Slashdot Mirror
Sony to Stop Producing Smaller CRTs
NerveGas writes "Sony is apparantly going to stop producing 17- and 19-inch CRTs, in favor of LCDs. It seems a bit soon to drop CRTs completely, seeing as how LCDs still have less than 30% of the market share. Maybe since their patent on Trinitron screens expired, they're not able to command ridiculous margins any more." Smaller CRTs? I've got a couple 19" Sony monitors here, and I've always considered them to be a good size.
I'm happy for 19" CRTs to be considered small -- anyone who would like to give me an LCD or nine, I take all sizes, even little tiny 17-inchers.
:)
Looking forward to the day that 42" plasma TVs are also small
timothy
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
If you look at the prices of both 17" and 19" CRTs, you'll see that there isn't much room for profit in making that size monitor. Sony's resources are much better spent making LCDs and large screen TVs.
It's not the size of the CRT that matters...it's the resolution of the image!
At least that's what my wife tells me.
Hey freaks: now you're ju
That we'll get to see some companies pick up the details of the patent and start producing CHEAPER trinitron crt's? That would be awesome since sony crts are expensive.
Hopefully this will be an incentive to drive the cost of LCD monitors down.
Invalid Checksum. Retrying.
I refuse to by a monitor that loses definition at odd angles, has a hard time with the color black, and is only sharp at one resolution. I especially refuse to buy them when they're twice as expensive. The only benefits are power use and desk space...two things that rank very low on the ladder of importance for me. I'm certain a LOT of other people feel the same way.
I'll form my OWN solar system! With blackjack! And hookers!
IMHO they really are, as long as space is not an issue. The contrast, brightness, sharpness seems to be better than LCD. In addition LCD screens have limited viewing angle. I agree LCD screens look cool, consume less electricity and space. But thats not good enuf to completely dump CRTs, esp if they are *cheaper*
Oh no!! not only is my cpu obsolete so is my monitor!! Next time i am buying a laptop.
...lcd's will now make up 100% of the market! (their market)
Blarf.
Look at the price difference. Sony charges much more for an LCD than a CRT. Obviously they make more money on LCDs than CRTs, so why not take the CRTs right out of the picture?
Easy solution to this problem: Copywrite Trinitron and lobby Congress to extend your rights for another 50 years.
Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known. -- Carl Sagan
by Amsterdam Vallon - Slashdot debut - 2003/01/23
Met a guy, thought he was grand
Liked his site, but found out first hand
Slashdot ain't for the trollin' kind
Next few weeks, it would all unwind
In a troll trap I can't grip
Never thought I'd be the one who'd slip
Then I started to realize
I was living one big lie
Rob fuckin' hates me
Yup
Rob fuckin' hates me
Truh truh truh troll
I tried too hard
And he mod-bombed my posts until I had none
He ripped them away
All was well for about an hour
But after an FP, shit got sour
He took all I ever had
No sign of guilt
Not feelin' bad
No!
In a troll trap I can't grip
Never thought I'd be the one who'd slip
Then I started to realize
I was living one big lie
Rob fuckin' hates me
Yup
Rob fuckin' hates me
Truh truh truh troll
I tried too hard
And he mod-bombed my posts until I had none
He ripped them away
That's my story
As you see
Learned my lesson
And so did he
Now it's over
And I'm glad
Cause I'm a fool
For all I've said
Rob fuckin' hates me
Yup
Rob fuckin' hates me
Truh truh truh troll
I tried too hard
And he mod-bombed my posts until I had none
He ripped them away
Truh duh duh duh duh duh duh duh duh duh troll
Yup
Truh duh duh duh duh duh duh duh duh
Uh huh
Truh duh duh duh duh (And he mod-bombed my posts until I had none)
Truh duh duh duh duh
Rob fuckin' hates me
by Amsterdam Vallon - Slashdot debut - 2003/01/23by Amsterdam Vallon - Slashdot debut - 2003/01/23by Amsterdam Vallon - Slashdot debut - 2003/01/23by Amsterdam Vallon - Slashdot debut - 2003/01/23
Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate. Ex-O'Reilly/MIT employee, now a full-time Google employee.
Okay, I'm not gonna buy an LCD screen anytime soon and neither is anyone else I know (but I would like one). But consider companies that require large monitors - they DO exist. For example, petroleum and minerals companies need their employees to inspect large amounts of geographical data as quickly as possible. Quite often they have many 19" to 21" monitors, and one or two 25"+ beasts.
... I don't think they'd be too worried about losing CRT sales. And CRT sales are declining - it's not a growth market. In fact, in five years time you may not be able to buy brand-new CRTs any more. Why would you want to hang around in such a market?
Now, if they're going to have all of these huge monitors, they may still want to be able to use their desks. So LCD screens that take up a small fraction of the desk would be a great improvement upon CRTs. And besides, the trend in screen sizes has always been "bigger IS better". So perhaps Sony is going to restrict itself to the upper-end of the monitor market.
But let's face it, Sony can afford to do this. They have the PS2, MiniDisc, a reputation as a maker of top-quality stereo equipment
And if they get an early start on LCD monitors, they may end up in a similar situation ten years down the track to what they had with the Flatron. They may corner the market with some technological gimmick just like before. At least this way, they're giving themselves every chance.
This sig intentionally left bla... dammit!
Who's got the whiteout?
Isn't the big price quagmire with LCD's still the liquid crystal? Isn't that why they're so expensive?
Can a major player like Sony suddenly start producing tons of these things with limited production resources?
I doubt that this will have a major effect on the monitor market, aside from Sony giving up market share. The major purchasers of monitors are businesses, and businesses have a choice between a $250 17" flatscreen CRT and a $500 17" LCD. I know which one my business would pick.
--My other sig is a ferrari.
..I'm tired of the oversized,desk wasting, heat producing beasts. I would much rather have a LCD display, especially if it's a good one with DVI input. Has anyone tried moving a 19" CRT latley. I quit taking CRT's to LAN parties and take my 15" (viewable) LCD instead.
(Mine's not as big as theirs, it would seem.)
... bulky.
desktop = 15" crt
tv = 13" lcd
laptop = 11" crt
And the best part? I wouldn't replace my small screens for anything. Anything bigger is just to
Let's face it. Sony really just wants to encrypt all the data going to your monitor.
is there really more of a market for a $900 LCD than a $150 LCD?
I doubt any conspiracy theories are in order. It is more likely that sales of lower-end CRTs are dropping to the point where there's no point in making the effort.
I doubt that the big CRTs are going anywhere, at least until LCDs get cheap.
Remember that Sony can't "force" you to buy a higher price LCD as you can always buy another brand. The fact that there taking the smaller ones of the market means that they feel that they won't lose very many customers.
The cake is a pie
100 columns of 1cm high text is just dandy
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
Given your reputation, it seems the Sony monitors you have are not the only 19" things you like to keep your eyes on, right?
So, I've been wondering for a while about this. I love LCDs, but I'm one of those people who likes to have all the fonts tiny, to squeeze as much space as possible out of the desktop.
Now, I can buy a cheap laptop with a 15 inch, 1400x1050 screen, like the one I'm typing on now, for less than 1200 dollars. But I can't seem to find an LCD monitor with the same specs at all, and anything that gets even close (1280x1024 or above) is ridiculously expensive.
What's the deal? I'm assuming the LCD on this laptop doesn't represent more than 50% of the retail price. So why can't I get a 15", 1400x1050 LCD monitor for 600 dollars or so? IS THERE A CONSPIRACY HERE?
--Joakim Ziegler
You can't use lower resolutions properly (at least not on the ones I've seen).
I know of people using really low resolutions (such as 800 by 600) on 17.4 inch LCDs. The fonts look like crap at that resolution and if you use the native resolution they cry "the fonts are too small".
Okay, these people need get their eyes tested but convincing them to use a higher resolution is near impossible.
The old CRT will in contrast cheerfully do this crasy low resolutions.
I just bought a 19" Sony E440 like 4 days ago. And while it was more expensive than the other 30 monitors sitting next to it on display, I could easily tell the difference in the vividness of color, and the sharpness of the resolution between the Sony and the other makes. And if your a computer nerd who spends all day infront of a computer, and only wants 1 monitor, wouldn't you likely get the nicest one out there?
Why stop producing these Sony? There are plenty of people out there who will pay the "premium" for the superior picture. Or am I the only one?!
For prepress and color-sensitive work, I would still want CRTs. Maybe 2-3 years down the line would sound OK, not now.
Reduced eye strain.
However, I prefer LCD screens for reading text. The square pixels and sharp edges lend themselves to that sort of purpose.
The interesting thing is that eventually everyone at home will be looking at my photos online with LCDs anyway, so it can't be ignored.
I just hope that as an artist I'll still be able to get CRT screens until LCD's have advanced to a point where they are acceptable, or DLP or other promising technology has taken over. I personally swear by the Sony 21" FD trinitron. We still use CRT's for everything in the effects industry, however I have seen the (very nice! IMHO) 22" Apple cinema LCD displays being used at a print studio facility in San Francisco that was producing the Macy's christmas catalog while I was visting. I asked them about the color and gamma shifting issue and he said "Yea, we just have to make sure and look at them dead center, and then it's okay." And in the final checking room, there were computers with CRTs and hoods on the monitors for fine tuning anyhow.
For now, my ultimate dream monitor is still the Sony FW-900 24" widescreen CRT display, and it's down to about $2k now.
--Mike
There is not a single LCD that can come even close to a CRT in picture quality, resolution, and, most especially, contrast and black levels, if you compare them dollar to dollar.
Unless your space costs $300/sq ft, or your electricity costs something ungodly, or you must have the very best of everything at any cost, I don't see why you would want an LCD.
Well, that's assuming you're going to put it on a desktop system.
But it doesn't surprise me that Sony is going to make another boneheaded move. Tell me again why it is that MD is all but dead in North America?
If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
Most CRT's double in price in two inch increments. Now I understand that because it becomes difficult to make a larger vacuum tube as volume increases. The same thing does not apply to LCD's in terms of production costs. However, since the standard price scale works that way, Sony will make a killing on their 17-19 inch lcds. Thats my theory as to why they are killing of CRT's.
Sigs? We don't need no stinking sigs!
They're obviously stuck in a hopeless cycle of groupthink here.... thinking that big==good. This, of course, is hogwash. I have a 17" monitor sitting on my desk and it's perfect. I have a 21" Viewsonic Pro monitor sitting in the corner of my room holding up a bunch of boxes.
:)
But EmagGeek! Why not use the 21"!?
Because it's so damn deep, I can't put my input devices in front of it! I just happened to be at that stupid trendy (but cheap) quasi-swedish furniture store today measuring up desks. The standard depth was 28", on almost every single desk. That ViewSonic monitor I mentioned is 24" deep including cable relief - so unless I can find a 4" keyboard, I'm screwed..
Of course, chiming in with all the "conspiracy theories" that this thread seems to have spawned, I could conjecture that monitor manufacturers have teamed up with computer desk manufacturers so that no desk can accomodate the smallest CRT, forcing people to LCDs...
but if I was going above 1280x1024, an LCD would have better image quality than my shitty CRT.
If monitors weren't so damn expensive, I'd buy several of them. The same goes for nearly all technology. If 1gb/s ethernet equipment was reasonably priced, I would upgrade my network.
Are tech manufacturers trying to squeeze money out of those that will pay the most before squeezing mass sales from the rest of us or does it really cost more to manufacture for the first two years?
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
And please listen to this.
Between Fall Breaks, Thanksgiving Breaks, Winter Breaks, Spring Breaks, and all the other comings and goings to and from your college, you really should invest in a nice LCD monitor rather than lugging a 17 or 19 inch monster CRT down stairs, into cars, worrying about it tipping over in the car, carrying it into your house at home when you get there, etc.
Between $300 for a really nice 19" CRT and $1,000 for a really nice big LCD monitor, that extra $700, if you have it, will really make you happy in the long run.
Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate. Ex-O'Reilly/MIT employee, now a full-time Google employee.
Now I won't be able to have a CRT display device double as a heater for my room. shucks!
I can tell you that those two things (well, one does, anyway) rank pretty high on a large organization's list. For example, I can tell you that any new computers which come with monitors bought by UCSD's CS dept have to be ordered with LCD monitors now. The power savings are pretty big, even though it may take a while to phase in the new machines and their flatpanels. A couple friends in various other large companies have also seen this trend.
My guess is that Sony is merely catering to business needs and pressures and not thinking of home users as much.
-B
Ash and Hickory, straight-grained and true, make excellent bludgeons, dandy for the cudgeling of vegetarians.
I was waiting for this. next larger crt's will no longer be made. soon i bet.
plasma and lcd and maybe someday oled will take over.
Another thing that comes to my mind in CRTs vs LCDs is that it almost impossible to find cheap lcds whatever the size, that can do 1600*1200 or over i prefer to have a 17in crt that can do 1600*1200 (ok its a little har to read :-) ). than a 19in or 21in LCD that can do not more than 1024*768 or 1280*xxx
after all My ** real desk space ** its those pixels !!!!
Overuse of the Pumping Lemma causes blindness
When they can charge 2250 bux for a 24 inch GDM-FW900 Wide screen monitor (2304X1440), compared to 250 bux for a 19inch monitor, its an easy to tell where the profit is.
BTW, We have these on triple headed sun boxes, man they are great. I'd love to have one at home, dvd, hdtv and games, oh yeah... Too bad its artificially priced high, you could buy 2 21 inch LCDs for the same price.
You know, I could have swore I hit submit on this...
Anyways, my LCD rocks. 17" LCD with built in TV tuner for 800 USD... and worth every dime. I live in a dorm room, so my deskspace is at a premium. I'm a computer geek and coder, so the lack of eyestrain is DEFINITLY worth it.
Refresh rate? 80 hz max, although I usually run it at 75 hz.
Resolution? 1280x1024. My biggest sticking point since I have a habit of running monitors at 1600x1200 if they are larger then 17".
Color depth? My god it is beautiful... I can't go back to a CRT because of how it looks.
Power? My UPS lasts a hell of a lot longer now...
The space saved is immense. I can play PS/PS2/Whateverconsoleyouwant games in a picture in picture if I so desired. My LCD rocks.
I just saw a LCD for 350 USD the other day. 17". Wow.
A side note: LCDs are measured in viewable sizes, so that 17" CRT is only really a 15.9" (or whatever) viewable, but that 17" LCD is really a 17" viewable.
--- Ãther SPOON!
I've got 17" monitors at work (3 of them) and a 17" at home. Not much point in getting anything bigger for what I do.
What I _really_ want is a 3840x1024 LCD display. Wide, wide, wide. Reference on the left, code in the middle, debug on the right. I'm probably going to get cancer from having three CRTs blasting at me all day.
I hate Trinitrons. Those lines thru the middle of the screen can really get annoying, like a dead pixel on an LCD screen.
That said, I don't buy LCDs except for space and computers I don't use alot. My 3 main monitors are CRTs. First, I run at 1920x1440 and 1600x1200 on my 2 main computers. To get a LCD that does that is well beyond my budget. Second, I play games, I like bright images, and clear colors. LCD's are great for places like entertainment centers where you don't want a clunky CRT viing for affection with the TV, but for something you need to look at for hours a day, a CRT is the way to go.
I do hope though, that in the future very high quality LCDs will be available at more reasonable prices. When I bought my first CRT, it did 1024x768 and cost more than my Diamontron 17in monitor that does 1600x1200 and is perfect flat. (I'm young. the monitors bought before the 1024x768 ones were purchased by the parents.) It seems like LCDs are at that exact point. The very cheap ones are 1024x768 and crappy quality. But hopefully the same way I can now get a nice monitor for that price, hopefully the same amount of time in the future the CRTs will be that good.
I do security
They worked nights and weekends on the project and when they finally had something to show, they schlepped the tube around to Motorola, Zenith, Sylvania, GE and one other American Television company. They chose those 5 companies because, combined, the companies dominiated the world television industry. None of the companies was interested. Discouraged, the group sold the rights to the tube to a European outfit. The Europeans gave the tube up as a lost cause because it was too hard to manufacture so the Europeans dumped it on a small Japanese electronics company. The company was Sony and that's how Sony ended up with the Trinitron. The name Trini - meant three for the three color guns and Tron, well because everything being built at Berkeley back then was a "-tron" - Calutron, Bevatron.
Funny.
- learn to swim.
Do some weights and then haul those monitors around.
;)
Or buy a trolley. Keep the original packaging material.
Spend the $700 on beer
If you had and balls you would have posted under your slashdot username. so says the anonymous coward.
I think the discussion here is funny and doesn't necessarily reflect a lot of business's monitor buying tendancy. The org I work for (a non-profit, mind you) now will ONLY buy LCDs when a CRT needs to be replaced. We have some large rooms with lots of desks, and we calculated that it is only an 18-month ROI with electrical savings using LCDs (got to count the cost of A/C in that too.) Also, I think some folks need to exercise some of the more recent LCD's -- refresh is excellent, clarity extraordinary - like the Mitsubishi NX85 I am using right now. Granted, some of the older and bottom-of-the-line LCD's still have a lot to desire....
I think it's more likely the diameter of the tube.
Like anything the quality of the screen will vary, depending on how much you pay and who you buy it from. I have a Dell portable with a 15" screen with a resolution of 1400*1050, and the image is crisp. Now I have walked into a fair few stores and most of the screens look fuzzy. I attribute this to the fact that they are all using SVGA (digital->analogue->digital), which in not the best solution. Most of the top end screens use a DVI connector which takes out the analogue conversion, which only really makes sense for CRTS. The other problem is, unless I am going for the high end, the screens tend to have a lousy resolution for their size.
For me resolution and screen real-estate are just as important, but unless I am willing to pay the price of a computer on a screen, I am going to stick with my CRT for my desktop.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
You're better off not lugging your computer home on breaks. Keep it at college, and keep an older computer at home. If you're a computer-oriented individual, you probably got your new computer well before your old one ceased to be functional. An extra 700 dollars is a waste (and if you're in college, you need your cash). Pick up a cheap CRT to keep with your old box, use an old keyboard and mouse (hell, if you don't have one you can get one free after rebate from any computer store). You shouldn't need much for a weekend (or even week) break, just net access. If you can't live without the latest game for Thanksgiving weekend, you should seek help (and get some hobbies/friends while you're at it).
GL
Sure it is!!
Red: 0 Blue: 0 Green: 0
Steve Jobs declared "the CRT dead" at MacWorld SF 2002. Besides the little eMac thing and them still selling the old CRT iMac , Apple stopped selling stand alone CRTs over a year ago. I am guessing Apple was not finding profit in them anymore either. Yes, they were more expensive than some other monitors, but they were very high quality and designers need that. They had a really nice high end graphic design quality 20" (or was it 21 or 22?) CRT that had a built in calibration button and was top notch all around. I still see a fair amount of them in places, they used the Sony tubes so it could not have eaten up as much money to make them as some other things.... ***COUGH*** cube ***COUGH****
In the next year or less i predict Sony will have a slick 17" laptop, then Gateway will follow and totally screw it up.
Trinitron tubes have always cost a lot more than Diamondtron (Mitsubishi's apature grill tubes), and I think sony may have been losing more business vs LCD than Mitsubishi has been, as the Mitsubishi tubes have been traditionaly cheaper.
The other factor is a 19" CRT is equivilent to a 17" LCD in practice, because the LCD's screen size is completely out there, while part of the CRT is hidden by the frame. Currently, 17" LCDs are more expensive, but the price is a lot narrower than it was a couple years ago.
Test your net with Netalyzr
How do you do that?
I went out and bought a 18" Samsung SyncMaster 181T LCD that cost $1000 7 months ago after a big boost in my business sales to celebrate lol ^_^ It is FLICKERLESS, and crystal clear sharp, I love it. I bought a Dell for $700 a couple of months, that came with a 15" LCD, and it really sucks compared to mine, I wouldn't be able to use one of them... IT SUCKS. My laptop screen also sucks against it but I forgive it LCD haters should check out a expensive LCD before making judgements on LCDs Now when I look at CRTs, because im so used to LCDs, I cant see the flicker I never saw before and CRTs just look blurry. I honesty couldnt go back to using CRT for my main computer.. I'm sure if I never used a LCD, CRTS would just look fine, but staring at a LCD screen for half a year ruins CRT looking ability a lot... The really bad thing is LCDS SUCK AT GAMES. It can do black fine when other bright colors are on the screen, but any dark DVDs or GAMES look terrible and gray But its perfect for anything else I'm a console gamer so it doesnt matter for me, but would be really irritating for any PC gamer :(
But now that im used to the sharp LCD, my TV quality looks terrible to me too hmmm >
when a girl says it's a good size, it's a nice way of saying it's small.
There ain't no rules here; we're trying to accomplish something.
frist they did it to betacam [old video standard] - they dropped it in favoure of VCR.
and now they are doing it again, dropping something far better in quality [picture weiss] for less.
I don't claim I know more than I know, and if you know you know more than I know, then by all means, let me know.
Its called "Reservation Price" and if you don't do it in business, you're doing the 'wrong' (profitwise) thing.
A persons reservation price, is the max $ they are willing to spend on an item. Lets say there are 5 (A, B, C, D, E) people in our world interesting in buying a shinny new FOO.
Bar INC. the maker of FOO does market research before releasing FOO and finds that some people (A and B) would pay $10 for foo, C thinks it is only worth $8 and D, E wouldn't buy it unless it were $5 or less.
So to make maximum profit, Bar INC. first prices FOO at $10 for a year, A and B pick up one each. Then they drop it to $8, C picks one, then after 18 more months, they drop it to $5 and D and E get there FOO's. Total revenue is 38$ for Bar INC. If they had just marketed at some average of like ~$8 they would have only made $24 because D and E would never purchase.
It is safe to assume that nearly all hardware companies practice this.
True story. I got a Dell laptop with their Ultrasharp LCD screen. It is incredible. Fast refresh, deep contrast, good black levels. And no headaches. It was getting to the point where I could not look at a CRT for more than an hour at a time. I do not have that problem anymore. After a few months of using the machine, I've noticed that my eyesight has improved from not staying in front of a CRT. Don't knock an LCD until you've used a premium one.
This may be impractical, but ive always thought a gaming console with built in projector would be a good idea! No tv required, just a white wall or suitable surface to project onto! Although it would have crap sound unless you used headphones offtopic maybe, but i dont care!
Anything is worth it when your parents pay for it.
I like CRTs over LCDs for the reason they are sharper with movement, and don't have as many compatiblity issues. On the other hand, they are heavy, and a bitch to move, but for a desktop monitor that is going to stay in the same spot for years, it doesn't really matter much. If you are a big gamer, a CRT is a deffinate adavantage over LCD, escpecially in fast action games.
That's like saying a vaccuum is something.
...like most dorm dwellers that read this site, you play 3D games! Like Quake, Counter Strike, DoD, Battlefield 1942, etc. Ever played a FPS on an LCD? Its sooooo difficult. You get fragged before you can see who your up against.
I have lugged a 19" Sony CRT around over all those school breaks for 4 years in a crappy car. Fortunately it has lasted. And if it hadn't lasted, I could always have bought 2 more Sonys with that $700!
Plus, with the LCD, you HAVE to take it with you. That is something too tempting for the average thief to not "borrow". CRTs are just too common, boring, and heavy to make off with quickly.
The sooner LCD production is ramped up, the sooner the price will drop.
Failed the attempts to remove two black lines on all trinitron monitors, Sony finally announces discontinuing of the production line.
:)
"For all these years," said a Sony spokemen, "we thought we could finally fix this problem, the progress were not as expected."
"but we pushed the defective products to the market anyway, and told people these two black lines are a sign of high quality. We're glad we didn't get caught and now it's over!"
(For humor impaired, this is a joke.
Now I won't be able to have a CRT display device double as a heater for my room. shucks!
My take:
Damnit, now I won't be able to get my white ass tanned from all of that monitor radiation my bright CRT gives off!
who hates those 2 little lines (from internal wires, I've been told) across the display on Sony Trinitron-based monitors?
"And this is my boy, Sherman. Speak, Sherman." "Hello." "Good boy."
The cube is dead.
Some pixel response times are measured in half-cycles and others are measured in full cycles.
My 25ms lcd's are FULL cycle. 25ms to clear and replace a pixel with a new colour.
Some manufacturers are advertising pixel response times based upon just the time from already cleared to fill, and as such report their times twice as good as they actually are. So be careful and definitely TRY BEFORE YOU BUY with LCD's. Also remember ot check for dead pixels.
lounge around on the blue couch
...make loud bangs and sore feet.
www.tigerdirect.com has got some great deals on LCDs. I just bought a 15" for $199 so I can get rid of this hulking 17" thing on my small desk.
It has positive energy within it, doesn't it?!
I used to be a Sony customer. I bought a 200-CD changer, a 19" CRT monitor. Now I promised myself to NEVER buy anything from them again.
Why? Because of their stupid anti-piracy politics. They are one of the main RIAA members, one of the main supporters in the lobby that approved DMCA, one of the main supporters of that stupid DVD zone, one of the creators of that stupidest "copy-protected" disks (they can't even be called CD's, according to Philips, that holds the CD patent).
So, even if their products are good, even if I can't find anything better, even it they are the last brand in Earth, I'll boycott Sony.
Will you ? Will you give money to a company that screws its users ? Will you support DMCA and RIAA ?
Ok, here's my idea. I know it's really me daydreaming but anyway:
How about both LCD & CRT? With many video cards supporting multiple monitors, this wouldn't be too difficult. Set the LCD smack dab dead center in front of you. Put the CRT off to the side, a corner position. My CRT is already on a corner, best place to have a monitor (you can also slide the desk about a foot away from the wall and let the monitor hang). You have the best of both worlds. Make sure both monitors are the same size & the screens are at the same height, then use software gamma correction if necessary. Play games on the CRT, read on the LCD.
~A'Ëq'i4d)^'$ÊSÈòB
That usually means it's small.
...only go to 1280x1024. Anyone who writes software for a living knows that this isn't enough.
Best Buy can have you arrested
But EmagGeek! Why not use the 21"!?
Because it's so damn deep, I can't put my input devices in front of it! I just happened to be at that stupid trendy (but cheap) quasi-swedish furniture store today measuring up desks. The standard depth was 28", on almost every single desk. That ViewSonic monitor I mentioned is 24" deep including cable relief - so unless I can find a 4" keyboard, I'm screwed..
My solution: Put the big monitor on a corner of the desk. That leaves over a foot in front of it, and fills a desk section that just collects cruft (especially if it's the corner that's in the corner of the room).
A desk that's designed as an L-shaped corner desk is even better for this, but I do it on standard desks as well.
YMMV.
That's what you, people with small CRTs, always say.
The Raven
~A'Ëq'i4d)^'$ÊSÈòB
For Sony, this probably makes good business sense. 19" and smaller CRTs are very much a commodity product nowadays. You can buy a complete 19" TV for US$100, and I suspect that more CRTs go in to TVs than computer monitors. The price competition has to be fierce, and the "small" (<= 21") CRT segment of the market is very price sensitive.
CRTs are very far along the "experience curve", and so further reductions in manufacturing costs are difficult to achieve. LCDs are still in the early phase of their life-cycle. I think Sony has decided to ride the cost curve of LCDs down, and not put any more resources into a dying market like CRTs.
Much like 30-40 years ago, the "smart" manufacturers of vacuum tubes exited the manufacturing end of that market, outsourced to the remaining producers, and concentrated on semiconductors.
I think your premise is flawed. The trinitron technology does make for a clear picture, IMHO. But dont expect to get the quality and features of a Sony trinitron from a company making 'cheaper' trinitron CRT.
My brother spent 3 months hunting for a Monitor because he couldn't afford/didn't like LCDs. All the models at the local Best Buys, CompUSAs, mom and pop shops, etc had wavering and flickering near the top of the display. Sales people responded by adjusting the monitor untill the top was off screen. It seems people's demand for cheap 17" and 19" CRTs caused manufactures to shrink the amount of screen traditionally hidden by the plastic around the monitor's glass. I've even seen Veiwsonic do this. But I've yet to see a Sony monitor that did this. My brother finnally settled on a KDS monitor from Walmart of all places.
I don't mind seeing CRTs go the way of the dinosaur when the time comes, but I'd hate to see them die off just because you can't find one worth having. What irritates me the most is that this problem is caused by people who what a big monitor at all costs (kinda like how printers sold in America have to be redesigned for other contries because they won't buy crap). Sure, I spent $200 dollars on a 15" CRT, but I've had it 5 years and the picture's still great, and I'd rather have a nice $200 dollar CRT than a crappy $300 LCD any day.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
~A'Ëq'i4d)^'$ÊSÈòB
You're hating the wrong component!
What I cannot understand is that most LCD have only 1024x768 resolution or maybe 1280x1024. With 19" CRT you can have a nice resolution of 1600x1200. Where are the cheap high resolution CRTs? HP Omnibooks have 1440x1050 and a 15" display size. And the screen can't be that expensive, because the whole Omnibook is quite cheap, but LCD panels at that resolution are really expensive.
- Raynet --> .
If you want a traditional CRT, you have another 2 years to stock up...maybe less.
I, for one, can't wait to see them go. Too much eye strain; too much heat; too much power consumption.
If you haven't checked out current model LCD's and/or large screen TV's that support PC/VGA inputs, maybe it's time you took a walk and looked for yourself.
Having been an IT Manager in a big corp and also worked at SGI where 21" monitors are par for the course, and in military app development, I can think of many reasons to favour LCD screens:
(not in any particular order)
- less desktop space
- lighter (you'd be surprised the number of insurance claims for back problems come from lifting monitors, they get moved from deskto desk or returned for repairs)
- don't go fuzzy over time
- look more high tech
- less fire risk
- less electric shock risk
- less radiation risk
- no alignment problems
- less heat generated
- lower magnetic interference of nearby equipment
- able to withstand wider temp and pressure fluctuations
- less storage space for stock
This is offset by the dowsides ppl have mentioned like:
- limited viewing angle
- gamma/colour problems in cheaper LCDs
- fixed resolution
- images can look "harsh"
- cost
I'm sure Sony did their marketing homework before announcing this. Personally I love my 21" Trinitron...
pithy comment
Trinitrons are not that great. As a gratuitous example, consider those two horizontal lines that run across the screen at roughly each third of the screen. Annoying.
There are CRT flat-screen displays out there for far less money - why would you want a Trinitron?
OTOH you'd be better off going LCD in any case. No radiation, more usable desk space, sharper picture (at the expense of refresh rate and scrolling picture clarity) and easier on the eyes - LCD is the shit amigo.
Samsung's is only...
you'll never go back.
Regardless of what Sony would have me do, I will replace my trusty 19" CRT only when a display with OLED technology become available at a reasonable price-point.
Vibrant colour, excellent resolution, quick refresh, cheap to manufacture and makes an LCD look chunky. Sony just wants to make money off LCD before OLED comes along and forces them to write off their LCD investments.
all of these people saying "i dont see ghosting".
how many do you think are "i payed a frickin fortune for my crt monitor, i can pretend its not there to justify the cost"?
also im betting vision is a lot like hearing. some people settling for crappy picture much like people settling for crappy mp3s and are happy with them.
I got a refurb Sony 19" HMDA400/L/RF from sonystyle.com for only 200 bucks and 1 penny to ship. It's awesome.
Of course, you can find great deals like this simply by going to techbargains.com
Live web cams
But for motion, LCD's will always have some ghosting, no matter how high performance they are. My theory is that a CRT is stroboscopic -- with the common phosphors it flashes an image, goes blank, flashes another image, goes blank. An LCD changes the image in steps -- it shows an image and keeps in on the screen, shows the next image and keeps that on the screen. With the right kind of panned image there is a clear difference, even at 60 fps or higher refresh rates.
In my opinion, LCDs are never going to be the equivalent of CRTs for motion images, but I guess people will call me a crank or I will be like one of those dudes who swears by tube amps. You can haul me before the video Inquisition, but I will mutter under my breath, "But it does blur!"
A colour exists within an observer, and blackness (the absence of light) produces a colour response just like any other.
I've used LCDs (in the context of laptops) and CRTs. I'd rather have a CRT where the option exists.
-There's no chance of a dead pixel wiggling across the virtual screen when I scroll my 1600x1200 virtual desktop on a 1152x864 actual screen.
-No viewing angle problems. Period.
-All the colours are attractive. Have they finally made LCDs that do adequate red and brown?
-No scaling problems. I need 640x480. I want 1152x864. If my screen is tied to 1280x1024, I'd have either a viewing window the size of a postage stamp or terrible scale-up.
Fortunately, I already have a 19" tube. Only way I'm getting a bigger one is if someone chains one of those dirt-cheap 10-year-old 20" Sun or HP fixed-frequency monitors to the back of a Voodoo III.
It's just like a fascist dictatorship, without the punctual rail service!
Yes, 19" is small. Yes, CRT's suck. welcome to the 21st century!
Slashdot Eds Link Anonymous Posts With Logged Posts
They Are Vermin Feeding On Each Other's Feces.
I Hate \.
I hope this means they are working on larger 16:9 CRT's
I love my mitsubishi 40" direct view tv (which they don't make anymore). My next TV is going to be a 16:9 screen size, and the largest direct view (crt) is 34" in this size, just a bit smaller than I'd like. If a direct view CRT at 40" in a 16:9 could be made cheaper than a plasma display they would have something! With plasma displays going for $20k in these sizes a CRT could be a real winner. I HATE rear projection sets!
I recently got a 19" lcd and it rules. my desk is liberated from the huge 19" CRT. for most people, LCD is more elegant and more than sufficient performance wise. as soon as the prices drop so they are priced more competative, CRT sales will go down.
so, we only have another -10 months until they stop...
if 5 people are in a room, and 7 people leave the room, how many have to enter the room to make it empty?
After these incidences and others, Sony got a very bad reputation in my eye. One day, the 3.5" floppy drive in my computer broke. I was like, wtf, that never happens! Sure enough, I open up the case, and it was a Sony floppy drive! Hah...
You are a linux user. You obviously don't play video games, otherwise you would realize how nice a 21+ inch monitor is compared to 19".
That is the only problem with trinitrons...but you'll only notice that on a white background, like when webbrowsing, and only when you first use the monitor...after about 5 days, it's a nonissue. And lets be serious: who needs a trinitron for webbrowsing?
Another plus for trinitron, appart from the !sharp! picture, is it's colour. Very important if you work in print, dtp, video, 3d or anywhere else where colour is important.
-- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
If you only want 1 monitor, you sir, are not a nerd.
I think one thing people have been missing out is also the environmental concerns in the productions of CRT's. I don't care what kind of monitor you're making, but if you want to to be able to display the type of colour and contrast, you need LEAD (Pb) in the glass. With the EPA getting harsher and harsher with materials controls and disposal, and also the fees that they're considering slapping on manufacturers of said monitors, i don't see why they wouldnt be finding ways of getting out.
This is just getting hilarious!
Artisan? Sony just came out with it, discontinuing it so quickly would be ceding an important market (color nut graphic designers like me who demand absolute color) to LaCie (I have an Electron19Blue III). Aside from the fact that it costs more than the 21 inch LaCie w/ Blue eye for the same package, I don't see the advantage, but it's still an important option as people are familiar with the Sony name.
Conglom-O: We Own You (TM).
It seems that the monitor world would be divided into 2 groups... people who buy the cheapest monitors, and people who buy quality/high end monitors. The people who buy the cheapest monitors aren't profitable, and the people who pay extra for quality are exactly the people moving to LCD's. The few high end CRT customers will be willing to pay for 21" or 24" monitors.
Personally, I use an NEC MultiSync 95 CRT as my main monitor, and I love it. But if you want to know how cheap CRT's are, I recently bought a 15" Compaq MV5500 for $150.. with a $150 rebate. Items that are given away tend not to be profitable.
I have blog like everyone else
well, you'd love to think that they don't produce anything of value, but they have a pretty darn nice sacd player! and, were one of the first out of the gate with it! though it helps when your choice of mechanism is sony and phillips... so look deep inside that marantz and see sony smiling back at ya!
Anyway, good riddance!!!
Why would you pay premium for a Sony monitor
when you can get a (better) Samsung for less?
I recommend the 17" SyncMaster 700IFT.
It's only annoying if you have a stick up your ass.
We had a HORRIBLE time with color and our Trinitrons, we had dual and tripple head systems and even when we ordered multiple monitors at the same time and they came from the same batch they would often have horrible color matching across screens. Even after running color matching programs and adjusting all the fine color details we could find we almost never got two screens to match perfectly. This would drive our design people batty to the point where one ordered a 24" display rather than use 2 21" G520's.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
...the fact that most LCDs today have horrible picture quality. Now why exactly would someone want to buy one again? Oh yeah, to save desktop space. Of all the LCDs I've seen (and sold at one point), I have never seen on that had good enough picture quality (sharpness, color, etc...) to make me say "wow". Not one. I've said that numerous times with CRTs though. The Mitsubishi 2060U is simply awesome. LCDs simply aren't good enough... yet.
I can understand your skepticism about the quality of LCD displays in general, but have you ever bothered to see the best LCD models?
Go take a look at the Samsung SyncMaster 152T (15"), 181T (18") and 191T (19") models--they are STUNNING LCD monitors with amazing sharpness, superb brightness and color accuracy, and have response times fast enough to play DVD movies and today's high-end games with just about no motion blurring. I think after seeing a SyncMaster 191T for yourself, your skepticism about LCD panels will probably go away. =)
Raymond in Mountain View, CA
I'm not going to question Sony's business decisions when I'm not privy to Sony's business analyses... :-)
Take a look around at some off-lease computer equipment places. These displays have been around for a few years, and the Sony tube can be found in monitors that are branded otherwise. For example, I have an IBM P260 here that I picked up locally for $193 after tax. It's a 20" IBM flatscreen CRT that happens to have a Sony Trinitron tube. No different than a Sony-branded one except for the plastic case. Besides IBM, I know that HP and Sun also do this... So, check the off-lease places. The only one I can personally recommend is Second Wind PCs in Troy, Michigan, but they are all over.
This is just getting hilarious!
Hey! That's five words too!
I know this goes against normal geek mantra of the bigger and faster the CPU the better. And it seems to me, that you guys recommend computers based mostly on the CPU. I could careless about the CPU, to me the most important component of a computer is the monitor and the bigger the better and the easier on the eyes the better. And yes, I hope flat screens will replace cathode ray tubes altogether. rant finished.
Apparantly
Apparently
any more anymore(one word)
to be good size
How about to be of good size, or be good sized
Learn to spell, nitwit!
I have a 17" POC CRT on my personal rig, that I got from office crapot a few years back for a song. it runs fine for me at 2048x1536, although a bunch of games I have dont let me run them that high. My mom on the other hand, just bought a dual 1.25 mac with the 23" LCD. what can I say, I am in love. I like my monitor, but that big beautiful, crisp and fast display is just nothing short of fucking schweet. LCD's are nice, I have personally never seen a shitty one outside of the PS2 displays at the local electronics retailer. Personally, I will pick one up when I can get one that rolls up and sits in my pocket and has 20 times the processing power of my current comp and 100 times the storage.
I'm a little tea pot.
Costco is now selling a 42 inch Sampo Plasma screen TV for $3,000, do you have any idea of the quality? I want a 16x9 TV, but I do not like the quality of any of the projection TV's, and there are not a whole lot of monitor/tube models out there.
Smaller CRTs? I've got a couple 19" Sony monitors here, and I've always considered them to be a good size.
I worked for a company that was onsite tech support/repair for a major hospital in San Diego.....they had 23" Sony Trinitrons just laying arround in the shop....this was in 1999....
The MRI and CAT scan machines, as well as a whole slew of other hospital equipment used these massive monitors....so I can understand how in comparison Sony would consider 17" and 19" small.
I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
CRT monitors get rather useless in environments with strong magnetic fields. (e.g. offices next to a laboratory with a big superconductive magnet) Since i saw that, i've accepted that LCD monitors might have their use.
This sig is a true statement, but I cannot prove it.
Maybe since their patent on Trinitron screens expired, they're not able to command ridiculous margins any more."
I doubt thats the case, arent the newer sony crts built using a better technology than trinitron anyway? Besides anyone selling a trinitron monitor pays to use the name because of the quality recognition associated with it.
I see this more as a move for Sony to set the new standard in monitors and its definately welcome in a time when the average cost of lcds is rising slightly resulting in some companies (ie Apple) to raise prices and stop selling some sizes of lcds.
> My cement pin won't vend unless I infect.
You clearly don't know what you're talking about. I can't believe that you could produce such an insightful and factually correct article, and yet sneak that nonsense about infectious prerequisites in there.
When I bought my current monitor last year, I had to take it out of the box before I could fit it in my car! I don't need a bigger monitor.
On second though, maybe this just means I need a bigger car...
That's not a Troll, it has never been a troll. It's Redundant. We've seen this a couple of times now. It was +5, Funny & Insightful the first time. Now it's starting to look like Crapflooding.
The P225f Black, PerfectFlat monitor from ViewSonic delivers extraordinary performance in a big 22" (20" viewable) screen. This impressive, award-winning monitor boasts an ultra-high flicker-free resolution of 2048x1536 and a video input bandwidth of 335MHz to provide incredible detail and clarity. In addition, features like an ultra-fine aperture grille pitch, PerfectFlat technology and advanced screen coating provide precise edge-to-edge images in astonishing, rich colors making this large-screen CRT monitor ideal for pre-press, imaging, desktop publishing and graphic design applications. .25mm aperture grille [at center]; Displays a maximum resolution of 2560 x 1920 at 63Hz; Absolutely flat screen; USB hub-compatible base; PC and Mac compatible; DIMENSIONS (WxHxD) 20.0" x 19.7" x 19.7", WEIGHT Net 67.2lbs; Manufacturer 3hree-year limited warranty on CRT, parts and labor.
Sony CRT monitors seem like the only ones that have a "convergence" option that can adjust the red and blue/green (usually grouped together) color alignment to reduce the "rainbow tinge" that you sometimes see on monitors, especially around text. That tinge drives me crazy, and I like to adjust it down when needed. Does anybody know of another company that offers such an option on their monitors?
Table-ized A.I.
I phased out my last CRT about a year ago. The only
difference I've noticed is how much more crap winds
up on my desks now. =)
Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine...
Of course it's something. How can you comprehend the universe if it's nothing? If you assign the concept of nothing to vacuum, you're one concept short when it comes time to conceive of lack of space (no medium for the establishment of nothing.)
I'll be the first to admit my utter ignorance when it comes to the wonderful world of home electronics, but I know how to spew things verbatim. :) The Samsung 50" DLP Widescreen HDTV-capable projection TV has zero problems with burn-in or convergence, since it doesn't have any CRT guns in it. My buddy just bought it for his apartment, and not only is the picture super-crisp and viewable at fairly wide angles without fading out, like some other big-ass TVs.
Oh, and did I mention it's only 17.5" deep and weighs all of 88lbs? That's just a smidgen heavier than my 21" NEC AccuSync 120 at work, and almost 3" shallower!
...they really mean its small.
Well, it has never been successfully tested.
Try walking into two similar offices, one with CRTs and one with LCDs. You'll find the second one feels more spacious. And life is about placebo after all.
Consider the real estate relted cost of CRTs and the tco of LCDs turns out cheaper. Good argument for the SO too (if you have one.)
I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
What exactly has market share got to do with Sony's decision? (Or rather, why should we consider it odd because of the current market share?)
How many have been sold in the past is not as relevant as how many will be sold in the future. A basic 15" LCD can be bought so cheaply these days, what market is there for 15" / 17" CRTs - especially 'premium' models that Sony produce?
Other monitors can be very nice, but for many applications you need a trinitron.
"A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming, is not worth knowing" - Alan Perlis
However, I prefer LCD screens for reading text. The square pixels and sharp edges lend themselves to that sort of purpose.
LCDs are better for reading text. CRTs quickly give you eyestrain. The CRT image aslo shakes, even if only slightly on the better models. When LCD producers have had time to put as much time, effort and funding into color as the CRTs manufactures, then there will be no need to keep the CRTs around.Right now, the best compromise is to have dual-head: one CRT for sensitive color work, one LCD for the other work.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
If you work in a room full of screens, say in a banks trading room, the reduced level of heat from LCDs is quite noticeable. In some cases, they have have even had to downgrade the airconditioning, because it was cooling the room too fast after the switch. Mind you some of that heat saving is going because of the computers going to 300w power-supplies to keep the P4s running at 2+GHz.
See my journal, I write things there
I just bought a new package PC and a 17" LCD could be bundled with it for $149 more than the price for a 17" CRT - a no-brainer for me!
Have you seen the 22-Inch Apple Cinematic Display?
The point is, I think LCDs have come a long way, pictures are sharper, colours more brillient, and refreshs fast enough to fool the eye. Plus, they don't comsume as much energy as CRTs, don't have a problem with magnetic fields and don't need annoying screen filters.
The only thing now is to improve yields as costs are high due to bad pixle rejections...
Now, where to get my radiation fix.....
Sometimes I wish I was a plumber, then I'd know how to deal with other people's shit.
I got a Sony VAIO notebook, a Sony mobile telephone, a Sony PS2, a Sony SuperTrinitron TV, Sony headphones and more stuff because this company really makes great products. I am not going to buy inferiour products just because of RIAA or MPAA. Also you lump together Sony Music, Sony Pictures and Sony Electronics which is just wrong. You should maybe not buy their CDs but I guess you either don't by CDs at all or you don't care who manufactures them.
why are youtrying to do colour critical on a G-series monitor? Sony have an excellent F-series which is actually DESIGNED to do colour critical, and there's always Barco and other vedors to consider too. Not to mention the fact that SW colour calibration is an almost complete waste of time - do it with a hardware calibrator and it'll ACTUALLY WORK. In TV, we have almost no problems with colour matching our BVMs - just gotta get the right tools for the job.
That was classic intercourse!
Bite my shiny metal ass!
Working on a desk that is only 24 inches deep and a monitor that is 17" deep, not including the space for the cords at the end, would leave me only about 10" (The afore mentioned cords need some room, so the monitor takes up actually about 14" obviously.)
My solution was to a) sit on a big ass unabridged dictionary so that it's at a comfortable viewing level and b) offset it from where my keyboard sits.
This allows me to have full space on my desk for my keyboard, and mousepad. I can also push my keyboard all the way back to the edge of my desk if I need room to write or crack open a box.
While if you are use to having your monitor directly in front of you, it might seem a bit different. But I've yet to have anyone say anything when they come over and use my rig. And when I'm at work, I don't notice the difference either having it the traditional way of it being directly in front of me.
Really, I know what I'm doing...Ohhhh, look at the shiny buttons!
at least vs. convexity! (the current state).
...)
...
Even those flat CRTs make quite a difference vs. the sort I have (which didn't look so bulgy before all the others looked so flat
Wall to ceiling sounds like a cool idea; if projectors weren't so expensive, I'd like to try an XGA/SXGA projector as a primary display. That takes a darkened or at least dim room with current projectors though
timothy
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
WTF? Who uses 63 Hz. Anything below 70 makes my eyes go nuts. 80s what I shoot for (or an LCD!).
So they'll make BIG CRTs now? My table's about to snap from 2 17"ers, are they going to buy me a table deep and strong enough for 2 25"ers?
Have you noticed what drug companys have done when a lucritive patent is about to expire? They just reformulate the drug a little bit and call it a different name. Like Prilosec, they came out with Nexium that is very simular. Or look at antidepressents liek Prozac that come out with a once a week pill. I find it hard to believe that Sony will just leave this market because if they do then they may as well leave the small TV sector as well. I find it more likely for them to patent a technology like their Wega product and just start marketing that. Look for more Sony Trinition Wega computer monitors in the future.
I like my 19" trinitron... I feel like im sitting in the front row of a theatre if I have a bigger monitor. Are they going to start making keyboard shelves that move back more so I will be able to back up? I hope so.
14" and 15" are small.
17" is 'medium'.
19" is big.
More than that is huge.
So, when Apple makes the iMac2, its kewl cause its LCD and no more craptacular CRT. But, when the iMac2 is killed due to lack of demand, what's left but CRTs? Funny no? Well, Sony just wants to be as cool, so why not support them?
I currently have 3 "trinitron type" monitors at home: 1-Compaq 17", 1-Dell 19" and a Sony 21" professional series. My work machine has a Compaq P1220 22" which is also aperture grill. Have been happy with them all and will continue to use aperture grill over shadow mask for the crispness and clarity. I've looked at the TFT offerings in 17" and 18" sizes and for me, they just aren't there yet. Even if Sony does get out of the "small" monitor business, hopefully other vendors will still continue to provide these sizes in glowing glass until the LCD quality catches up.
-- Rick
With the passing of the new millenium, I noted that the CRT was the only remaining, widespread, consumer use of vacuum tube technology.
We were so close to leaving those heavy, hot, power-gulping things behind with the 20th century.
(OTOH, I also note that it always takes about half a minute for my computer to power up, even the laptop with LCD. Same as when I was a kid and we had to "warm up" the television or radio in advance of a show.)
It's all about money and margins... In the imaging industry, it's not uncommon to see 24" CRT's
17" and 19" are simply mass produced with low margins. There is no business interest. 21" and 24" screens offer more $ per units and less repair.
This is basically a big equation involving cost to produce (including advertisement), cost to ship (LCD's take less space in a container), cost to repair (more fragile parts in a CTR), etc. If it makes sense, sell them, if not stop selling them. Heck, Sony will probably save 50% on plastic used for the LCD shell (compared to a CRT shell). In the end, that has to be big bucks for such a maker.
-- Leeeter than leet
FW-900
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. You're superficially quoting something that admittedly is often quoted, but this is a very complex subject, and your summary of it is so simplistic as to be wrong.
For one thing, the "critical flicker fusion rate" is not simply a universal "60 frames per second". It depends on:
That's part of why movie theaters get away with a mere 48fps (24 unique frames, but each is double shuttered). They turn the ambient lights down to almost zero, and that helps a lot.
You're also mildly confused about tv, which in the US does use 30 unique frames per second, but by using interlace, increases that up to more reasonable 60fps...however most people will definitely see flicker on US tv at some times in some conditions. Sophisticated broadcasters usually try to minimize the issues on their end, but that's not always enough.
Europe of course has 25 unique frames, interlaced up to 50 total frames per second (to match the frequency of their wall current, just as 60 Hertz matches US wall current frequency), and TV's in Europe are often perceived to flicker, as opposed to rarely.
It also depends on which aspect of perception under discussion; cartoons sometimes use as few as 4 unique frames per second (each displayed repeatedly to end up with a total of 48 or 60 or whatever fps), because that's adequate for a perception of motion. But it's jerky motion.
And now we have come to the heart of the issue of why it can be desirable to have even higher rates than 60 to 80fps. We are strobing objects in continuous motion, and the faster they move, the more the strobed snapshot of them is subject to motion blur (potentially...never mind whether this happens e.g. Quake in particular).
In real life, objects being viewed are in a continuous domain, and our perceptual system does something similar to discrete sampling. That will never mathematically be identical to discrete sampling of a discrete sequence at another rate; there's always issues of aliasing. This is a huge issue for digital signal processing in every domain, whether audio, visual, or other.
At any rate, in theory, certain very rapidly moving objects should be perceived more crisply at (say) 150 fps than at 80fps, even though that's way over that critical flicker fusion rate --- there are more issues involved than just that.
Professional Wild-Eyed Visionary
30fps is a slide show. Movies get away with it because of motion blur - but in the newest style the action scenes are filmed with very low blur because otherwise any fast motion get smeared across the screen. The effect is that you can percieve much more detail - but it looks like a strobe light is going off.
60Hz refresh is a strain on the eyes because 60fps is very visible to the naked eye. The flicker you see should be proof for anyone that even 60fps is not enough to render true fluid motion.
Regardless, don't take my word for it - ask the air force.
"I don't know that atheists should be considered citizens, nor should they be considered patriots." George HW Bush
The higher your max capabilities, the better the lower ones get. Since the parent to my post said 1920x1440, there's a good chance it'll hit at least 75Hz at that resolution.
As for myself, I don't need anything over 1600x1200 @ 85Hz, thus that monitor would do me just fine (and I'd love to have it, if it were free :) LOL)
The higher your max capabilities, the better the lower ones get. Since the parent to my post said 1920x1440, there's a good chance it'll hit at least 75Hz at that resolution.
>>>>>>>>>
75 Hz is too low, and besides, even then 1920x1440 is only 120 dpi. Like I said, I have yet to see a CRT than can match the resolution and image stability of my Dell LCD.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Also on the plus side, I have two Sony TV's (13 inch, 20 inch) that have worked great for about a decade. The 20-inch model suffers from less-than-perfect linearity, and the 13 had the labels rub off of its buttons, but other than that both have been perfect over their entire lifetime.
On the minus side, I bought a Sony VCR in 1994 or so, and when I got it home, it was DOA. Took it back and swapped it for an identical Sony VCR, and never had any problems with it. My next two VCRs, plus my DVD player, did not come from Sony, mostly because of my previous experience.
Bottom line: I don't know whether to recommend Sony or not... but I really like their headphones!
When the time comes for a high definition LCD TV, I'll have to decide whether or not to consider a Sony; it won't be an easy decision.
If you feel a need to buy CRT's for prepress or whatever, then ok... I'm sorry for your loss.
For everyone else, get an LCD now! Vacuum tubes suck.
BTW, I once tried to reheat a slice of pizza on the back of a CRT. They seem hot, but they're not quite hot enough. Ended up having to use the microwave as usual. Bummer.