick the LCD, but as a gamer i would always take CRT for the performance... or is there some other kind of monitor i've been out of the loop on?

Yeah but the thing is, are there more "average" people who dont care, or gamers who do?

Some LCDs today make great alternatives to CRTs, so don't be so discouraged. In 2-3 years, when they all get to like 5ms refresh rates and 19 Inch will cost $250, no one will look back.

Besides can you imagine dual-CRT setup? It would take up the whole desk and weigh 100lbs.

BS there are some serious issues you can't ever correct with LCD tech.

1. Response time. Sorry CRT's are 400 times faster than the fastest LCDs "A measured rise time of 35 µs - that is, a response that's about 400 times faster than that of an average TFT"

http://graphics.tomshardware.c...3/lcd_monitors-07.html

2. LCD's lie like no tomorrow on thier advertised response times. They pick the fastest color and use it. The so called 9ms BenQ (which still ghosts BTW) has an average of 22ms accross all color ranges. Everyones favorite dell has worse.

http://graphics.tomshardware.c...ay/20041015/index.html

3. Resolution scaling. It's perfect with crt's at any res but since LCD's must have a fixed pixel number, anything other than Native looks like crap cause it interpolates.


4. Pure black is impossible in LCD cause it has to be on which is grey.

The fact is, none of those things matter to 98% of the monitor buying population. I mean, face it, most people on AT are pretty knowledgable about hardware, and those things don't even matter to us (AT is now majority LCD btw.)

CRTs are in their twilight years folks, if you want 'em, get 'em while you can.

 

[gsellis]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: jiffylube1024

Originally posted by: apoppin


The CRT is NOT dead!

LCD TVs face fierce fight from new tech CRTs

RESEARCH COMPANY Meko said that LG-Philips will show off a shallow depth cathode ray tube (CRT) for TVs, while other giants such as Samsung are also identifying opportunities in the technology.

According to Bob Raikes, MD of Meko, his firm's forecasts show that CRT tech will remain the dominant technology in TVs for Europe. He said: "Even in 2007 we see CRTs outselling flat panel TVs by around three to one".

It's performance that's the key, it appears. Flat panel TV makers, like their counterparts in the LCD monitor business, still need to do a great deal to match the performance of the 100 year old CRT technology.

So there
:roll:

This discussion is about LCD's for computers, not how LCD-TV still hasn't really caught on in the television market. CRT's position is still very strong in the TV market...

So there!

The ONLY ones predicting the iminent demise of CRTs are LCD manufacturers.

EVENTUALLY, the LCD will overtake the CRT(unless the CRT can get really thin) . . . . but it's nowhere iminent.

edit:

need more links?


Take a look at new CRT technology:

Samsung's Vixlim

LG Philips Cyber-Tube



:roll:

Thanks for the post Mark. Total missed these announcements. Gave me a chance to pester our monitor rep.

 

[konakona]

Originally posted by: Xed
my 2001 fp has a much better picture quality than all 3 of my 19 inch trinitron's, there are a lot of good lcd's out/coming out lately. Lcd's still have a bit of improving to do of course but I guess with declining crt sales they figure they won't lose much overall. (my speculation)

in your opinion. our school has a whole lot of dual 2001FPs in the library and none of them come close to my vx1120. even my roomates keep complimenting how much better mine looks. oh yeah, there is a FD trinny in the comptuer cluster that looks like an utter crap. not all AGs look good, since CRTs are more prone to degradation due to prolonged use &amp; abuse.

 

[VIAN]

CRTs are in their twilight years folks, if you want 'em, get 'em while you can.

Stock up!

 

[Spike]

POS shadow mask... I don't think they are that bad, I love my 21" Nokia invar shadow, beautiful picture, even with the slight curve.

I am one of those split people, I use my 21" for gaming and my 15" sony LCD for surfing, chatting, and typing. I recently got to play a few games on a 2001FP (UT2K4, BG 1942, Battlefront, and Morrowind) and I was very impressed. Good picture with no ghosting (at least not to my eyes). When my 75lb Nokia beast dies I will get an LCD even though they are pricey and don't have the good blacks. Just seems like a better choice, not to mention that it would be nice to have more desk space...

-spike

 

[rogue1979]

I don't see anyone mentioning my main gripe about LCD's.

Anything but the native resolution looks like crap!

I have a lot of different games that play best at different resolutions. Waddya gonna do when you are stuck with just one gaming option?

Not good enough for me, I will continue to use a laptop to surf the web and do light desktop work and use my 19" DiamondTron to game with.

 

[carage]

Originally posted by: rogue1979
I don't see anyone mentioning my main gripe about LCD's.

Anything but the native resolution looks like crap!

I have a lot of different games that play best at different resolutions. Waddya gonna do when you are stuck with just one gaming option?

Not good enough for me, I will continue to use a laptop to surf the web and do light desktop work and use my 19" DiamondTron to game with.

I play most of my games at at 1024x768 or 1280x1024 so I can comfortably turn everything on, although my native resolution is 1920x1200, and the games DON'T lok like crap at other resolutions.

 

[sfgtwsac]

Originally posted by: Nebor
As I predicted last year, within 5 years you won't be able to buy a 19" or bigger CRT without BIG money, as the only existing ones will be made for professionals, by companies like Eizo.

Don't bet on Eizo. Their website is promoting LCDs and I couldn't find a current CRT model listed. At the 21+ inch level, this leaves the $1700+ Sony. One would expect that Sony will dump it as soon as it has a pro-level color scheme for an LCD.

 

[Zebo]

OMG NEWEGG STOP LISTING the DIAMONDPRO 930SB-BK JUST TODAY!!!

I was looking at buying two last night and they stocked them, today it's not even on thier site.

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: Zebo
OMG NEWEGG STOP LISTING the DIAMONDPRO 930SB-BK JUST TODAY!!!

I was looking at buying two last night and they stocked them, today it's not even on thier site.

I told you! The time has drawn near!