Author Topic: CRT's are better than LCD's.  (Read 81705 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Lanx

  • Posts: 1903
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #150 on: Mon, 16 August 2010, 01:28:05 »
did anyone mention power draw? i have 31w coming from my 22's (lcd) and 01 idle.

Offline gr1m

  • Posts: 439
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #151 on: Mon, 16 August 2010, 06:54:45 »
Quote from: Lanx;213003
did anyone mention power draw? i have 31w coming from my 22's (lcd) and 01 idle.


This is Geekhack, any advantage of LCDs is ignored because CRTs can display 640x480 properly.

Offline typo

  • Posts: 833
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #152 on: Mon, 16 August 2010, 07:28:14 »
i did not find this post. i apologize for having started another one one the same topic.

i am running a very high end crt i just repaired myself. i know electronics. so it was free.
as i said in the other post, everyone here(like 12 people so far) agree one way or another the picture is better than the apple cinema 30" s-ips panel it is next to! i certainly agree.
of course the apple has a lot of advantages over the crt besides outright image quality.

i don't mean to argue these points though. instead i have a serious question i honestly do not know.
of course the geometry takes 15-20 minutes to warm up on a crt. i frequently do other tasks for 1/2 to 2 hours. the fancy screensavers piss off one of my cowrokers. he is a d!ck. so instead of have him do something nasty to me.... i would use the blank screensaver in windows.  that way it does not have to come out of power save when i am ready to use it. i am not concerned about the electronics since i just replaced everything that burns up anyhow.

the question is: will the blank screensaver work as any other screensaver to prevent image burn or does the blank screensaver not acomplish that?

edit: i have read now that burn is not really the issue with modern crt's. it is keeping the electron gun heated. which i suppose the blank screensaver still does since it is displaying a actual image. to prolong the life(which i dearly wish to do) use power saving. so i will just let it warm up 15 minutes each time i need to use it. not a big deal since high end lcd's and plasma's take ven longer to warm up but not due to geometry of course. unless someone here knows different please tell.

thank you
« Last Edit: Mon, 16 August 2010, 07:41:27 by typo »

Offline bhtooefr

  • Posts: 1624
  • Location: Newark, OH, USA
  • this switch can tick sound of music
    • bhtooefr.org
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #153 on: Mon, 16 August 2010, 08:19:19 »
Displaying a non-black image is what creates burn, and the blank screen saver is just that, blank - all black.

Offline typo

  • Posts: 833
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #154 on: Mon, 16 August 2010, 13:12:06 »
yeah, i'll have to use the blank screensaver then. this thing takes over an hour to fully warm up. yes, i used the right caps.

the gun is very low at all black and this thing is almost at half bright. so i figure there is nothing to lose. if i had a brand new monitor of any type i'd use eco.

i have some guesses why crt's became obsolete but there is no equal for less than serious money as of yet. of course, these were serious money as well. i can't wait untill there are h-ips panels in the basement for the taking :)

Offline itlnstln

  • Posts: 7054
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #155 on: Mon, 16 August 2010, 13:29:17 »
I have always been amazed how CRTs work.  Not only just the technology of the thing, but even at how long they have been around.  I hate working on them, though.  You can never get the picture absolutely perfect. Close, but not perfect, and it annoys the hell out of me.


Offline itlnstln

  • Posts: 7054
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #156 on: Mon, 16 August 2010, 13:39:27 »
No joke.  I have a Dell 21" Trinitron in my closet.  It's still there, because I am dreading the day I decide to get rid of it.


Offline Lanx

  • Posts: 1903
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #157 on: Mon, 16 August 2010, 13:58:14 »
Quote from: ripster;213138
They stay around because they weigh so much.

Finally got rid of my brother in law's TV.  Cost him $50 to have two guys haul that monster to the dump.


150lb'er? lol they musta came in w/ a trolly.

Offline microsoft windows

  • Blue Troll of Death
  • * Exalted Elder
  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 3619
  • President of geekhack.org
    • Get Internet Explorer 6
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #158 on: Mon, 16 August 2010, 14:08:35 »
CRT's can withstand just about any temperature from 30 degrees to 115 degrees. At work, during the summer, since there are all those big, closed windows, it gets pretty warm in some of the rooms. The warmest room I ever worked in was 109 degrees. And I was sitting at computer with a CRT. And it all worked fine.
CLICK HERE!     OFFICIAL PRESIDENT OF GEEKHACK.ORG    MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN MERRY CHRISTMAS

Offline typo

  • Posts: 833
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #159 on: Mon, 16 August 2010, 22:30:31 »
i have realised the cheap ips panels are not comparable to the top lacie or eizo,duh. actually they are hardly better than tn. i am talking about the sub $300usd 23"+ ones.
other than that, the top lacie has a much wider gamut than the fw900 and artisan 520. still not as warm or deep though, sharper.

i also wanted to mention, there was some talk of crt repair in this thread. of course including by myself. may i suggest that if you do not know what a flyback is don't find out the hard way! hint: leathal voltage, easily touched by accident of the novice. just thought i'd give some good advice.

Offline instantkamera

  • Posts: 617
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #160 on: Tue, 17 August 2010, 07:40:20 »
Quote from: typo;213344
i have realised the cheap ips panels are not comparable to the top lacie or eizo,duh. actually they are hardly better than tn. i am talking about the sub $300usd 23"+ ones.


how so? Are you equating QC issues (uniformity and shifting etc.) at a given price point to the actual technology?

How are they "hardly better than TN"? What models are you referring to, and have you owned them, or just going by what you have heard? What issues are you referring to?

Lacie and Eizo dont use the same IPS panels either. Eizo use hitachi, where Lacie use primarily LG/philips (as do the "cheap" HP and Dell IPS).
Realforce 86UB - Razer Blackwidow - Dell AT101W - IBM model MCST  LtracX - Kensington Orbit - Logitech Trackman wheel opticalAMD PhenomII x6 - 16GB RAM - SSD - RAIDDell U2211H - Spyder3 - Eye One Display 2

Offline NamelessPFG

  • Posts: 373
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #161 on: Tue, 17 August 2010, 14:49:49 »
Quote from: EverythingIBM;212379
It's a lot easier to find an IPS than you think for cheap (you just have to look, the internet is huge).
Normally, I would have questioned that, but then I saw a listing in the local craigslist for a Dell 2005FPW for $100.

Alas, I don't have even that much to spend on a monitor right now. Not after springing for a Neo-Geo CD not too long ago.

Quote from: itlnstln;213140
No joke.  I have a Dell 21" Trinitron in my closet.  It's still there, because I am dreading the day I decide to get rid of it.
Let me guess: P1110 or P1130.

On another note, what is it that monitor "drivers" in Windows do, exactly? Trying to figure out the Sun GDM-5410's reluctance to have higher refresh rates forced led me to the Device Manager, which recognized it as...a generic VGA monitor. Could've sworn the Dell P1110 was listed by name...so I went in and tried to install the P1110 drivers, just for the hell of it. It worked.

And then, by some miracle, the same settings that worked on the P1110 now worked on the GDM-5410. Finally got my 1600x1200 at 95 Hz back!

(Now I just need to figure out how to totally get rid of that green tint. I don't know how to utilize the WinDAS white balance procedure properly, though...looks like I'll need a good colorimeter. I don't want to start it beforehand because it resets the color-related values and could just end up making things look worse.)

Offline bhtooefr

  • Posts: 1624
  • Location: Newark, OH, USA
  • this switch can tick sound of music
    • bhtooefr.org
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #162 on: Tue, 17 August 2010, 15:32:46 »
Drivers do a couple different things.

Some have EDIDs that get stored in the registry (if the monitor has an incomplete or nonexistent EDID,) and some have color profiles. Many nowadays just have the color profile.

Offline microsoft windows

  • Blue Troll of Death
  • * Exalted Elder
  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 3619
  • President of geekhack.org
    • Get Internet Explorer 6
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #163 on: Tue, 17 August 2010, 16:06:36 »
Quote from: NamelessPFG;213630
Trying to figure out the Sun GDM-5410's reluctance to have higher refresh rates forced led me to the Device Manager, which recognized it as...a generic VGA monitor.


If you disable the "Use refresh rates approved for this monitor" in Display Properties you can set the rate to whatever you want. And if the monitor doesn't like it, just wait 10 seconds and let it revert.
CLICK HERE!     OFFICIAL PRESIDENT OF GEEKHACK.ORG    MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN MERRY CHRISTMAS

Offline EverythingIBM

  • Posts: 1269
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #164 on: Tue, 17 August 2010, 16:14:53 »
Quote from: ripster;213656
Usually a very crappy profile.  Calibrate your LCD and it'll beat the CRT.

Plus if you have sensitive hearing those CRTs are noisy.


Some CRTs do ring, yes, and sometimes the ring is only heard on certain resolutions, or sometimes they just ring for the heck of it now and then.

But if you really want to be picky, LCDs make noise too -- because of the power adapters built inside, it's a humming noise.
Keyboards: '86 M, M5-2, M13, SSK, F AT, F XT

Offline microsoft windows

  • Blue Troll of Death
  • * Exalted Elder
  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 3619
  • President of geekhack.org
    • Get Internet Explorer 6
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #165 on: Tue, 17 August 2010, 17:58:51 »
CRT's also have much better color depth. Compare a solid black image on a CRT to an LCD and you'll see the difference.
CLICK HERE!     OFFICIAL PRESIDENT OF GEEKHACK.ORG    MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN MERRY CHRISTMAS

Offline NamelessPFG

  • Posts: 373
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #166 on: Tue, 17 August 2010, 22:41:28 »
Quote from: ripster;213656
Usually a very crappy profile.  Calibrate your LCD and it'll beat the CRT.

If it's an RGBLED-backlit IPS or AFFS panel, I'd believe you for the most part, but there's no way that the cheap-ass TN panels in my house are going to touch my FD Trinitrons if both are calibrated, except in geometry and convergence (the two things that take a lot of time to try and get just right on CRTs). I should also remind you that said LCDs in my house are also so cheap and crappy that they don't have DVI or HDMI ports.

Then again, FD Trinitrons, Diamontron NFs, and other such tubes are pretty much the best CRTs have to offer, much like IPS and AFFS are pretty much state of the art for current LCDs. If you were talking old, cheap shadow mask CRTs, then even TN panels could compete with those pretty well in some key regards, especially if the old, cheap CRTs are likely to be 15" or less, maybe 17".

Quote from: microsoft windows;213661
If you disable the "Use refresh rates approved for this monitor" in Display Properties you can set the rate to whatever you want. And if the monitor doesn't like it, just wait 10 seconds and let it revert.

Believe me, I tried unchecking that, when it wasn't greyed out. It didn't work. The NVIDIA drivers just told me something that I could sum up as "unsupported, sod off" when making custom resolution/refresh rate entries, right up until I set it to use the P1110 driver. Then it just worked, though like with the P1110, I have to use CVT for setting timings (part of which involves making the horizontal refresh have negative polarity instead of the usual positive), or else the monitor won't actually apply the higher refresh rate. Makes me wonder how much that monitor driver has to do with it.

Offline typo

  • Posts: 833
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #167 on: Tue, 17 August 2010, 23:24:07 »
i have used various ips monitors. it is pretty simple, you get what you pay for. if someone does not notice the difference between a lacie and a $300 hp or dell than something is wrong or they might need to see an eye doctor. that being said, crt's still have certain advantages at the very high end of photo editing. as i said the apple 30" cannot match the crt's overall. i have a number of people that are agreeing with me after witnessing it here. the thing the lacie and eizo have is a much wider color gamut. that point is moot though because humans cannot see all the colors the lacie can display. still, the black level and white balance does not even come close to gdm and nf crt's imo. we don't have to argue about it, thats just my personal perception.

now, be aware that there are different fd and nf crt's! for instance the crt in the gdm-f900 is a lot different than the one in say a cpd-g200. besides the obvious size difference.
the gdm is of course based on ages old crt technology but it has better phosphors,coatings etc. plus the whole chassis and control are much higher end. so if you are out to buy a $50 monitor, you need to know what you are looking at. since pretty much anything can show up at this point for $50. including but not limited to a gdm-fw900! i have found them in dumpsters for free! as early as 2008 even.

with occasional adjustments and repairs a fd or nf(any of them) can last 40+ years. since the last ones are less than 10 years old i am simply waiting for a technology that truly trumps the crt to arrive. in my opinion it it has yet ro happen.
of course when you factor in some other things like geometry issues,size,heat the current laxie's and eizo's are good enough really. however i still maintain that the $300 ips offerings are not. at least that i have seen thus far. the better ones have different shutters and a lot of other things. there is a reason for the cost difference.

i wanted to add there is no way around letting any type of display warm up. the blank screensaver simply pushes a black image. it of course does not shut off the gun. it will prevent burn in but it is also a great way to win a race to half bright if it is run 24/7. you should use power saving on any display. i put a photo meter to the blank screen saver and it had plenty of light. so that idea is out the window. in fact, something like the moving 3d box is probably a lot better idea if one is not going to use power saving.

my refresh rates do not work either. 43 is the same as 180! i'll figure it out though.

Offline EverythingIBM

  • Posts: 1269
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #168 on: Wed, 18 August 2010, 16:41:00 »
Quote from: microsoft windows;213721
CRT's also have much better color depth. Compare a solid black image on a CRT to an LCD and you'll see the difference.


That's also something I wanted to mention.

If you look at an LCD & a CRT turned off, you'll notice the LCD (well mine anyways) actually has a darker panel than CRTs. So if there wasn't the issue of a backlight, LCDs would have a much more blacker black.

Although this is theoretically impossible unless you use some kind of grid to remove nearby luminance (white contrasted against black will always light up the black a little near the converging point).
Keyboards: '86 M, M5-2, M13, SSK, F AT, F XT

Offline microsoft windows

  • Blue Troll of Death
  • * Exalted Elder
  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 3619
  • President of geekhack.org
    • Get Internet Explorer 6
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #169 on: Thu, 19 August 2010, 09:59:12 »
Quote from: EverythingIBM;214080
So if there wasn't the issue of a backlight, LCDs would have a much more blacker black.


Only one little issue there. Without a backlight, that dark black's just about all you'll see on that LCD.

You know, this reminds me of when I was at the farm equipment store the other day to get some chain when I saw a 122-key Model M and 3 IBM LCD's on their checkout computers.
CLICK HERE!     OFFICIAL PRESIDENT OF GEEKHACK.ORG    MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN MERRY CHRISTMAS

Offline bhtooefr

  • Posts: 1624
  • Location: Newark, OH, USA
  • this switch can tick sound of music
    • bhtooefr.org
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #170 on: Thu, 19 August 2010, 10:48:49 »
You can actually get LCDs that are color and lit in other ways, but you lose the dark blacks in those situations, too.

But, monochrome LCDs have much less of those problems, due to not having color filters blocking a significant amount of the light going through them.

Offline microsoft windows

  • Blue Troll of Death
  • * Exalted Elder
  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 3619
  • President of geekhack.org
    • Get Internet Explorer 6
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #171 on: Thu, 19 August 2010, 11:17:14 »
But I definitely wouldn't recommend a monochrome LCD for photo editing though...
CLICK HERE!     OFFICIAL PRESIDENT OF GEEKHACK.ORG    MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN MERRY CHRISTMAS

Offline typo

  • Posts: 833
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #172 on: Sat, 21 August 2010, 00:55:01 »
figured i'd mention. nf and fd crt's are not completely flat. they played some tricks to make it look that way. if you sit in front of one for a bit you will notice a slight curvature on either. the crt in the gdm-400ps is probably just as flat as a fd. it is just curved on the outside of the glass rather than inside of it. this is one advantage i can think of with lcd's. they are flat. more real estate. plus no geometry issues or screen sizing. so those are some plusses of lcd's. i still maintain that high end crt's have better color rendering. especially black.

it seems odd then being that a lacie can display many more colors than a crt. untill you read my other post where i state a human cannot see many of those colors. the lower end ips panels have worse color gamut than the best crt's.

i think this will all change soon though. in a year or so i am guessing there will be lcd's for less than $500 that wipe the floor with crt's. thats my guess, time will tell.

then a question: if lacie uses the same panel as a cheap dell or hp how come the lacie has much better specs on paper? namely the color gamut. i know i just mentioned it did not matter but i am wondering how they have different specs on the same panel. different model of panel from the same manufacturer? if that is the case that is like comparing a c class benz to a s class.

Offline EverythingIBM

  • Posts: 1269
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #173 on: Sat, 21 August 2010, 01:38:42 »
Quote from: typo;215245
figured i'd mention. nf and fd crt's are not completely flat. they played some tricks to make it look that way. if you sit in front of one for a bit you will notice a slight curvature on either. the crt in the gdm-400ps is probably just as flat as a fd. it is just curved on the outside of the glass rather than inside of it. this is one advantage i can think of with lcd's. they are flat. more real estate. plus no geometry issues or screen sizing. so those are some plusses of lcd's. i still maintain that high end crt's have better color rendering. especially black.

it seems odd then being that a lacie can display many more colors than a crt. untill you read my other post where i state a human cannot see many of those colors. the lower end ips panels have worse color gamut than the best crt's.

i think this will all change soon though. in a year or so i am guessing there will be lcd's for less than $500 that wipe the floor with crt's. thats my guess, time will tell.

then a question: if lacie uses the same panel as a cheap dell or hp how come the lacie has much better specs on paper? namely the color gamut. i know i just mentioned it did not matter but i am wondering how they have different specs on the same panel. different model of panel from the same manufacturer? if that is the case that is like comparing a c class benz to a s class.


It's impossible to get a tube 100% flat, as, the tube needs a curved surface to display things. Thus, more noticeable on bigger CRT screens.
"Flatscreen" CRTs are indeed a lot more flat than the older ones. I remember some CRTs were so bubbled you could see the cursor change form as you'd slide it from one side to another. I'm not a fan of that bubble distortion (you did get used to it after awhile), but in newer CRTs it is basically nonexistant.
Keyboards: '86 M, M5-2, M13, SSK, F AT, F XT

Offline microsoft windows

  • Blue Troll of Death
  • * Exalted Elder
  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 3619
  • President of geekhack.org
    • Get Internet Explorer 6
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #174 on: Sat, 21 August 2010, 07:11:32 »
The CRT on my Micron has that bubble kind of distortion.
CLICK HERE!     OFFICIAL PRESIDENT OF GEEKHACK.ORG    MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN MERRY CHRISTMAS

Offline instantkamera

  • Posts: 617
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #175 on: Sat, 21 August 2010, 10:06:31 »
Quote from: typo;215245
then a question: if lacie uses the same panel as a cheap dell or hp how come the lacie has much better specs on paper? namely the color gamut. i know i just mentioned it did not matter but i am wondering how they have different specs on the same panel. different model of panel from the same manufacturer? if that is the case that is like comparing a c class benz to a s class.

Different backlight (RGB LED)?

I don't know if this was directed at me, but I'm answering. The panels (probably)aren't exactly the same models, but they are IPS from the same manufacturer. This generally means that they carry all the same characteristics of the given IPS "sub-type" (of which all IPS offer: good viewing angles, proper 8+ bit panel (TNs are usually 6 bit),etc ).

Im not sure if it was you who said "cheap" IPS are like TN, but that just isn't the case. Which there are some IPS specific issues that COULD be more prevalent in the "cheaper" models (uniformity), those issue do plague more expensive models as well (hence NECs creation of "Color Comp").

Dell and HP ALSO have their own wide gamut displays as well, so I'm not so sure LaCie/eizo have the market cornered on wide-gamut, as you seem to be implying.

Finally (I have mentioned this already before), keep in mind not EVERYONE wants a Wide Gamut screen, as those of us who are very particular about our workflows do not want the added variable/complexity to have to deal with.
Realforce 86UB - Razer Blackwidow - Dell AT101W - IBM model MCST  LtracX - Kensington Orbit - Logitech Trackman wheel opticalAMD PhenomII x6 - 16GB RAM - SSD - RAIDDell U2211H - Spyder3 - Eye One Display 2

Offline Lanx

  • Posts: 1903
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #176 on: Sat, 21 August 2010, 12:50:41 »
Quote from: ripster;215335
On  The Guild (skip to 1:47, season 4, Ep 1 the bald guy uses a CRT with headphones held together with duct tape.

His name is Vork.  You may recognize him from this awesome commercial
Show Image


So do some of the other Guild characters...
Show Image

i think vork lives off the socials security checks of his dead father? i think the duck taping old crt is to reinforce that. (don't understand how grilling bacon while playing mmo does that, must be to reinforce that in order to play mmo you have to keep life choices such as eating/bathroom to a mininimum in order to mmo successfully, which is false)

Offline EverythingIBM

  • Posts: 1269
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #177 on: Sat, 21 August 2010, 17:08:37 »
Quote from: ripster;215406
Like CRTs, I respect other people lifestyle choices.
Show Image


Owning a CRT is not comparable to LARP.

One is a nice computer display, the other is insanity and boredom.

LARP for a variety of reasons annoys me. One is simple logic: real warfare you need actual ARMOUR, thick steel, not useless skimpy clothes.
Whatever, I'm thinking over it too deeply.

That's actually one thing that bothered me about warcraft 3 -- some of the characters are so inappropriately dressed for warfare. Blizzard needs to learn a thing or two from Age of Empires 1.
Keyboards: '86 M, M5-2, M13, SSK, F AT, F XT

Offline ch_123

  • * Exalted Elder
  • Posts: 5848
  • Hello Baton Rouge
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #178 on: Sat, 21 August 2010, 17:10:02 »
Quote from: EverythingIBM;215462
That's actually one thing that bothered me about warcraft 3 -- some of the characters are so inappropriately dressed for warfare..


Do tell me, good sir - what is the 'realistic' load-out for an Orcish grunt?

Offline EverythingIBM

  • Posts: 1269
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #179 on: Sat, 21 August 2010, 17:15:48 »
Quote from: ch_123;215465
Do tell me, good sir - what is the 'realistic' load-out for an Orcish grunt?


I actually had the nightelves in mind when I made that statement.

There's nothing realistic about *Orks, but skimpy clothes seems to be a common malady in fiction or non-fiction.

*Tolkein actually changed his mind and wanted "orc" to be "ork," well he should have made up his mind to begin with. If you ever played "Tzar: the Burden of the Crown" you'll see they use "Ork" instead which I found interesting.
Keyboards: '86 M, M5-2, M13, SSK, F AT, F XT

Offline ch_123

  • * Exalted Elder
  • Posts: 5848
  • Hello Baton Rouge
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #180 on: Sat, 21 August 2010, 17:17:12 »
You're playing a game with night elves in it, and you're concerned by how 'unrealistic' their armor is?!

Just assume that it's magic. Y'know, that stuff that explains most things away in fantasy stories.

Offline EverythingIBM

  • Posts: 1269
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #181 on: Sat, 21 August 2010, 17:22:21 »
Quote from: ch_123;215471
You're playing a game with night elves in it, and you're concerned by how 'unrealistic' their armor is?!

Just assume that it's magic. Y'know, that stuff that explains most things away in fantasy stories.


Quote
...but skimpy clothes seems to be a common malady in fiction or non-fiction.


Or a better explanation than "magic" is to attract more gamers with dressing the characters in less clothes.

Besides, I always play as the humans and rush to knights (someone accused me of hacking once, well I hope they enjoyed the replay!).
Keyboards: '86 M, M5-2, M13, SSK, F AT, F XT

Offline Lanx

  • Posts: 1903
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #182 on: Sat, 21 August 2010, 20:00:23 »
larp movie
darkon
http://www.hulu.com/watch/68489/darkon

the reasons that ppl explain why they like larp... sound kinda loser'ish (i'm a clerk in the daytime but i'm a king on the weekends!)
if you enjoy it as your past time, whatever then, imo.

Offline typo

  • Posts: 833
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #183 on: Sun, 22 August 2010, 01:56:34 »
back on topic for a moment?

lacie says nothing about their backlighting afaik. in fact the dreamcolor is better imo. it's less money too. i think even these offerings cannot completely eclipse a fw900 or c520.
yes, soon they will be better but not at the moment. i am speaking solely of color rendering. the cheap ips panels are as stated 8 bit. the lacies are 10 or 12. the dreamcolor is 30! it still cannot match the gdm crt's. plus as i stated they must use different shutters, they are probably led backlit and not sidelit. the panel may be different like a cpd crt vs. a gdm crt. the other problem is the specs get better as the displays get larger. 16:10 is stupid for almost anything that has to do with the internet.

when they get me a 20" 4:3 lcd with at least 125% ntsc. i will take it. even if it is expensive. the fact is that is not going to happen. simply because they are not going to make a 20" 4:3 display ever again most likely.
meanwhile i am much happier with crt's. which if need be i could probably have for the rest of my life for free! there are millions of good or repairable crt's to be found. unless they destroy them there will be working crt's in 2050 or beyond. i hope by then lcd's or whatever technology exists will be much better than crt's were. of course they will be 200" and then weigh more than the crt's did!

besides guys, look what you were just discussing and many of you have model m's and f;s to boot. i can't imagine how some of you cannot embrace crt's for all their glory. the grade 1 crt's are/were the model m's of the display world. oh, i see brand new in box fw900's for 2 grand. i'd rather spend it on that than on the dreamcolor at this point but that's just me. anyhow i don't have to, i can get gdm crt's for free or a $40 "thank you" all day long! basements,landfills,closets etc. are full of them. they were so stinking robust most of them are in a+ condition even if theya re sitting in a landfill. they are like roaches, they will be around forever. no, i do not go through dumps but i am good friends with the trash driver. a good friend to have indeed!
now as for the lcd, i do have a few at home and my cats and dogs mostly had them for lunch. they use the crt's as a chair but have yet to cause any damage whatsoever. really my investing in a $6,000 lcd would be an exercise in futility then. crt's for the win!

Offline bhtooefr

  • Posts: 1624
  • Location: Newark, OH, USA
  • this switch can tick sound of music
    • bhtooefr.org
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #184 on: Sun, 22 August 2010, 06:01:43 »
Just so you know, CRTs pretty much all have a roughly 20 year lifespan - more if they're not used much (but even 30 years is still pushing it,) less if they're used heavily.

Offline EverythingIBM

  • Posts: 1269
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #185 on: Sun, 22 August 2010, 08:15:39 »
Quote from: bhtooefr;215565
Just so you know, CRTs pretty much all have a roughly 20 year lifespan - more if they're not used much (but even 30 years is still pushing it,) less if they're used heavily.


Can it actually "die" after 30 years, or just get a very horrible picture?

Quote from: typo;215551
back on topic for a moment?

lacie says nothing about their backlighting afaik. in fact the dreamcolor is better imo. it's less money too. i think even these offerings cannot completely eclipse a fw900 or c520.
yes, soon they will be better but not at the moment. i am speaking solely of color rendering. the cheap ips panels are as stated 8 bit. the lacies are 10 or 12. the dreamcolor is 30! it still cannot match the gdm crt's. plus as i stated they must use different shutters, they are probably led backlit and not sidelit. the panel may be different like a cpd crt vs. a gdm crt. the other problem is the specs get better as the displays get larger. 16:10 is stupid for almost anything that has to do with the internet.

when they get me a 20" 4:3 lcd with at least 125% ntsc. i will take it. even if it is expensive. the fact is that is not going to happen. simply because they are not going to make a 20" 4:3 display ever again most likely.
meanwhile i am much happier with crt's. which if need be i could probably have for the rest of my life for free! there are millions of good or repairable crt's to be found. unless they destroy them there will be working crt's in 2050 or beyond. i hope by then lcd's or whatever technology exists will be much better than crt's were. of course they will be 200" and then weigh more than the crt's did!

besides guys, look what you were just discussing and many of you have model m's and f;s to boot. i can't imagine how some of you cannot embrace crt's for all their glory. the grade 1 crt's are/were the model m's of the display world. oh, i see brand new in box fw900's for 2 grand. i'd rather spend it on that than on the dreamcolor at this point but that's just me. anyhow i don't have to, i can get gdm crt's for free or a $40 "thank you" all day long! basements,landfills,closets etc. are full of them. they were so stinking robust most of them are in a+ condition even if theya re sitting in a landfill. they are like roaches, they will be around forever. no, i do not go through dumps but i am good friends with the trash driver. a good friend to have indeed!
now as for the lcd, i do have a few at home and my cats and dogs mostly had them for lunch. they use the crt's as a chair but have yet to cause any damage whatsoever. really my investing in a $6,000 lcd would be an exercise in futility then. crt's for the win!


Sadly, 4:3 will indeed be ignored. Which is stupid, widescreen is just annoying for regular tasks at a computer -- for a TV or medical equipment, OK sure. It's interesting no one complains about the space widescreen takes up horizontally, I find having a monitor poking out so much from the sides to be highly inconvenient (and this is in comparison to a regular 4:3 LCD).

There probably will be CRTs for a long time, but many of them are being recycled quicker than you can say "widescreen sucks". Plus the ones at the landfills being harangued by environmentals are surely not suitable for actual working monitors anymore.

I indeed wish I knew someone who worked at recycling or the dump, probably lots of good stuff...

My cat used to sit/sleep on top of my CRT as well, probably because it's warm. Kitty luv radiation.

Although in terms of health, LCDs probably win because they don't act as X-Rays lol.
Keyboards: '86 M, M5-2, M13, SSK, F AT, F XT

Offline bhtooefr

  • Posts: 1624
  • Location: Newark, OH, USA
  • this switch can tick sound of music
    • bhtooefr.org
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #186 on: Sun, 22 August 2010, 08:51:07 »
In the case of Trinitrons, they've got issues with their brightness limiter circuits that give them a 10 year or so lifespan before that dies suddenly and completely.

Or you get a terrible picture from the guns degrading.

Or the phosphor degrading.

Or the circuitry controlling things degrading.

(The last three bits apply to any CRT.)

AppleColor RGBs are dying en masse because of tubes wearing out - the electronics killed a bunch in the first few years, and then the tubes are killing them now.

Offline microsoft windows

  • Blue Troll of Death
  • * Exalted Elder
  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 3619
  • President of geekhack.org
    • Get Internet Explorer 6
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #187 on: Sun, 22 August 2010, 09:48:32 »
Quote from: bhtooefr;215591
In the case of Trinitrons, they've got issues with their brightness limiter circuits that give them a 10 year or so lifespan before that dies suddenly and completely.

Or you get a terrible picture from the guns degrading.

Or the phosphor degrading.

Or the circuitry controlling things degrading.

(The last three bits apply to any CRT.)

AppleColor RGBs are dying en masse because of tubes wearing out - the electronics killed a bunch in the first few years, and then the tubes are killing them now.


I wouldn't say that Trinitrons last only ten years. I've got a Trinitron (It's a Gateway2000-branded one) from 1996 that still gets great picture and contrast. Now, my old monitor from 1993, that's another story. It's got miserable contrast. It's still good enough to use, but it's probably got worn out or degraded so the contrast isn't as good anymore.
CLICK HERE!     OFFICIAL PRESIDENT OF GEEKHACK.ORG    MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN MERRY CHRISTMAS

Offline EverythingIBM

  • Posts: 1269
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #188 on: Sun, 22 August 2010, 10:12:12 »
Quote from: ripster;215621
I'd turn that working one off and save it.

In 50 years you can be on Antiques Roadshow.


How much do you think my 5150 and two 5160s will fetch at the antique roadshow in 50 years?
Keyboards: '86 M, M5-2, M13, SSK, F AT, F XT

Offline EverythingIBM

  • Posts: 1269
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #189 on: Sun, 22 August 2010, 10:34:29 »
Quote from: ripster;215632
"Sir, this Lion is worthless.  But your HHKB is a NATIONAL TREASURE!"
Show Image

"Sir, this is the most ADVANCED COMPUTER I'VE EVER SEEN! This is worth at LEAST a million dollars!"
Keyboards: '86 M, M5-2, M13, SSK, F AT, F XT

Offline ch_123

  • * Exalted Elder
  • Posts: 5848
  • Hello Baton Rouge
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #190 on: Sun, 22 August 2010, 10:49:04 »
Or the strange "black glow" that eminates from it.

Offline instantkamera

  • Posts: 617
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #191 on: Sun, 22 August 2010, 11:20:16 »
I'd say worst 'shop I've ever seen, but knowing EIBM, this is not PS. What do you call a bad MS Paint composition? MS Taint? Normal?
Realforce 86UB - Razer Blackwidow - Dell AT101W - IBM model MCST  LtracX - Kensington Orbit - Logitech Trackman wheel opticalAMD PhenomII x6 - 16GB RAM - SSD - RAIDDell U2211H - Spyder3 - Eye One Display 2

Offline Lanx

  • Posts: 1903
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #192 on: Sun, 22 August 2010, 12:29:29 »
on the comment that 16:9 or 10 wastes space or is inconvenient how about windows 7 new snap feature? just hold a program and snap it to the left and snap another one to the right and you have two equidistant programs now?
or how about the surge in the use of ati eyefinitiy, buy three monitors and flip em 90degrees to portrait and you got tons of real estate. (and is ergonomically better scanning from top to bottom instead of horizontal)

Offline EverythingIBM

  • Posts: 1269
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #193 on: Sun, 22 August 2010, 15:15:28 »
Quote from: kishy;215643
I'm surprised he's not yelling about how his left hand is in extreme pain.


They're actually not that heavy as one would first guess. You could comfortably put your hand under one without feeling any pain.

However, carrying THREE of them down three flights of stairs is. Well first I had to load them onto the elevator from the school basement (which went up to the top floor), then I took them into my teacher's room (left them for a few weeks there), and then carried them downstairs into the jeep.

Although my teacher got a lot of comments from those computers sitting in her classroom, some kids said "wow, those things are older than you". Of course that wasn't true, my teacher was much older than a 5150.

Now to get those iMac G3s and powerbook....
Keyboards: '86 M, M5-2, M13, SSK, F AT, F XT

Offline microsoft windows

  • Blue Troll of Death
  • * Exalted Elder
  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 3619
  • President of geekhack.org
    • Get Internet Explorer 6
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #194 on: Sun, 22 August 2010, 18:22:19 »
Quote from: EverythingIBM;215699
Now to get those iMac G3s and powerbook....


The saying goes, "It takes only one bad apple to spoil the whole bunch."
CLICK HERE!     OFFICIAL PRESIDENT OF GEEKHACK.ORG    MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN MERRY CHRISTMAS

Offline EverythingIBM

  • Posts: 1269
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #195 on: Sun, 22 August 2010, 19:00:26 »
Quote from: microsoft windows;215746
The saying goes, "It takes only one bad apple to spoil the whole bunch."


Of course they're crappy, but even you have two iMacs.

Besides, they might be worth something some day.
Keyboards: '86 M, M5-2, M13, SSK, F AT, F XT

Offline typo

  • Posts: 833
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #196 on: Sun, 22 August 2010, 19:50:49 »
lol, i was thinking worst 'shop as soon as i saw that. i carried a smartups 3 city blocks with batteries just to find out it was beyond repair! that day sucked.

i have to use the blank screensaver and take my chances. this thing takes almost 2 hours to fully warm up and i don't have that long for every time it sleeps. i am guessing that constantly on is pretty much the same lifespan as power saving and more than power down. power saving does not sht off all the electronics, just the flyback board.
power cycling often(as i would) is bad for any electronic components. especially capacitors which are the first thing to fail on a crt monitor. so i may have been wrong about the blank screen saver. which is probably the safest screensaver to use. since it scans the whole tube black. cranking the brightness is the sure way to kill acrt. to that end, any notice the high end ips lcd's don't get very bright?

i have decided very late in the game i prefer diamondtron nf to trinitron fd. towards the end a nf monitor as good as the f400 or c520 was $400 or so brand new. the sony's were 2 grand. the diamondtron nf does not have the g2 issue. it does not feature flybacks that go nuts and short the tube(the infamous pop sound and out of focus). i remember how pissed iw as at sony. 2 grand for that? give me a break. plus the diamondtron i have repaired and am now using has terrific geometry. nothing like a sony. 15 minutes to set up instead of an hour. the top left corner is just a little fuzzy, otherwise the picture makes me drool.

so if this thing only lasts a few years it was worth "free". i gather by then lcd's will be much higher quality and under $500 for the very best 23".
i think i mentioned this already but i think it also sucks that the very best lcd's are all huge 16:9-10. they are so big i can't even consider one. i personally don't want more than 23-24". i found a 4:3 ips that is pretty pro quality 19" and about $400. i might snag that tomorrow while the getting is good.

btw, if i am living up to the name "typo", the das has developed a problem. i know i don't use caps but thats not what i am talking about. keys are randomly not regitering now. i am not worried.metadot are very nice folks. unless someone knows how i can fix it. i am guessing the controller is shot.

Offline EverythingIBM

  • Posts: 1269
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #197 on: Sun, 22 August 2010, 20:00:16 »
Quote from: typo;215782
the top left corner is just a little fuzzy, otherwise the picture makes me drool.


I'm starting to wonder just what exactly you're using your CRTs for.... hmm... high quality picture... drooling...
Keyboards: '86 M, M5-2, M13, SSK, F AT, F XT

Offline typo

  • Posts: 833
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #198 on: Sun, 22 August 2010, 20:11:53 »
haha. not for that. i meant the picture quality is so good it makes me drool. not the actual image being displayed. that is g rated. seriously.

now i have a serious question please. my cats mean a lot to me. they take turns snuggling ontop of crt's for hours. cam this actually impact their health? i know more radiation is out the bac and a cat is very small. i never thought of this. i don't lnow if it is enough to harm them. either short term or long term. would you keep them off of there?
please don't guess at this question hopefully someone actually knows. all i'd have to do is put some double sided tape on it and they would not go there anymore of course. if it is safe for them then so be it. cats do like warm spots.

again, sorry about this darn das pooping out on me.

Offline Lanx

  • Posts: 1903
CRT's are better than LCD's.
« Reply #199 on: Sun, 22 August 2010, 20:21:04 »
Quote from: typo;215793
haha. not for that. i meant the picture quality is so good it makes me drool. not the actual image being displayed. that is g rated. seriously.

now i have a serious question please. my cats mean a lot to me. they take turns snuggling ontop of crt's for hours. cam this actually impact their health? i know more radiation is out the bac and a cat is very small. i never thought of this. i don't lnow if it is enough to harm them. either short term or long term. would you keep them off of there?
please don't guess at this question hopefully someone actually knows. all i'd have to do is put some double sided tape on it and they would not go there anymore of course. if it is safe for them then so be it. cats do like warm spots.

again, sorry about this darn das pooping out on me.

I don't think this makes a difference if this were true then most of japan's y generation would be even worse off than godzilla. (since they culurally have small rooms, sit on floor and sit a few feet away from the tv)(and no i'm not being culturally biased, this is statistics and further enforced by the many warnings of anime saying that kids should sit further away when watch tv, and lets not forget the pokemon incident where the super flash of a zillion colors up close caused siezures among the kiddies)