Which does everyone like more? I like CRT's for good picture, and there's none of that ugly pixel-dithering to simulate low res, or that ugly black-border-around-screen for low res either. LCD's take up much less space though.
LCD's have a number of reasons for being much better. One of the main reasons would be that LCD screens render each pixel as it's own light, rather then rendering them up on a large flashing picture.
Each pixel flashes only when it's updated, which can speed refresh rates up nicely. With these 2 things in play, the picture comes out much cleaner and smoother as far as animation goes because each pixel being rendered on it's own, means that pixels don't blur into each other that easily. LCD, because pixels only refresh when they need to update, can flash much more on the screen at a higher resolution too. This means much higher refresh rates at much higher resolutions. However LCD's are the reason things such as game anti-aliasing and the 'clean' font style are in high demand. The sharpness of pixels, because they don't blur, is so sharp that ugly edges that were before, unnoticeable, show up more now. Because the screen is HD, both the good and the bad , that were hidden, show up now. In the end though, LCD's are overall much better for the future. To expensive for me though, so I stick with CRT.
Don't quote me on anything above as far as the actual explanation, I'm just repeating the information a friend gave me.
LCD. I remember seeing one of the first decent LCD displays from the 90's and thinking the colours looked very "metallic". once upon a time CRT was good, but I wouldn't trade my 2005FPW for anything, except maybe a 2405FPW or 30" Apple Cinema Display. Very bright, vibrant, widescreen and doesn't take up my whole desk.
I got an LCD for my 19th B.day and I prefer it so much more than the bulky crap I had before. I actually think the picture looks alot better, but that might just be my settings. It also allows space for my fish tanks
Anyway, back to the not-phizzy-induced portion of the topic, LCD's do indeed render better, considering they also won't hurt your eyes as much since they're not flashing at least 60 times per second. But the sharpness is a little too strong on lcd's, because with the tiny-bit of blurring crt does it can make some picutre actually look BETTER.
The idea that the tiny little blurring can be added through anti-aliasing though, gives you much more flexability with the picture. Because that little blur can't be controlled that well on CRT's, it's just there. No matter how sharp you make it, it's there. With LCD, you can simulate that blur, and because it's simulated, it can be removed if need be, to create a better looking picture.
A great example would be a standard TV vs a computer monitor. You'd be shocked how tiny the resolution on standard TV's really is. 320x240 looks like 640x480 on a TV, because the TV blurs alot. This may look nice and all on lower resolutions, but once you see a high resolution picture on a low resolution TV, and that same high resolution picture on a high resolution TV, you'll find out why HD TV's and LCD monitors are becomming much more popular.
well that depends Mr.C. in the UK the TV signal is a generous 576i, and through a completely digital connection (ie. a DVB-T reciever for a computer) you get a very nice image. I use my 2005FPW monitor as a TV with an EyeTV USB accessory which upscales the interlaced signal to progressive. TV itself is fairly high resolution it's just the translation to get it onto most TV's renders it ugly. though it is pretty impossible to use a computer with a regular TV. I used to run klik games when I had a regular tube TV with an S-Video TV output. it was fine there but with any precision use like navigating an OS or writing became impossible.
but to the OT - do they still make CRT monitors? the last new one I saw was a good 4 years ago.
I work at Currys, and I am a salesman, mostly on computers and televisions... and I tell ya, I would take a LCD over a CRT any time. LCD generally has a much better picture quality in resolutions terms. CRT does produce alot more colours but has a poor resolution to display them in. You can get a perfect picture on an LCD, where as a CRT the picture can be distorted, zoomed and stretched. The picture is sharp, there is no glare and no picture burn, something that CRT's can get if left on too long.
Also, with HD on the move, it's better to be watching High Def on an LCD TV than a CRT TV. Not because the quality would be better but there is hardly a choice for HD CRT set's. And the only one we seem to have in the store is a crappy, Samsung model.
So, if you are looking for a new TV, go for LCD and not CRT. It may still be good but they're slowly dying out and being replaced by LCD.
And Jimmi, I don't think there is a CRT set which supports DVI, just HDMI. They still make CRT monitors but it's demand isn't as great as LCD. Go to any Currys or Comet store and you will see LCD's and Plasma's (less of the latter) spread throughout the Television department, but only a small section for CRT set's.
Well, I'm guessing some people are going to say whatever they have is better.
I just upgraded from using a 21" CRT monitor to just using my laptop 17" TFT widescreen. I was going to use the CRT monitor plugged into my laptop because the screen is bigger. But I have to say compared to the laptop, looking at the CRT is awful! Its blurry, the colours are less vibrant, and it puts a strain on your eyes after a while. With the tft theres none of that, so I don't think I'll be switching back any time soon.
Linda Barker was a fucking whore. During that terrible promotion, all you saw around the store was her ugly, shit-eating grin staring at you wherever you went. We do have some terrible promo's and adverts, and we're so strict that I'll probably get fired for saying that.
Simulated Anti-aliasing looks horrible in my opinion. I've also found that the sharpness can be controlled eiher in settings or (if you're a DIY kinda person) you can take off the back and there's often a dial, right next to the high voltage warning sign .
I'm glad I don't ever have to sell TV's to people like you, one lady asked me why I should buy a LCD instead of a standard TV. I pretty much said the opposite of what you said because it's so easy to sell to dumbasses. I lost the sale though because we didn't have any in stock, bitch.
I mean we've all grown up with CRT's, but they're being replaced in the retail market and slowly they'll start creeping up on the Antique's Roadshow. RIP CRT LOL.
LCD! Not because they're smaller or look better, but because when you poke 'em, they go all gooey. At least the old school ones did. I loved those things. I used to go to computer stores just to screw with those. The sales clerk would come up and say "You can ruin the screen by doing that", and I'd reply "Oh. Sorry, then". I'd wait for him to walk away, and start poking at them again, even harder.
ChrisD> Employer: Say, wanna see a magic trick?
ChrisD> Employee: Uhh… sure, boss.
ChrisD> Employer: Your job! It just disappeared! Pack your things and leave! Pretty good trick, huh?
CRT... in general the life of a CRT is much longer, there are so many bad LCD errors like dead pixels etc, those can come at the most simple poweroff. Also i feel more control in CRT, and visual its easier to adjust (taking its digital).
I worked for year on R&D for cathodes (I know it's a dying technology, but meh, it was a year getting paid before uni) and except for the size, the technology provides much better picture quality. They were also developing slim-line CRT's (for television's, not monitors though) which were not much thicker than LCD TV's. I dunno when they are being fully marketed, but they are definitely possible.