How come LCD's are still so expensive?

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: JackBurton

*edit: LCDs are also MUCH easier to steal.

Can you tie an 80lb weight to the LCD to make it harder to steal and feel more like a CRT?

lame "excuse" imo
(unless you are in a dorm*; keep your CRT and get a bigger Apt . . . )

Wouldn't getting a new LCD be cheaper than getting a bigger Apt?

I LOVE my Sony G500, but since I have a corner desk, I don't gain anymore space going to an LCD. HOWEVER, I will be adding an LCD for a dual monitor setup, and this is where I'll run out of desk space if I go CRT. I have a BIG desk, but adding another 21" CRT would kill A LOT of my deskspace. I'm planning on getting an LCD with a swivel arm which would basically use up zero desk space. This also gives me the ability to pull the monitor close or push it away very easily. It should be a kick ass setup!

Also, LCDs look cooler.

A bigger apartment has other advantages . . .

. . . think 'girls' for us unmarried ones . . .

(for a change)
:roll:



(to affirm: i am & have been just kidding)

but my original point remains . . .

. . . the "real advantage" of a LCD over a CRT is saving space.

but then i own a house
(women like that)

 

[Slickone]

Originally posted by: Matthias99
"behind the desk"? Most desks are next to the wall, and with a smaller desk, the problem with CRTs is usually that the screen is forced *too close* to you, not that an LCD would be too far away. If you have a giant desk sitting in the middle of a room, I suppose it's not much of a space savings, but for, say, college students with a cramped desk in up against the wall in a dorm room, it's significant.

I've never had this problem you speak of.

Seriously, in terms of ergonomics, LCDs have CRTs beat hands down. The only disadvantages of LCDs right now are response time (rapidly improving), color reproduction (which has also been improving), and cost (again, improving).

..., and...see dullard's post above (resolution : FPS). Response time, color reproduction, cost, and resolution & FPS are more important than ergonomics.

Originally posted by: deathkoba
I'm also talking about appearance and presentation when people come over. I don't want old ass looking CRTs on my desks. LCD's look cool and IN.

:roll:

I didn't know people got PC's for home decor. Regardless, mine's in a spare bedroom.

 

[KoolAidKid]

I purchased a Samsung 191t 19" LCD a year ago, and it is hands down the best computer-related purchase I have ever made. The thing is BEAUTIFUL, bright colors, sharp display, no eyestrain at all. I use a 19" CRT (trinitron, not the best, I know) at work and the 191t at home, and my eyes thank me every time I get home from work and flick on the LCD.

The main reason I got it, though, is not the usual reason that people give to justify them. I got it because I wanted (for lack of a better word) an elegant-looking PC. A behemoth CRT doesn't really work for that.

 

[JackBurton]

Originally posted by: Slickone

Originally posted by: deathkoba
I'm also talking about appearance and presentation when people come over. I don't want old ass looking CRTs on my desks. LCD's look cool and IN.

:roll:

I didn't know people got PC's for home decor. Regardless, mine's in a spare bedroom.

Yes, most geek don't know this. But yes, there is a thing called "style" and it does transfer over to PCs.

 

[Elcs]

Originally posted by: deathkoba
I did push back my LCD and have absolutely no problems viewing it

I bought my LCD because my CRT took up half the desk. I was sitting 2' at most away from a 17" CRT @ 1024x768. Now im sitting 2 1/2-3' away from my 17" LCD at 1280x960 and Im quite comfortable. No problems reading or viewing.

One major benefit with my LCD being further back is that less people stretch over the top of me and make big finger print marks on my screen (example: mother). My room receives a load of sunlight in the evening and hence a lot of glare, fingerprint marks were a major annoyance. Now, they are less of a pain.

My room isnt big and if I have been living on campus instead of at home (im a university student), Id have been grateful to be able to get a desk and my PC with CRT in, nevermind be able to sit at my pc for a long time.

Most people here are argueing in circles. Person A comes up and says I have an LCD because I use it for X, Y and its better than a CRT at Z. Person B criticises Person A because Person B thinks differently. Person A then replies with a counter arguement... more and more people join in and it goes on forever.

We've had AMD Vs. Intel, ATI Vs. Nvidia.... now CRT Vs. LCD? Pointless arguements. As long as someone is happy with what they have bought, what right does anyone have to tell them anything different?

 

[freeject]

Adding to what someone else said about LCDs being an investment, I bought a 15" lcd from gateway for $360 after rebate 3 YEARS AGO. Since I'll be upgrading soon, I put it up in my local college classifieds and Im getting offers of $200+ (its in perfect condition, no dead pix).

I wouldnt buy a 3 year old 20 inch CRT for $50.

 

[konakona]

geez dont be ridiculous. i live in a basement atm and used to live in a cramped ass dorm room few years ago and it really makes infinitesimal difference if at all. sometimes i wonder just how you manage your desktop space; you know, some people are just bad at packing their luggage, you might be experiencing something similar to that effect. lets face it : i never seen ANYONE use that whatever space is left in front of LCD to do anything truly productive. i occasionally have to look at the printouts and screen at the same time, and it works PERFECTLY FINE on my free desk i got from the x-owner. it is not a big desk by any means, rather a small one, yet my 22'' sits pretty on top of it and i get plenty manuvering room for my mouse and keyboard. hell, if anything get a QUALITY CRT for better color (no argument there, never seen a LCD with visually pleasing colors. if you dont really care i guess you could be happy with monochromes) and spare some $$$ to drop on a nice desk. there goes your ergonomics argument out of the window. eyestrain seems to be very subjective as well, i never had trouble with my CRT. in fact as i always say 1500FP at the school computer cluster is about the same if not more fatiguing.

 

[freeject]

i never seen ANYONE use that whatever space is left in front of LCD to do anything truly productive

You've never seen someone put a keyboard in front of a lcd?

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: JackBurton

Originally posted by: Slickone

Originally posted by: deathkoba
I'm also talking about appearance and presentation when people come over. I don't want old ass looking CRTs on my desks. LCD's look cool and IN.

:roll:

I didn't know people got PC's for home decor. Regardless, mine's in a spare bedroom.

Yes, most geek don't know this. But yes, there is a thing called "style" and it does transfer over to PCs.

style for geeks . . .

only a fellow geek would notice your LCD.

If you want real style that everyone will notice when you invitem them over - get a plasma TV
(not some 19" LCD on a desk in a corner)
:roll:

edit

face it - there is NO (universally accepted) cool factor in an LCD over a CRT except in your own mind

 

[konakona]

Originally posted by: freeject

i never seen ANYONE use that whatever space is left in front of LCD to do anything truly productive

You've never seen someone put a keyboard in front of a lcd?

you mean how i fit my keyboard just fine on my desk in front of my CRT and have 0 complaints while you need a LCD to get around?

 

[Sunner]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: sharkeeper
I guess the tape measure is wrong. Try again. :roll:

I'd much rather have a 17" LCD then an inferior 19" CRT with poor focus, geometry issues, flicker, blotchy colour across the screen and lack of text clarity (at 1280x1024) that would give me eyestrain in less than an hour...

I won't even mention notebook displays such as 15.4" WUXGA running at 1920x1200! A CRT that size would strain (the user's eyes) to do 1024x640!

Let's face it...the CRT is *dead*.

I do prefer the superior contrast and response time for playing games, but my days are spent looking at charts and text for 120 hours+ a week and a CRT would kill my eyes.

19" monitors have nearly 18" viewable. That is MORE than a 17" LCD. Your tape measure is incorrect. You also must have had inferior CRTs. A good CRT (not a trinitron, but a good one) won't have geometry issues, flicker, or blotchy color areas.

You are right that LCDs can have higher resolution for a given area. Most people I know though complain about text that small and then need tools to make it readable. CRT size is even too small for many with bad eyesight. But I give a plus to LCD in this category.

CRTs have the one huge advantage of multiple resolutions. I've got a 21" CRT at work. Great for programming with many lines of text (I also use CRTs 120+ hours per week on many weeks, but usually just 100 hours). But then when I run the program, I need to test it on multiple resolutions for the various customers. An LCD cannot do it without totally f()cked up text. Thus ruining any of the benefits in my paragraph above. Or when guests/coworkers come by, they cannot read the 1600x1280 text from 3-5 feet back, so I temporarilly drop the resolution down. Again, your 15.4" WUXGA running at 1920x1200 cannot do that without making the text nearly unreadable.

Same for games. I play 5 games regularly - all at different resolutions to maximize the look while keeping FPS up. I couldn't do that with an LCD without making parts look like crap. Instead I have to sacrifice FPS or sacrifice resolution.

I use LCDs all the time (laptop + other work computers), and cannot stand them. Yes CRTs are dying, but they aren't dead yet. As long as I can get two quality 19" CRTs for the price of your 17" LCD, I'll be happy. There are many uses for them, and the lower price is just another great benefit.

I agree completely.
I have two decent 19" CRT's at work, and five 21" CRT's at home, all are good enough to not cause eyestrain.
Also, big LCDs are prohibitively expensive, a 20-21" Sony or Samsung with decent specs will cost me over $1.000, while an extremely good 22" CRT will cost me ~$700, and the CRT will be far superior to the LCD.

 

[CVSiN]

Originally posted by: deathkoba
They are cheap now man what are you talking about? A 17" Sony costs only $450. I bought three of the SDM S73s last year and have been very happy with them. I remember a few years ago buying a 17" CRT for almost a grand.

thats not cheap...
I can still buy a Kick ass CRT at 21+ inches for less than that...

 

[thirdlegstump]

Well you guys stick to your old school bulky ass CRTs. I don't think they even sell CRTs in Japan anymore come to think of it.

 

[CVSiN]

sure they do...
where the hell you pulling that one out of your ass from?
where do you think they come from?
not here thats for sure... since us Americans cant build crap that works anymore =P
Sony still makes and sells Kick butt CRT monitors...

21 inch CRT>>> crappy off color LCD that cost 4x as much..
btw peeps quit buying cheap CRTs and get a decent one =P

as for looks i have my computer room seperate from the rest of the house.. dont need peeps near my systems...

 

[konakona]

as for looks i have my computer room seperate from the rest of the house.. dont need peeps near my systems...

actually i dont think LCDs are any better in the looks department either. they look fragile, flaky and unbalanced

have you seen a DP-930 in action? its a real beauty.

oh btw, dont forget even in the tv market, the king of picture quality is sony WEGAs IIRC (your good old CRTs my friend)

 

[GrumpyMan]

LCD's are thin, anorexic and metrosexual looking. Give me a manly 22" CRT any day!!! )

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: Slickone

Originally posted by: Matthias99
"behind the desk"? Most desks are next to the wall, and with a smaller desk, the problem with CRTs is usually that the screen is forced *too close* to you, not that an LCD would be too far away. If you have a giant desk sitting in the middle of a room, I suppose it's not much of a space savings, but for, say, college students with a cramped desk in up against the wall in a dorm room, it's significant.

I've never had this problem you speak of.

Good for you. I did. In my dorm room I had a short-depth 19" monitor -- at an angle -- and with my keyboard and mouse on the desk I had very little free space. I definitely would have preferred to have it further away, and if I had a larger monitor (a longer 19" model, or a 20-22" one), things would have been real cramped.

Seriously, in terms of ergonomics, LCDs have CRTs beat hands down. The only disadvantages of LCDs right now are response time (rapidly improving), color reproduction (which has also been improving), and cost (again, improving).

..., and...see dullard's post above (resolution : FPS). Response time, color reproduction, cost, and resolution & FPS are more important than ergonomics.

To you. If you're not gaming (or watching a lot of fast-motion video), response time and variable resolution are not a big deal, and if you don't do art, super-accurate color reproduction isn't that important either (I mean, I saw a lot of people in school using dirt-cheap 15" and 17" Gateway monitors that look like ass). And FPS has nothing to do with the monitor you're using. Cost is definitely a factor, but the price differences are not THAT big, especially when you can buy a computer for under $500. An LCD monitor today still costs less than an equivalently-sized CRT did just a few years ago.

Now, personally, I do a lot of gaming, and 25ms LCDs are not acceptable to me, and so I still have a CRT. But I've been eyeing a 2001FP for a while now for a dual-monitor setup -- and for the vast majority of users, the advantages of LCDs far outweigh the disadvantages.

 

[JackBurton]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: JackBurton

Originally posted by: Slickone

Originally posted by: deathkoba
I'm also talking about appearance and presentation when people come over. I don't want old ass looking CRTs on my desks. LCD's look cool and IN.

:roll:

I didn't know people got PC's for home decor. Regardless, mine's in a spare bedroom.

Yes, most geek don't know this. But yes, there is a thing called "style" and it does transfer over to PCs.

style for geeks . . .

only a fellow geek would notice your LCD.

If you want real style that everyone will notice when you invitem them over - get a plasma TV
(not some 19" LCD on a desk in a corner)
:roll:

edit

face it - there is NO (universally accepted) cool factor in an LCD over a CRT except in your own mind

You can't be serious. "Only a geek would notice your LCD?" You're smoking crack, or you're just in complete denial. Yes, they may not notice it, if you never show them your PC. Style is not limited to just one place in the home you know. After they're done watching TV on the plasma TV, we can go back and play games on my "cool looking" PC. You can entertain your guests on your ghetto machine if you'd like.

I did get a good laugh at this though:

face it - there is NO (universally accepted) cool factor in an LCD over a CRT except in your own mind

In my own mind he said, hahahaha.... That was great.

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: Matthias99
And FPS has nothing to do with the monitor you're using.

You didn't understand my post then. Suppose you play a first person game where text is quite important (Neverwinter Nights is the first example that comes to mind). Suppose the native resolution of your LCD is 1280 x 1024. Suppose your game is intensive or that you have a cheaper video card that cannot play the game well at 1280 x 1024. You then have a few choices:
[*]Turn the resolution down making the game horrible since the text is crap.
[*]Play with a horrible FPS since your video card cannot handle it.
[*]Turn off features that make the game look great so that you can barely scrape by at 1280 x 1024.

If you don't like my resolution numbers, change them, my point doesn't change. You give up quality or FPS. It is your choice. Thus the monitor can have a big impact on FPS.

 

[CVSiN]

"true" geeks only care about performance and function..

Yuppie wannabe geeks would spend the extra cash for fashion and marginal function...

sorry guess im a true geek =P

 

[JackBurton]

Originally posted by: CVSiN
"true" geeks only care about performance and function..

Yuppie wannabe geeks would spend the extra cash for fashion and marginal function...

sorry guess im a true geek =P

You mean "I have no girlfriend because I have no style" geek? Then yes, you maybe right. You're a "true" geek.

 

[Anubis]

actually real women couldent care less if you have a CRT or LCD, it makes no fusking difference

 

[ptw]

People are the debating space saving benefit of LCDs. The benefit isn't usually the extra space you get on your desk by replacing your CRT with an LCD. The benefit is usually having more options on furniture types and placement because you now have a monitor that takes up significantly less space.

I have an LCD at work and a CRT at home. This is a perfect combo for me right now, since I stare at text and numbers all day and play games, touch up photos, etc at night. Getting an LCD at work didn't gain me much useable space since my desk is designed for a CRT, and so all it means is that I can stack more pens, paper pads, etc around my monitor. BUT--it also means that I could move my monitor to a different place on my desk instead of having to leave it at the junction of the "L" shpae. Or I could get a different desk altogether and still fit my monitor on it.

CRT's won't die until LCD's are almost the same price.

 

[CVSiN]

Originally posted by: Anubis
actually real women couldent care less if you have a CRT or LCD, it makes no fusking difference

no crap my wife would perfer the PC to get tossed in the trash...

she hates it.. it could have a 5000000000000000000000 inch flat screen and it wouldnt matetr how flat it ws.. she still hates CPUs..
only Yuppie geeks give a flying f00k..

 

[Anubis]

Originally posted by: ptw


CRT's won't die until LCD's are almost the same price.

even then they wont die, the are still far better for image and video work, LCDs have a long way to go to catch up in that area