107 total posts
(Page 1 of 4)
Although CRTs take up more room, are considered less sightly, and typically cost more to run, they are still by far the cheaper option. If they were no longer produced those who cannot afford a plasma or LCD TV would be forced to go hunting for a used CRT or not have a television at all. In addition, even those who can afford a 52" plasma may not want to spend a lot of money on a TV for their kids' rooms...little kids could care less about the TV as long as they can watch their favorite TV shows/movies and parents certainly don't want to see $300+ fly out the window as a teddy bear knocks the TV of the stand/wall. Until the cost of flat-panel TVs drops close to the cost of CRTs, the tube should continue to have a spot reserved for it on the shelves.
No Way! Think Of The Kids
You have children, are you really going to buy them a plasma TV. I know my parents wouldnt and would think I was crazy. You gotta keep the old school.
Not to mention....
That, on average, tubes deliver a better picture. Take a look at the high end Sony 34" tube and see if the flat panels match up. The vast majority won't. So for those who don't want to play the macho "mine's bigger than yours" game, you'll get better pic quality from the higher end tubes.
Lots of Senior Citizens....
John, you're right regarding the second (and subsequent) TV's around the house. And, there is a second consideration. We have many senior citizens on fixed incomes that simply can't afford the latest and greatest. They are the ones that are retired and rely on TV for entertainment and information. We, as a society, have to allow for this growing population. When LCDs/Plasma TVs are in the $150 - $200 range then, it makes sense to stop CRT TV production.
Not just Senior Citizens
You also have people with disabilities on a limited income and, can't afford expensive TV's. And, some low income families who are struggling paycheck to paycheck. While we would enjoy the technology, we simply can't afford it. So, we still need TV's that are affordable.
This discussion is likely mute
Try to find a major manufacturer that is still manufacturing a TV using a CRT - in current production.
You will find it interesting. None have a current production of TV's using picture tubes. This was an observation I made 2 years ago!
I am believing that any TV's being sold using CRT's is NOS - New old stock and are being dumped as fast as possible.
>>This discussion is likely mute
If it were mute, no one would be saying anything. What you probably meant was "moot".
However, not having kept up with the refresh rates of flat panels, I can't say absolutely that they are up to the standards of CRTs in regard to fast-moving action.
I think you are right that CRTs are going to be phased out if they haven't already been.
YOU PEOPLE DISGUST ME. (about 35% of you that is...)
the CRT still has the best picture qualety and price compaird to flat displays, it has been around for over 100 years and has had time for every aspect to be perfected.
flat screens still have some growing up to do...
as do the ignorant yupster consumers that dont know the differance between any of the display technologys and a hole in the ground, exept that "ones flat and ones not".
keep this in mind...there are 3 offical resolutions used bt TV today 480, 720, and 1080. a CRT is THE ONLY DISPLAY DEVICE THAT CAN DISPLAY ALL 3 CORRECTLY.
because a CRT is the only device that can MULTISYNC.
read some of my other rants on here for the full explanation..
the verry idia of them not making tube displays anymore makes me shivver and get diareha.
makes you shiver and get diareha, lol
You got issues man - your presentation of any ideas "disgust me" oh one who knows everything - should we all bow down now????
The best reason to get rid of crt
while I tend to agree that CRTs are the most flexible because of multi. syncing, it is misguided to say that CRTs can fully create a 1080 image using a line of phosphor twice and refreshing faster than the human mind can see is not at all a full display of resolution its a nice trick but when it comes to crisp images there are only pc monitors that can display 1080 not TVs, secondly in a digital world an analog device is still restricted to the same set of rules as everyone else that's 256 values of grey no more no less (well hopefully no less) so as flexible as a CRT maybe it is no better of an image then a plasma with grey scale.
no to my statement the best reason to get rid of crt is so CE companies can focus more on the refinement of production of flat panel sets and push price down further with volume productions continuing to produce CRTs coast money there margins are small so those companies that still make them make almost no money no them. Also by continuing to sell crt it is splitting costumers even more with their choices and slowing the adaption of HD keeping prices high and confusing everyone.
Crt were great but its there time to go, I will miss them dearly but you just can't beat a 42" set verse a 32" one.
NEW CRTs will replace LCDs
The new F.E.D.s and S.E.D.s are flat one to two inch think CRTS but they uses Nano carbon tubs and have 1000s guns to display the images and will cost $600 for a 70 inch and will have no color distortion and be sharper in definition.
SEDs will be out next year and FEDs will be out in 2008.
$600 bucks, I'll beleave that when I see it...
I don't know about that pricing you just gave?
Where did you come up with those numbers anyway?
Of course, this would probably be great new if it were true, but it sounds like another one of those things that even IF? it were better, it might now ever come to pass.
Kinda like VHS vs Beta back in the early 80s.
Though, what would they do if one cell went out?
Are they all connected as one unit or seperate independant parts that are interchangable?
Thanx and I'd love to see a link to a where you found such info and pricing?
i found my zenith hdtv on ebay if you've ever heard of it.
the set retailed for $1400 and was sold by a korean business called refurbishedking.com outside chicago.the sale price was $600 because the set first came out in 2002.
Wow! WHERE DID YOU GET THIS INFO?
OK, some of these things I've heard of, but.........
Where's that's price tag that was posted here?
The $600 price tag, as though it were already, ready to be sold this next coming year?
These are technologies that are coming down the pike at future times, but aren't ready for anything realistic yet.
And also, though they may technically be similar to a CRT in how they work, let's face it, it's NOT the same as what the question of this poll was asking, which really was geared towards regular CRT tube sets, not some flat panel hybrid thing taht barely even resembles a CRT in any way shape or form, like what was mentioned in that link.
Redundancy is always wise. Heaven forbid that something major goes wrong, at least there is a back-up source for local news.
I have an LCD HDTV in my bedroom (32" Vizio) and a CRT HDTV in the living room (Sony 36" XBR Vega), and will be upgrading to a 50" plasma in the next year.
Plasma's technology has improved ten fold since its inception but the black levels and color accuracy are still nowhere near that of a Sony Trinitron tube.
When I bought the Sony I told my wife I would not buy a new High Def TV for the living room until 2007 and that time is almost here. I have seen a few great displays by Samsung and Panasonic that are acceptable but they are no match for the LIMITED-IN-SIZE, EXTREMELY HEAVY (250lbs), VERY DEEP cabinet, and extremely accurate, professionally calibrated, fine tuned CRT display.
Absolutely Not! (cont)
Agreed on all points, but there are a lot of other reasons as well. For one, when viewing a standard definition signal (which currently comprises around 95% of what's currently broadcast by cable or satellite companies), a high quality CRT television actually looks better than virtually any plasma or LCD television, ESPECIALLY up close. Also, nearly all LCD and Plasmas are widescreen and nearly all television is still broadcast in 4x3, so most everything you watch is either going to be stretched & distorted, or you'll have large chunks of black or gray space on either side of the picture. What's more, the lifespan of a good CRT television is MANY times that of any LCD or Plasma television, with incredibly expensive repairs if you have to replace one of the major components that are guaranteed to need replacing.
In the interest of full disclose, I own a 55'' Sony LCD, 32'' Sony LCD, 26'' Sony LCD, 32'' Sony CRT, and 2 27'' Sony CRTs (I know, it's a big house). After 1 year of owning the 55'' LCD I've already had to replace a MAJOR component that would have cost about 70% of the price of the television if it wasn't still under warranty. After owning the 26'' for 1.5 years it has significant discoloration issues with the display that will again probably cost a fortune to repair and it's NOT under warranty. I highly recommend to anyone purchasing an LCD or Plasma to definitely purchase the extended warranty, I assure you it will pay for itself within the lifetime of the warranty. I very rarely purchase them for anything else, but with LCDs and plasma they're simply indespensible.
In summary, as long as CRTs are much less expensive to purchase and repair and have a greater lifespan, there is going to be a place in the market for them.
Full Disclose - Supporting Comments
I also have a 27" Sony Trinitron currently in the kids' bedroom.
Before purchasing the Vizio 32" LCD, I had a fairly unknown brand 27" LCD (Maxent) in the bedroom. After 15 months, it developed burn-in on the lower third of the screen from the Info screen of the cable guide, a black line on the left side of the screen from watching 4:3 material, and severe discoloration. FORTUNATELY, I bought the LCD from Costco and was able to return it and purchase the Vizio (Perfect by the way).
I could not imagine the cost of repiaring the LCD 3 months after the warranty expired.
What's the life span of a laptop's LCD?
eclipsed, but not obsolete
OK, tubes of all kinds are so 20th century - EARLY 20th century... but 70 years of technical refinement would be a waste to just toss out. Sure they're big & bulky, energy hogs & filled with toxic substances (not to mention those taser-like capacitors), still as far as value (I was going to say 'bang for the buck' but between the large vacuum tube & extremely high voltage innards that would be a poor choice of words), CRTs are hard to beat for sheer performance, contrast, brightness, color accuracy (potentially anyway) and low image latency. No doubt it will become a niche item. Maybe like class-a tube amps did for golden-eared audiophiles.
Consumers say YES!
After the companies stop making the CRTs, the LCDs will become the new standard, and the companies will compete for pricing on the LCDs, making them cheaper.
Consumers are clueless
That's why they are running out to toss away large amounts of cash on flat panel displays that have inferior picture quality and display only a franction of HDTV resolution but think they are watching HDTV
I agree...typical consumer not informed.
I couldn't wait to get an HDTV. About 6 months ago I got into the game even though I knew there were trade-offs and that standard definition would not be as good as my old CRT-based TV. Well, it was far worse...to the point of being unwatchable to me. I returned it and purchased another brand. Same thing. Even though the prime time lineup and sports are broadcast in HD, as well as the movie channels, much of my viewing is still non-HD. The trade-off of dazzling HD sources wasn't worth the poor standard definition...for me. My old 27" gets a beautiful crisp clear picture all the time. PS: I kept the HD cablebox from my cable company and it works great with my old CRT Panasonic. Watched the US Open on the HD channel and it was eye-popping...though not HD.
of course i want a lcd screen.good,sharp view and you can hang it on the wall.BUT,as long as the prices are high,i still use a tube tv! i can't afford(t?)a lcd and don't want a plasma.i don't know the prices in the USA,but here in The Netherlands the prices are still high!eventhough the prices are now half the original prices! i can't afford that.that's why i said "Maybe",it depends on the future prices of lcd screens.
Definitely - based upon the energy consumption alone!
Prices are dropping as the LCD units become mainstream, and will continue to drop in price as sales volume increases.
The big factor is the huge energy savings of an LCD unit over a tube set. This country is at an energy crossroad and we need to reduce the consumption of electricity of which, CRT TVs and CRT computer monitors are a major consumer.
You think you can get away with that?
I love it when people have a math-free discussion about numbers.
In this forum, you really should know better.
Let's use round numbers, shall we?
if an LCD uses 100 watts less, and you pay $.10/kWh, and you're a total potato and watch 8 hours a day, it would take 7 years to pay back only $200 higher cost. Now, most in the business don't expect them to last any longer than that.
The higher cost of flat screens partly reflects the higher amount of energy and more hazardous waste it takes to make them. I like the planet, so I hate it when people say or do things that feel good, but really do no good, when they could use their energy to actually do good, instead.
You want to really save energy? Turn it off, and the 1,000 watt sound system with it.
It's like the people who feel so good about themselves buying an Accord Hybrid, which gets 4 MPG (!) better than the regular one, which will NEVER repay the pollution and energy involved in making the hybrid system (forget the expense).
Back to The CNET Lounge forum
(Page 1 of 4)