Slashdot Mirror


Sony Profits Low, Halts CRT Production

mtndue1 writes "Forbes is reporting that with lower than expected profits, Sony is halting the production of CRT's for televisions at many of its plants. The restructuring move is meant to catch the company up with other manufacturers who moved to LCD displays more quickly." From the article: " In the second quarter to September, net profit dropped 46.5 pct to 28.5 bln yen, pressured by 32.3 bln yen in restructuring expenses to write down the impaired value of its cathode-ray tube (CRT) plants. Under the plant closure program, Sony will shut down some of its CRT television assembly factories by March 2008 in order to shift its focus to the flat-screen TV business ... In a bid to revive its game division, Sony plans to release its next-generation stand-alone PlayStation 3 game console in the spring. To speed up development of PlayStation 3, Sony plans to devote 410 bln yen to capital investment in the year to March, up from 356.8 bln yen a year earlier."

270 comments

  1. It's about time... by bassgoonist · · Score: 1, Informative

    LCD may not be superior in all ways, but for the average consumer the small size is ideal. Although sony isn't the best, I'd hate to see them go the way of the dodo.

    --
    You can tell I'm an aries because of my ram.
    1. Re:It's about time... by Allen+Zadr · · Score: 2, Informative
      When it comes to CRTs, Sony was the best only three years ago. When Mitsubishi started pushing their "DiamondTron" flat-CRTs, totally ripped off from Sony's Trinitron technology.

      LCD/DLP/Plasma are still not bright enough for well lit spaces (IMHO). I don't always want to use the basement for my Television viewing.

      --
      Kinetic stupidity has a new brand leader: Allen Zadr.
    2. Re:It's about time... by Karma_fucker_sucker · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Although sony isn't the best, I'd hate to see them go the way of the dodo.

      That's interesting. SONY used to be considered the top of the line. (Shows you how much time I spend shopping for electronics.)
      I wonder what happened. Did they get tired of being the innovators and decide to become the followers: at least in consumer electronics?

      --
      Evil people don't think they're evil. - George Lucas, Making of Ep III
    3. Re:It's about time... by hal2814 · · Score: 0, Redundant

      I for one welcome our new Chinese and Korean TV-making overlords.

    4. Re:It's about time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Although sony isn't the best, I'd hate to see them go the way of the dodo.

      Oh god no!!! That must not happen... I mean... what if Sony dies before Nintendo... all those Sony fanboys... what are they gonna do? Buy a Revolution and a NDS? Ya know... to play real games for once...?

    5. Re:It's about time... by glenrm · · Score: 1

      Didn't the patent on Trintron expire?

    6. Re:It's about time... by Average_Joe_Sixpack · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's interesting. SONY used to be considered the top of the line. (Shows you how much time I spend shopping for electronics.) I wonder what happened. Did they get tired of being the innovators and decide to become the followers: at least in consumer electronics?

      China, Korea and Malaysia happened. They just couldn't compete with electonics dumping from Samsung, Goldstar, LG, APEX ... etc.

    7. Re:It's about time... by m4dm4n · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sony are very good at refusing to drop their prices to be competitive. As others have said here already, many other manufacturers have caught up in picture quality, the new Samsungs look & sound beautiful, as do many other brands.

      Yet Sony still price their sets like they have no competition.

    8. Re:It's about time... by xtracto · · Score: 2, Interesting

      LCD/DLP/Plasma are still not bright enough for well lit spaces (IMHO). I don't always want to use the basement for my Television viewing.

      While I agree with your point I think it is nice that companies are discontinuing production of CRT at once. I think this will increase the competitivity for better flat display TV. And I am sure it will also make its prices drop (and this is something I would really want because the prices are still not affordable for people like me).

      Also, as there is more companies concentrating on competing in this technologies I am sure the issues you state are going to be lessen. I would really love to see the flat[or other than CRT] technologies catching as standard alternatives NOW!! (even for developing countries like mine [.MX]) becuase, as a slashdoter said before, when you watch a web page with a CRT tube is like "staring at a 60watt lightbulb", and that is why after 8 hours of continuous work you end with a just-shoot-me-eye strain*.

      *Just as a side note try making ALL your background color BLACK and your fonts color white just for 1 day and yo will see how nice is that setup for your eyes [of course, you will also see how ALL the internet pages AND Operating System applications are soooo badly designed specifically for white/bright backgrounds].

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    9. Re:It's about time... by linzeal · · Score: 1

      Sony is still the best for longevity and durability, I've had a 21" Sony CRT in a SGI plastic case for almost 10 years now without a single problem. In that time I've gone through a string of 17" CRT off brands and 4 LCD monitors, 2 on the same HP laptop I am using.

    10. Re:It's about time... by Zathrus · · Score: 3, Informative

      Didn't the patent on Trintron expire?

      Yes, but remember -- when it's a patent/copyright/other IP that you hate then it's evil and wrong. When it's something you like, when the IP expires then others "rip off" your hard work.

      And I heartily disagree with the grandparent about the brightness factor of LCD/DLP -- my 46" DLP is visible in normal light conditions, in a well lit room. No, I can't see shit on it when the sun is shining directly on the screen, but I can't see shit on a CRT in those circumstances either.

      And I suspect he was comparing apples to oranges anyway -- direct view CRT to projection LCD/DLP (since projection is the only way you can view DLP). Compare projection CRT and the LCD/DLP literally shine -- you need as dark a room as possible for projected CRT. Also, if you want much more than 36" diagonal you can't use direct view CRT -- the tubes are just too big, heavy, and expensive (IIRC, the largest direct view tube ever produced for home use was a 44" Mitsubishi).

    11. Re:It's about time... by ergo98 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      LCD may not be superior in all ways, but for the average consumer the small size is ideal.

      Indeed, and this story really has very little to do with CRTs versus LCDs - It's a simple tale of a very large corporation that lost its way (I stopped buy Sony stuff because what once was an extremely high quality brand turned into an overpriced garbage brand) that's now spastically shifting around to try to regain its footing.

      Even more ridiculous is the "SONY IS STOPPING PRODUCTION OF CRTS!" followed by the rather important disclaimer "at most of its plants". That entirely counters the headline, and it more accurately should be "Sony is scaling back CRT production", which seems obvious given how many computers, for instance, come with LCDs now, eliminating the need for such a glut of CRT supply.

    12. Re:It's about time... by orderb13 · · Score: 1

      Sony still is the best. They're high end products have no equal. They are harder to find though. When I got my XBR CRT there was only 1 in the entire city (approx 1 million people). Amazingly enough the store that had it was Circuit City. Weird.

    13. Re:It's about time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All of the LCDs I have seen are a lot brighter than CRTs, so they are sure bright enough. Maybe you haven't seen any recently ?

    14. Re:It's about time... by Nerdfest · · Score: 2, Informative

      Have a look at the JVC HD-ILA projection, and the new SOny equivalent. The use reflective LCD (non-organic), and are icredibly bright. One of the reviewers of the JVC said something like "If you watched the winter olympics on this at max brightness, you'd get a tan".

    15. Re:It's about time... by pete6677 · · Score: 1

      It seems to me like Sony quality and support have really fallen off in recent years. I remember when Sony was more expensive, but worth it due to the superior quality and features. Now, it seems like the company has rented its formerly good name out to whatever bottom-of-the-barrel manufacturer wants to pay for it. They churn out garbage with Sony stamped on it and then the company refuses to support it when there are problems. The last Sony Trinitron I bought failed after 3 months and the support was non-existant. After reading about similar problems other customers had, I decided no more Sony products for me. This company is running on fumes and will be bankrupt before the end of the decade.

    16. Re:It's about time... by Allen+Zadr · · Score: 1

      There are a few "super-bright" LCD / Backlights available, but they still are not as bright as my CRT. They may be "less sharp" though.

      --
      Kinetic stupidity has a new brand leader: Allen Zadr.
    17. Re:It's about time... by Allen+Zadr · · Score: 1
      For the record. Patents and Software are the "evil mix". That still doesn't mean there are not rip-off programs.

      The best example I can think of would probably get this post labelled as a troll, though, so I'll just leave it at that.

      ---

      The point I was trying to make is that even after all those years, Sony's Trinitron technology was an immediate improvement to what they could already offer. It would seem though, that after 17 years, someone would of come out with something better that didn't require visible cross-wires. In other words, Sony was indeed that far ahead.

      --
      Kinetic stupidity has a new brand leader: Allen Zadr.
    18. Re:It's about time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Put a Samsung DLP in a dark room and behold the sun-core effect that instantanously melts your cornea. I dont know what you are smoking but DLP is bright. Too bright. Until you need to replace the bulb, ofcourse.

    19. Re:It's about time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LG = "Lucky Goldstar", so Goldstar is redundant

    20. Re:It's about time... by Allen+Zadr · · Score: 1
      That's really funny. I own a 42" Samsung DLP, HD w/ cable card.

      I note that you said "in a dark room", you should also add "directly in front of, and no more than 20 degrees off center".

      Certainly, DLP is still clearly visible (in that dark room) up to 60 degrees off center, but that rightness degrades quickly.

      --
      Kinetic stupidity has a new brand leader: Allen Zadr.
    21. Re:It's about time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, their CRT monitors sucked in reliablity.. I had a nice and expensive 21" crt trinitron, but it failed after less than 3 years with the exact same failure that many other people have been experiencing with various different models.

    22. Re:It's about time... by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yet Sony still price their sets like they have no competition.

      That makes an interesting corrolation between American automakers in the 70's and 80's getting beat out by the Japanese (and slowly adapting), and now the Japanese electronics vendors vs the Korean and Chinese electronics vendors seem to be going through the same thing..

    23. Re:It's about time... by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      Now, it seems like the company has rented its formerly good name out to whatever bottom-of-the-barrel manufacturer wants to pay for it. They churn out garbage with Sony stamped on it and then the company refuses to support it when there are problems.

      As I hear it, they farmed their export products out to china, but still manufacture their domestic stuff locally.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    24. Re:It's about time... by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      I don't like LCDs. I'd buy them if they were 4:3, went up to 1280x960 or 1600x1200, had no native resolution crap (i.e. no blending/stretching issues) and proper color settings. Sure, some of that is not possible but I won't buy a screen that doesn't do all of this. Anything less than what a CRT delivers is not acceptable IMO.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    25. Re:It's about time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do have my background nearly black, and I use off white text. By telling the browser to override the colors of the web pages most site work ok. Of course, all the objections to the different themes on Slashdot don't concern me at all: I can't see them.

      There are some downsides. The use of different color text to distinguish various types of information is lost on me. Many places use small bit maps for things, e.g. mathematical terms, and that looks horrible if done wrong (it's ok if its embedded in a background square).

      The advantage of not having a bright light shining in my face outweighs all these problems.

    26. Re:It's about time... by CmdrPorno · · Score: 1

      Up until the mid-1990's, you used to get something by paying extra for the Sony name (case in point, Trinitron). As another poster noted, the patent expired, so every manufacturer has flat CRT's now.

      Sony still has some neat stuff (the rear-projection Wega), but the differential between Sony and other brands is much smaller than it once was. I have a couple of Sony LCD's, but I bought them because they were on sale, not because they were head-and-shoulders above the competition.

      --
      Sent from my iPhone
    27. Re:It's about time... by Castar · · Score: 3, Funny

      China, Korea and Malaysia happened. They just couldn't compete with electonics dumping from Samsung, Goldstar, LG, APEX ... etc.

      Not to mention Sorny, Magnetbox, and Panaphonic.

      --
      I yearn for you tragically. A. T. Tappman, Chaplain, U.S. Army.
    28. Re:It's about time... by default+luser · · Score: 1

      When it comes to CRTs, Sony was the best only three years ago. When Mitsubishi started pushing their "DiamondTron" flat-CRTs, totally ripped off from Sony's Trinitron technology.

      You act like Mitsubishi was stealing candy from a baby. You also act as if competition is a bad thing.

      Sony had their chance at the Trinitron. They've been making it since 1969, so they've gotten more than their money's worth out of the technology.

      Normally such a market lead as Sony had with such a sophisticated product would preclude other companies entering the market, for fear of never catching up. But Sony was complacent, never offering significant improvements on the Trinitron beyond the 70s, and always charging a premium. When Mitsubishi saw an opportunity in the market in the 1990s, they caught Sony with their pants down.

      Mitsubishi was the first Aperture Grille manufacturer to produce a completely flat, distortion-free tube (marketed as Diamondtron NF), and they pushed Sony to release their own version (FD Trinitron) in response. Who knows how long we would have had to wait for Sony to do it without competition, especially with the explosion of LCDs looming on the horizon?

      The best part is, Mitsubishi has worked to reduce the price of their Dirmondtron NF line, effectively removing the premium long associated with the Trinitron. The end result is, you can still buy a quality Aperture Grille tube, even though Sony can't seem to make theirs cost-effective. Sony no longer matters.

      * Proud user of the Diamondtron NF since 1999.

      --

      Man is the animal that laughs.
      And occasionally whores for Karma.

    29. Re:It's about time... by Allen+Zadr · · Score: 1
      I never suggested that the CRT that I'm comparing "other stuff" to wasn't a Mitusbishi Diamondtron. As, yes, in fact, it is.

      Nor was I suggesting that it was taking candy from a baby. I was merely mentioning that Sony was in the lead, and lost it. You seem to re-date that loss, so I'll concede that you are probably right.

      --
      Kinetic stupidity has a new brand leader: Allen Zadr.
    30. Re:It's about time... by cramcram · · Score: 1

      Sony was considered top of the line for a long time. What happened wasn't really the emergence of Korea, Inc. but rather their reluctance to accept the future. Their own head of engineering recently acknowleged that they had an excellent array of analog engineers but were somewhat behind in digital (quite an understatement actually). When they had to compete with LCD/Plasma/whatever they were clueless (except for the games division however). And their user interfaces are just plain awful.

  2. Improve quality? by BenjyD · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I wonder if this means Sony is going to start improving their LCD TV quality finally? When I was shopping for an LCD TV recently, the Sony ones were overpriced, ugly and had poor image quality compared to competition.

    1. Re:Improve quality? by Flave · · Score: 1

      Actually, their new Bravia line of LCD TVs is outstanding quality wise. Unfortunately, they're still way overpriced.

      And I don't understand this statement: But because we can now use our own LCD panels, we can limit the price fall of LCD TVs to around 15 pct in the year to March.

      It sounds like they're saying that since they now make their own LCD panels, they can limit future price erosion. Do they think they're the only game in town?

    2. Re:Improve quality? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      honestly the ones I was impressed with were the mid priced wierd-named brands. they had the best picture at a price that made you ignore the high end stuff.

      One of the wierd name brands had a contrast level that made all the others look bad. and yes I grabbed the remote and reset all settings on every TV I looked at. I know you cnat make a real assessment without dangling a calibrator over the front and playing a refrence test pattern but if I save $3000.00 and get a great picture who cares.

      We are looking to pick up a nice $1500.00 model that is nice and wide and has a fantastic picture.

    3. Re:Improve quality? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (speculative)

      One possibility would be asian "use it or lose it" patent laws: in several asian countries, if you don't actually produce something based on a patent you hold, you can't enforce it, and you will lose it if you try.

      Patents prevent commoditisation and drive up prices: Sony has a large patent portfolio, now that they make LCD screens, they can now enforce various LCD-technology related patents, and thus prevent other manufacturers reducing prices by requiring payment of patent licensing fees despite their steadily lowering manufacturing costs as processes improve.

    4. Re:Improve quality? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dunno. I got an MFM HT75W, a 17" widescreen monitor with TV Tuner. I've been quite happy with the brightness and picture quality (glare is still an issue, albeit a minor one).

      Sharp seems to be the market leader when it comes to brightness, however.

    5. Re:Improve quality? by coleridge78 · · Score: 1

      This shouldn't be considered good news.

      Sony has been making LCDs for year, for use in videocameras, digicams, and the like, and they are renowned for horrible quality control. Everytime you buy a product with a sony LCD you're rolling the dice. The problems come and go with individual products at different times, leading most people to suspect that they roll bad batches off the production lines and unlike other REPUTABLE companies don't bother doing any QA, or even responding after the fact when there's been a problem.

      Everyone talking about how great Trinitrons are is also a doofus, for the record. The picture quality wasn't any better than other sets at their price point (anyone who says otherwise is either fallen victim to marketing or a liar), and their failure rate was the highest in the industry. The tubes blew more often than Korean discount-store brands like Goldstar, and that is not exaggeration.

    6. Re:Improve quality? by vinn01 · · Score: 1

      I join those "most people" in suspecting that Sony doesn't bother doing any QC. All it took was seeing a couple of dead-on-arrival HDTV's.

      I think that Sony cut all it's QC staff during their glory years. Now, they probably think that "the quality is built-in".

      In their dreams...

    7. Re:Improve quality? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Everyone talking about how great Trinitrons are is also a doofus, for the record. The picture quality wasn't any better than other sets at their price point (anyone who says otherwise is either fallen victim to marketing or a liar), and their failure rate was the highest in the industry. The tubes blew more often than Korean discount-store brands like Goldstar, and that is not exaggeration.

      No, in fact, it's not an exaggeration. "Outright lie" would come closer to the truth.

  3. Sony still sold CRTs?? by neologee · · Score: 0, Troll

    I havent seen any at sony retailers in 3 years at least! heh.

    1. Re:Sony still sold CRTs?? by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      you'll see plenty if you shop at the cheap consumer-crap places like I do, my 28" Sony TV weighs a ton! I'm hoping LCD will become so cheap I can buy 3' at less than $400, because I'm getting too old to lug around this moster vacuum bottles

  4. Mostly a good thing by Snamh+Da+Ean · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If this means there is a much greater supply of LCDs then the price should drop. Does anyone buy who isn't budget constrained buy CRTs anymore?

    1. Re:Mostly a good thing by Mprx · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you play fast action games then CRTs are still the best, and until LCDs can display at refresh rates of at least 100Hz without blurring they always will be. People saying you can't notice the difference with frame rates higher than 60Hz obviously haven't tested it. CRTs are also best for playing older or emulated games that require a low resolution.

    2. Re:Mostly a good thing by taskforce · · Score: 1

      Is anyone not on a budget?

      --
      My 3D Texturing Skinning work (under construction)
    3. Re:Mostly a good thing by petabyte · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well yes, me. I just opted for the 30" CRT Television (HDTV widescreen) instead of the 30" LCD. The reason? True black on the CRT and better colors overall. People have mentioned size constraints with televisions and yes, I got a slim fit CRT but it sits on an entertainment center which houses my reciever and DVD player. Since thats a dedicated area for the TV, I don't have a problem with that space being used for the TV and having the best picture I can. When it goes kaboom, I figure LCDs will be the standard and the picture will have improved.

      Now, my desk is another story. I have a CRT for my computer there too but when that goes, the LCD cometh ...

    4. Re:Mostly a good thing by Yaa+101 · · Score: 3, Informative

      All people in need of real colors still use CRTs...
      Those LCDs are ugly, none of them come near to what colors should look like.

    5. Re:Mostly a good thing by networkBoy · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually there are a few that cover the gamma curve of CRTs nicely, and can be calibrated further for color temperature and such. The downside is those LCDs cost around $2K for a 17-19 inch.

      Tom's Hardware did a nice piece on them.
      -nB

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    6. Re:Mostly a good thing by dreamchaser · · Score: 1

      Apparantly Congress isn't. Then again they probably all already have LCD's.

    7. Re:Mostly a good thing by Zathrus · · Score: 2, Funny

      Now, my desk is another story. I have a CRT for my computer there too but when that goes, the LCD cometh ...

      Man, I keep pseudo-hoping that my Viewsonic 21PS will die. Maybe then I could justify buying an LCD.

      Except that I have two spare VS 19" CRTs sitting around. Sigh.

      Maybe my toddler will figure out a way to trash them for me...

    8. Re:Mostly a good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice. This AC was seriously considering going that route as well. Now it looks like I'd better step on it, before cheap CRTs are extinct.

      When it goes kaboom, I figure LCDs will be the standard and the picture will have improved.

      That's the best part: modern CRTs almost never die. If anything, the electronics supporting them go a long way before the tube goes. I would certainly hope that things will have improved after the minimum 10-15 years your new set is going to last.

    9. Re:Mostly a good thing by xSauronx · · Score: 1

      and thats why i bought a 19" diamondtron last year when my 17" dell CRT stopped working. i gamed heavily at the time and loved it. $300 for a great picture; weight be damned, i dont have some silly need to move my monitor after its on the desk, and have plenty of deskspace to use it.

      --
      By and large, language is a tool for concealing the truth. -- George Carlin
    10. Re:Mostly a good thing by Zathrus · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's the best part: modern CRTs almost never die. If anything, the electronics supporting them go a long way before the tube goes.

      While technically true, the reality is that even though the CRT may not be dead it may be so dim that you wish it was. And compensating by pushing up the contrast and brightness just causes it to fade even faster.

      I can't tell you how many old CRT monitors I've seen that were so dim that they should've been thrown in the trash. Mine's not there yet, but it won't be much longer I think.

    11. Re:Mostly a good thing by digidave · · Score: 1

      Some people enjoy a long-lasting TV with high quality colors, brightness and contrast. Some other people enjoy showing off a TV that will hang on their wall and die in five years.

      --
      The global economy is a great thing until you feel it locally.
    12. Re:Mostly a good thing by crabpeople · · Score: 2, Informative

      "If you play fast action games then CRTs are still the best"

      You probably baught a cheap LCD. My Sceptre X9 19" 12ms LCD, cost about 100$ more than the cheapest 19" LCD on the market but the quality is supurb. I can play BF2, wow, quake4, etc.. all look beautiful. 180* turns are flawless with no motion blur. In addition, this particular monitor is shiney/reflective, like a crt, so you get a bit of glare from the sun, but the blacks are truely the most well done i have ever seen.

      Where I work we have hundreds of LCDs. verying manufacturers. Some people will get really attached to a perticular model or manufacturer. If we switch it out for them, even say from a 15" to a 17" they immediately complain of eye problems and the like. LCD's come in a vast range or specs. Buy a nice samsung one if you cant afford 550 for the spectre. I use a samsung at work. Tried to switch to an NEC, but couldnt do it. similar feeling to look at a 60hz CRT when you used to 75-85.

      also, correct me if im wrong, but Hz doesnt really apply to LCD like it does to CRT. I thought that was true but i dont know why.

      --
      I'll just use my special getting high powers one more time...
    13. Re:Mostly a good thing by mcho · · Score: 1

      I just bought the Sony 30" CRT HDTV Widescreen TV too.

      For me it was a no brainer -- among the other reasons already listed in previous posts, the larger size was not a concern because I needed an entertainment center for my DVD player, etc.

      It sucks that Sony isn't going to make CRT's anymore.

    14. Re:Mostly a good thing by tukkayoot · · Score: 1
      Personally I can't really notice a different in refresh rate above 85 Hz or so. Lower than 70 Hz hurts (ha, pun) my eyes though.

      But LCDs don't have a refresh rate. They don't redraw the image so many times a second, instead they display an image and change which pixels need changing as necessary. The length of time it takes for a pixel to change color appropriately is called "response time" and over the past few years, LCD response times has improved considerably, to the point where many gaming/hardware web sites now recommend LCDs as a primary choice, because CRT technology has been pretty stagnant for a while now (some actually believe the quality has been on the decline) while the advantages of the LCD have been steadily piling up (or more accurately, their disadvantages have been getting toned down).

      My next display will probably be an LCD.

    15. Re:Mostly a good thing by Ixitar · · Score: 1

      I couldn't agree more. I just got a 34 inch widescreen CRT. It is taking the place of a 36 inch standard television.

      While the flat panels are more stylish, the CRT works for me. I also got it for over 60% off because it was a discontinued model.

    16. Re:Mostly a good thing by topper24hours · · Score: 1

      Guess you missed TA yesterday about 3ms response time LCD screens. 12ms looks good to me @ home w/ HL2.

    17. Re:Mostly a good thing by Mprx · · Score: 1

      Still maximum displayed frame rate of 75fps, you can definitely tell the difference between 75fps and 100fps. Q4 is also frame rate capped, and BF2 is not the type of twitch gaming I'm talking about, so those are not good examples. Try playing Q3 1v1 instagib, and see how every frame counts.

      Hz does apply to an LCD in that displayed FPS can never be higher than display update Hz. A LCD won't flicker at 60Hz, but it won't give you perfectly smooth movement either.

    18. Re:Mostly a good thing by lmlloyd · · Score: 1

      In the TV space, I have a 34" CRT HDTV from Toshiba, because I am really picky about color and image quality, and while you can calibrate the color on a CRT TV, you are pretty much out of luck on an LCD. I compared just about every TV on the market when I bought this one about two years ago, and at the time there was nothing, plasma or LCD, that could compete on HD image quality with a really good direct-view CRT.

      As far as computer monitors go, I am putting together a new computer, and really wanted to go with dual CRTs. Unfortunately, a lot of companies have recently discontinued their high-end CRTs in favor of the more popular LCDs. This leaves a big hole in the market where the only CRTs are either low-end models for a couple of hundred dollars, or ultra-high-end models costing thousands. As a result, I was forced to go LCD, which is really a pain, since I do graphics, and it really does cause some color problems. At least the newer LCDs don't have the ghosting problems the older one do. That is a plus.

    19. Re:Mostly a good thing by tukkayoot · · Score: 1
      Huh, or maybe they do have refresh rates, but they have response times too, of course. I must have misread something a while back about the fundamental technology of LCDs, because now I do notice refresh rate is a listed spec on some models.

      My mistake.

    20. Re:Mostly a good thing by Yaa+101 · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the tip, but like you say... they are too expensive, especially for a one man shop...

    21. Re:Mostly a good thing by zakath · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So this is what gets modded as +5 Insightful on /. these days? Guess the trick is to say it like you know what you're talking about and the mods will follow. LCD 'refresh' rates are measured in 'ms' not 'Hz'. Poster also seems to be stuck in 2002...todays LCDs with sub-10ms refresh rates (I believe I read about a 3-4ms LCD coming soon as well) have eliminated the 'blurring' problem evident on older units. I've played many BF2, Doom3 and several others on my 19" 8ms LCD and it's been excellent...no ghosting. Todays units are greatly improved over the old 20ms+ ones. The only area CRTs still maintain an advantage are in displaying high resolution...LCDs outside their native resolution just aren't as nice.

      --

    22. Re:Mostly a good thing by Malor · · Score: 1

      Well, I play on a Dell 2405FPW(16ms = 60fps), and it seems fine to me, though I'm certainly not (anymore) a terribly competitive FPS player. I used to play at 85hz on my CRT, and I'm at 60 now, and I don't really notice a difference. Maybe when I was younger it might have mattered.

      I'm really quite impressed with how well this unit scales. Earlier LCD scaling was incredibly horrible. I think it must be actually scaling the images past the native 1920x1200 resolution and then sampling back down. It doesn't have hard edges, it sort of blurs. It's not as good as a CRT, but it's close. You can tell it's not native resolution if you look, but you have to LOOK. It's not instantly apparent.

      LCDs have come a long, long way in the last three or four years.

    23. Re:Mostly a good thing by Malor · · Score: 1

      Refresh rate in an LCD spec is really what the receiving circuitry can handle/adapt to. It doesn't change how fast the actual LCD elements update. A CRT is constantly drawing the screen, left to right, top to bottom, X number of times per second. So the refresh rate is very important there.... the faster it goes, the less flicker. An LCD emulates this behavior, by letting the monitor update an internal buffer up to X times a second, where X is the maximum refresh rate it supports.

      If I understand the technology correctly, LCDs do an instant update of every pixel on the screen simultaneously every 1/60th of a second. (possibly faster in the newer, sub-16ms LCDs). It just writes out whatever was most recently loaded into the buffer, meaning that if the monitor is running faster than 60hz, frames will get dropped. This could cause image tearing as well, though the monitor could do internal double-buffering to prevent that.

    24. Re:Mostly a good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hz doesn't matter for an LCD because the pixels stay lit. On a CRT the 'pixels' are excited so they light up and then discharge all of their energy so they go dark. At less than 60 Hz the average person notices. At less than around 90 Hz, prolonged use can cause eye strain.

      To the sibling post: I call BS. While you may notice the difference between 75 fps and 100 fps from your graphics card, unless you have superman-like vision you probably can't tell 60 from 75 fps on your monitor*. NOTE: This is the the 75Hz refresh. For a CRT that is the # time /sec that each 'pixel' is excited. For an LCD it's the max viewable frame rate. If you noticed bluring or crappy fps on an LCD it's because the one you looked at had a high refresh time. My SyncMaster has a 8ms refresh time. Unlike several other companies Samsung's refresh time seems to actually represent true time for a pixel to change color. 8ms => 125 Hz. So the refresh time is faster than max FPS. This indicates no blurring, smearing, etc. On this model, for this company, that indication is correct. Some companies misrepresent the refresh time so that it may take 18ms black->red (55 fps) Which means that a pixel that changes every frame in the graphics card will lag on the screen. Since refresh rate is not a standard it is hard to tell which ones to trust. But if you don't mind 6bit color, try the syncmaster line. It is very good for gaming.

      *Take TV. In America, NTSC Tv is 29.997 FPS (59.994 half-fps**) Whilst in Europe, PAL is 25 fps (i assume they use 50 half-fps as they run 50 Hz for power there).

      **Each actual scan across the entierty of a TV screen only updates half the screen. The frequency of electricity is the 'clock'. So in US 60 Hz => ~60 hfps => 30 fps.

    25. Re:Mostly a good thing by ipoverscsi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So this is what gets modded as 4 Insightful on /. these days? Hz and ms are easily converted from one to the other (e.g. 60Hz approx. = 16 ms, 85Hz approx. = 12ms). And while there are some puny 19" LCDs that can do 10-12ms refresh, those of us who run at 1600x1200 resoltion or larger would be "stuck" buying LCDs at 20"+ that are incapable of such speeds.

      That is why I buy CRTs.

    26. Re:Mostly a good thing by Frostalicious · · Score: 1

      So this is what gets modded as +5 Insightful on /. these days? ...'refresh' rates are measured in 'ms' not 'Hz'...todays LCDs with sub-10ms refresh rates (I believe I read about a 3-4ms LCD coming soon as well)...

      In the slashdot article you "read", there was a lengthy discussion about how refresh rate still applies to LCDs, and how the ms response time quoted by manufacturers is essentially useless. Similar to a wattage rating on your consumer amplifier. Whether current LCDs are good enough for games is very subjective.

      Insightful rating intact.

    27. Re:Mostly a good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I still use two CRTs. LCDs have still not been able to get color like a CRT (which is important for those who are not constrained to sRGB) and offers greater resolution. LCDs have come a long way, but have not equaled CRTs for color yet IMHO.

    28. Re:Mostly a good thing by Kjella · · Score: 3, Informative

      LCD 'refresh' rates are measured in 'ms' not 'Hz'. Poster also seems to be stuck in 2002...todays LCDs with sub-10ms refresh rates (I believe I read about a 3-4ms LCD coming soon as well) have eliminated the 'blurring' problem evident on older units. I've played many BF2, Doom3 and several others on my 19" 8ms LCD and it's been excellent...no ghosting. Todays units are greatly improved over the old 20ms+ ones. The only area CRTs still maintain an advantage are in displaying high resolution...LCDs outside their native resolution just aren't as nice.

      Well, ms and Hz are just two different units of measurement. What they mean by "refresh" is completely different though. For one, a CRT will flicker, an LCD will not at low refresh rates. Furthermore, a CRT will actually refresh exactly so, while an LCD will not (you will see different numbers for gray-gray, black-white-black, averages vs worst case). Not to mention you have ringing caused by trying to speed up the process. Take the "3ms" screen on slashdot here recently, it has 5ms black-to-black, more like 8ms before the ringing stops. Effectively, that means ~125fps, not ~333fps. Realisticly, most people don't notice more than ~60fps (as it doesn't flicker), so around 16ms actual response time. To make up for the marketing BS you need to buy a "8ms" screen though.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    29. Re:Mostly a good thing by Mprx · · Score: 1

      I can tell the difference between 75Hz and 100Hz animation on my CRT. This is *not* the same as "flicker-free" stills, which is not relevant on LCDs. It is generally accepted that a CRT flickers at 60Hz, and for a flicker to be seen there has to be a change from light to dark. This means that each flicker is actually equivilant to *two* frames, so the maximum animation frame rate for which increasing does not improve perceptible smoothness must be around 120Hz. In practice I think 100Hz is enough. Interlaced telivision looks terrible, and 50Hz update hurts my eyes. If you think television is acceptable quality then you must not be the kind of person who cares about fast graphics, and would be better off with an LCD.

    30. Re:Mostly a good thing by InvalidError · · Score: 1

      Actually, LCDs are refreshed one row at a time and controllers typically do not do buffering beyond two lines for double-buffered DAC inputs. The LCD controller selects the display line, loads one line (or segment) worth of data and drives the DACs' outputs to update the line. This is in many ways very similar to how CCDs and DRAM work.

      The reason why LCDs are perfectly acceptable at 60Hz as far as flicker is concerned is that undriven LCD elements take hundreds of miliseconds to fade while CRT phosphors fade in ~10ms. The LCDs' long fade time is also one of the main factors that make fast pixel response times difficult to achieve, this is why manufacturers are experimenting with over-driving DACs and other fancy schemes. As for the virtual 75Hz refresh limit on LCDs, this is in large part a DAC, analog buffering and pixel driving limit. DACs have finite bandwidth - even more so if you want to settle under 1LSB, analog buffers have finite bandwidths and capture/drive delays, pixels are located several centimeters away from the controller chip. All these constraints put very real limits on what can be done. Going beyond these limits would (probably) cause vertical streaking very similar to the horizontal streaking I am used to see on CRTs and analog-input LCDs. The only work-around for this is to divide the display area into quadrants but this strategy has its own issues.

    31. Re:Mostly a good thing by kosmicki · · Score: 1

      I have an old princeton monitor like that, so faded that you can't distinguish dark colors apart. Picked up a cheapy 15" Norcent LCD at staples a few months back for $90. I LOVE it compaired to my old CRT. I like 1024x768 for 15" or smaller monitors. Granted, I do think the quality of my LCD is on the low scale, but dang it is nice compaired to a dim CRT.

      Whenever I get around to building myself a new desktop, I'm getting 3 19" LCDs for a display. I don't game on the PC much so the low end ones are good enough for me. *Drools at the thought of all that desktop space*

  5. Anyone know...? by Otter · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Have Japanese largely stopped buying CRT televisions and monitors in favor of flat-screens? Given their space constraints, especially at home, I'd imagine it wouldn't take much for them to give up on tubes entirely.

    (Note: I'm looking for replies based on experience with Japanese reality, not on anime. TIA...)

    1. Re:Anyone know...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      (Note: I'm looking for replies based on experience with Japanese reality, not on anime. TIA...)

      Actually, they've quit with TV altogether, and instead battle aliens with huge anthropomorphic robots.

    2. Re:Anyone know...? by dduck · · Score: 3, Informative

      They did so a while back. When I was in Tokyo about 3 years ago, you could hardly find a CRT TV, uch less a CRT monitor. Everything new was flat and thin.

    3. Re:Anyone know...? by Bueller_007 · · Score: 1

      CRT sales are still higher than LCD sales here, but industry (see marketing) "experts" say that LCD sales will overtake them this year. (For what marketing hype is worth.)

      As a side note, manufacturers have blamed fluorescent lights for the slow sales of LCD TVs here. The "big box" electronics stores like Yodobashi and Bic all extremely well lit with fluorescent lighting, and manufacturers have requested that their TVs be placed on shelves at floor level (rather than eye level) where it's supposedly a little darker, and the quality of the picture a little better. It seems counterproductive to me, because then customers have to squat to actually see the TV, but hey, what do I know. There are enough 4.5-foot tall grannies here that it might actually work.

    4. Re:Anyone know...? by Kryptolus · · Score: 1

      I would say they have. I stayed in a not-so-big city, and even people there tended to have flat screens.
      In the electronics stores, almost every TV and monitor on display was flat.

      --

      --
      Violators will be prosecuted and prosecutors will be violated.
    5. Re:Anyone know...? by meringuoid · · Score: 1
      (Note: I'm looking for replies based on experience with Japanese reality, not on anime. TIA...)

      It's kind of sad that you had to specify that.

      Can we cite live-action horror movies, though? There was one of those that had a lot of TVs in it, but they were still using VHS! I mean, come on... Sadako really should have cursed someone's TiVo :-)

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    6. Re:Anyone know...? by Jflatnote · · Score: 1

      Having recently lived and worked in Japan for a number of years, I don't know many people there who own TVs big enough to really matter whether they were CRT or LCD. Size just doesn't seem to be as important there as it seems to be in the States (size of our houses, size of our cars, size of our...). Other than in the big electronics stores like Best Denki and Yamada Denki, I don't remember even seeing any LCD TVs. Everyone I know (and I know a lot of people) had CRTs.

    7. Re:Anyone know...? by dbleoslow · · Score: 1

      That's funny. When I bought my CRT TV while living in Tokyo 1.5 years ago there were quite a few choices.

    8. Re:Anyone know...? by mercedo · · Score: 1
      I am the perfect person that can tell. Flat-screen is very expensive, and I don't buy the flat-screen next time. There are two corners in any premises, in which large section was shared in flat-screen while other sections were all occupied by many small CRT versions.

      I would say it will take more than 5 years for flat to occupy the whole share of CRT.

      --
      Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters
    9. Re:Anyone know...? by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      They did so a while back. When I was in Tokyo about 3 years ago, you could hardly find a CRT TV, uch less a CRT monitor. Everything new was flat and thin.

      This makes me curious - what's the rent on the floorspace covered by a 30" CRT in Tokyo-to?

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    10. Re:Anyone know...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Everything was flat and thin."

      Kinda like most Japanese women.

    11. Re:Anyone know...? by dduck · · Score: 1

      Well, my experience was in the electronics area of Tokyo (its name escapes me right now), where perhaps they would be pushing the more futuristic stuff, rather than the status quo. Big city, Tokyo! (*) :D (*) THAT is the understatement of the century!

  6. Re:Welcome to 1990, Sony. by Fireye · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Welcome to variable resolutions, myriads of colors, quick response time, and incredible flexibility. Yes, I like my CRT's.

  7. I don't know about anyone else by Colourspace · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It looks to me like Sony are beginning to bet the farm on the PS3. The Walkman range is now outsold by Apple branded players, the TV market is awash with other makes of TV.. I could go on in any other markets (maybe brodacst - admit not too sure on that). They also seem to be losing their grip on their legendary quality of years back (though my admittedly late-era PSP is still a thing of beauty IMHO - lets ee how it stands up to time) - My Sony 6 CD player in my less than year old car has already taken to playing no CD's and has a radio that likes to retune at random... I could go on.. Sony are to me, at least, beginning to look more like a games company than anything else - if they don't succeed they may well be dodo, if not severely crippled.

    1. Re:I don't know about anyone else by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      I can go on about broadcast for you.

      Sony is losing big time there. Right now someone with less than $10,000.00 can buy a XL2 and a no-name editing platform and produce video content that is equlivant to that shot on a DigiBetacam camera that cost $100K and edited on a DME-9000 or any of their other pro video gear.

      when you can build an entire video editing platform for less than the price of one sony deck, sony is going to hurt bad.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    2. Re:I don't know about anyone else by evil+agent · · Score: 1
      Sony are to me, at least, beginning to look more like a games company than anything else - if they don't succeed they may well be dodo, if not severely crippled.

      I dunno, I just can't see Sony going under. They still have that great name recognition. As long as they keep putting out electronics with "Sony" emblazoned on them, people will buy them. How else can they keep getting away with higher prices than the competition? Customers obviously think that they're getting higher quality as well.

      --
      End transmission.
    3. Re:I don't know about anyone else by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You should take a look at how many electronic entertainment companys are awash in financial problems right now.

      The only one that seems to have any real profit and good returns is nintendo.

    4. Re:I don't know about anyone else by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      You could have said the same thing about Ford/GM/Dodge up until 2000 or so; for the longest time they were producing cars of lower quality that Honda/Toyota and American consumers were still buying domestic because they thought it was higher quality. Eventually a track record of lower quality catches up to you and your market share (and brand value) drops dramatically.

    5. Re:I don't know about anyone else by Rinikusu · · Score: 1

      I'd like to see more Sony->Apple partnerships, like, say, iTMS compatability. I know it's apple's cash-cow, but I'd buy a PSP if I could watch stuff I buy on iTunes. I've already got a nano, I'd rather have a more general purpose device than an iPod Video, especially one that can be a highly functional gaming device like the PSP. Now, if they'd just hurry up and start releasing more games...

      --
      If you were me, you'd be good lookin'. - six string samurai
    6. Re:I don't know about anyone else by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1, Troll

      I've never owned a quality Sony product. I had a Sony walkman that fell apart after only a couple months, a Sony television that got fuzzier and fuzzier until I finally gave it away-- at a year and a half old, and a Sony 5-disk DVD changer that loved to eat DVDs. I finally gave up on the damned thing, unscrewed it to get Alien and Aliens out of its greedy non-ejecting maw, and returned it to Fry's. (They're still using it to demo DVDs! Hah! When I returned it, the guy there told me that had tons and tons of complaints about this model of DVD player and stopped carrying it shortly before I brought it back, so now they just have my returned one.)

      Anyway, the point is, I'm sure at one time Sony stood for quality, but it's been a long time since that's been true.

    7. Re:I don't know about anyone else by jedrek · · Score: 1

      A couple of years ago I was talking to a friend about electronics equipment. After talking about a couple of brands we moved to Sony and were a bit surprised that between the two of us, we'd owned (or lived with) at least 30 pieces of Sony equipment, and the only two things that hadn't broken. This included at least 3 or 4 minidisc, a number of walkmans, playstations, tvs, vcrs. The only thing that came out ok was the a boom-box radio/tape player and a playstation console. Since that realization I've stayed away from Sony as far as I can and have pretty much told anyone who's asked the same.

      On the other hand, I have a 14" Sanyo TV that's working as well now as it was 15 years ago.

    8. Re:I don't know about anyone else by Dogtanian · · Score: 2, Informative

      I had a Sony walkman that fell apart after only a couple months, a Sony television that got fuzzier and fuzzier until I finally gave it away-- at a year and a half old

      Do you live in the US? Chances are that if you lived in the EU, you'd be able to get something done about that, if not a refund. Even if it had the "standard" base warranty for cheaper items (1 year), if you could prove that the fault was inherent (within 6 months of purchase the onus is on the retailer to prove the opposite), the court would almost certainly rule that a "quality" TV like Sony could be expected to last longer than 18 months.

      I mean, that is a POS. I have a portable Sony TV I purchased in 1993; it's had (I'd guess) average use, and the picture is as good as the day I bought it... can't believe it's the same company people talk about today.

      My father had two faulty Sony cassette Walkmans in a row three or so years back, before he gave up and got a Panasonic.

      For their own sake, Sony had better keep designing "fashionable" and "innovative" stuff, because no-one's going to pay a premium for that Sony quality for much longer.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    9. Re:I don't know about anyone else by toddestan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, while we are piling on anecdotes, why don't I give you some of mine:

      Sony 20.1" flat panel - had it for a year, works great. Almost 2 million pixels and no dead or hot ones.
      Sony 19" monitor - Worked great until I got the flat panel. Still works great for the person I gave it to.
      Sony 15" monitor - Got it way back in the mid 90's. Worked great until I bought the 19". Then I gave it away, then the person I gave it to gave it back to me cause they no longer needed it. Still works great on a second computer.
      Sony 13" TV - no complaints, never did use it much though (gave up on TV shortly after buying it)
      Sony Stereo reciever - Works great. Sony doesn't make any high end audio, but for $250 this one is quite adequate. I think I got it back in late 1999. The only complaint I have is minor - the remote has about 50 identical buttons (this seems to be a Sony tradition) which makes it hard to find the button you are looking for without looking at the remote to read the labels. Atleast the volume buttons are easy to find since they are on the bottom right.
      Sony 5 disk CD changer - Works great. Got it with the reciever, and have played a lot of CDs with no problems.
      Sony CD-RW drives - They just don't quit (same with Lite-on). Even my old 12x burner still keeps going in one of my old computers, even after burning many hundreds of disks.
      Sony Cybershot digital camera - Only minor complaint I have has to do with the slightly more expensive memory sticks. Otherwise camera is durable, fast, and easy to use. It has a standard smaller USB connector on it, and shows up as a USB mass storage device on the computer as well as using AAA batteries, which is better than most cameras I know.
      Sony studio headphones - Once again, Sony does not make high end audio equipment, but they do (or did) make a nice pair of headphones for $100.
      Sony Alarm clock - no complaints.

      So maybe I have good luck, or maybe a few others have just had bad luck. Of course, a lot of this gear is more than 2-3 years old, so perhaps it does date back to Sony's better times.

    10. Re:I don't know about anyone else by mink · · Score: 1

      You have a PSX that didn't eat the laser assembly? Holy shit! We need to get top men to study that thing.

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
  8. Can we get a CRT Price Drop? by aka_big_wurm · · Score: 1

    I have been looking at the Sony 30 inch wide screen CRT, can they drop the price on it $100 or so

  9. Not good news? by saskboy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I don't think this is very good news if you're in the market for a large screen TV in the future and want a CRT. With the supply from Sony dwindling, prices won't be dropping as much as we'd like them to in comparison to LCD. And I wonder how much easier it is to recycle components of an LCD screen device, compared to a CRT's? There will be less lead I'm guessing, but are there any rules about throwing LCD monitors/TVs into the landfill?

    --
    Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
    1. Re:Not good news? by lpangelrob · · Score: 1
      Maybe, maybe not. Depends what you mean by the future.

      In the next few months, stores will be clearing inventories and waiting for Sony's LCD products. This should mean clearance prices on existing Sony CRTs relatively soon.

      In the next few years, other CRT manufacturers may or may not ramp up production based off demand for CRTs. I'm gonna hedge that they won't, but you'll still probably be able to get CRTs from Sylvania (I thought they only made light bulbs!) or... Daewoo, I suppose... but probably not at significant discount from today's prices.

      At the same time, Sony's focus on the LCD market will result in more competition and less Sony LCD suckage.

      FYI, I am not an economist or dreaded market trend reporter.

  10. Don't forget oem market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I havent seen any at sony retailers in 3 years at least! heh.

    Sony oem's a large number of Trinitron crt's for other manufacturers.

    1. Re:Don't forget oem market by gid · · Score: 1

      Indeed, my NEC MultiSync FE1250 CRT monitor has a Sony trinitron tube in it. At least according to the graphics guy at my previous employer. You can see two wires streched across the screen, one on top, and one on the bottom when the display is white--apparently a trinitron signature.

    2. Re:Don't forget oem market by orderb13 · · Score: 1

      Is that what that is? I've had an NEC (forget the model) since they came out with "their" trinitron model. I always wondered what those lines were.

    3. Re:Don't forget oem market by Roliverio · · Score: 1

      Don't Forget South and Central America where these TV's are very big sellers in the low price , big performance market.

    4. Re:Don't forget oem market by ncc74656 · · Score: 2, Informative
      Indeed, my NEC MultiSync FE1250 CRT monitor has a Sony trinitron tube in it. At least according to the graphics guy at my previous employer. You can see two wires streched across the screen, one on top, and one on the bottom when the display is white--apparently a trinitron signature.

      NEC merged its monitor business with Mitsubishi a while back. Mitsubishi makes the Diamondtron tube, which uses the same cylindrical section (as opposed to a spherical section) for the face of the tube as a Trinitron. It wouldn't surprise me if the internal structures of the Diamondtron and Trinitron are similar (unlike conventional color CRTs that use three electron guns and a shadow mask, Trinitrons use only one electron gun and an aperture grille). That, most likely, is what's in your monitor.

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
  11. Playstation 3 by stone2020 · · Score: 1

    And now Sony is going to sell a couple million Playstation 3's at a loss? Good luck.

    1. Re:Playstation 3 by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      Says who?

    2. Re:Playstation 3 by stone2020 · · Score: 0

      http://games.techwhack.com/148/sony-playstation-3- rumors-say-sony-might-lose-usd-100-on-each-unit/

      Its just a rumor but pretty standard fare for a company to lose money selling the system and making money on the games. Microsoft lost a ton of money trying to shove the Xbox down our throats.

    3. Re:Playstation 3 by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      It's not even a rumor (some guy saying he heard it from an official source), it's speculation. The only confirmed consoles to ever have sold at a loss in recent times are the Saturn, the Dreamcast, and the Xbox. There was speculation that Sony lost money on the PS2 for the first few months, but it isn't confirmed.

      Hardly 'standard fare'.

      Anyway, as far as that story goes, Console makers only take in $5-10 per third party game sold. There isn't a chance in hell that they'd bet the farm on selling 10 games for every PS3 sold. Especially since they need to see a return on investment within a year or so. Unless you're Microsoft and can get away with announcing to your stock holders that you're going to take a $1 billion loss on a product line, no console made by a publicly traded company will ever ship at a loss greater than can be recovered by the sale of three games. And if some company did do that, they would have that info public in a report to their stock holders.

    4. Re:Playstation 3 by stone2020 · · Score: 0

      It's not even a rumor (some guy saying he heard it from an official source), it's speculation.

      Speculation from Merril Lynch of Japan based on a study. I'll take that any day over EGM, GamePro, Game Informer and Nintendo Power.

      The only confirmed consoles to ever have sold at a loss in recent times are the Saturn, the Dreamcast, and the Xbox.

      I'll go the other way. Gamecube is the only confirmed system to sell at a profit. Sony develops their own chips so they can hide costs in R+D. Fabs cost billions of dollars.

      Console makers only take in $5-10 per third party game sold. There isn't a chance in hell that they'd bet the farm on selling 10 games for every PS3 sold.

      You forgot to mention First party games. How much do they make on those? Please look up blade and razor business theory.

      unless you're Microsoft and can get away with announcing to your stock holders that you're going to take a $1 billion loss on a product line, no console made by a publicly traded company will ever ship at a loss greater than can be recovered by the sale of three games. And if some company did do that, they would have that info public in a report to their stock holders.

      Now you get my first post. Good Luck Sony! Your stock is going to tank even more soon.

    5. Re:Playstation 3 by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      Speculation from Merril Lynch of Japan...

      Speculation from an analyst is speculation from an analyst. It's all the same bullshit.

      I'll go the other way. Gamecube is the only confirmed system to sell at a profit.

      If you're only talking about at launch, then that's true. But why would a company tell people who think they're getting more than their money's worth that, in reality they aren't?

      Sony develops their own chips so they can hide costs in R+D. Fabs cost billions of dollars.

      Time to come back to the real world here. What's the motivation? These companies are in this to turn a profit, not to win some fanboy flamewar.

      Please look up blade and razor business theory.

      I think it's you that needs to look it up. The loss-leader business model works because the costs can be recouped. In the specific case of razor handles and blades that's because blades are disposable. They stop working after a few uses. Games are not. They can be re-sold, and they continue to work fine use after use. The average user only buys five or six new (I.E. not pre-owned) games over the life of a console, and less than that in the first year where the company needs to show profits on their balance sheet to keep the stock price up. That means when it comes to game consoles the loss leader model only works for prices that are only $20-30 under cost.

      First party games? Unless you're Nintendo, the percentage of games for the platform isn't high enough to skew the numbers very much.

      Now you get my first post. Good Luck Sony!

      Don't forget that Sony also has a media business to keep them afloat. Plus, if you're right that would mean they succeeded with the PS2 without the help of their other divisions, so there's really no reason to assume they're in any trouble.

      Please, describe for me a situation where you assume your analyst and commentary is right and Sony is in trouble financially from it.

    6. Re:Playstation 3 by stone2020 · · Score: 0

      Speculation from an analyst is speculation from an analyst.

      Same applies to slashdot wannabe's.

      If you're only talking about at launch, then that's true. But why would a company tell people who think they're getting more than their money's worth that, in reality they aren't?

      You're right. Stockholders would probably care though.

      Time to come back to the real world here. What's the motivation? These companies are in this to turn a profit, not to win some fanboy flamewar.

      So companies never lose money?

      The average user only buys five or six new (I.E. not pre-owned) games over the life of a console.

      So you've taken a survey of every user ever? I think it is probably closer to 10. The blade and razor theory applies because when the person gets done with a game they are probably going to buy another. How many people buy 5 games and then pack up the console and put it in the closet?

      Don't forget that Sony also has a media business to keep them afloat. Plus, if you're right that would mean they succeeded with the PS2 without the help of their other divisions, so there's really no reason to assume they're in any trouble.

      When is the last time you bought a Sony TV? VCR? DVD/CD Player? Monitor? Walkmen?

      Please, describe for me a situation where you assume your analyst and commentary is right and Sony is in trouble financially from it.

      Here's the math. System costs $500 to make. They sell it for $400. The person only buys 5 games. They make $25 to $50 on the games. That is a loss of $50 to $75. Plus Marketing costs and R+D costs.

    7. Re:Playstation 3 by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      When is the last time you bought a Sony TV? VCR? DVD/CD Player? Monitor? Walkmen?

      What does that have to do with their media business? They make most of their money on content, playstation, and intellectual property licensing.

      When's the last time you bought something that plays CDs? When you did, no matter what brand it was, you gave Sony money.

      Here's the math. System costs $500 to make. They sell it for $400. The person only buys 5 games. They make $25 to $50 on the games. That is a loss of $50 to $75. Plus Marketing costs and R+D costs.

      You're contradicting yourself. You say they sell enough games, but then you pull a situation that where they don't. Remember, I said to assume you were right. You're assuming that you're wrong.

      If the PS3 flops, the won't sell systems, so they won't lose much money. More realistically though, they'll sell systems for a profit, because that analyst is basing costs based on today's market, but Sony is making the parts themselves and will have figured out how to make the parts for much less by then. Remember that six months is a long time in the electronics business.

    8. Re:Playstation 3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Playstation and PSP saw a profit. It's probably the only thing keeping them afloat.

    9. Re:Playstation 3 by stone2020 · · Score: 0

      When's the last time you bought something that plays CDs? When you did, no matter what brand it was, you gave Sony money.

      Probably 5 years ago. Ever heard of Itunes? The music and movie industry also has a piracy problem which sony has no solution for.

      You're contradicting yourself. You say they sell enough games, but then you pull a situation that where they don't. Remember, I said to assume you were right. You're assuming that you're wrong.

      You really seem to know what you are talking about so I just used your numbers. With my numbers they still lose money or break even on systems sales but your forgetting marketing and R+D costs again.

      If the PS3 flops, the won't sell systems, so they won't lose much money. More realistically though, they'll sell systems for a profit, because that analyst is basing costs based on today's market, but Sony is making the parts themselves and will have figured out how to make the parts for much less by then. Remember that six months is a long time in the electronics business.

      The PS3 won't fail because of fanboy's like you. More realistically they will lose money on systems because they are using Blu-ray drives. How many of those drives have you seen for sale? Zero. Do you think when they come out they are going to be cheap? That's a pretty big assumption that they will figure out how to make parts cheap in 6 months. Funny, Sony Earnings came out yesterday and they are down 46% from last year.

    10. Re:Playstation 3 by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      Probably 5 years ago.

      Sorry, but I don't believe you. You're telling me that you're still using a 16x CD-ROM drive from 1999 in your computer (and that it still works), you don't own any of the current generation gaming consoles, and you don't have a DVD player.

      I'm sure that you have either purchased a new computer in the last five years, own a PS2 or an Xbox, or have a TV with a DVD player in your house... probably all of the above. Those are all devices that can play CDs and CD-Rs and they're all devices that paid a royalty to the CD IP collective.

      With my numbers they still lose money or break even on systems sales but your forgetting marketing and R+D costs again.

      No I'm not. That works itself out through the magic of amortization. You see, the cost of each part produced by a company is calculated to be the price of the phyiscal goods and labor, plus the R&D and production costs of the entire product line divided by the number of units you expect to produce over the life of the product. Smart business people under-estimate the number of sales they're going to have when they make that calculation. Your analyst knows this too, though he probably ignored it and used that as justification for his "losing $100 per unit" analysis.

      The other thing Sony knows is that it's often cheaper to convert low-margin production facilities over to a more profitable product line than it is to build new factories. Hence this announcement.

      The PS3 won't fail because of fanboy's like you.

      What? So being objective is being a fanboy now. You don't know me, so you have no business making assumptions. The only reason I'm having this argument is that I'm sick of fanboys using this false argument to declare one gaming company or another dead.

      If this were a thread about the Xbox 360, I'd have been making the same arguments. Microsoft won't be allowing themselves to take the big losses on the 360 that they did on the first Xbox. I'd bet money that they're only losing about $20 on the $299 version, and turning a healthy profit on the $399 version of the 360. The design of the 360 clearly shows that Microsoft has learned these lessons and knows how to make a profitable machine this time around.

      I'm arguing with you about conventional console wisdom, not about how cool Sony is.

      More realistically they will lose money on systems because they are using Blu-ray drives. How many of those drives have you seen for sale?

      Gee, who makes Blu-Ray drives? I wonder who sony is going to have to buy them from. Clearly they're going to pay a new-technology markup to whomever that is...

      90%+ of the technology in next genereation optical drives is the same as what is in 52x CD-ROM drives that sell for $15 at retail. The techniques for building nine out of the last ten percent of the parts are also the same as stuff that's already in use. The first Blu-Ray and HD-DVD drives will be expensive because the profit margins on them will be insanely high, not because the parts are expensive to make. The only reason other companies can't get away with putting this stuff in their systems is that they have to buy their drives instead of making their drives. Why do you think that Sony has pushed so hard for Blu-Ray instead of coming to a compromise with the HD-DVD consortium? It's all about money, and Sony would rather have had the ability to make tens of millions of players and game consoles on the cheap than to pay royalties or buy components from somebody else.

      That's a pretty big assumption that they will figure out how to make parts cheap in 6 months.

      See, that's the trick. They figured out how to make the parts cheap ten years ago. The only expensive parts are going to be the new processors.

    11. Re:Playstation 3 by stone2020 · · Score: 0

      Ok, your right. I bought a DVD writer for $40. How much of that does Sony get?

      Smart business people under-estimate the number of sales they're going to have when they make that calculation.

      And Sony fits in that category because their stock has been doing so well the last couple years.

      What? So being objective is being a fanboy now. You don't know me, so you have no business making assumptions. The only reason I'm having this argument is that I'm sick of fanboys using this false argument to declare one gaming company or another dead.

      All I read is assumptions and speculation from you. So yes you are just like all the people you hate.

      If this were a thread about the Xbox 360, I'd have been making the same arguments. Microsoft won't be allowing themselves to take the big losses on the 360 that they did on the first Xbox. I'd bet money that they're only losing about $20 on the $299 version, and turning a healthy profit on the $399 version of the 360. The design of the 360 clearly shows that Microsoft has learned these lessons and knows how to make a profitable machine this time around.

      Speculating again? Your really good at that. The thing with Microsoft is the world's richest person runs it and has a little loose change that he could lose. Sony's time is running out.

      90%+ of the technology in next genereation optical drives is the same as what is in 52x CD-ROM drives that sell for $15 at retail.

      So now you make CD-ROM drives too?

      See, that's the trick. They figured out how to make the parts cheap ten years ago

      They figured out how to make cheap Blu-ray Drives 10 years ago?

    12. Re:Playstation 3 by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      They figured out how to make cheap Blu-ray Drives 10 years ago?

      They figured out how to make plastic lenses, tiny stepper motors, disc trays, plastic bezels, 20 gague steel boxes, ribbon cables, nylon worm gears, rubber belts, laser diodes and CMOS electronics 10 (or more) years ago, yes.

      So now you make CD-ROM drives too?

      Not personally, but I didn't spend $80,000 on an engineering degree for nothing, and you don't have to make 'em to know what goes inside of one.

      And Sony fits in that category because their stock has been doing so well the last couple years.

      No, they fit into that category because they consistantly make a profit. Something that their stock price is only tied to indirectly. (Profits don't increase stock price... Growth increases stock price. You don't need to grow, or increase the value of your stock to stay quite healthily in business though.)

      All I read is assumptions and speculation from you. So yes you are just like all the people you hate.

      First of all, you've only seen me speculate up until now. No assumptions.

      Second, there's nothing wrong with speculation. The people I'm talking about make their arguments with a bias that's based on something independant of the objective discussion. Which...

      The thing with Microsoft is the world's richest person runs it and has a little loose change that he could lose. Sony's time is running out.

      ... it would appear you have demonstrated describes you perfectly. Microsoft is a publically traded company, just like Sony. They can't just burn cash because they have it sitting around. This is recently demonstrated by Microsoft's shareholders demanding dividends. You know that big pile of cash they're sitting on? It turns out that they have to spend it responsibly after all.. Which is why I think they'll actually go for making a profit this time around rather than spending a ton of money and having no profits, only market share to show for it. It's not internet forum fanboy king-of-the hill. It's business. It's not the guy with the most polygons, video memory, or unit sales that wins, it's the guy with the biggest number at the end of their balance sheet, and Microsoft is well poised to have a good shot at moving up into second place.

      Now if you don't mind, since you've just proven you're incapable of rational discussion on this topic, I see no reason to continue this thread. Bye.

    13. Re:Playstation 3 by stone2020 · · Score: 0

      They figured out how to make plastic lenses, tiny stepper motors, disc trays, plastic bezels, 20 gague steel boxes, ribbon cables, nylon worm gears, rubber belts, laser diodes and CMOS electronics 10 (or more) years ago, yes.

      You forgot the whole sensitive blue laser that has to read the sensitive blue-ray disc. Didn't the first run of playstation 1's have to be flipped upside down to work right? And then the infamous playstation 2 disc read error. Sounds like they had some problems over the years with their drives.

      Not personally, but I didn't spend $80,000 on an engineering degree for nothing, and you don't have to make 'em to know what goes inside of one.

      I was waiting for that. I spent $80,000 to learn how to drink beer and BS. I bet you make a ton more money than me too. Thats what makes everything you say correct. News Flash! Merrill Lynch analyst went to a more expensive school and makes more money than you.

      First of all, you've only seen me speculate up until now. No assumptions.

      You assume your the smartest guy in the room. You try to pass opionion as fact. Sorry not buying it.

      This is recently demonstrated by Microsoft's shareholders demanding dividends.

      I was actually talking about Bill Gates' money not Microsoft's.

      rational = you tell somebody something and they have to agree with you. It must suck to be schooled by a 12 year old.

    14. Re:Playstation 3 by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      News Flash! Merrill Lynch analyst went to a more expensive school and makes more money than you.

      The analyst learned how to make safe bets and talk out of his ass. There's a reason the word 'analyst' starts with 'anal.' I learned how to actually build things, and reduce the costs of what goes into them. I have about as much respect for 90% of market analysts as I have for astrologers. They both use exactly the same 'skills' for their jobs.

      I was actually talking about Bill Gates' money not Microsoft's.

      Yeah, he's going to blow his cash to give you a better video game machine. Thanks for the laugh.

      You try to pass opionion as fact. Sorry not buying it.

      I did? You must have the reading comprehension of a ...

      It must suck to be schooled by a 12 year old.

      Oh. Right. Sorry.

  12. NO, but I love the CRT...! by GecKo213 · · Score: 1

    I love my old CRT TV! It's picture is so, well, it reminds me of being a kid! I don't want to grow up! This opinions expressed in this post are totally random and have nothing to do whatsoever with the posters true feelings or the feelings or opinions of your local stations. Thank you.

    --
    I should be working, but I'm posting on /.! Life is good

    --
    Generation Trance: What generation are you?
  13. If the CRT dies by erroneus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    it can only mean that other display types will become more affordable. Right now, the really nice TVs are way out of reach for Wal-Mart shoppers such as myself. I look forward to the changes coming soon.

    1. Re:If the CRT dies by GrumblyStuff · · Score: 1

      I say hit the estate sales. Might be hard to find what you want but when you hit gold, oh is it ever so sweet.

      A friend of mine managed to snag a 19" viewable CRT beast for $5. I just hope my table doesn't break.

  14. Too Bad; LCDs are Overpriced by h4ck7h3p14n37 · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's too bad that Sony is phasing out it's CRT production. Granted, flat-screens have much better resolution, a smaller footprint and are lighther, but they're still extremely expensive. A 32" Sony Trinitron is going for around $400, while a 32" Sony LCD Wega flat panel is more than $2,000 (the cheapest 32" LCD flat screen I could find goes for $1,300). I just don't understand why anyone would buy one flat screen when they could get four or five CRTs for the same price.

    1. Re:Too Bad; LCDs are Overpriced by aetherspoon · · Score: 1

      Easy. LCDs take up less space and (well, not the really crappy low end ones or some crappy midranged ones) look better.
      Anyone who has to move around a whole bunch can appreciate the whole size (and weight) thing. I've had to move around the TV in my livingroom (furnished, so it isn't mine) quite often. It scratches up the center and weighs a ton. I'd much prefer a smaller LCD to such a large TV.

      Besides, why does anyone need such a large TV?

      --
      --- Ãther SPOON!
    2. Re:Too Bad; LCDs are Overpriced by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      Is the price of the 32" that you quoted even HD capable? Based on the price, I doubt it. I think 32" is a little too large to be 480i. Also, the size rating on an LCD isn't exaggerated by 10% like they are on CRTs (rated diagonal is not viewable diagonal on CRT).

      For as long as there is a market for CRT worth exploiting, I'd say just look to other brands. In the next few years, I expect that the price pressure be too great as LCDs get cheaper such that it's not worth making them anymore for anything other than special uses.

      Heck, forget Sony altogether, just look to other brands. I have no problem buying Sony but only for special cases.

    3. Re:Too Bad; LCDs are Overpriced by CrazyTalk · · Score: 1

      I put my 27" CRT TV on the shelf above my fireplace when I moved in to my house two years ago, and haven't moved it since. I will probably never move it until it breaks. For me (and I suspect a lot of other people), size doesn't matter, except for screen size.

    4. Re:Too Bad; LCDs are Overpriced by b1t+r0t · · Score: 4, Informative
      Except that you're comparing apples and oranges. A 32" Wega CRT is about $600-$700, but the HD-ready Wega is about $1000, and was around $1500 two years ago. Oh, and a minor point is that their LCD line seems to be called Bravia, not Wega.

      Mmmm... and that LCD has a PC input, too. I know for a fact that their CRT Wega line isn't designed for PC scan rates on the DVI input. You can get 640x480 to work, but there's overscan, and even if you get your video card to generate ATSC scan rates, anything higher than 480p forces the 4:3 CRT into widescreen mode.

      --

      --
      "Open source is good." - Steve Jobs
      "Open source is evil." - Microsoft
    5. Re:Too Bad; LCDs are Overpriced by tgd · · Score: 1

      If you're talking USD, then you're not looking very hard. Its easy to find 32" sets WELL below $1000, and its fairly common to find 37" LCD sets for $1000.

      And if you don't understand why $999 for a 37" LCD makes sense either you have never lived in a small house and had to move a 35" CRT TV, or you just wanted to post on Slashdot with a contrary view in hopes of getting moderated up.

    6. Re:Too Bad; LCDs are Overpriced by moviepig.com · · Score: 1
      Granted, [LCDs] have much better resolution, a smaller footprint and are lighter, but they're still extremely expensive.

      Still, their price-point has now crept from beyond the horizon and into distant view. So, e.g., anyone who's recently enlisted able bodies to help move a CRT behemoth across the living room has a gut-reaction against buying another... even postponing a purchase, if possible.

      --
      Seeing bad movies only encourages them. Watch responsibly
    7. Re:Too Bad; LCDs are Overpriced by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not all flat screens have better resolution. My Sony 34xbr910 16x9 CRT, which can be had for around 1000.00 today, is true 1080i. Most flat screens don't even have this high a resoulution at twice the price, and it is only now being out done by the new 1080p DLPs on the market. If you need more than 34 inches you'll have to go to another technology, but the picture quality is still ranked as the standard in HD. It comes in at over 200 pounds though ;)

    8. Re:Too Bad; LCDs are Overpriced by the_rev_matt · · Score: 1

      Space, heat, power consumption, aesthetics. Just to name the most significant reasons.

      --
      this is getting old and so are you

      blog

    9. Re:Too Bad; LCDs are Overpriced by orderb13 · · Score: 1

      I've got the 960, it is 1800 still I think. But I like the things they improved about it over the 910. I'm pretty sure it is the last CRT XBR they are going to make though.

    10. Re:Too Bad; LCDs are Overpriced by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup your 960 is still up there, but the 955 has the same tube with superfine pitch etc., for around a grand. It doesn't have all the bells and wistles of the 960, but the picture quality is the same. Best Buy was blowing them out at 899 for awile. I love the picture on my 910 and would still buy this type of crt again today.

    11. Re:Too Bad; LCDs are Overpriced by steeef · · Score: 1

      I think the point the parent was trying to make is that now that their CRT line is gone, there isn't a replacement technology to fill the same price point. Consumer's can no longer find a sub-$500 Sony TV.

    12. Re:Too Bad; LCDs are Overpriced by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where can I find a 37" for less than $1k?

    13. Re:Too Bad; LCDs are Overpriced by h4ck7h3p14n37 · · Score: 1

      I can definitely appreciate the weight factor. I ended up putting my 32" CRT on a Metro shelving unit with 2" casters; that way I can just roll the thing to wherever I'd like.

    14. Re:Too Bad; LCDs are Overpriced by daviee · · Score: 1

      Like another poster said, you're not really making a fair comparison.

      Exactly 1 year ago, I purchased a Sony HD-ready 27" 4:3 CRT TV. It was US$750. At the time, even an off-brand LCD TV is $1k+. Today, the price of my CRT TV is $650, while I see frequent ads for off-brand 27" 16:9 LCD TVs at $699. I think most people will opt for the LCD.

      If I'm Sony, I'll drop CRT manufacturing as well; at least for their HD CRT lineup!

    15. Re:Too Bad; LCDs are Overpriced by WuphonsReach · · Score: 1

      I bought a 23" Samsung LCD for a similar reason recently. Only paid around $900 and got a decent sized unit that is easily portable. The Samsung prices are very competitive in the sub-24" market. I may even purchase a 2nd unit next spring for my bedroom.

      There are some things with the Samsung that could stand to be improved, but it's not that bad of a unit for a small living room or small office. (I sit about 5-6' away from it.) Better then the small 13" CRT TV that I was using.

      My biggest complaint about the Samgsung 23" LCD TV is that the headphone jack is on the *back* of the unit. Which is a rather silly place to put it. I ended up piping my audio out to a set of speakers that had a headphone jack cutout. That lets me plug/unplug a headphone jack for times when I don't want to wake the neighbors with the sounds of orcs screaming.

      The second issue is that there are no side connectors at all, so hooking up a camcorder requires going behind the unit. I also wish there was a 2nd HDMI input connection.

      --
      Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
    16. Re:Too Bad; LCDs are Overpriced by TekPolitik · · Score: 1
      I put my 27" CRT TV on the shelf above my fireplace when I moved in to my house two years ago, and haven't moved it since.

      This is a really bad place to put a TV (especially a CRT) unless you don't use the fireplace. Televisions can be quite sensitive to excess heat, so you will have a much lower time to failure.

    17. Re:Too Bad; LCDs are Overpriced by CrazyTalk · · Score: 1

      Actually, the space was designed for a TV - the house is new construction, and has one of those gas fireplaces that vents through the wall directly outside, not through a chimney. The area above the fireplace doesn't get hot, even when in use.

  15. Hard choice by boa13 · · Score: 5, Informative

    It must have been a hard choice for mtndue1, torn between hyping up his scoop so that he would have a chance to be published on Slashdot and not telling outright lies. So he took both approaches:

    Sony is halting the production of CRT's for televisions at many of its plants

    Sony will shut down some of its CRT television assembly factories by March 2008 (emphasis mine)

    No, I didn't read the fine article, but I did laugh out loud.

    1. Re:Hard choice by SmittyTheBold · · Score: 1

      Those sentences contradict each other...how? They're practically synonymous. The first one primes you, the second one fills in the details better. It's a common approach in writing.

      Get over it.

      --
      ± 29 dB
    2. Re:Hard choice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the point he is that saying that the production is "halted" means STOPPED which is a sensational headline, whereas they are only starting to slow production in 2008.

    3. Re:Hard choice by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      The first one primes you, the second one fills in the details better. It's a common approach in writing.

      There's more to it than that... This is known as spin:

      3. (Politics) an interpretation of an event which is
                      favorable to the interpreter or to the person s/he
                      supports. A person whose task is to provide such
                      interpretations for public relations purposes is called a
                      {spin doctor}.
                      [PJC]
                      [1913 Webster]

      In other words, the writer was trying to get you to form an opinion that you probably would not have, had you been presented with just the raw facts. Not only has it been common practice for decades (that definition was written in 1913), but it's been considered reprehensible for nearly as long.

    4. Re:Hard choice by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The mention of Sony's allocation of a big pile of money "to speed up development" of the PS3 falls into a similar category of inaccuracy, I think. At this point in the product lifecycle, Sony should be ramping up MANUFACTURE of PS3 units. If they're still in the DEVELOPMENT phase for the hardware, they're lagging behind and may have already lost the next-gen console battle to the Xbox 360.

  16. Re:Welcome to 1990, Sony. by Datamonstar · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You and me both. I'm going to go right out and get a Sony Trintron in theu nfortunate event that I won't be able to find them in stores come another couple of years. But yeah, Trinitron CRT is the best picture quality you can get hands-down. Heck, CRT's period are surprisingly superior to LCD's in many ways. I hate how the industry is practically forcing the change upon me, but I guess I'll have to conform sometime.

    --
    The eternal struggle of good vs. evil begins within one's self.
  17. Different Viewpoints by goodEvans · · Score: 1

    I think I'm right in saying that most people here would thank Sony for allowing them to buy the Playstation 3. A large percentage of us are looking forward to spending our money on it when it is finally launched.

    However, it's interesting to see the Forbes' take on the release: In a bid to revive its game division, Sony plans to release its next-generation stand-alone PlayStation 3 game console in the spring.

    Funny how a slightly different viewpoint casts a whole new light on a subject...

  18. Yen by kevin_conaway · · Score: 1

    38,500,000,000.00 JPY = 334,047,807.86 USD
    32,300,000,000.00 JPY = 280,239,409.58 USD
    410,000,000,000.00 JPY = 3,556,690,039.42 USD
    356,800,000,000.00 JPY = 3,095,187,819.67 USD


    Thanks xe.com

    1. Re:Yen by digidave · · Score: 2, Informative

      You know you can just use Google for that, right?

      Google "38,500,000,000.00 JPY in USD" (no quotes) and you'll get "333.42001 million U.S. dollars" as the answer. I'm not sure why the number is different.

      --
      The global economy is a great thing until you feel it locally.
  19. I think this is a pity, actually by FluffyWithTeeth · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Sony have always made some damned fine CRTs. Their Trinitron range has always been pretty much the cream of the crop.

    Of course, myself, I got a second hand 21" Sony Trinitron VGA monitor for about $80, so I'm fine :)

    Mmmm, obscenely high resolution...

    1. Re:I think this is a pity, actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doesn't that make it a Trinitron monitor? AFAIK Sony is just reselling Trinitron (the real OEM here) monitors. ... mmm obscenely high resolution indeed :)

      -- owner of a used, 21" Dell Trinitron

    2. Re:I think this is a pity, actually by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I'm reminded how fine their monitor tubes are every day I look at the two support wire shadows on my screen. yes it's less than 1 pixel tall and hard to see unless you are looking at a white screen but the defect is there and on EVERY trinitron monitor.

      sony trinitrons have ALWAYS suffered from these in their 19 inch and larger tubes. and made us move away from them as they had no plans to fix it.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    3. Re:I think this is a pity, actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, Trinitron is a Sony brand name. If it says Trinitron, it is a rebranded Sony monitor.

    4. Re:I think this is a pity, actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for the clarification :)

      - Owner of a used 21" Sony Trinitron, rebranded by Dell :)

    5. Re:I think this is a pity, actually by Malor · · Score: 1

      That's not a defect, it's by design.

      A Trinitron tube has thousands of tiny vertical wires to disperse/channel the electron beam. The horizontal wire is necessary to keep the vertical ones from moving. To see it, you generally have to know what you're looking for and explicitly try to find it... it's not at all obvious. That's the price you pay for the superior picture.

      The really big 24" monitors have two wires, at 1/3 and 2/3 the way down the screen.

    6. Re:I think this is a pity, actually by kidcharles · · Score: 1

      I have to agree, I've always thought the trinitron color reproduction was superior to other methods. I've got 3 CRT's in my household (1 TV, 2 Monitors), all of them trinitron and they all look gorgeous. I'm not anti-LCD but I wouldn't buy one if it can't match the image quality that I have now.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas une sig.
    7. Re:I think this is a pity, actually by markhb · · Score: 1

      I've been looking at my 27" Trinitron screen since 1998 and never noticed any lines. Hmmm.

      --
      Save Maine's economy: write stuff down. All comments are exclusively my own, not my employer.
    8. Re:I think this is a pity, actually by argent · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm reminded how fine their monitor tubes are every day I look at the two support wire shadows on my screen. yes it's less than 1 pixel tall and hard to see unless you are looking at a white screen but the defect is there and on EVERY trinitron monitor.

      That's not a "defect", any more than the legs on a table or the wheels on a car are a "defect", even if it'd be nicer to have tables or automobiles that floated unsupported. Until the Singularity and we're all uploaded into Cyberspace we'll have to put up with display technologies that are less than perfect.

      If those lines bother you, don't buy a Trinitron.

      Those lines don't bother me, but the exaggerated artifacting and aliasing on LCDs do, so I'll stick with my CRT for now.

    9. Re:I think this is a pity, actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they did bother us and we did stop buying them.

      the graphic designers were the ones that whined the most about them about how it ruined their abilities and other nonsense.

      they really are only visible on a mostly white screen.

      doesnt matter LCD is better anyhoo.

    10. Re:I think this is a pity, actually by Malor · · Score: 1

      I was talking about the computer monitor, the 24" widescreen. I think the TVs have them too, but I'm not sure if they have as many.

      Generally, the only way to see them is to display a solid white image, and then get very close to the monitor and look either in the middle or at 1/3 and 2/3 of the way down the screen. You're looking for very, very thin horizontal black lines. They're completely invisible in normal viewing... you have to really look to find them.

    11. Re:I think this is a pity, actually by tomlouie · · Score: 1

      Then I laugh at your "graphic designers".

      They would prefer to have the iffy color fidelity of LCD monitors, the lower dynamic range, lousy ghosting issues and smaller viewing angle of LCD monitors over two t-i-n-y little wires that most people can stare at a Trinitron for a decade and never notice?

      Any hints for what company these designers work for?

  20. "Revive its games division"? by Sockatume · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The implication there is that it needs reviving. As far as I'm aware it's the healthiest part of the company by a long shot. Sony really are banking on SCE: when the PS2 began to approach saturation point (pre-slimline PS2) and sales dipped, Sonys profits dropped by some obscene percentage.

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  21. Investments? by dzafez · · Score: 1

    How much of the money will really go into development? How much into Marketing and overpaid Managers??

    1. Re:Investments? by vertinox · · Score: 1

      Nah!

      This is Japan.

      Instead of marketing and overpaid manager, most of it will be used to paid to prevent Sokaiya at the stock holders meeting! ;)

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
  22. LCDs are overrated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    For computer monitors CRTs are still superior for a number of reasons.

    Some examples:
    Much higher contrast between black and white.
    better color definition.
    gamma/color/brightness doesn't change based on fewing angles.
    much faster response/no ghosting.

    People who complain about flickering with CRTs are usually just running the monitor at a to high of resolution. There problems are more related to not spending enough on their monitors rather then serious flaws in CRT monitors.

    even on very nice LCD monitors I get headaches. This is because I habitually read scrolling text. This works on CRTs, but ghosting and inferior response rates blur everything. I bought a LCD monitor a while ago and I learned this. I bought a CRT to replace it and gave the LCD to a friend.

    Of course now bunches of people will jump on me to justify buying a LCD monitor instead spending a 3rd of the price on a CRT monitor with similar capabilities. (You probably spend a lot more on your jeans then me, too. Oh and ipods with harddrives and unreplacable batteries that have failures with batteries and harddrives, rather then going out and buying a flash-based device for a 4th of the cost and 400% of the reliability.)

    LCD is a dead-end technology. It's great for places with low amounts of space... like if you want a 50 inch TV in your living room, or 30 inch displays on your desktop, and in laptops, but it's not ever going to go anywere beyond that.

    Once we get stuff like OLEDs or whatever replaces LCD, then it will be superior to LCD AND CRTs in terms of price, performance, energy usage, and mass.

    1. Re:LCDs are overrated. by Stupendoussteve · · Score: 0

      "even on very nice LCD monitors I get headaches. This is because I habitually read scrolling text. This works on CRTs, but ghosting and inferior response rates blur everything. I bought a LCD monitor a while ago and I learned this. I bought a CRT to replace it and gave the LCD to a friend." I am the reverse. I get headaches on a CRT after maybe an hour of use. It doesn't matter the model, refresh (though low refresh dries my eyes out), resolution or anything else. It will give me a headache and blur my vision. I looked forward to working on my laptop at work only because I could work all day without having issues. I recently (four months ago?) bought a nice Hyundai Imagequest L90D+ monitor as my old 19inch CRT was going out and had been for a while. It's 8ms response, never seen any ghosting, including watching line upon line compile during a Gentoo install... no I'm not a ricer, nor have I seen any blur. It also has almost true black (when the screen glows black there is a little glow, but not much more than my old CRT did), great color etc. I got it on a nice sale at Newegg for around $300. Maybe more than a CRT, but I think it was justified. This is not to try to say why you should buy an LCD... only my experience.

    2. Re:LCDs are overrated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You missed the #1 reason to buy a CRT over LCD for a computer. Multiple resolution support without interpolation.

      As for the rest of your rant... it's uninformed, opinionated, and not based in reality.

      (Go read text sometime on a good 125ppi or better LCD display, where you can give text 33-50% more pixels per letter to make it crisper and easier to read.)

  23. Re:Profit is immoral by Sockatume · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yes, poor people are in trouble because they keep buying overpriced luxury goods. That's the real root of the problem.

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  24. Cuts possible at SCE? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With the failure of the PSP, Sony is already cutting features left and right to curb its losses drastically for the PS3. Maybe we'll see a $300 release price after all.

  25. Re:Profit is immoral by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so why havent you given all your money to the poor?

  26. Re:Profit is immoral by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe if they weren't constantly being plundered by corporations, they would be able afford the things they need.

    Stop blaming the victim!

  27. too many numbers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    better yet:
    38.5 Billion JPY = 334.0 Million USD
    32.3 Billion JPY = 280.2 Million USD
    410.0 Billion JPY = 3.56 Billion USD
    356.8 Billion JPY = 3.10 Billion USD

    1. Re:too many numbers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or, if you're British : 38.5 Thousand Million JPY = 334.0 Million USD 32.3 Thousand Million JPY = 280.2 Million USD 410.0 Thousand Million JPY = 3.56 Thousand Million USD 356.8 Thousand Million JPY = 3.10 Thousand Million USD

  28. Re:Profit is immoral by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm not rich! The rich corporations are the ones trampling on the poor, not me. They're the ones that owe society for their immoral (if I had my way, illegal) actions.

  29. Re:Profit is immoral by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Any excess profit proves that they are charging too much for their product, and exploiting the poor. Such immoral profiteering should be illegal!

    Keep in mind that Sony does not sell food, clothing or any other necessities of life. They sell stereos, televisions and PlayStations. If you consider pricing their products to high is "immoral profiteering", then are you trying to argue that the poor somehow have a god given right to have access to stereos, televisions and PlayStations?

    I like my PlayStation as much as anybody, but I would not consider myself exploited if somehow I could not play GTA.

    People like you really do a disservice to the poor by clouding the real problems that the poor face, but what can I expect from someone named "Trolling4Columbine"?

  30. Re:Profit is immoral by m0fin0 · · Score: 0

    Is there a "Insane" mod yet?

  31. I bought one last December by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A 42 inch flat screen standard aspect ratio trinitron. Weighs 215 lbs, cost $1000. At 215 lbs I don't worry too much about it getting stolen!

    It has an incredibly annoying useability problem. It's capable of shrinking the scan lines so you can get widescreen format without wasting scan lines, makes widescreen DVDs a whole lot sharper.

    It takes 12 button presses on the remote to get there, and if you shut off the TV, it's standard aspect again even though it's still showing the same DVD requiring 12 more button presses.

    I didn't know Down's Syndrome was so prevalent in Japan. It should have a dedicated remote button (it has half a dozen buttons nobody would ever use) and as long as you don't change channels it should stay widescreen. Dumb dumb dumb.

  32. Re:Profit is immoral by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "then are you trying to argue that the poor somehow have a god given right to have access to stereos, televisions and PlayStations?"

    The rich have that right, along with many others privileges that are denied our less fortunate citizens. All I'm asking for is equality!

  33. Re:Welcome to 1990, Sony. by b1t+r0t · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Heck, CRT's period are surprisingly superior to LCD's in many ways.

    But not when it comes to weight. Be sure to get someone to help you lift it. Their 32" flat-CRT HD-ready models weigh around 175 pounds. I've had one for about 2 1/2 years and I had it delivered. If I need to get behind it, I can slide it around on the stand. I'm glad I spent the money for the official Sony stand, it's fits perfectly, and it can hold half a dozen video game consoles.

    --

    --
    "Open source is good." - Steve Jobs
    "Open source is evil." - Microsoft
  34. Re:Welcome to 1990, Sony. by digidave · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think people who hype LCD and plasma quality are in one of two camps:

    1. They have sensitive vision and the brightness of the CRT hurts their eyes (this is why my work computer has an LCD monitor).

    2. LCDs are newer and these people keep reading about how great they are.

    Side by side in a store it's easy to see that a good CRT provides much better color, brightness and contrast than any LCD or plasma TV. Considering that they are a third the price, I often wonder why there is such a big market for skinny TVs. Can the depth of the TV really make someone spend so much more money?

    I also have an issue with plasma vs projection large screen TVs. A good projection TV is indistinguishable from a plasma TV and costs half the price. Why aren't people buying projection instead of plasma?

    --
    The global economy is a great thing until you feel it locally.
  35. surprisingly superior to LCD's in many ways by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They make a better noise when you throw them out of the window?

  36. CRT by certel · · Score: 2, Interesting

    No one wants to purchase CRT. DLP is the new Plasma.

    1. Re:CRT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DLP will continue to be 2nd rate until they start including 3 DLP chips for RGB rather than the color wheel . Nobody likes rainbow artifacts.

  37. Re:Profit is immoral by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm presuming that you own your computer. Assuming that is the case, you are richer than the bulk of the worlds population.

    If you were really for equality, then you would sell your computer and give that money to the poor people in the third world.

  38. WOuldn't it be funny by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 3, Interesting

    WOuldn't it be funny if one day, only the expensive TVs will come with CRTs, what with the better colors and saturation...

    --
    "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
  39. Sad by courtarro · · Score: 4, Insightful
    This is a big loss. A few years ago my Sony display bit the dust after only 1.5 years of use. I was ready to move away from Sony because of that quick failure, so I looked at all sorts of alternatives. I couldn't afford an LCD that could match a CRT for color, so a CRT it was. I came close to buying a ViewSonic display for just over $100, but when I checked it out at the store it was amazing how poor the video clarity was compared to the Sony I had. I finally checked some reviews and went with a 19" Sony CRT from Newegg, and it's been great since. I've seen monitors from all over, and Sony CRT displays are clearly above all other consumer CRTs. Dell displays that use Sony tubes are equally excellent.

    It's hard for me to say that CRTs are still superior to LCDs because I haven't actively researched the best LCDs, but of the many LCD displays that friends and labs use, I can't imagine what I'll do when my current CRT comes up for replacement. There's simply no comparison. The LCD blacks are fake on many of the Dells (they seem to cheat to get a good contrast ratio - perfect black is dark, but the dark grey levels are much lighter). There's also the abrasiveness of the tri-color split of LCD pixels.

    I guess I'm an old-fashioned dinosaur, and maybe the CRT v. LCD battle is comparable to the tube v. solid state amplifier battle, but this day marks the end of the era of beautiful CRT displays. I'll mourn.

    1. Re:Sad by Alioth · · Score: 3, Informative

      Although the sharpness of a modern LCD monitor is better than my 21in Sony Trinitron monitor at home, overall, the Trinitron has them beat. Not just because the colours are better - but also that they don't change if you move your head or change your seating position, or adjust the monitor stand! The rather nice LCD I have at work - this Slashdot section here, if I move my head to the side, the background on the comment titles all but disappears, and the brightness changes. This is inherent in the way LCDs work.

    2. Re:Sad by eclectro · · Score: 1


      Don't give up hope. Toshiba and some Korean companies have started to produce SED screens. All the benifits of a CRT without the problems that LCDs and plasmas have in a nice flat screen. The blacks are very black too.

      I too am a CRT guy who likes the qualities it offers, and I am finding many large CRTs dropping in price, esp. in the used market in my area. My CRTs should last for another year when SEDs are supposed to arrive.

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    3. Re:Sad by 9Nails · · Score: 1

      SED? Interesting. Can I get that in my next car with Bose suspension?

  40. Re:Profit is immoral by Sockatume · · Score: 1

    Why are you even here? Shouldn't you be off discussing this somewhere relevant instead of lowering the tone of a sci-tech discussion site?

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  41. Re:Welcome to 1990, Sony. by generic-man · · Score: 1

    Tragically, that would still make them money. With satellite service as of right now, you need an antenna to receive over-the-air HD channels. I did not know this; it turned out to be cheaper to cancel Dish Network's service than to purchase and install a large enough antenna.

    --
    For more information, click here.
  42. Re:Profit is immoral by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just a guess...

    but your flunked econ 101 right?

  43. It ain't Forbes. Its Xinhua by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Forbes is reprinting a story it didn't even write. Don't give them the credit. Give it the outfit that did the actual reporting: China Xinhua news agency. Anyone see the irongy of the Capitalist Tool reprinting news published by Communist China's official News Agency?

  44. Defect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Umm, those support wires are there by design. Calling it a defect is misrepresenting the product. I own a 21" Trinitron monitor and was well aware of the presence of these wires before purchace. Some get hung up on it, some never notice it.

    Don't confuse personal preference with a "defect" that requires "fixing".

  45. Trinitron song by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh where, oh where, has my Trinitron gone,
    Oh where, oh where can it be?
    With its lines ultra-sharp but its price set so high,
    Oh where, oh where can it be?

  46. Slightly OT by Viper+Daimao · · Score: 1

    But with this talk of LCD tvs and CRT's, I'm wondering if there is a comparison out there, or if anyone has any advice for what I should buy for a HD big screen tv for my new apt. How do LCD's compare to DLP's as far as cost, quality of picture, and size go?

    --
    "In the game of life, someone always has to lose. To me, if life were fair, that someone would always be Oklahoma." -DKR
  47. Re:Profit is immoral by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you need a tv? Do you need a game console? Do you need a ipod? Do you need a computer? Do you need half the crap that people buy? What you need is food and shelter everything else is a luxury.

  48. Welcome to get a clue... by Viol8 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Aside from CRTs having better picture quality than LCDs they
    were also invented in 1897, not 1990 (which I suspect is when
    you were born sonny).

    1. Re:Welcome to get a clue... by GreekPimpSlap · · Score: 0

      so we can assume you were born in 1897 ? .... dustball

    2. Re:Welcome to get a clue... by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      Variable resolution (multisync) was invented, or at least started becoming widely available, in the 90s. Also, we're talking about monitors, not TVs. It wasn't until the late 80s that PCs really started moving toward color displays instead of monochrome. But then you'd remember that if a) you were old enough, or b) young enough that Alzheimers hadn't set in.

    3. Re:Welcome to get a clue... by Viol8 · · Score: 1

      I used a colour computer monitor back in 1983. There were computers
      before PCs you know sonny and uou don't need multisync to display a
      computer generated image. How do you think the 1970s video games
      worked? Etch-a-sketch? I know this is Slashdot but it would be nice if
      just occasionally people engaged brain before posting.

    4. Re:Welcome to get a clue... by glazed · · Score: 1

      LCD is older than that:

      Friedrich Reinitzer first observed liquid crystals in 1888.

      Reinitzer Scientists have known about liquid crystals since the end of the 19th century. Austrian botanist Friedrich Reinitzer (1857-1927) first noted the phenomenon in 1888. When he heated a solid organic compound, cholesteryl benzoate, it appeared to have two distinct melting points. It became a cloudy liquid at 145C and turned clear at 179C.

      Otto Lehmann, a professor of physics in Germany, learned of Reinitzer's experiment and continued the research. Using a microscope fitted with a heating stage, he determined that some molecules do not melt directly, but instead first pass through a phase in which they have the ability to flow like a liquid while retaining the molecular structure and optical properties of a solid crystal. These properties led Lehmann in 1889 to coin the term "liquid crystal."

      George Heilmeier headed the research group at RCA that invented the first liquid crystal display.

      Heilmeier The first published suggestion for using liquid crystal materials for display came in 1963 from Richard Williams and George Heilmeier at the David Sarnoff Research Center, RCA's laboratory in Princeton, New Jersey. Heilmeier (1936-) went on to head a group at the lab--including Nunzio Luce, Louis Zanoni, Joel Goldmacher, Joseph Castellano and Lucian Barton--to investigate the use of liquid crystal displays for a "TV-on-a-wall" concept, a dream of David Sarnoff himself.

      The digital time display was developed in order to market the LCD in a commercial product.

      The challenge was to find a liquid crystal that would provide a display at room temperature, and by 1968 the RCA group had a display based on the dynamic scattering mode (DSM) of liquid crystals. But at the same time it was clear that large-screen LCD TVs were many years off, and the group set its sights on displays that could be incorporated more immediately in commercial products. A number of the RCA pioneers left to form Optel Corporation, in Princeton, New Jersey, where they perfected techniques for the manufacture of LCD displays and digital watches. Beginning in 1970, Optel designed and produced LCD watches for several watch companies. Optel later marketed LCD watches under its own name.

      In the dynamic scattering liquid crystal display, an electrical charge is applied which rearranges the molecules so that they scatter light. These early DSM displays proved unsatisfactory, suffering from relatively high power consumption, limited life, and poor contrast. An improved liquid crystal display was invented in 1969 by James Fergason at Kent State University based on the twisted nematic field effect.

      http://invention.smithsonian.org/centerpieces/quar tz/inventors/liquid.html
      http://invention.smithsonian.org/centerpieces/quar tz/inventors/heilmeier.html

    5. Re:Welcome to get a clue... by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      Jesus Christ, he was making a joke about the timeframe of certain technology inventions.. He never said the CRT was invented in the 90s. Go back to your hole.

  49. Don't care by laughing_badger · · Score: 0, Troll
    I've not bought anything with a Sony badge since Sony Pictures bought MGM and then jerked Alderac around with the license for the Stargate-SG1 role playing game.

    Current cost to Sony, about four thousand pounds. Well, it makes me feel better... It was a kick ass RPG too - the Alderac designers ROCK.

    PS: Don't buy Sony stuff.

    --
    Help children born unable to swallow - www.tofs.org.uk
  50. From inside Sony's HQ by kukickface · · Score: 1

    Sr. Executive: "Profits are down. Somebody should really look into this. Brenda, who works for me?" Brenda: "Let me check." Sr. Executive: "No time, my jet is landing. Just send one in." ... moments later Jr. Executive: "Sir?" Sr. Executive: "Profits are down. Take care of that." Jr. Executive: "Right." ...later that same day Jr. Executive: "So, what is it that we make here?" Engineer: "Televisions." Jr. Executive: "Ok, stop making those." Engineer: "What are we going to sell?" Jr. Executive: "That's marketing's problem." -End Yes I realize they'll still make LCD tvs...

  51. Sony is suffering for high quality, !$profit by ztalbot2000 · · Score: 1

    I bought a 17 sony trinitron over 15 years ago for $1700. It is still going strong. When I went looking for an HDTV replacement nothing is better than a CRT. The Sony line is quoted as being the standard for which all others are measured, even LCD. Sony stopped making the 40" model. I guess that was a sign. Considering the quality of Sony's products, known by there reputation; I'd say that Sony is suffering losses because of their high quality.

    1. Re:Sony is suffering for high quality, !$profit by Gogo0 · · Score: 1

      I dont know if this is a troll, a joke, or if you just dont know.

      Sony may have been the benchmark for quality years ago, but they are far behind in pretty much every consumer technology they sell. Hell, I've seen APEX TVs with better picture quality than Wegas that cost three times as much.

      The only product Sony makes that can be considered one of the best is their rear-projection CRT sets.
      Panasonic owns the plasma market in both sales and quality.
      Samsung and Mitsubishi own the DLP market in sales and quality.
      The LCD market is the only one that has yet to be decided on a current far-and-away leader, and it looks like Sony is aware of that.
      This is all ignoring their Incredible Shrinking receiver, personal music player, set-top cd player, and dvd player market shares. Their DVD players offer nothing (picture, features, overall quality) in comparison to offerings from Panasonic and even Chinese brands like Oppo and Momitsu.

      Sony still sells stuff by their name alone, but apparently people are finally catching on that there are far better products for a ton less money.

    2. Re:Sony is suffering for high quality, !$profit by ztalbot2000 · · Score: 1

      It was simple to find so many reviews to back up my comments, that being the Sony's CRT is the best out there. http://reviews.cnet.com/Sony_KV_34XBR910/4514-6485 _7-30536650.html http://www.circuitcity.com/ccd/productDetailReview .do?oid=96194&com.broadvision. session.new=Yes&BV_SessionID=@@@@1779814821.113043 5483@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccdeaddgd hdiiijcfngcfkmdffhdfkl.0 http://hardware.gamespot.com/Story-ST-1341-x-10-11 -x http://reviews.cnet.com/Sony_KV_34HS510/4514-6481_ 7-20886712.html Yes they are more expensive than any other type, but you truly get what you pay for. It is like buying fine furniture made of real solid wood or the stapled together crap that you get at the brick. The CRT industry is being phased out just like fine furniture did a long time ago. People bought crap because it was cheap and served their immediate purpose. Fine furniture is a rarety, but it is better. So too is the CRT. It is being pushed aside by inferior products that are cheaper and of less quality because most consumer demand it. This is why Sony is turning down the product lines. Unlike fine furniture, technology will make the competing products better Just not yet. Until that time, I'll stick to my Sony 34" HDTV CRT thank you.

    3. Re:Sony is suffering for high quality, !$profit by Gogo0 · · Score: 1

      I'm not saying youre wrong to like Sony, I'm just saying that the other hardware manufacturers out there (Panasonic, Mitsubishi, Samsung, etc) are making hardware of equal and greater quality than Sony's, and at a lesser price.

      This is going along with the line of thinking that if it costs more, it must be better. Many times that is truly the case, but the TV market in recent years has turned away from this model because it is no longer working. Mitsubishi, Panasonic, Samsung, and all the rest are competing with each other, while Sony prices themselves out of competition with them, perhaps because of quality, but many times it is simply because they think they can get away with it. Sony's top of the line TVs that garner accolades cost a lot, of course, but so do their low-end TVs that are outclassed by other manufacturers in price and performance. You do get what you pay for most of the time, but with all the competition in the home theatre market these days, you stand a better chance of getting so much more than your money's worth. The fact is that Sony is moving out of a market they could have been competitive in to this day, were it not for their sales tactics across their product lines, and moving into territory that they have no name in hoping that the very same name will carry them to the top.

      PQ is subjective anyway, though I will admit the majority of people buying CRT sets arent having the store employees move a Panasonic next to a Sony so that they can calibrate each and carefully judge PQ side by side with a DVD they brought from home.

  52. Re:Profit is immoral by Rycross · · Score: 1

    Economics is not a zero sum game. You lose.

  53. Re:Profit is immoral by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My point exactly! The rich don't need these things, yet they spend their ill-gotten fortunes on them while they leave the poor they've exploited without food, shelter, and other life necessities!

  54. You can pry my Trinitron from my cold dead fingers by pair-a-noyd · · Score: 3, Funny

    Thanks but I chose to stay with CRT's forever.
    I do not like LCD or flat panel TV's or monitors at all.
    The response time is god awful, the resolution is god awful.
    They just flat out suck... Not to mention the abysmally short life span of the LCD/plasma/whatever screens.

    I have a number of 21" Sony Trinitron CRT's stockpiled as backups.
    I have a matched pair sitting on my desk right now and 4 spares stuck away because I KNEW this was going to happen...

    I have a few 27" TV's that I never really watch but I suppose that sometime in the not to distant future I'll go out and purchase a few of the very large Sony Trinitron CRT TV's. My uncle is a big Sony fan (100% Sony in his home) and has several very large Sony Wega CRT sets in his home and man, I'm here to tell you those sets have magnificent pictures!
    I can imagine they are very expensive but I expect the price to drop as Sony tries to push old stock out the door to make way for the dinky little flat screens that all the LEMMINGS just *have to* run out and buy. It's the "me too syndrome". You know, keeping up with the Jones and all that.

    People are basically stupid and will buy stuff just because the voice on the idiot box tells them it's cool and trendy and that you MUST run out and get yours today.

    Not me. I stick with yesterdays technology. It's tried and tested and no one is jealous of my Fred Flintstone equipment and decor... Not to mention, I save a lot of money by not replacing all my stuff every commercial break..

  55. Re:Profit is immoral by orderb13 · · Score: 1

    Quit feeding the troll, you'll only make it spew more shit.

  56. Re:Profit is immoral by TummyX · · Score: 1

    stop it or you'll make the poor little socialist-i'm-only-asking-for-equality-wanna-be's brain explode

  57. Re:Profit is immoral by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I'm not rich! The rich corporations are the ones trampling on the poor, not me.

    If you own a computer, by the standards of the world's population, yes you are rich. And because you won't give up all of the things you "don't need", judging from your rules, you are trampling on the poor just as much as the evil corporations.

  58. CRTs are still 84% of the market by obarthelemy · · Score: 1

    ... by volume. In poor markets, LCDs are still to expensive for doing the same job, less well, their only advantage is that they take up less space and look cool. In richer markets, people are starting to realize that CRTs' image quality is better. I don't know how fast LCD technology will progress, but i'm guessing CRTs will prove a bit more resilient than most people expect. So I'm not sure it's a smart move for Sony, especially since their Trinitron screens are quite good, though not the only game in town anymore.

    What also bothers me about Sony is that they fancy themselves a high-end brand, but I had a couple of discmans fail right out of the box, sent each 3 times for service, they came back as broken as they went (so quality AND quality control AND service suck). Luckily, my retailer let me exchange them for another brand. I wrote to Sony, got a started "too bad" customer service letter.

    Maybe they'll come out of their memory stick delusion sometime too... many people I talk to won't buy Sony stuff because of these. I know I won't.

    Their latest phones, notebooks and digital cameras seem fine, though.

    --
    The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
  59. Better Idea by Rickler · · Score: 1

    How about they stop manufacturing worthless proprietary media?

    --

    The human race is artificial intelligence created using object orientated programming.
  60. Until they improve product quality... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd like to see them go the way of the dodo.

    Yeah, yeah, -1 troll.

  61. Re:Welcome to 1990, Sony. by BigDumbAnimal · · Score: 2, Informative
    Can the depth of the TV really make someone spend so much more money?
    "Conspicous consuption" my friend. Or "keeping up with the Joneses."
  62. Warranty? by markdowling · · Score: 1

    Seems odd the warranty wasn't still good on the Sony - I remember crappy ADI monitors and the like offering three years...

    1. Re:Warranty? by courtarro · · Score: 1
      It was a one-year warranty, unfortunately. It couldn't have been any more their fault either - the thing literally gave up its magic smoke. I yanked the power out and ran it out to the hallway of my dorm; the stench of electronic death filled the room for quite a while afterward.

      When I replaced it, I made sure the new 19" Sony had 3-year warranty :)

  63. The End of an Era? by Jerrry · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'll be sad to see CRTs finally become extinct. Although LCD and plasma screens have come a long way in the last few years, there's nothing like a good CRT when picture quality really matters, and this news of Sony cutting back production brings back nostalgic memories of the old days.

    Many people today don't realize how far CRT TVs have come in quality and usability. I got my first TV set, a 19" Admiral B&W set, for my 8th birthday back in the 1960s. Admiral was one of the big brands back then, along with such former household names as Philco, Zenith, and Packard Bell. Japanese TVs were as rare as Japanese cars.

    My TV was a tube set, of course. Not just the CRT itself, but all of the active circuit elements were tubes. If you think today's CRTs generate heat, then you've never seen a tube set--they're in a totally different league. I don't miss the heat, but back then TVs had a warm, satisfying orange glow eminating from the rear of the set, and a peculiar smell as well.

    Tuners were not digital PLL back then either. They were analog with click stops for the VHF channels and a fine tuning ring around the main tuning dial to make fine adjustments. UHF tuners didn't even have click stops--you tuned until you found the station you wanted--and the channel numbers on the dial sometimes weren't even close.

    Then there were the controls I haven't seen on a TV in 30 years--horizontal and vertical hold. These were used to prevent the picture from "jumping" vertically and smearing out horizontally. The settings would drift, requiring frequent readjustment, and a trip across the room, as remotes were nonexistant.

    When a TV broke down back then, fixing it was an adventure. You took the back off the TV and removed all the tubes and took them down to the supermarket or drugstore and plugged them into a tube tester. You'd look up the settings for the particular tube in a book, set a bunch of dial settings, and then push the "test" button. If the meter needle moved into the green, the tube was OK. After buying replacements for the bad tubes, you went home and plugged them all back in and hoped everything was fixed. In my experience, replacing tubes fixed 90% of all TV problems.

    Ah, the good old days!

    1. Re:The End of an Era? by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 1

      I got my first TV set, a 19" Admiral B&W set, for my 8th birthday back in the 1960s.

      Damn, is your family the Rockefellers or something? That would be like an 8 yr old getting a 50" plasma TV today.

    2. Re:The End of an Era? by fred+fleenblat · · Score: 1

      >> TVs had a warm, satisfying orange glow eminating from
      >> the rear of the set, and a peculiar smell as well.

      And a sound! Older sets had notoriously cheap flyback transformers and if your ears were any good you could hear the 15KHz horizontal sync very clearly. Newer CRT's seal the transformer in epoxy or similar plastics but back then they were often made with paper.

  64. Sony by mercedo · · Score: 1

    I bought the short wave radio -Skysensor 5800 made by Sony for the first time at age 13. At that time I greatly enjoyed listening to the broadcasting from overseas. I started listning to FEN at age 21, and I started listning to BBC at age 27. I changed the short wave radio three times and all were made by Sony. Now I sometimes listen to the radio through the Internet. Radioes are no more needed. Times have passed.

    --
    Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters
  65. Re:Welcome to 1990, Sony. by ivan256 · · Score: 1

    A good projection TV is indistinguishable from a plasma TV

    No they aren't. In may ways, they're easily distinguishable.

    Why aren't people buying projection instead of plasma?

    They are.

  66. Re:Welcome to 1990, Sony. by Solosoft · · Score: 1

    I picked up a Mistubishi Diamondtron 19" Flat CRT (based off of sonys trintron design) and im more then happy with it. Got it for 119 bucks used at some chinese computer store and I couldn't be happier with it. Although I wasn't sure on the Aperture Grille technology. I get my monitor and it has 2 fine lines going through it on 1/4 of the way down and up. After reading I find it's because the screen is too flat (no complains here tho) after a little while you get used to it. Plus the monitor has FPM mode which brightens the brights and darkens the dark (good for games and movies) but not very nice for just normal computing because it's so bright that it makes you dizzy.

    Lots of other people borrowed sonys trintron technology. So there is alot of selection out there. Don't just look at Sony's if you want a good deal. Oh yeah and don't expect it to be light. My 19" CRT is over 60lbs but it's worth it if you want a nice picture at any resolution.

  67. CRTs also kick LCDs but in color fidelity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    although only a handful of folks still care about being able to see exactly what's going to get printed.

  68. Re:You can pry my Trinitron from my cold dead fing by Gogo0 · · Score: 1

    The response time is god awful
    Plasma and newer LCD screens have fine response time, exhibiting no ghosting at all. Early-generation technology will never be that great, but it has gotten a lot better.

    the resolution is god awful.
    God-awful resolution? 720p is the same on a CRT than it is on an LCD/Plasma/DLP.

    They just flat out suck... Not to mention the abysmally short life span of the LCD/plasma/whatever screens.
    Modern plasma screens (at least Panasonics) have a life of 80,000 hours. That is approx 3333 hours, which is nine years of uninterrupted play. Sure, I have a CRT that is 14 years old that I still use today, but I also have a 52" Widescreen DLP because that CRT wasnt cutting it any more for me in the main TV-viewing area.
    This nine years can be extended signifigantly by lowering the contrast to the proper level, as most TVs ship with it at max. This will also lower the risk of burn-in.
    These were neq technologies and they all had major flaws, but they are all past their third gen (DLP being the newest, in its fourth generation right now) and these flaws are rapidly disappearing. The ones you cited were the first to be corrected.

    I have a number of 21" Sony Trinitron CRT's stockpiled as backups.
    My DLP will only last me about three years on its original bulb, but those can be purchased new from Mitsubishi for about $150. Not a problem to maintain a large television. I would rather spend $150 for a warranteed bulb every few years than have two or more CRTs taking up space somewhere.

    My uncle is a big Sony fan (100% Sony in his home) and has several very large Sony Wega CRT sets in his home and man, I'm here to tell you those sets have magnificent pictures! I can imagine they are very expensive but I expect the price to drop as Sony tries to push old stock out the door to make way for the dinky little flat screens that all the LEMMINGS just *have to* run out and buy. It's the "me too syndrome". You know, keeping up with the Jones and all that.

    People are basically stupid and will buy stuff just because the voice on the idiot box tells them it's cool and trendy and that you MUST run out and get yours today. That is a bit of a contridiction. The only reason Sony sells stuff now is because theyre a much bigger and trendier brand name. Their PQ is far outclassed by other manufacturers, even the budget ones, and they cost an arm extra compared to the other big names.

    This article basically details that Sony's hype doesnt sell their products any more, as consumers are getting smarter and buying on picture/audio/feature quality and not brand-name. Sticking to Sony is fine for people, but they are limiting themselves to inferior products in a large majority of cases.

  69. trick for getting good picture at non-native res. by tomcres · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've noticed that if I change the settings on my video card (I have a GeForce FX 5900XT) under "Digital Flat Panel" to "Video Card Scaling" (actually, I prefer "Aspect Ratio Scaling" even better), the picture at sub-optimal resolutions looks outstanding. Apparently what it does is use the scaling features of the video card to output a lower resolution to the monitor at the monitor's optimal resolution. Seriously, you need to try it and see it for yourself, but it can be night and day for certain monitors.

  70. Re:Welcome to 1990, Sony. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I like LCDs because my dorm room is the size of your closet. And on the 5th floor. 17" LCD 5 lbs. 17" CRT = broken back.

  71. What about my shutter glasses and light guns? by greythax · · Score: 1

    Since neither of these technologies will work on an LCD TV (no scan beam to track) is anyone aware of functional replacements for 3D viewing and gun tracking? Sure, my retro collection is useless no matter what, but is there any hope for the future?

  72. Silly Metric System by iamlucky13 · · Score: 1

    Thanks for putting it in more comprehensible terms, but that only helps us Americans. Do you think you can convert that to even more intuitive units like Rolex watches or pirated CD values?

  73. Aren't CRT's better for gaming? by elmerf9001 · · Score: 1

    I still use a CRT, although its as big as a house. I use it because I am under the convention that CRT displays graphics better, sharper testures, lines etc... I know the LCDs have come along way but graphics are as sharp as CRTs. I haven't done any testing on this theory other than what I read a few years ago. So my question is are LCD's up to par now with CRTs in this arena? If so I would switch to save me some desk space.

  74. Re:44"!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OMFG I had to help a friend move a 36" Sony TV down 4 flight of stairs...that alone required use of an inclined plane to slide the TV down as it was just too dmned hard to hold onto. Thank goodness for apartments with sliding closet doors that come off their tracks :D

  75. Tubes are better than transistors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I find the images are a bit warmer (or maybe that's just the tube).

  76. Re:blah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nah, Digg's childish

  77. Re:Welcome to 1990, Sony. by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

    My main reason for getting an LCD monitor for my home computer system is the size & weight issue. I want a 19" screen and a CRT equivalent would take up most of my desk including requiring the screen to be right up to the edge to make room for the back of the tube. The weight of a large CRT would damage my desk not to mention my back when moving it.

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  78. Re:Welcome to 1990, Sony. by ShibaInu · · Score: 1

    For those people that live in apartments in urban areas, flat screen TVs make perfect sense. If you are paying thousands for an apartment that is less than 1000 square feet, every square foot matters. If you live in a walkup, every pound matters.

  79. Stash away those Sony CRTs Now !!!! by Nick+Driver · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Got one or more Sony Trinitron monitors or TVs that are in great operating condition?

    Quit using them now (to stop wear & tear on the tube) and stash them away. When CRT monitors and TVs disappear from the market after a few more years and there will be no more spare replacement tubes available, you'll be able to sell a good working unit to the CRT addicts for much more money than they are worth on the used equipment market right now.

    I'm unsure if I'm being serious or sarcastically humorous on this comment ;-)

  80. Re:You can pry my Trinitron from my cold dead fing by wift · · Score: 1

    I have a Sony 34" Wega HD and a couple of Sharp LCD TVs. While Sony beats them hands down on sound, Sharp's LCD quality is excellent and in many cases outperforms the Sony. The LCD weighs less, has less EMI and uses less electricity. I'd also be willing to bet is easier on the environment in manufacturing and recycling.

    Your argument sounds like the guys who still like vinyl albums over cd's although with less technical facts and thought.

    --
    ....... Thus ends my attempt at wit or whatever
  81. Re:You can pry my Trinitron from my cold dead fing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Modern plasma screens (at least Panasonics) have a life of 80,000 hours. That is approx 3333 hours, which is nine years of uninterrupted play.

    Since when is 80,000 hours approximately equal to 3,333 hours?

  82. Screen advice for gamers! by doc+modulo · · Score: 1

    If you play fast moving games, don't buy an LCD screen. They may tell you it's fast (Xms !!!1) but they will still show a streak when a bright character is moving in front of a dark background.

    LCDs suck for living room video as well, there are LCD types that are fast enough for video (TN type) but which distort their colours when viewed from the side even by a little bit. Sucks for the people at the ends of the couch. The other type of LCD has nice viewing angles but isn't fast enough for action sequences.

    The type of display that combines all the good features of LCD and CRT is SED

    They'll be available at the start of 2007 and might be affordable at the end of that year. Hopefully the manufacturers aren't too greedy to make a profit.

    Stay with a CRT until then, if you can.

    --
    - -- Truth addict for life.
  83. Re:Welcome to 1990, Sony. by sootman · · Score: 1

    "A good projection TV is indistinguishable from a plasma TV and costs half the price."

    From dead-on, maybe. But stand up, or sit a few feet off to the side, and the brightness gets cut dramatically almost instantly.

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  84. Re:You can pry my Trinitron from my cold dead fing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dad, is that you?

  85. Mod Parent Up. by SeaFox · · Score: 1

    The minidisc could have done so much better in the US if Sony hadn't forced consumers to transcode their mp3's to ATRAC3 to put them on disc. Same with Sony's first HDD players. It could have continued even better if Sony had used it for PSP instead of inventing that stupid UMD disc (which for the most part seems to be a minidisc platter in a differnt sleeve).

  86. This is a very sad day for Videophiles! by aaronmarks · · Score: 1

    I have had 3 Sony Trinitron's in the past decade and they have seen huge advancements and helped me through all my entertainment needs. I have owned a Sony Trinitron 27", a Sony Wega 27", and now my Sony Wega HD 34" XBR. The color reproduction on my 34" HDXBR can't be matched by any plasma, lcd, dlp, rear-projection crt, front-projection, you name it. CRT is still the standard when it comes to perfect contrast and color reproduction. The only place that I wish my CRT was a Plasma is when it comes to using it as a HTPC. Having a fixed pixel (i.e. 1280x720, 1280x768, 1366x768, 1920x1080) display is great when using it as a computer screen because there is absolutely no overscan or geometry issues. CRT's biggest downfalls really are that it doesn't have perfect geometery across the screen and it doesn't have uniform sharpness across the screen, the outside edges are always blurry in comparison to the center of the TV. For the purpose of a TV though this really doesn't make a difference though most of the time, because as long as there isn't a static picture on the screen (i.e. computer desktop) you would never see this. The most rewarding and exciting way to play computer games these days is in the dark and on a CRT HDTV. If you try to play in the dark on a LCD there is going to be white light from the backlight even on a 1000:1 contrast ration monitor. Not to mention that I can still see that LCD's aren't perfectly smooth like CRT's, even on 6ms response time LCD's! They don't ghost, they just stutter to the very sensitive eye (especially if you play a FPS). Please continue to provide me with quality CRT HDTV's Sony incase I ever need to buy another one before a new technology comes out to replace all these current ones.

  87. Re:You can pry my Trinitron from my cold dead fing by Gogo0 · · Score: 1

    sorry, 3333 days of uninterrupted play, though I suspect that you may have guessed that it was a typo/brainfart.

  88. Re:Welcome to 1990, Sony. by evilviper · · Score: 1
    1. They have sensitive vision and the brightness of the CRT hurts their eyes (this is why my work computer has an LCD monitor).

    The brightness of CRTs hurts my eyes as well. That's why I TURN DOWN THE BRIGHTNESS. You know monitors are adjustable right?

    LCDs don't give me the same controls unfortunately. You can't get the brightness/contrast down low enough that it looks evenly bright on white/black. It either looks washed-out, or much too bright on light colors, and much too dark on dark colors... etc.

    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  89. Re:44"!!!! by stalky14 · · Score: 1

    We have a couple of those 44" Mitsubishis where I work. They're
    beautiful TV's, but we had to build a special heavy duty cart
    to move one around on. The other is in a "kiosk" exhibit, and
    has a problem with the HV circuit. It is literally too heavy to
    be safely moved from its current location to be serviced. Those
    things are at least 200 lbs, and front-heavy.

  90. HDTV CRT's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are there even CRT's available in 1080P? Seems like LCD is the only way to get "true" hdtv resolution.

  91. Re:Welcome to 1990, Sony. by petermgreen · · Score: 1

    the other thing lcds give is very sharp pixel edges which is imo a good thing on monitors but bad on TVs.

    --
    note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  92. Re:You can pry my Trinitron from my cold dead fing by Tyrant+Chang · · Score: 1

    Except that, you can't produce/manufacture big-screen televisions.

    The main advantage of flat-panel tv (lcd or pdp) is that companies can produce gigantic screen like 50" or 60" or even 100" somewhat economically. You could possibly buy a projection tv with those types of dimensions but projection tv have even worse display quality than flat-panel tv.

    So under 30", CRTs rule and will maintain its dominance for a while (2~3 years). But you can't even find any CRT tvs greater than 36" in any volume.

    Television manufacturers are betting that consumers will easily sacrifice some quality in favor of having a big screen (for watching dvd, watching sports, etc)

  93. Re:Welcome to 1990, Sony. by frn123 · · Score: 1

    i just went out and bought 5 keytronic keyboards. the word is that keytronic stopped selling to europe altogether.

    even their keytronic-europe.com domain seems discontinued and squatted.

    so - does anyone has suggestions, whats second-best after keytronic?
    (no, don't suggest logitech - they KBs feel like swamp and the one i tried had a MISSING FUCKING INSERT KEY)
    (and if possible - i'll try to refrain from buying MS products too)

  94. MOD PARENT DOWN: KNOWN TROLL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He's just got his karma up, and he's about to goatse us.

    Minidisc transcoding was done without the user even noticing. It may have made it hard for Linux users (read: 0.5% of the market) to use, since they would have to write a transcoder in C themselves, but for Windows users, it was easy.

  95. WEEE Directive by Kev_Stewart · · Score: 1
    I personally prefer CRT to LCD at the moment. However..

    In Europe we have recent environmental legislation, which makes the retailer responsible for the disposal/recycling of electronic products for the *entire life* of that product. If your customer buys a TV from you, in 20 years they can make YOU collect and recycle/dispose of it. This has obvious cost implications for the retailer. CRT screens are NOT easy to recycle into anything useful - you can't use the recycled glass for foodstuffs for instance. In an industry where margins of 1 or 2% can make or break a retailer, it's understandable that they'd go for the lighter, more easily recycled/disposed of option - LCD screens.

    Maybe this is another nail in the coffin of CRTs?

  96. The poster was not making a troll statement. by SeaFox · · Score: 1

    The poster may be a troll but his comment isn't. Transcoding degrades music quality and people with large libraries of music didn't appreciate having the size of their collection double on disk just so they could use it on their MD.

    Apple actaully let folks use whatever bitrate they wished (rather than three to six choices like Sony). I would have abandoned Minidisc far sooner if the iPod had had the battery life and recording abilities an MD unit did.

  97. Forward looking statement by HermanAB · · Score: 1

    The CRT TV plants are only to be closed in 2008. Geez, will they be able to sell both CRT TVs they still plan to build then?

    --
    Oh well, what the hell...
  98. Re:You can pry my Trinitron from my cold dead fing by StikyPad · · Score: 1

    Television manufacturers are betting that consumers will easily sacrifice some quality in favor of having a big screen (for watching dvd, watching sports, etc)

    The problem is that when you increase size AND decrease quality, the flaws become even more evident.

  99. check the new Sony SXRD (LCOS) RPTVs by YesIAmAScript · · Score: 1

    The colors still aren't quite as good as CRT, nor the blacks, but they're very, very close. It's leaps beyond RP LCD (or DLP) (I say as an LCD and previous CRT HDTV owner).

    The contrast ratio on the new TVs is listed as 5,000:1, for whatever that means. And the response time is 3.5ms.

    I don't know how fake those numbers are. I'll just say this. I saw one, and it's incredible. It uses the same technology that knocked people's socks off at $40K with the Qualia 004. Some said the picture was "perfect". Well, maybe it's not perfect, but it's incredible. Good LCOS units like this one will tear away all but the most diehard of diehard CRT fans.

    --
    http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
  100. No more Sony production monitors (PVM series) by Nicky+G · · Score: 0

    Several months back it started becoming impossible to find Sony's PVM series of professional broadcast monitors. Then I was told by my Sony distributor that Sony had ended all production of the PVM monitors. This caught me off guard, because the PVM monitors are THE standard in the video production industry. As has been mentioned, we're simply not at the point where you can judge color-accuracy on an LCD or plasma or whatnot. But then you have to consider, what are people color-correcting to, if there are so many display standards out there now, and NTSC is about to fade away in another few years? It's a very confusing time for the broadcast/video industry.

  101. Re:You can pry my Trinitron from my cold dead fing by BillyBlaze · · Score: 1

    Methinks the superior resolution and image quality of those CRTs you're stockpiling won't mean much when the computer you're borrowing from Microsoft won't trust you to play HD movies on it.

  102. Re:Profit is immoral by Sockatume · · Score: 1

    You're right of course. The moderation system can take care of these folks more effectively if they're ignored.

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  103. Just wait for SED by cellocgw · · Score: 1

    All these posts, and nobody has mentioned the latest TV technology: SED.
    http://www.canon.com/technology/detail/device/sed_ display/

    IMHO this will blow away all other flat-panel technologies (assuming nobody sells a triple-MEMS version of the DLP design, thus eliminating the color wheel). SED has low profile and uses the same phosphor screen as CRTs. Aside from price and having to wait a year or two for the USA rollout, SED is perfect. :-)

    --
    https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw