What would it take to manufacture CRTs on a commercial scale again in 2026 and the years to come?Would it be more viable to buy existing IP/patent rights from the companies that used to be the leaders back in the day, or to re-develop the technology from scratch using modern means?
>>107603053>What would it take to manufacture CRTs on a commercial scale againdemand
Imagine if we had FW900's with quantum dot phosphors
>What would it take to manufacture CRTs on a commercial scale again in 2026 and the years to come?Some technical innovation that makes it both cost efficient AND better than OLED.
>>107603109>better than OLED.Always has been
>>107603126Yes dude I fucking know that.I mean after whatever makes it cheaper.
>>107603064/thread
>>107603148Tubes got shockingly cheap towards the 00s, and some digital innovations already back then managed to eliminate a lot of the expensive manual labor involved. For example, the last generation CR1 chassis Trinitrons didn't need any convergence strips anymore, as their DCNV system could do that job entirely digitally. This is how you got $600 G520's, affordable endgame monitors that trivially beat pro monitors that cost $5k just a couple year prior. The F520 is the best CRT ever made and it only had an MSRP of $1600. The absolute peak of monitor tech for just $1600 !!!
>>107603216Sorry for raging.That's still a ton of money compared to all the other display tech available now though.
We've already forgotten how to manufacture many of the components.
LCD is just cheap. CRT is more expensive to manufacture especially. CRT manufacture only worked because up until the early 00s manufacturers had a huge economy of scale to call uponIt's a modern wonder that mass CRT manufacture even worked. It's like cutting edge chip production in complexity. Without the economy of scale that CRT had almost nobody would have had one. In many ways, LCD is a simpler technology
>>107603053I experimented with magnetic bearings (acting as some sort of voice coil minus the diaphragm), mirrors and lasers back in the 90's, and actually managed to get proper SD raster going with remarkable stability, only at a very low framerate due to shit laser quality (literal $10 laser pointer, slightly modified)That's where my money is.
>>107603251OLED monitors cost at least as much just a couple years ago. Although affordable OLED monitors are starting to become a thing.A lot of that $1600 was monopoly premium, as that monitor was electrically almost exactly identical to the $600 G520's. Sony just was the only one that manufactured .22mm aperture grilles.That price tbf was still only possible via economies of scale. It'd be so difficult to come to close to that now. But electronics are soo much cheaper now than they used to be.
>>107603053If it wasn't for the fact that CRTs are expensive to ship, and fairly complex to manufacture I'm sure some Chinese company would have picked up CRTs to feed into the retro niche, especially as they are willing to pay a premium for them. But yeah, too big/heavy/expensive to produce and ship.
>>107603053nobody wants a TV that fills 90% of any room you put it in
>>107603587Poor people shouldn't be buying monitors anyways.
>>107603064This, only a few of the most turbo of turbo autists who only use it to look at a pixelated space ship care about crts in 2026.
>>107603282We already have laser projectors.
>>107603053any patent related to crts expired decades ago
>>107603587Wasn't there some pretty big progress in CRT towards the end of its lifespan. Like screens nominally thicker than the early LCD TVs at the time.
>>107603053What if instead of 1 bug tube they make 4 smaller tubes?
>>107603948What if every pixel was it's own CRT?
>>107603053>What would it take to manufacture CRTs on a commercial scale againSocietal collapse and the complete loss of knowledge on how to make LCD and OLED screens.
Literally impossible. >needs to first create tooling for a fuckton of specific items>needs a ton of chemicals that aren't even in production / available anymore>tons of shit regarding CRTs got outlawed
>>107603053it's not happening ever lmaobest case scenario you're getting baked in bfi that emulates crts like this https://testufo.com/crt
>>107603053>Would it be more viable to buy existing IP/patent rights from the companies that used to be the leaders back in the day, or to re-develop the technology from scratch using modern means?neither are viable
>>107603053You wouldn't need to buy any patent rights; patents are only 20 years so any 2005 and earlier CRT is now public domain.
>>107603053>Would it be more viable to buy existing IP/patent rights from the companies that used to be the leaders back in the day, or to re-develop the technology from scratch using modern means?first, most if not all crt patents are expired, after 20 years you are free to use them.second buy ldp patents, they are the same but with a laser instead of a heavy bigass vacumm tube and a high voltage power supply. it would be cheaper, and better in almost every way bc its is stackable, as it is is currrent usehttps://www.prysm.com/displays/lpd-6k-series/features/
>>107603053The cost to restart CRT production would be massive. The technology is practically lost at this point, you would need to recreate so much.
>>107605659Stackable displays have high input lag, because you need to buffer incoming frames so that they can be split.
what if you just made an oled that lights up in a way that emulates phosphors?
>>107605659some fag is making a website to promote the tech, he was saying to make domestic units when the patents expire, if only...https://lpdisplays.com/>>107605741that is not inherent to the tech, you could just make a big single tile one
>>107605749this is being developedhttps://blurbusters.com/crt-simulation-in-a-gpu-shader-looks-better-than-bfi/they implemented it in their test https://testufo.com/crtand this other guy made a program with ithttps://store.steampowered.com/app/3448910/Vint_Realtime_Video_Interpolation_and_CRT_Emulation/
>>107603064Autists cannot understand this concept, whatever obscure/outdated shit they've hyper fixated on in their mind is the greatest thing ever and they genuinely cannot fathom that nobody else gives a shit about some dead technology everyone abandoned the second there was an alternative.
>>107605850crts are really bad in this regard, is not a tech that its manufacturing scales down easily, unless you only need really basic osciloscope screens
>>107603064demand will never be there again (probably) for it to be cost effective with current manufacturing technology, I guess 8 billion people still isn't enough to provide that niche.if something came along that would make it easier to manufacture these at smaller scales it might be doable to sell to autists.>>107603291>.22mm aperture grilles.surely this can't be that hard to manufacture at least for creating prototypes, right? We have laser cutters and shit now that should make this easy. idk
>>107606841>it might be doable to sell to autists.I don't think so. How many CRT autists are there? A thousand? How many of them aren't broke? Let's say there are 10,000 insane people who would buy a giant box for flying ufos for $10,000. It's just one hundred millions dollars. And we need to build a factory, design the product, market it, ship it. Why those autists would buy a second box next year?
>>107607029Far more than a thousand. If there were that few, the prices of CRTs, which, despite their stock decreasing due to being sent to landfills or recycled, are still fairly plentiful, then they wouldn't be selling on markets like eBay for hundreds of dollars.So there are enough people willing to pay current market prices to sustain the market we're seeing or else that market wouldn't exist at current prices, which looks like $100-$300 for a decent-ish late model computer monitor, which is probably nowhere near the price that a newly made similar product would be. So it would be pointless.I think the whole reason people like the idea of new CRTs is to keep them alive, and more importantly, combat the reducing supply and therefore lower the prices, but that won't happen.It could work for highly valued collector stuff like the FW900 which sells for over $4,000.These days, you don't need a factory and you don't need to tool up IMHO. If you're targeting autists (us) you can sell 3d print files for all the plastics, so no injection molding, PCBs can be custom ordered in under a dozen units, etc.Literally the only challenging part is the tube itself. Considering there are people who can make computer chips in their garages with enough money, I could see such a thing maybe being possible and being sort of a DIY scene thing.
>>107603053https://archive.org/details/1990s-sony-trinitron-television-how-it-was-made-vintage-tv-crt-tube-electronicsWhenever someone asks if CRT manufacturing could come back, show them this. A billion dollar factory, top of the line robotics, hundreds of employees all to make a product which is unequivocally inferior to today’s television sold exclusively to a niche market of retro game enthusiasts. It will never happen again. All the CRTs there are are all there’ll ever be.Even still, the few thousand total sales from Redditoids and 4chan incels won't cover it.You are making an inferior product for an extremely niche market.Those CRTs you find are using scavenged stock.Once that's gone it's literally impossible to manufacture more; not just because the infrastructure no longer exists, but because CRTs were only viable to produce because of scale: you needed a massive production line of thousands of people where one guy was an expert in making one thing. The professional market (PVM/BVMs which sold by the thousands) was only kept afloat by the consumer market (150 TVL pieces of shit which was sold by the millions).Moreover, making the parts used is now illegal because of toxic chemicals.No kickstarter is going to fund your gigantic illegal underground CRT assembly line that employs more people than the mafia, I'm sorry.
>>107603126their current solution to this is to have super high refresh rates and just interpolate intermediate frames. you can reduce motion blur on sample and hold displays by using really high framerates, but it's unreasonable to run every game at 600fps nativelyall this to try to solve an issue crt's never had to begin with
>>107603053Could you use some of the tech from modern VR/AR headsets to make the sets smaller? Pancake lenses, waveguides, etc.?
>>107607248it's not inferior from the consumer's pointit's just less profitable for the manufacturer and distributorit was only marketed as inferior to make people switch to the more profitable but ultimately worse product
The death of capitalism.Same goes for 4:3 displays above 22-24", features like freesync, displayport etc.
