The CNET Lounge forum

General discussion

Which type of light bulb do you prefer?

by lizamaloy CNET staff/forum admin / January 3, 2014 8:33 AM PST
Post a reply
Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Which type of light bulb do you prefer?
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Which type of light bulb do you prefer?
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
The CFL has its place for sure
by rolo8b / January 3, 2014 9:14 AM PST

The CFL 23 watt throws a great for the bathroom..CFL will light-up
that wall your about to paint....I have these type lamps with 4 tube CFL
that emulate sunlight , super for house plants....Incandescent offers that warm inviting
feeling........Oil burnig lamp when all else fails

Collapse -
High quality Incandescent bulbs
by Ray Johnson / January 3, 2014 9:49 AM PST
Collapse -
Uncle Sam's demands
by TheMander / January 3, 2014 10:00 AM PST

Not only do I refuse to bow to Uncle Sam's demands regarding what he feels I should buy,use,eat,wear, think,worship, act, speak.....I simply hate the CFL's. I stocked up on "regular" light bulbs a couple of years ago when the gov't started pushing it's agenda about this issue. I much prefer the warmth and light from regular bulbs, plus I don't have to call a haz mat team if I drop one of the ugly, nasty merc contaminated bulbs. Funny how that works....we are told to avoid fish that may contain mercury, but it's perfectly fine to use BREAKABLE products that contain mercury in our homes.
Just more government intrusion that will someday backfire.

Collapse -
unka sam
by tedtks / January 3, 2014 10:49 AM PST
In reply to: Uncle Sam's demands

exactly - plus - they break if you even look at them wrong.

Collapse -
CFLs reliability?
by kratzen / January 4, 2014 9:51 PM PST
In reply to: unka sam

I have replace all bulbs in my house in Panama with the so-called long life CFLs three years ago. Not one of the bulbs has lasted more than 6 months. The initial cost of the bulb has far exceeded the projected savings. ckratzen

Collapse -
White House dope
by roscojim / January 3, 2014 11:04 AM PST
In reply to: Uncle Sam's demands

I should be able to choose the bulb I want to use. What's it to the dope in the White House how much I spend on electricity? I should be able to spend more if I want. First light bulbs, then healthcare - what freedoms will be destroyed next?

Collapse -
You even blame Obama for Bush policies?
by SteveRMann / January 12, 2014 10:29 PM PST
In reply to: White House dope

The new light bulb rules are from a 2007 law, signed by President George Bush, which requires that light bulbs use less energy.

Collapse -
How true!
by jaidensgrgranny / January 3, 2014 12:04 PM PST
In reply to: Uncle Sam's demands

The Mercury is left for us to take care of - - if one should shatter (sp ?). What are we to use in the various kitchen appliances? New bulbs are 'more efficient'; but way toooo big!

Collapse -
Knowledge without Wisdom
by mcgilbdd / January 3, 2014 1:33 PM PST
In reply to: Uncle Sam's demands

I agree fully.

The "twenty something" liberal left coast techies think they know all there is to know about everything.
They just have no wisdom , so the knowledge is useless.

We live in America, where freedom to chose is what we were founded on. Corrupt government, and
liberal egg heads have converged to take more choices from us once again. We are NEVER better when choice is taken from us, unless that choice infringes on the life or liberty of another citizen.

I would like to think that one day, they will understand. In reality, I doubt they ever will.

Collapse -
by alias Winston Smith / January 3, 2014 2:55 PM PST

I think your definition of liberal is wrong, liberals would allow you to go to hell however you chose without imposing their belief system. It's the greedy, 'over educated' stupid, and rich without working for it who are forcing this issue as they have nothing better to do with their time

Collapse -
Liberal = Progressive = Totalitarian
by richteral / January 4, 2014 12:09 AM PST
In reply to: Liberal?

Unfortunately, this is the historical etymology, and it all has to do with corruption. True liberals nowadays have to designate themselves as conservatives, while conservatives are being reviled as the far right, or even fascist fringe, which is a real lark! Words and meanings have been twisted beyond recognition, and values have gone up in smoke in the whirlwind of intellectual perversion.

All regulation is about control and power, not for the common good. Corporations want more profit, they buy lawmakers who will oblige accordingly. The system is rotten and destined to die, safely guided to its final destination by dimwits and their bulbs.

Collapse -
common good?
by alias Winston Smith / January 31, 2014 1:17 PM PST

Working for the common good is akin to saying your a communist Laugh
control and power - all power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Wink

Collapse -
common "good"
by TheMander / February 1, 2014 4:36 AM PST
In reply to: common good?

I wonder just how many touchy,feely "common good" folks would be willing to split their bank accounts with us? I mean ACTUALLY hand over half to you or me? Common good sound good to them until it actually touches THEM, then it's "but I worked for that". Nope, "you didn't build that".....right? Confused

Collapse -
by oharras / January 4, 2014 12:57 AM PST
In reply to: Liberal?

Todays liberal will attack you with illogical, yetvilifying words while they escort you to the edge of hell where you fall off, keping their slimy hands clean!

Collapse -
Now we're switching to HAZMAT bulbs?
by HetCon / January 3, 2014 10:31 PM PST
In reply to: Uncle Sam's demands

I admit that I've not done much "research" on CFLs, but I know from experience that they don't work very well in sub-zero (New Hampshire) environments. They don't last much longer than incandescent bulbs. They cost a lot more. Finally, unless I'm mistaken, they are made with mercury, thus making them HAZMAT when it's time to dispose of them. Basically, all I've seen is lose-lose-lose... Then again, what else could we expect from the same "leadership" that gave us our current economy, unemployment, poverty, and our abysmal international stature? Come to think of it, I'm starting to lean more toward the guy that's burning candles {:-)

Collapse -
(NT) Cheer Cheers tell them to stay the hell out of our livess
by jroacura / January 3, 2014 10:54 PM PST
In reply to: Uncle Sam's demands
Collapse -
by ldacruz2255 / January 20, 2014 12:47 AM PST
In reply to: Uncle Sam's demands

I couldn't agree more and in addition, I have bought a few boxes of 4-7 bulbs that promised to last 5 years or more, and none even lasted a year. Yeah, I started keeping track when the first one I bought conked out after a couple months.

Collapse -
CFL - conned for life?
by alias Winston Smith / January 3, 2014 2:48 PM PST

I found they fail far too soon.
As an experiment I tried leaving one turned on in the garage (which kind of defeats the purpose of energy saving) it lasted about 3 months! 168 hrs in a week, 4 weeks to month, say extra week for the odd days, around 2200hrs. That's a long way from the 20,000+ hrs it was supposed to last
If it had been one of the cheap 'made in China' 'bulbs' I probably wouldn't be so annoyed, but, it was a much more expensive 'Made in USA' (as opposed to assembled in USA , although I believe manufacturers only need 51% made in USA to say it was 'all' made here)

Collapse -
Many CFL bulbs caused a reputation for short life.
by mgirard30643 / January 3, 2014 8:38 PM PST
In reply to: CFL - conned for life?

The failing of many CFL's in life expectancy has prompted standards ratings to be developed. The government standards include the Energy Star ratings:
Florescent bulbs have been around for over half a century. I had them in my classrooms as a child. {What? Me worry?} The new bulbs contain far less mercury than the old bulb standards. And the best name brand manufacturers produce the best qualities in any bulb. And - small, compact fluorescents are available.
Consumer Reports tested one of the early LED bulbs (Cree) and found it to exceed package ratings in every respect. And no mercury. And still saving for even more years.
Resistance is futile. But resistance is often mental and deep seated. As an example, I have heard of people not using an LED bulb because it had a sticky coating, that would not wash off. Ah! No - it is a coating to assure good gripping and glass retention in the event of breakage. I have heard of people not wanting to install LED because the fixture was dimmable. Ah! No the Cree bulb was dimmable, instant on, valid in Lumens rating, and valid in color rating. I use the Cree bulb because it was readily available. And why not?

Collapse -
LED bulb experience
by lilliput2 / January 4, 2014 1:22 AM PST

agree - my experience also

Collapse -
Incandescent lights are inefficient and old fashioned
by brooking101 / January 3, 2014 7:00 PM PST

Incandescent lights were phased out a few years back here in the UK. I cannot understand why some are getting in such a state about a common sense policy. It was accepted over here because the new range of lights are more efficient and a lot cheaper in the long run. I cant imagine anyone over here wanting to go back to incandescent lights. It's also not true to call them bulky as you can get them in the same sizes as incandescent ones, over here you can anyway.

Collapse -
Incandescent phase-out
by SteveRMann / January 12, 2014 10:36 PM PST

It's no secret here that every policy coming from the White House is automatically defined by the Right-Wing as an evil, communist plot. Even when the law phasing out incandescent lights was passed by a Republican congress and signed into law by President Bush in 1997.

I have been replacing all my bulbs at home with LED lamps, and I have seen a remarkable drop in my power utility bills. They work in low temperatures and come on instantly, unlike CFL's.

Collapse -
Astonishing hatred in America.
by Carsto / January 14, 2014 11:45 AM PST
In reply to: Incandescent phase-out

Every job has its problems. So does every type of light bulb. Here in South Africa, Escom subsidized CFL's. You get two types. The Cool type is hard white and cold but very good for reading. It did take getting used to, but the other type is similar in lighting to incandescents. More yellowy in hue.

Have any of you ever considered what the saving would be in electricity if say 1 billion households would save 80% (about 48 watt over say 5 hours a night and maybe 6 lights) over one year? I wonder where George Bush got the idea?

Say 1,000,000,000*48*5*6*365/1000 kWH = 1,000,000*1440*365/1,000,000GigaWattH = 525,600 GWH.
That's just to put some size to it.

You live in a radio-active environment anyway. And yes, your cell phone does affect you too.

Your little bit does matter. You can make a difference.

Collapse -
Read the fine print
by johnedwardsbc / January 4, 2014 2:40 AM PST

While waiting at Home Depot I read the print on a package of CFL's.
"Will last for 9 years" in big letters.
Fine print buried in the back "Based on operation of light for 3 hours a day".
Surprised me that they didn't go for 27 years based on 1 hour a day of use.

Collapse -
More fine print
by NOT-STRESSED / January 6, 2014 3:44 PM PST
In reply to: Read the fine print

I also read that their testing was with the CFL bulb turned on only once a day. Reading between the lines that tells me that by specifying "once a day" means that they found it would burn out faster if you turn it on three times for one hour each.
Of course what makes that type of usage ridiculous is that by being meticulous about turning the light out if you are gone from the room for a short while is more wasteful in bulb costs than the savings in electricity costs. And while CFL bulb costs have come down, they are still nowhere near incandescent prices, and in terms of total cost of ownership the true lifetime of CFLs will cost more than the much more durable LED lights which are also starting to come down in price.

Collapse -
by alias Winston Smith / January 31, 2014 1:28 PM PST
In reply to: More fine print

LED seem to cope better with voltage fluctuations and being left on as a night light.
. I haven't had to change a LED 'bulb' yet (18months and counting)
CFL only lasted 2~3 months in the same socket
I have one in a work light, it's been dropped a couple of times without damage. Only problem, they are generally not as bright as incandescent
When they get brighter at reasonable cost I'll switch more lamps to LED

Collapse -
CFL lifespan
by alias Winston Smith / January 31, 2014 1:23 PM PST
In reply to: Read the fine print

It will probably last forever if it isn't switched on Laugh
If there was honesty in advertising things would be a lot different (print so small it needs a magnifying glass doesn't count as honest)

Collapse -
Which type of light bulb do you prefer
by PeteNC / January 3, 2014 9:58 AM PST

I understand the economic advantage of LEDs, but until they can come up with a 100 watt equivalent, I'll stick with the incandescents. Putting one of the 60watt equivalent in a table lamp makes reading a book or newspaper impossible.

Collapse -
Not such a big savings
by XJSTWR / January 3, 2014 10:18 AM PST

The government, and most others, are ignoring the system view. There is little or no energy or dollar savings by switching to CFLs or LEDs in a cold climate such as Canada has. The heat from the incandescents wasn't wasted, it helped heat our homes. Now that same energy has to be provided by the gas, oil or electric heating system. Net gain of approx zero, with a harsher light, and more pollution from mercury, etc.

Collapse -
Heating with electricity
by mwooge / January 3, 2014 2:12 PM PST
In reply to: Not such a big savings

Heating with electricity is expensive. The heat from an incandescent might not be wasted, but it's an expensive way to heat the house. Better to use a light bulb for it's intended purpose and a furnace for it's intended purpose.

Popular Forums
Computer Help 49,613 discussions
Computer Newbies 10,349 discussions
Laptops 19,436 discussions
Security 30,426 discussions
TVs & Home Theaters 20,308 discussions
Windows 10 360 discussions
Phones 15,802 discussions
Windows 7 7,351 discussions
Networking & Wireless 14,641 discussions


Having Wi-Fi troubles?

From the garage to the basement, we blanketed every square inch of the CNET Smart Home with fast, reliable Wi-Fi.