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.
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.
I'm a gamer.
I run UT2003.
I own a LCD.
My LCD runs usually at 75 hz, although it can run at 80 hz.
I see no ghosting whatsoever.
I see no dead pixels, and I've even had my monitor go through the US's airline BAGGAGE.
Me thinks you have not seen a modern LCD.
--- Ãther SPOON!
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...
I refuse to buy a monitor that doesn't have at least a 120 DPI native resolution. That rules out pretty much every CRT. I switched from a nice 19" Sony Trinitron to a 15" 1600x1200 Dell laptop LCD, and it's the best switch I've ever made. Staring at text just plain becomes easier when there are enough pixels to actually display letter shapes! The total lack of flicker and zero geometric distortion doesn't hurt!
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
People who buy them as televisions have to be very careful to avoid burn it, that's why they have grey vertical bars instead of black when watching 4:3 television on a 16:9 display. The technology just isn't quite there yet.
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.
This all depends on what the pixel response time is. I get no ghosting on my LCD's at all, but I have seen some crappy (eg Viewmaster) ones that did ghost.
My pixel response time on my TWO LG 563LE's is 25ms. This is the equivalent of 40fps... BUT this is only for the pixels that change colours.
All of the other pixels don't change color at all, and as such are inifite FPS !!! This is why you don't get such sore eyes on these babies.
I also play counter-strike and DOD on my LCD's and I experience no problems at all playing. I have had other gamers surprised at how good they are given they are LCD's
lounge around on the blue couch
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
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.
Your eye can't pick up more than 60 fps anyway. If you think it can, you're high on crack. Film is 20, TV is 30. The only reason people like video cards that get 150 fps in "Quake", is because that means at the "tough spots" they still stay above 30. Pretty sad if you trash a technology because it doesnt get more than 65 fps. I suppose all cars that have a top speed under 220 mph suck too.
I'm Rick James with mod points biatch!