I miss the old days of CRT's

[Pghpooh]

I miss the old days of crt's.
Why???
I have a small living room. In years past I would buy a 32 inch tv. Back then, you could buy a small screen that still had all the bells and whistles. (features) Today, if you want a small screen (under 55 inch) you basically get a bare bones set. If I want say a Sony with trumuminos or Samsung with quantom dots I am forced to buy 55 inches or more and pay outlandish prices.

 

[JeffMD]

Uhmm, I don't think you actually remember how little there was that actually differentiated TV's back then. They were all crt, they all used the same box stripe pattern, and the ONLY high tech feature they may have gotten is picture in picture. And what made the bad TVs bad was their lack of SVHS and RBG connections. That was it!

Now you have ~8 different types of IPS panels, 2 types of resolutions at 32", several smart TV options, more hdmi connections you can shake a stick at, and the only reason you don't see quantum dots yet is #1 very small market at 32", much like 1080p is, and #2 UHD is still in infantile stages, no one is going to risk money on a TV the market won't buy yet.

 

[frowertr]

Well I'm not sure you need Quantum Dots or whatever new fangled fancy term they want to call it for a tv that is only 32" in size. The screen size is too small to take advantage of it. You wouldn't notice the difference with or without it. I'd stick with 1080 at that size of a tv.

I had a 32" Sony Trinitron tv back in the mid-90s. It was a good tv but, my god, it was built like a friggin safe. Moving it was a nightmare and you better have a stand that was real wood and not the flimsy mdf crap they have today to hold it securely. I don't miss that heavy fat bastard at all.

 

[poofyhairguy]

I miss the old days of crt's.
Why???
I have a small living room. In years past I would buy a 32 inch tv. Back then, you could buy a small screen that still had all the bells and whistles. (features) Today, if you want a small screen (under 55 inch) you basically get a bare bones set. If I want say a Sony with trumuminos or Samsung with quantom dots I am forced to buy 55 inches or more and pay outlandish prices.

So you miss CRTs because larger screens are cheaper so the average size is bigger? That makes no sense.

I can go pick up a super fancy 32 inch LED tv tomorrow for $300:

http://www.frys.com/product/8756671

The only feature I can think of that requires a larger size to get is OLED, but if you are that serious about watching movies you aren't screwing around with a 32 inch TV anyway outside of somewhere like a bathroom or a kitchen (the only room I have with a tv that small).

 

[Caesar]

I am complete opposite. I am so glad we are done with the days of CRTs. Those monsters were impossible to easily move around, needed a lot of space and cost more than a 32" LCD TV would cost now. I remember getting a 27" CRT TV in the late 90s for $200+. Just bought two 32" LCD TVs in the last 2 months at around $150 each.

 

[sandorski]

I don't. TV's especially, their picture quality was crap compared to even 720p LCD. As others mentioned, size and weight differences are also big reasons why LCD is better. The only place that CRT had some advantages was as PC Monitors and LCD's have closed and even surpassed CRT's at this time.

 

[Eug]

I miss plasma more than CRT. I am running a plasma for living room TV, because most similarly priced LCDs suck in comparison, even today. You can get 43" upper mid-end 4K TVs, but they aren't that cheap.

BTW, I owned a 34" 16:9 widescreen CRT in 2001. When it got delivered, one of the delivery guys couldn't lift his side of it. I had to move it with the other delivery guy. The TV was something like 175-200 lbs.

This was pre-HDMI though, so my HD image was through component video. Worked well with my cable box and later on, my Xbox 360. Having zero input lag was great.

 

[reallyscrued]

Rose-colored glasses, indeed.

Big bulky CRTs, as much as I loved my trinitron monitor, refresh rates, flickering, fuzzy picture, energy usage and heat...I was glad to have moved to something better.

I do miss not being tied to a "native" resolution. Running anything in non-native res for a fixed-pixel display such as an LCD/Plasma/DLP requires interpolation of some sort that always makes text and edges look off - but in today's world, you can typically match your native res of your display to what your graphics card can push and adjust AA to where you can balance performance without needing to move off your native-res.

I also miss black levels, but OLED should make short work of that in a few years... *fingers crossed the technology doesn't get axed for "quantum-dot" or something stupid*.

 

[poofyhairguy]

I miss plasma more than CRT.

Amen to that! OLED is better in most ways, but it isn't cheap enough and doesn't offer all the size ranges plasma used to offer.

 

[Nashemon]

I've still got a 27" flat screen (not flat panel) CRT that I have all my retro game consoles hooked up to, so I can play them in all their <= 32-bit glory. That damn thing weighs 150 lbs. I had to move it to the other side of the room recently, which was a chore. I can't believe I carried up to the 3rd floor of the house 8 years ago.

 

[NutBucket]

The beauty is, with HD and 55" set you can sit just as close to the TV (if not closer) than you did with the old CRT. Problem not found!

 

[rchunter]

I've still got a 27" flat screen (not flat panel) CRT that I have all my retro game consoles hooked up to, so I can play them in all their <= 32-bit glory. That damn thing weighs 150 lbs. I had to move it to the other side of the room recently, which was a chore. I can't believe I carried up to the 3rd floor of the house 8 years ago.

I still have a Sony KV36FS12 in one of my back bedrooms. That thing is 220 pounds. Mainly use it if I want to play old PS2 games.

 

[JeffMD]

I loved my trinitron monitors as well, the flat screen ment the color elements were very uniform and low distortion, very excellent for digital images. But yea, lcd couldn't have come soon enough. Saddly my pockets forced me to waddle in single and dual scan until even the cheapest laptops finally got active matrix. -_-

 

[Sheep221]

I junked my last CRT last week after 6 years of being unused, glad I finally got rid of it!

 

[Binky]

I don't understand how you can miss the days where TV's looked like crap and could weigh up to 5+ pounds per inch of screen. The old Sony 32 and 36 inch Trinitrons weighed 165-215 pounds!

Oh, and they were almost two feet thick. There's that too...

 

[nerp]

Those things killed eyes. I had a 19inch Mag innovision and that thing at 1600x1200 was painful on the eyes, lemme tell you. Weighed like 50 lbs and made my room so hot in the summer I would have sweat dripping from my armpits.

I'll keep my dual 2K 27" setup.

 

[HeXen]

I don't miss those heavy ass, space hogging contraptions whatsoever. You can have your cyberpunk world, just find some CRT's on eBay or something.

 

[MaxDepth]

I don't miss home theater cabinets which were basically old dressers with swinging doors.

 

[BurnItDwn]

I only miss the good black levels and contrast. Otherwise DLP is cooler, quieter, uses less power, and shittons brighter than CRT.

Its true that the old $60000 Barco CRT three bulb lamps offer better image quality over todays "prosumer" or "consumer grade" projectors ... but .. they also use ridiculous power, take up a LOT of room, and generate more heat than a bonfire.

DLP front Projection is my current favorite, though once I can get an OLED or some other good contrast type screen in the 100-110 inch size for like $2-3K .. I will gladly change my opinion.

 

[Scarpozzi]

I agree with some of the other comments that the smaller size of the screen is what hurts it from getting the bells & whistles. The cost of manufacturing a 50% larger screen doesn't cost quite 50% more for the manufacturer and they get economies of scale when they sell more of a particular size. 42" and 50" screens were the norm.....but now they are going 60"+. The 32" market has been reduced to volume sales to be kitchen or small bedroom TVs...or hotel/motel TVs... Most of those screens aren't going to be the higher end screens because there will always be cheaper competition at that end with less profit margins for the manufacturers.

If you are wanting a higher quality screen, look into buying a computer monitor with HDMI in, use a splitter, and break apart the tuners. That market doesn't play by the same rules, as a result though, you'll find much higher costs. Just remember to make sure you get one with a vesa mount and speakers.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Description=4k monitors&Submit=ENE

 

[NutBucket]

I don't see the point in limiting yourself to a small screen.

 

[dainthomas]

I am complete opposite. I am so glad we are done with the days of CRTs. Those monsters were impossible to easily move around, needed a lot of space and cost more than a 32" LCD TV would cost now. I remember getting a 27" CRT TV in the late 90s for $200+. Just bought two 32" LCD TVs in the last 2 months at around $150 each.

I helped my brother move a 32" CRT back in the day. That beast was well over 200 pounds and had no easy way to hold it. We ended up wrapping it in a blanket to lug it up three flights of stairs. My back killed for days.

I could carry a 32" LCD under one arm.

 

[Drako]

I helped my brother move a 32" CRT back in the day. That beast was well over 200 pounds and had no easy way to hold it. We ended up wrapping it in a blanket to lug it up three flights of stairs. My back killed for days.

I could carry a 32" LCD under one arm.

Reminds me when my wife bought a 36" Sony WEGA TV. That thing weighed almost 250 pounds. When we moved I had 3 friends come over to help me move it - none of them are my friends anymore.

 

[Oyeve]

Come to my co-op's basement. There are at least 5 crt/tvs in the electronics recycle room. Almost took a sony XBR system last week. It was in immaculate condition. Then common sense hit.

 

[Pacfanweb]

What "bells and whistles" were there on CRT's?

Not like they made "smart" TV's back then. About the only difference was whether you got one bare or made into a big cabinet.

About the only real option CRT's ever had was picture-in-picture, which was worthless if you had a cable/satellite box anyway.