Why did the industry switch to inferior technology?
>>110054956Somehow I doubt you never bought a flatscreen in the last 20 years. If you did then you are the problem
You zoomies are so funny. The only advantage CRT has over LCD/OLED is that it has no native resolution, it's been surpassed in every other aspect, by a wide margin.
>>110054956Shipping costs.
>>110054956Because they're bigger (which gets in the customers) and cheaper to make (which saves manufacturing costs).It's really that simple.
>>110055189Nope. It was shipping costs.
>blurry ass 1024x768>vs crisp 1440x900sorry to break your bubble zoomie but we all fucking hated CRTs by the mid 00s. We dumped them in the curb to be rained on or took them to the woods to shoot them. it's not inferior technology, in fact CRTs are.
>>110054956>The original manufacturer's suggested retail price (MSRP) for the Sony GDM-FW900 was $1,999.99 at launch in 2000. When adjusted for inflation to current 2026 dollars, that equivalent purchasing power is approximately $3,900.>Recommended Resolution: 1920 x 1200 pixels at 85 Hz>Weight: 42 kg>22.5-inch viewableI wonder why zoomie
>>110055021>>110055235>>110055286It's interesting to watch you rage about zoomers, when you were obviously 10 years old playing with a worn out, hand-me-down CRT monitor that was as old as you were.Outside the chinkshit, CRT monitors made in the 2000s were blasting 1600x1200@75Hz straight into your soul. Sorry you missed out.
>>110055292nobody had the good ones, only design studios bought those. most people's experience with CRTs were crappy 15-17inch models that looked blurry as fuck
>>110054956crts are only better with retro nostalgia glasses. sure you can play some nintendo game the way it was meant to be played, but aside from that the only good thing about crts was the thwonk noise from degaussing
>>110055292Nice projection buddy but I had a Mitsubishi 2070SB 20 years ago and I stayed on it until 2012.
It's the same fucking thread over and over and over again. Holy fucking shit, you boring cunt.
>>110055380>launched 2002hello zoomie, also $800 in 2002 for a 20" viewable screen, no wonder you only kept it for 10 years retard.
>>110054956All boils down to electricity consumption. Garbage, inefficient incandescent lost, LED won.CRTranny lost, LCD won.
>>110055318>>110055380>i didnt have the good ones because i was a poor 10yo kidThat's exactly the point I was making, anon.I really expected someone who's pushing 35 to have better reading comprehension - but oh well.
imagine hauling a crt to a lan party...
>>110055380Cool so you spended so much on a CRT and were too poor to afford oled? Grim. And moving it causing you to get back problems, so you can't afford a job to buy a better one? LOL.
>>110055412I was still in high school when I bought it in 2006 used from a design firm, I don't have a photo earlier than 2007 because that's when I bought this camera. Any other valuable insights?
CRTs lost to 60hz 1024x768 6-bit TN panels with CCFL backlight...
If CRT is so good, then how come the only time I see them in battlestation threads they're accompanied by furry shit?
>>110055479All the shit you just listed, literally nobody cared about - all they cared about was that it was nearly twice the screen area.In reality, 15" CRTs lost to 20" LCDs.
>>110055472so like I said you are a zoomie retard who happened to buy a top end 2002 CRT second hand who has no idea what the average CRT experience was in the 90's.
>>110055520I like how this guy has slowly moved the goalposts to "modern LCDs are better 90s chinkshit CRTs for poors".Well, duh. But the discussion has always been what was better in the early-to-mid 00s. If you can't confine yourself to that, then you're obviously arguing in bad faith, and should be disregarded as a result.
>>110055520I'm 10 years too old to be a zoomer you fucking imbecile.>happened to buy a top end 2002 CRTMore projection, as if I fucking happened to stumble upon it and wasn't actively looking for a high-end CRT at a bargain price. >who has no idea what the average CRT experience was in the 90's.Yet again, I do, I've seen the best and worst of CRTs.My point, as per my original post was>The only advantage CRT has over LCD/OLED is that it has no native resolution, it's been surpassed in every other aspect, by a wide margin.Which is factually correct, and is coming from an informed opinion as someone who's experienced the high end of CRTs and held out for as long as it was practical.
VA is enough
>>110055575VA's only advantage over IPS is better static contrast through lower black levels. There are IPS montiors with 2000:1 contrast ratios, I have one of those, and newer 3000:1 contrast ratio IPS panels as well.
>>110055292software and desktops back then were not made with high dpi displays in mind and most games and apps had fixed pixel resolution interfaces. on any normal sized CRT commonly included with a pc 1280x1024 was enough to sometimes strain your eyes after a while, many schools/business normies ran their screens at 1024x768.
>>110055676>1280x1024Those best buy bargain bin laptops have barely better resolution to this day, normnigs keep buying them in droves
>>1100556761024x768 was perfectly fine in an era where websites were made to accommodate 640x480 on Internet Explorer, the problem was the refresh rate. I saw so many tech illiterate people with CRTs stuck at 60 or 75Hz that honestly for them an LCD was an improvement over headache inducing flicker they didn't even realise was their fault.
>people who have never used CRTit wins in image persistence and response times which is all that mattersthat why a 60hz crt can outmatch a 360hz lcd with motion strobingit actually feels like you're looking at fluid objects and not just quickflashing slides
>>110055833>which is all that matters
>>110054956>image>>110055575Might you be able to elaborate?>>110055651>imageAre those measurement results? If so, do you recall the monitor?
Size and weight is a huge factor.CRT's over 17" get too heavy and bulky for most.You can maybe stretch it to 22" but few people would want a 27"+ CRT on their desk.
>>110055833>you're looking at fluid objectsI was mostly looking at fairly static textSwitched from my soft 17" crt to a hard 24" tft without looking back once
>>110056034>Are those measurement results? If so, do you recall the monitor?Yes, I do graphic design so I've got a basic calibrator. Why would I recall the monitor, it's not defective. If you mean if I remember the model it's a Dell U2724DE.
It's only cool until you need to haul a 19" CRT to your buddy's home
>>110056034>Might you be able to elaborate?VA is easily the best compromise. It has everything, great colours, great blacks, contrast, size (it's not a bulky CRT), can do high refresh rates, price. But anons are too stubborn to admit that IPS is a bit of a meme. The one thing that IPS does well, and it was designed literally for that one thing, is to work against direct sunlight. So if you work in an office, or a public place, then yes IPS is awesome. So, it was memed into being the "professional" choice. And reddit PCMR, loved it. But for 90% of home uses VA is vastly better, because it doesn't look washed out. And because VA is meant for indoor use and doesn't have strong glow, it's less eye fatiguing. Mind you most TVs are VA. Yet, you always see anons cope with things they never experienced like smearing that is overblown and barely noticeable in real use. The arbitrary "better colors" is also cope, by definition you can't have better colors with shit contrast. Anons are so used to bad image quality that they see things like pic related, and see nothing wrong. For me it's dogshit and I could never see myself using an IPS as my main monitor ever again. But don't try to fight anons on IPS. They are reddit to the bone and they will die defending that meme. I bought a Samsung 32" 4k VA 3 years ago for 300 euros and i can see myself use it for the next 10 years. I don't even care about OLED. My oled phone is enough.
>>110055520Not him, but I'm 40 and had multiple new CRTs, and also had a lot of experience with high-end ones because my dad was a designer in the movie/TV industry and had them on his home setup, including a Sony GDM series (400 I think) at the end of the CRT era. You couldn't pay me to go back to that shit.
>>110055021Yes, having everything turn to smears as soon as anything moves is an improvement. The weird motion artifacts are an improvement too.
>>110055235Most people are NPCs, and you are one of them.
VA has smearing though
>>110056306*yes that's supposed to look black.
>>110054956It's cheaper. Next thread.
>>110055021There's no excuse technically speaking why flat screens needed over 20 years to reinvent the wheel and move away from sample and hold and back towards strobing the damn light. Interlacing and progressive scan left to right worked for a reason. Give me one damn reason why Pulsar could have not been invented sooner.
>>110056337it's mildly noticeable only at 100+hz.
>>110055286>adjusted for inflationYou know you're in for a good argument when it starts with this.
>>110056324CRTs have their own motion artefacts and smearing (phosphor decay, try moving a white mouse cursor on a black background). >>110056376And I don't disagree with you, that's why I held out on CRT for so long, I loathed 60Hz with input lag, I got used to it, since I had no choice, but it was painful.
>>110056380I've tried a 144hz curved samsung VA and it has black smearing on desktop and youtube videos lol
>>110056505im sure it does
>crt is good for what playing vintage games?An airgapped dumbed downed smart tv can do everything, vintage games can be emulated and I can hoard every single game for free, played on a screen 6 times larger than what I could get as a kid.The only valid argument is modern tech spies on me, so keep it offline then if it can't be used offline don't buy it at all.
>>110056306High contrast IPS panels have made VA obsolete for everything, but the absolute entry-level market, stop coping. Not to mention that with the shift to mini-LED over edge backlight the higher native contrast of VA becomes even less relevant. Poor viewing angles, smear and black crush are inherent limitations of VA, there's no fixing it.
>>110056456CRT phosphor persistence is minimal, and also very natural and predictable. LCDs have incredibly unnatural and highly unnatural motion artifacts. Certain motion patterns can cause the image to look extremely weird, sometimes crawling like, and in some cases LCDs can get into a weird persistent state of oscillation that continues after the motion has stopped.
>>110056456People always say that, but I never see it in use on my 2070sb. Maybe it's noticeable on crap CRTs, but it doesn't exist for me.
>>110056551>CRT phosphor persistence is minimalBut noticeable >natural>unnaturalNot worth addressing >>110056553But I'm the one who posted an old photo of my 2070sb, it happens on it too, it's how the technology works. Whatever you do you can't let the phosphor decay too fast or the strobing at lower refresh rates will be unbearable, it needs a certain amount of persistence and delayed decay.
>>110056587I don't know what to say, really. Maybe if you pointed it out to me, but either way I love my 2070sb even just basic stuff like scrolling through a webpage feels amazing. I'm afraid to use it too much though because I'll never get another one where I live. Theyr'e $500+.
>>110054956Just because you refuse to acknowledge it, doesn’t make CRT superior. In fact, CRT is inferior in almost any way.
>>110056612>Theyr'e $500+.lmao another CRT fag outed as being an absolute poorfag retard
>>110055021I bet you turned on the damn compositor when Windows 7 introduced it too. The age dulls your reaction times, y'know.
>>110056612Somehow my eyes are way too sensitive to that stuff. Also on large CRTs they had a harder time maintaining their geometry, sometimes if you brought a big white window over a black background you could see the picture shrink and expand by a couple of mm. I love my 2070SB, I still keep it at home and take it out from time to time, this year I had to tweak the focus a bit since the picture had gotten a bit soft.
>>110056637I'm not poor, but it's hard to even find them for sale, the price was to show the rarity of high end CRTs, but it does play a factor as they can easily fail, and I'm too retarded to repair.>>110056644Yeah, my 14" TV I pulled out the attic after 20 years had perfect geometry lol. Biggest issue with my 2070sb(sun) is you can't adjust the focus pots without removing the case.
>>110056541>High contrast IPS
>>110056641>age dulls your reaction times, y'know.Are you sure about that?I was faster on a CRT of course, but not bad for a 120Hz IPS office monitor.
>>110056755Yes, try reading the previous replies in the thread, might help you to not feel lost >>110055651The marketing term they're sold under is IPS Black but that doesn't tell you anything, they are higher contrast IPS panels compared to the mass-market ones that hover around 1000:1.
>>110056773>try reading thank you reddit.
>>110056787I've been here for 20 years and I've never in my life had a plebbit account, what about you zoomie?
>>110056809>I've been here for 20 yearsyou don't have to tell me, i can smell how old you are by how stubborn and retarded you sound. i know your kind because im also in my 40s.
>>110056831>i know your kind because im also in my 40s.So why do you insist on impersonating a 15 year old with brainrot?
>>110056858>brainrotnegro you are giving me the "i know better" boomer stick while im explaining shit. there is no such thing as high contrast IPS. 2000:1 is still shit and doesn't tell the whole story because IPS by definition still has glow and is eye fatiguing. IPS is technology meant for use in direct sunlight.
>>110056927Just because you're "explaining" doesn't mean you're not wrong and retarded:https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/dell-34-curved-gaming-monitor-s3422dwg/apd/210-azep/monitors-monitor-accessorieshttps://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/monitors/apd/dell-ultrasharp-27-4k-thunderbolt-hub-monitor-u2725qe/u2725qe_monitor/-Both IPS black and VA have a 3000:1 static contrast. VA has zero advantages over IPS, and many, many inherent disadvantages that even the best VA suffers from. I've got a relatively new VA monitor too, so don't try and tell me not to believe my lying eyes over your non-technical bullshit oh it fatigues the eyes, oh it's made for viewing in direct sunlight, what the fuck are you even on?
>>110056997>Just because you're "explaining" doesn't mean you're not wrong and retarded:>Dell Price $849.99I just hate old people.
>>110057020So now the problem is the price and you're not going to address anything I've said?
>>110057043>you're not going to address anything I've said?you literally posted two wildly different models from different years at retard prices to make an argument that exists only in your head.
>>110054956why can't you come up with original thread to save your sad excuse of life?
https://www.lofibucket.com/articles/dwm_latency.html https://raphlinus.github.io/ui/graphics/2020/09/13/compositor-is-evil.htmlWhy did we switch to an inferior rendering method too?
>>110054956I never understood this revisionist history for CRT
>>110057067You're too young to be this senile.I told you good IPS black matches the static contrast of VA, both are 3000:1, anything else is you coping and pretending the point was something else. Here;s a 2025 model, nothing has changed: https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/monitors/apd/dell-32-plus-4k-monitor-s3225qs/s3225qs_monitor/-VA is a shit technology, that's why you only find it in cheap monitors, why would anyone who isn't strapped for cash make a compromise with VA?In your original post you said you only bought yours because it's 300 EUR, I nobody cares about your poorfag cope.
>>110056809>>110056831I'm a couple years younger, but we really are old shits huh.
>>110054956Superior in terms of space used, energy used, less strobe flickering, etc
>>110057140>I'm a couple years youngerafter 35 it's over unironically. you just can't talk to people. it's like talking to a wall.
>>110057140I started building an IMMICH photo library for my family and had to do a double take at the sheer number of years at the end of it. I suppose I'm just glad I got to be a teenager before smartphones.
>>110057140I've got you all beat: I'm forty-fucking-eight.
>>110057186Certified unc
>>110057165I've felt like that for a while now. I think when I turned 30 things just started to be different.>>110057175I get a horrible knot in my stomach looking at old pictures like that.>>110057186Does it get worse? I always wondered if I'd reach some kind of I don't give a fuck stage.
>>110057186it never stops. after that you'll be 49. after that 50and in ten years, you will reminisce being 50 because you'll be 60.
>>110057213Depends on hat you mean by "worse". Is it harder to make friends? Hell yeah. Are the friends better when you do make them? Also hell yeah.Is it getting more and more annoying - and sometimes even painful - to run, carry things, do the garden, fix the water pipes, etc? You better believe they're all "hell yeahs".
>>110057213>I get a horrible knot in my stomach looking at old pictures like that.Same, looking at my parents when they were my age, grandparents that passed away, old girlfriends.Somehow I got though it all the way until I saw photos of a good friend that died last year and I lost it.
>Anon from reddit buys >AOC U27G4XM 27 UHD IPS MiniLED>27" 4K 3840x2160 160Hz 1ms GTG ~$400 >MiniLed supposed to be the best IPS has to offerstill looks like dogshit in a dark room
>>110057234Damn I didn't think it would be hitting you like that at 48.>>110057242That's awful. I can relate, I lost my best friend a few years go.
>>110057257Wait till you see cheap "mini LED" TVs, they are atrocious, 200 zones is considered enough to market it as miniLED lmao. You either make each pixel/subpixel an individual LED, or go with OLED, everything else is a compromise and the manufacturers know it too.
>>110057262My condolences, Anon.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUWZqbumaZo
this fucking thread again. if you zoomers really want a CRT go buy one on ebay and use it instead of doing this performative retardposting
>>110054956>old good new badyour noodle arms could never lift a crt
>>110056587> Not worth addressing It very much is worth addressing. Not all forms of artifact are equal. Naturalness is very important. Consider one extreme example to prove the point, imagine if you were comparing two types of audio recording technology, say cassette tape, with a new digital format. The cassette tape has tape hiss, which is natural. But lets say the new digital format, has no hiss, but instead has quiet whispering in the background. That is an example of an unnatural artifact.
>>110054956I miss my Sony GPD520 21" and Mitsubishi Diamond 2070SB
>>110055566>>110056319Based fellow millennials appreciate high-end CRTs. Remember fighting for the flat screen monitors at school/work/college labs? Flat screen CRTs were fucking God tier.
We could have had CRT quality with LCD thinness, if not for patents fuckery.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface-conduction_electron-emitter_display
CRT's were fine when the monitors were 15 inch (with 13 inch viewable). But 20 inch LCD's become popular. Higher resolution and higher refresh rates than most CRT's at the time. People always use high end CRT's as examples. Like I had a 17 inch trinitron. Looked great but it wasn't affordable until LCD screens were popular and the 17 inch went on clearance.
>>110058694From my old records: Seven years I used that trinitron. Sony Trinitron 17" HMD-A240R (Sept 2002, Circuit City)(-max resolution: 1280 x 1024 @ 60hz or 1024 x 768 @ 85hz) Replaced with:-ASUS VH202T-P 20" Widescreen LCD Monitor 20000:1, 5ms, 1600x900$119.99 + free shipping (buy.com) (7-22-09)
>>110055021>it has no native resolution,Some of them absolutely do, the majority, even.
>>110058830Not really when they don't have pixels as such, though there is always a practical limit of course
>>110058694Refresh rate don't matter on CRTs. Anything 75hz> is fine, 60hz on CRTs is usually headache inducing only reason it's an issue. Otherwise a 60hz CRT has better motion than 99% of modern displays.
>>110058912I could see the flicker at anything lower than 100Hz
I bought a legion lenovo like thishttps://www.youtube.com/shorts/CicP7REBNsEpros. it's stunning. cons. it's a glossy mirror and it is a little tiring on the eyes.
>>110058912Where do you come up with this bullshit?
>>110055458Yeah it was a pain in the fucking arse. Did that many, many times in the 90s.
>>110055321Nah it is better in a lot of ways
>>110059035You should've bought one with a matte screen.
HRT is only good if you're a deaf retard btw
>>110057858Would have had CRT brightness, shit black levels in lit rooms like a CRT, and burn in like a CRT. Just a worse version of plasma
>>110054956>whyMoney. Get them while you still can. People getting $5k systems to play on "4K," not realizing the moment they move in-game, you're back to 720p. I have more respect for audiophiles.
>>110054956Concerted pressure from digital display connector cartels and cinemas continuing to produce bad widescreen formats.If you bought a new thing then it likely didn't have a full range of connectors for any new hardware, if you bought new software then it likely used a font that showed up badly on CRT, if you bought a movie then it was either black-barred or awkwardly cropped for your 4:3 aspect ratio too if it wasn't shot for 4:3.CRT phaseout is kind of like Pantone colors in printing, the industry values consistency more than it does quality or not being subject to bullshit so adoption from the industry and adoption by consoomers was a feedback loop, CRT was only really good as long as most content was being developed on CRTs since artists and programmers continuously adjusted based on how it showed up on their displays.>>110055235>Any format that isn't 4:3gross.>>110058694There was never any reason to chase size, that's just conspicuous consumption.
>>110054956CRT tech didn't scale. People wanted bigger screens and CRTs became too thick, heavy, power-hungry and expensive.
>>11006092716:9 widescreen CRT TVs were super cheap and common in Europe where we also had widescreen analog OTA TV broadcasts (using tech to encode extra data inside the black bars). Widescreen was no reason to move away from CRT. The US had some jewry going on where they moved to widescreen + digital + HD + flat panel displays all one go, but in Europe those all happened in separate steps one after another.
>>110055021can your LCD/OLED do this *presses degauss button*
>>110054988Enjoying my 77" never configured "smart" flat screen tv that I just plug 'n played as a computer monitor personally it's greatI used to have an old big box tv growing up those things take way too much space flat screens value is mostly in that you don't need a deep piece of furniture to place it on hell you can wall mount these ones wouldn't even dare to try that with a big box
>>110054956When I got my first LCD in 2001 ($750 for XGA TN panel, lol) I was in genuine awe at the corner-to-corner sharpness. No CRT I ever owned looked that crisp unless I was doing something stupid with it. It replaced a nice CRT running at 16x12@75Hz and I never looked back.Apparently that CRT was still in the basement... and was recently murdered by an exploded water heater.
>>110061600>corner-to-corner sharpnessAnd that's why CRTs should have a surface shaped like a part of a sphere, so each part of the screen is the same distance from the gun, flat screen CRTs have a hard time achieving uniform focus across the full display area.
>>110054956>Why did the industry switch to inferior technology?have you ever equipped a classroom with 20+ CRTs?Then you will understand
>>1100549561. not true, an average oled/ips is better that a good crt2. you can get a good old crt for cheap now, but back in the day, a high-quality crt cost way more than an average ips/oled does today
>>110054956The left might have better niche uses, but otherwise it's heavy, fragile, and burns your eye sockets if improperly calibrated.
>>110054956Wrong, the industry had switched to superior solutions for the vast majority of use cases. CRTs are obsolete museum pieces. Ignore NuCRT-fags who wank over them in order to feel validated.
>back in the 1980s everyone was going around driving Lamborghini Countaches and Ferrari Testarossas... man shitty soulless modern cars like Toyotas and Volkswagens suck compared to the superior cars we had back then...
>>110055412>also $800 in 2002 for a 20" viewable screenyou lying ass mother fucker.
>>110056306>rgbHAggggggggaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
>>110057257>in a dark room
>>110056306Again, black smearing. IPS is better.
>>110062890ntaips has its own bag of shit
>>110055520I pulled my aunties derelict 2003 Hyundai V770+ from the attic after god knows how many years and it was perfectly enjoyable. No noise, perfect motion clarity and blacks. 85hz at 1024x768 was fine for the day.
>>110054956WHY COULD I FIT MORE WINDOWS ON MY 14 INCH CRT MONITOR THAN I CAN ON MY 32 INCH CURVED MONITOR
>>110055021And tell me anon, what good is every other aspect when you're unable to see it clearly?
>>110055235Crisp, until you move the image that is and the trend reverses.
>>110056306Why are you using a computer in the dark and not in a well lit room or daylight? You'll ruin your eyes, don't you remember what your parents taught you?
>>110057257Looks decent to me, better than the TCL 27C2A it was compared to on reddit. It is the cheapest mini led of it's tier for a reason though.>MiniLed supposed to be the best IPS has to offerNo, that would be eizo's dual layer IPS panel that costs 30 grand. Mini LEDs are full of compromises in their design, LG has that annoying fan because they made their screen too thin to dissipate heat so it aggressively limited brightness to 450 nits.
>>110057408I'm about to bring my CRT back out of the basement to see if it didn't fucking rot and die from the moisture down there here just to test all these stupid posts, if it still works.
>>110054956>Why did the industry switch to inferior technology?The deadly roentgen emission, insufficient shielded by a thin layer of leaded glass was not to hide on wider than 15" screens. Just look at the face skin of workers doing that anyway.
>>110062967Sure, LCD/OLED are so bad that pro esports players still use CRTs
>>110054956>you do not own the glass
Why are people ITT pretending that CRTs aren't worthless trash? Serious question, they're probably the worst piece of trash to have ever been invented
>>110064053Because some people ITT actually own good CRTs and know how incredible they are
>>110064137that tiny ass screen and dogshit geometry lmao
>>110064139I see multimodal models still can't really interpret pictures correctly to generate accurate bait
>>110064143the right border geometry is all fucked up retard and your shit is 20" at best so both my comments are correct.
>>110064172The picture is overscanned and any pixels of distortion you think you see is almost certainly due to the flattening glass optics working a little different depending on the angle it's viewed from. These mitsus didn't have as refined optics as sonys.> your shit is 20" at best Reminder a 20" 4:3 display is taller than a 24" 16:9
