Re: LCDs are garbage

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 23:13:30 +0100, "Java Jive" <java@xxxxxxxx> Gave
us:

>"Bill" <wh@xxxxxx> wrote in message news:mfjQe.1939$rj.862@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>> I returned a $500 LCD monitor from LG to Best Buy last year
>
>I don't doubt there are some bad desktop monitors around, because some
>laptop LCDs have a very poor viewing angle, and if any desktop monitors are
>built to the same spec, they will have as well. However, I've used a
>Philips and now use a Viewsonic, and I have had no trouble with viewing
>angle on either.
>
>> Digital technology isn't always better technology.
>
>An LCD monitor isn't necessarily a digital monitor -

It essentially is as it reprocesses the video, and the result is a
digital rendering. DLP suffers even worse from this affliction.

>many still use the
>same analogue connector

So.

> - but taking your point as I think you meant it,
>LCDs have the potential to provide as good a picture as any CRT,

Bullshit. They never will. OLED will usher in first. Illuminated
pixels will ALWAYS be better than backlit or cast pixelations.

> but as with
>anything else, there are bad ones and good ones. Getting a bad one doesn't
>make the whole technology bad.

The technology isn't bad. But it will still never catch up to a CRT
in quality. Keep current... Think OLED.

> One should always research one's purchases.

That's why I still buy CRTs.

>A very good reason for buying an LCD is that, as an inevitable consequence
>of the technology, CRTs are low-level X-ray sources.

You're a wussy.

> This is particularly
>important wrt monitors because, depending on eyesight, screen res, etc, one
>puts one's face relatively close to it compared with a TV.

Show me all the blindness stats since the advent of TV, a
considerably higher level source. Where are all those old men that
have been blinded from decades of CRT viewing?

Where are all the traffic control casualties of this dangerous
technology?

Give it a rest.


> My eyes used to
>tire with CRT monitors, they don't with LCDs

You probably had cheap shit then, driven by a cheap card.

> - I can work at them happily
>for hours.

Funny since eye strain has historically been reported as higher from
LCDs than from CRTs. Particularly with constantly moving imagery.

>
>Also, I have sometimes found houses where children sit right in front of CRT
>TVs, and have explained to the parents why this is not a good idea.
>

You're an idiot. Millions of folks in this country and around the
world would have ALREADY been affected by your supposed danger.

Show me the stats, liar.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Flat Monitors [OT]
    ... monitors, they will not touch LCDs for anything other than monitors that ... LCDs are crap. ... CRT set is vastly superior to a $700 LCD set. ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: LCDs are garbage
    ... I don't doubt there are some bad desktop monitors around, ... > Digital technology isn't always better technology. ... An LCD monitor isn't necessarily a digital monitor - many still use the ... tire with CRT monitors, they don't with LCDs - I can work at them happily ...
    (alt.video.dvd)
  • Re: Refresh rate on an an LCD monitor?
    ... But what does 'refresh rate' mean for an LCD/TFT screen ... I thought that applied only to CRT monitors? ... "Refresh rate" means exactly the same thing for LCDs that ...
    (comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video)
  • Whats changed in CRT display in the last decade?
    ... figure television /CRT technology is pretty much matured. ... You can get a 19" CRT for $200 today that has a completely flat tube. ... I remember high end 17" CRT PC monitors were over $1,000 in 1995. ...
    (sci.electronics.basics)
  • Re: Digital TV suppliers urged to save energy
    ... I am talking about the risk from decelerating the electrons in the CRT, ... how come I and others report that LCDs of a similar size and resolution ... monitor than an an average viewer spends in front of the TV. ... If X-Rays were present, they ...
    (uk.tech.digital-tv)