steve30 wrote:
I'd say modern LCDs have easily surpassed CRTs in general, though a good quality CRT monitor is still very good, and very usable.
No, they have not surpassed them; the display time is near non-existent and only ips monitors even come close to the contrast and color depth of CRTs but their display time are not as good as NT monitors. The main adavantage of LCDs is the picture stability, which is the reason some them comfortable to watch.
LupaLuna wrote:
I have to say that I am torn between CRT and LCD. I like CRT for it contrast, and most importantly, it color vibrance. The colors are sooo much prettier on a CRT, especially when watching cartoons. Unfortunately, CRT have a nasty flicker problem to them, even at 120Hz, the flicker just gives me headaches.
Next time you buy a monitor, seek a ips one.
MindOfOrderedChaos wrote:
Yeah CRT's are cheap. I can pick up a 17 inch CRT for $20 in New Zealand. But I can't get a 17inch LCD for $300.
Honestly with that kinda price difference I would rather have my money than a little bit of extra desk space on a desk I only use for my computer any way.
Even with inflation (This is a 2005 post.) this is much cheaper that the LCDs of today.
Pete1051 wrote:
But until OLEDs become more affordable I'm staying with CRTs. We'll start seeing OLED monitors within the next 5 years. They will make an LCD look thick and clunky. kodak has prototypes 1/8" thick, with color quality rivaling that of CRTs. By 2015 we'll be sticking roll up screens in our pockets.
Pete
Turn out that 2005 post was too optimistic. Which is too bad.
OLEDs have the problem of a short lifespan, quantum dots could eventually work with the OLEDs advantages while still having a longer lifespan. Of course it could mean that monitors manufacturers may prefer to push for OLEDs.