The CNET Lounge forum

General discussion

Should manufacturers stop building direct-view (tube) sets?

by Marc Bennett CNET staff/forum admin / September 7, 2006 7:50 AM PDT

With the increasing popularity of flat-panel TVs, should manufacturers stop building direct-view (tube) sets?

Absolutely not! (tell us why)
Probably not (tell us why)
Maybe (tell us why)
Definitely! (tell us why)
Not sure

Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Should manufacturers stop building direct-view (tube) sets?
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: Should manufacturers stop building direct-view (tube) sets?
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 -
Should manufacturers stop building tube sets?
by SFOracle / September 9, 2006 11:31 AM PDT

Number one, the picture on a tube set is still the best, clearest of the all.
Number two, skinny wall hung tv`s are way to exspensive.
Number three, the bulbs to light up the other sets are quite exspensive also. You have to have a tech come over to adjust the picture .
In conclusion, tube tv`s have been around a very long time and will last longer and are cheaper to replace if needed.I myself have an XBR by Sony. It is a tube type tv, HD ready and beautiful sound and picture.

Collapse -
by slh53041 / September 9, 2006 1:50 PM PDT

Considering the rapid decline in price of samller LCD and flat screen TV's alone should make the old type tv's go the way of the Dodo.

However, there are other factors. the future of broadcast signal, availability of cable becoming more widespread, HD reception, size and weight all lean toward new sets.

But, one factor stands out over all of these; energy consumption. If you only had one tv/crt monitor, it probgably would not matter. Today practically every room has a tv and/or computer. They should do double duty and in comparison to yesterday it's a saving in energy cost by at least a 1/2 - 1/4.

Anybody checked their electric bill recently??? Don't you realize that saving on energy cost can ultimate bring the cost of gasoline down

Collapse -
I don't want a double duty screen!... [more]
by BlazeEagle / September 10, 2006 1:30 PM PDT
In reply to: tv's

I don't want to toggle between my computer screen & TV screen, sheesh! Is this what your meaning?

No matter the size of my screen, I like to have what's on my TV & my monitor to be separate. I find a "picture-in-picture" view to be annoying as well as distracting.

Collapse -
double duty?
by maxibemis / September 10, 2006 1:51 PM PDT

Is this what people are talking about, is BOTH uses at the same time!?
I don't think it is, but if that is what people want, I guess that's up to them, but I also want my computer and TV viewing a seperate thing.
I keep a little 13" TV next to my monitor for TV and my monitor for my computer and my 32" in the living room for real TV viewing when I just want to kick back and enjoy.

Collapse -
No more non-HDTV televisions
by skywatch / September 9, 2006 10:51 PM PDT

I stated earlier that I favor keeping the CRTs, but I would like to throw in another twist. Should manufacturers continue to make non-HDTV sets, since non-HDTV signals will become extinct in 2 1/2 years.
It seems to me that to buy a non-HDTV set is a waste of money at this point.
What do you think about this?

Collapse -
Definitely Not.
by Darius2010 / September 10, 2006 2:10 AM PDT

CRT based displays are a necessity for video purist, like myself. However, non HDTV displays would be a waste of money for consumers AND manufacturers. The TV doesnt need to have an HD tuner built in but it should be able to downconvert a standard HD signal (1080i/p & 720p) to EDTV resolution (480p).


Collapse -
Do not stop building CRT monitors
by geyo / September 10, 2006 9:41 AM PDT

It is my understanding that CRT's, at least at the upper end, still offer superior resolution, contrast, brightness, and speed. So, for some types of professional uses, a CRT display is still the better choice.

Collapse -
Not Yet
by quazimo / September 10, 2006 10:01 AM PDT

The cost of CRT sets are far cheaper than those of LCD and other higher end options. For those of us who have not the money nor the care of how the set looks, the CRT is definetely the better option. As others have stated, until the price of LCD TVs drop significantly enough for them to be a better value over CRTs, the CRT should still be on the shelves of stores.

Collapse -
I'm not arguing but...
by BlazeEagle / September 10, 2006 1:38 PM PDT
In reply to: Not Yet

Which [espcially over the long term]is easier on the eyes, a CRT or an LCD?

I want honest, unbiased & truthful opinions please.

Collapse -
I can't tell yet,....
by maxibemis / September 10, 2006 1:59 PM PDT
In reply to: I'm not arguing but...

I can't tell yet as I just got my new LCD TV a couple of days ago and am still in the "is it any better?" stage of examining things.
I deffinately love the new set, but I can also say there are some minor things that take a little getting used to, but then I keep comparing it to my little tube TV to see what the differences are and mostly, the LCD is pretty perfect and the only reason there is any double image ghosting, is simply because of the cable channels have not yet been converted over, so i can't tell for sure what the true quality of the thing is yet.
As the little tube set also has that ghosting affect, just like I've always seen on any CRT, tube type TV.
But I do get the feeling that the LCD doesn't hurt my eyes as much as tube set does.
I have noticed though, that when I watch things that I have to set to 4:3 mode, i.e. almost all regular TV programming, it doesn't look as good as when I get to watch something in full 16:9 mode.

Summary, I can't totally decide on this issue of which is easier on the eyes yet?
Too early.

Collapse -
by mfulling23 / September 11, 2006 4:46 PM PDT

I absolutely support the move to discontinue the production of CRT televisions. LCD technology has many important advantages over CRT, such as ...

- Better energy efficiency (Better for large cities and the environment in general)
- Significantly less radiation (Better for your eyes and your health)
- Significantly smaller for a given screen size (Space costs a lot of money these days)

On top of those, it also offers native support for progressive video, which gives more fluid motion on-screen, as well as most LCD TVs supporting the upcoming ATSC formats. And, with LCD TVs continuing to drop in price (you can get 20" LCD TVs for under $200 if you look hard enough), there really won't be any reason to buy a CRT television within a couple of years.

As for the other competing display formats, I'm not a fan of plasma (expensive, not energy efficient, only available in large sizes) and I don't know enough about or have enough experience with the other formats to have an well-formed opinion about them.

Collapse -
Decent Quality - Cheap TV
by Red Diamond / September 12, 2006 6:37 AM PDT

If you still want to buy a decent 25" to 35" TV for under $400 you still should be able to for another 2-1/2 years - why not??
Just because the NTSC broadcasts will stop that doesn't mean the TV will no longer work. I haven't picked up an "air" broadcast in over ten years. My signals come in digitally and they are coverted nicely to analog by the set top box as I'm sure they will be for years to come.
I'n addition, you could always use the old set to watch videos, DVD's, or play thousands of games through about fifteen different games consoles/systems.
In fact, I'm confident that technology will kill the CRT and not the end of Never Twice The Same Color (NTSC)

Collapse -
Market Forces
by zclayton2 / September 14, 2006 12:37 AM PDT

will tell manufacturers to stop any particular product line, a poll on the subject is stupid. In a free market economy, economic forces will eventually drive the energy efficiency question and any other use factor toward the most efficient use of consumer dollars and manufacturing effort.

Collapse -
Market Forces, Exactly.
by maxibemis / September 14, 2006 3:19 AM PDT
In reply to: Market Forces

This is exactly the real point and absolutely ture.
And I agree with you 100%.

What a few os us may say, think or wish for here in this poll doesn't really matter.

Collapse -
out of style!
by gritsdummy / September 25, 2006 9:54 AM PDT

only if you do not watch tv much and do not care about those sets are anywhere from $150-$300.retailers are getting to a point where they are just giving them away.

Collapse -
Direct view tvs
by Nova73 / October 29, 2006 10:47 AM PST

Any direct view TV made today is not worth repairing if it breaks down. So all you can hope for is a couple of years of service out of the sets being made now, then throw it out anyway.

Popular Forums

Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
Laptops 21,181 discussions
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
Phones 17,137 discussions
Security 31,287 discussions
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
Windows 10 2,657 discussions


Your favorite shows are back!

Don’t miss your dramas, sitcoms and reality shows. Find out when and where they’re airing!