This thing can out match a CRT any day. IT is extremely clear, great refrsh rates, small dot pitch, and easy on the eyes.
I love it. I would never go back to a CRT.
Some other advantages:
1: Generates VERY little heat
2: Uses Very little power (great if you have a High end system
(and depend on a UPS if power fails)
3: Takes up little space and doesn't stick out the back of your
desk
4: lasts LONG time
Lian li Case with 5 fans
Antec Trupower 550 Power supply
2.8 ghz INTEL Processor (YEAH BABY)
P4S533 Asus Motherboard
(2) 60gig Maxtor 7200 ATA133 Drives
Sony 48x CDR/CDRW Drive
Sony 16x DVD drive
Sony 1.44 Floppy
Audigy 5.1 MP3 Sound card
3COM 56K fax /modem
Toshiba Cable Modem
ATI Radeon 9700 Pro 128 meg Video
1.5gig Kingston DDR2700 ram
USB ZIp drive 250
Round IDE & Floppy Cables
Backups UPS 650
at this point LCD offers nothing of real value other than space and not generating as much heat. There are a few good flat panels out there but they cost thousands and arent LCD.
I got a NEC FP2141SB flat CRT screen recently, thing rocks, its big yes (22" nearly 80lbs.) but best monitor I've ever used and I do graphic design and multimedia work for a living. Even blows away the trinitron i owned before this one.
Visionology Interactive Media
http://www.visim.com
Where I work (an architecture company), some people's secondary screens are LCD (expensive ones) coupled with expensive CRT's obviously. The LCD's just can't compete at all with them in terms of refresh, contrast, vibrance, sharpness... you name it, the CRT beats it hands down (well other than power consumed). Even the nice expensive LCD looks worse than some of our old CRT's the IT dept now uses. LCD still has a ways to go to catch up to CRT's period. They've made great progress, but not nearly enough as CRT's still are ever so slowly getting better.
has anyone tried hooking their computer up to say a 42-62" Plasma screen? I'm curious how good the picture quality is and the resolution.... If it was crisp and semi high rez it might be one helluva desktop
Visionology Interactive Media
http://www.visim.com
Originally posted by Someone Stupid Where I work (an architecture company), some people's secondary screens are LCD (expensive ones) coupled with expensive CRT's obviously. The LCD's just can't compete at all with them in terms of refresh, contrast, vibrance, sharpness... you name it, the CRT beats it hands down (well other than power consumed). Even the nice expensive LCD looks worse than some of our old CRT's the IT dept now uses. LCD still has a ways to go to catch up to CRT's period. They've made great progress, but not nearly enough as CRT's still are ever so slowly getting better.
Yes i totally agree, same with my friends that works with AutoCAD and 3D Studio in their engineering and design shop for buildings and stuff.
they Like LCD, but only to SURF the net, but for REAL WORKS they still uses their 21" CRTs
exactely due the colors, and quality, and sharpness, crystal clear, and crispy, etc.
LCD can only come so far, but ... is restrained by a lot of factors.
specially when it comes to Refrection, LCD has the most trouble trying to reproduce that effect properly, with the same intensity than a CRT or plasma can do.
anyhow CRT is best for a long shot, until Plasma becomes dirty cheap, or until LCD evolves much more
geez... by then Holographics display will be widely available already
i had the same choices to make and i went for lcd. saw a noticeable decreas eon my energy bill, since the monitor was on most of the time during the month. I can actually play a dark game with the window open and sunlight puring in with no effect. thats what i like, no glare and colours are still there. its also a load easier for my eyes, and this model, the samsung 150s has good display timings, i can play sof2 and still be fragmaster :P , with no headaches, and colours richer than crt. i dont see what your complaining about, just try lcd for once. and try a good one.
also add to lcd goods:
-no geometrical errors
-better brightness