Support NeoGAF

[DirtyLarry]

This story may seem to not be related at first, but it will be. Sharing it to illustrate a point. It is 110% true.

This holiday weekend in the United States instead of enjoying the 4 days off I had from work (took Friday off as well), I had to clean out my entire house in preparation of a move in my family. We had so much shit to get rid of, we just rented a dumpster to throw everything in it.
I live in Central NJ and the street I am on is the main street that connects my town to the main highway. So we get a whole lot of people driving by and also a decent amount of foot traffic.
Anything I had that I thought someone else could possibly use I just put on my curb with a Free sign on it.
Every single thing except one that I put to the curb was taken within an hour. Most things were taken within 10 minutes of me putting them out. The Rock Band drums and 3 guitars I put out were taken within a minute.
There was only one thing that did not get taken and I left it out over 8 hours.
My 21 inch Viewsonic CRT Monitor. I believe it had a native resolution of 1856 x 1392 and a max resolution of up to 2048 x 1536. I could not give the thing away. Two different people asked me about it and plenty looked at it. One even went as far as beginning to take it and once he felt how heavy it was, he gave up.

People just few it as prehistoric. Even though it is not, and even though in many ways the technology is still outstanding. They are just too damn big.
I was sad at the end of the day when I was forced to put it in the dumpster, but it had to be done.

 

[laser]

Because it's as heavy as fuck.

 

[SOME-MIST]

Still use crts too. NEC xm29, Sony bvm a20f1u, Sony pvm 14m4u, and then in storage a 29 inch Sony trinitron tv. Granted I still use hd displays too, but I spend about half my time on each

 

[desmax]

They're too heavy for me

 

[Peltz]

Compare the jaggy effect from the left image to the right.

Sort of gives the illusion of a denser set of pixels...colors bleed into each other a bit. A natural AA effect.

Look especially at the blocky colors on his chest piece, how they blend together instead.

Here's one I took that compares Wii U VC on a Plasma vs. RGB out from an SNES to a CRT.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

My 21 inch Viewsonic CRT Monitor. I believe it had a native resolution of 1856 x 1392 and a max resolution of up to 2048 x 1536. I could not give the thing away. Two different people asked me about it and plenty looked at it. One even went as far as beginning to take it and once he felt how heavy it was, he gave up.

People just few it as prehistoric. Even though it is not, and even though in many ways the technology is still outstanding. They are just too damn big.
I was sad at the end of the day when I was forced to put it in the dumpster, but it had to be done.

God this made me sad.

I just really hope it's still possible to find nice CRT monitors in 3-5 years. I'm in college now, and the weight and size of even a small CRT actually would be problematic in my dorm room. But once I get my own place...

 

[Nostremitus]

Oh man, lol. I had a 36" CRT. It was backbreaking trying to move that thing.

It weighed over 200lbs.

Nope, OP. I'm good with making a few concessions in order to not deal with that anymore.

I gave it away to someone willing to move it.

 

[uncredited male]

I had a FW900. It was okay but I didn't miss it when I got a bigger LCD.

It was such a bitch to move around. I actually got better image clarity with the LCD as I didn't have to deal with the ghosting caused by the BNR connections.

 

[wanderingprostheyltite]

I have a second bedroom not being utilized right now and I'd love to turn it into a retro game room+VR space for the Vive. Not really sure where to get crts for cheapish tho.

 

[To Far Away Times]

I just hooked up my CRT this weekend to play some light gun games and I have to say it's almost like taking a step forward in a lot of ways. Incredible response times, color, and overall pleasant image on older games.

The best picture quality I ever saw on a TV was on one of those old Sony HD CRT displays. I wish they still made them.

 

[Skux]

Ease of use (weight) and cost of production trumps technical features almost all of the time.

 

[magnetic]

CRTs always gave me headaches, no matter the model or size. That really limited the time I could spend in front of those monitors unless I wanted to suffer for the rest of the day, I'm just sensitive to that.

I'm personally happy that they're gone, and unlike other tech like audio cassettes, vinyl or other old hardware I have zero nostalgia for them.

I also have a rather small room and with LCDs I can still have two separate setups.

Big arcade cabs have a certain appeal to me, but I don't need to have those at home either. I'd rather have a nice pinball machine.

Also, phrasing it "Why aren't we all?" is annoying. Because people have different priorities, that's why.

 

[biggersmaller]

Pic I took from our Sony 34XBR960N CRT which was a Super fine pitch model Sony had out towards the end of CRT production. That thing had ridiculous PQ.

(PS3 playing a Bluray)

The college I attended had a couple of these in their library my senior year (2005). They were fucking awesome. The specs can be found here. If you're wondering after looking at that kick-ass shot why the industry moved away from CRT, notice this $1000 32 inch TV weighed 196 lbs and was 23" deep.

 

[SneakyStephan]

Oh man, lol. I had a 36" CRT. It was backbreaking trying to move that thing.

It weighed over 200lbs.

Nope, OP. I'm good with making a few concessions in order to not deal with that anymore.

I gave it away to someone willing to move it.

We are talking about monitors, not tvs. A 21 or 24" crt monitor does not weigh200 pounds, they can in fact be moved just fine.
My leather motorised relax chair weighs about 120 pounds and no I am not going to throw it out for one of these just because it is heavy when I'm moving.

 

[gunslikewhoa]

I had a pair of 1600x1200s for poker like 11-12 years ago. They were great, but I had to switch to LCDS because long sessions were too hard on the eyes.

 

[Kudo]

After getting my first 27" IPS 1440p, I'm glad CRT's are gone.
That geometry stuff had to go, some funny video on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGXNHYFDeyg (finnish language but laughter makes it gold)

 

[KyanMehwulfe]

i wish I had kept my 21" Trinitron but it became too annoying to move between uni/work... thing was massive and heavy.

and a furnace in the summer... between a gaming pc and that crt, heat was unbearable anytime days got between 30-40c (ummm....90-110f? lol) i had to buy extra fans and move my gaming table closer to an AC unit haha

on the plus side, i never had to turn the heat on during canadian winters lol

wish i had kept it in storage somewhere or back at my parents' place tho. prob weird to ditch widescreen for games but sure i'd have found some use for it

 

[Bergerac]

- large
- heavy
- not sexy
- noticeable flickering
- getting a good picture requires more tweaking
- probably more expensive to manufacture

This is the actual answer.

 

[Lactose_Intolerant]

Mine died, I would still use it for photoshop if I still had it around.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

Also, phrasing it "Why aren't we all?" is annoying. Because people have different priorities, that's why.

Yeah, I realized the second after I posted it that the topic title wasn't the best.

What I meant was: Why aren't the people who are using gaming monitors (ie, they've already bought a monitor specially designed for gaming) using ones that have CRT screens? For gaming specifically, it seems like they make the most sense.

 

[Nostremitus]

We are talking about monitors, not tvs. A 21 or 24" crt monitor does not weigh200 pounds, they can in fact be moved just fine.
My leather motorised relax chair weighs about 120 pounds and no I am not going to throw it out for one of these just because it is heavy when I'm moving.

Screen real estate is important for productivity and gaming. A 21" monitor isn't really worth buying regardless of the technology. A 24" CRT monitor will weigh between 85-100lbs. A 36" CRT is going to have weight whether it's a TV or monitor.

And the chair comment? That made me lose all respect for any opinion you could have on the matter. In the future I'd refrain from adding ridiculous hyperbole like that if you want people to take you seriously or in any way believe that you know what you're talking about.

 

[magnetic]

Yeah, I realized the second after I posted it the that the topic title wasn't the best.

What I meant was: Why aren't the people who are using gaming monitors (ie, they've already bought a monitor specially designed for gaming) using ones that have CRT screens? For gaming specifically, it seems like they make the most sense.

Fair enough! I mean, it is an interesting topic for sure.

 

[Robaperas]

Still less than plasma tvs, and I know a bunch of gaffers love their kuro plasmas dearly and would not give them up for anything.

Wow, you're right.. 393 watts for the Pioneer PDP-LX5090 on default settings. It just seems too wasteful for me.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

And the chair comment? That made me lose all respect for any opinion you could have on the matter. In the future I'd refrain from adding ridiculous hyperbole like that if you want people to take you seriously or in any way believe that you know what you're talking about.

I actually thought it was a decent analogy. Everyone seems so concerned with the portability of their monitors... but these aren't things that are meant to be moved around anyway. We don't care about the portability of our chairs, or our dishwashers, or our desks. Why is the portability of our monitors so important? I could understand if it was 300 pounds and impossible to move even once, but CRT monitors rarely weigh more than 100 pounds. 100 is a lot more than 3 (an LCD monitor), but not that much for something that won't be moved regularly anyway.

 

[MrCunningham]

I agree that CRT's are greater when it comes to gaming. When you think about it, they still have superior black to white colour ratio, no issues with view angles, and no input lag. CRT's are an old tech, but they still have some advantages over current LCD's. But on the downside, they are bulky and use way more electricity than flat screens. But in the long run, I do think we are starting too see some of these downsides of flatscreens disappear.

Furthermore, while most CRTs were standard definition, HD CRT's did exist. Most CRT monitors were at least 1024x768 (low by today's standards, but a lot higher than 480i!), and I've read that some were as high as 1080p.

Some of the old 4:3 CRT computer monitors could display up to 1600x1200 in resolution. I had one back in the day. They were great up until Windows Vista, when Microsoft started using sub pixel rendering that really made CRT's look blurry on Vista and higher. I always hated that. But there were 1080p CRT widescreen monitors as well as well as 1080p/ 1080i (eeew) wide screen TV's.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

They were great up until Windows Vista, when Microsoft started using sub pixel rendering that really made CRT's look blurry on Vista and higher.

Can't you turn this off?

 

[VanquishUK]

Because they suck

 

[Nostremitus]

I actually thought it was a decent analogy. Everyone seems so concerned with the portability of their monitors... but these aren't things that are meant to be moved around anyway. We don't care about the portability of our chairs, or our dishwashers, or our desks. Why is the portability of our monitors so important? I could understand if it was 300 pounds and impossible to move even once, but CRT monitors rarely weigh more than 100 pounds. 100 is a lot more than 3 (an LCD monitor), but not that much for something that won't be moved regularly anyway.

He compared a motorized lounge chair to a folding chair when talking about monitors. That's a ridiculous exaggeration, ie hyperbole. I wasn't comparing CRT TVs to LCDs in cheap Timex wristwatches. We are talking about comparing a good LCD panel to a good CRT. They perform the same functions using different tech.

A good analogy would be comparing one motorized chair to another that didn't weight as much but the cord for the remote was shorter and it reclined a fraction of a second slower.

 

[magnetic]

I actually thought it was a decent analogy. Everyone seems so concerned with the portability of their monitors... but these aren't things that are meant to be moved around anyway. We don't care about the portability of our chairs, or our dishwashers, or our desks. Why is the portability of our monitors so important? I could understand if it was 300 pounds and impossible to move even once, but CRT monitors rarely weigh more than 100 pounds. 100 is a lot more than 3 (an LCD monitor), but not that much for something that won't be moved regularly anyway.

I agree that complaining about the portability of a device that is considered stationary is a bit silly (unless for people who move regularly) - I think it´s more the effect that for most people, thin and light monitors are basically the same thing but in a much sleeker and lighter package, making the old tech seem very outdated by comparison.

Similar to that, I bought a Kindle a few months ago and was really fascinated by it for a few weeks, until I realized that I stil prefer paper books. Those can take up massive amounts of physical space as well, but I consider that a good tradeoff for the tactile feeling of a book. A Kindle can carry thousands of books and take up no more space than the device itself, yet I don´t consider my physical books a burden, because I just like them around.

I think most people look at CRTs and think "why should I have such a large and heavy thing around?", even if the heaviness doesn´t really come into effect on a daily basis, it´s more the direct comparison to the new tech.

 

[Risible]

Find yourself a working FW900, that thing was a beast.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00004YNSR/?tag=neogaf0e-20

22.5-inch viewable screen
2,304 x 1,440 maximum resolution

Shipping weight: 107.8 pounds.

There's your answer, OP.

 

[FoxSpirit]

I had a pair of 1600x1200s for poker like 11-12 years ago. They were great, but I had to switch to LCDS because long sessions were too hard on the eyes.

Yeah, independant of refresh rate your eyes really burnt after some time. Anything abover 100Hz was golden as far as flicker free goes.

Nowadays, imagine a 24 inch CRT. MONSTER. And a 50 inch CRT TV? Better get a crane.

 

[MrCunningham]

Can't you turn this off?

It has something to do with cleartype, doesn't it? When I first installed Vista, I was using it on a PC with an older CRT monitor, and I remember disabling the clear type and it still looked really bad. Almost impossible to use for long periods of time. I thought the monitor was dying, but then I plugged it into a tower with XP and it looked great.

 

[d00d3n]

*snip*
Soft, round "pixels." In fact there weren't really "pixels" per se with a CRT. Just a dot mask and the cathode ray beaming back and forth. One thing that really annoys me about "retro style" games these days with "8 bit pixels" and such is that the games back then did NOT look nearly as blocky or stair-steppy as that. And that was because of the CRT's.

Compare the jaggy effect from the left image to the right.

Sort of gives the illusion of a denser set of pixels...colors bleed into each other a bit. A natural AA effect.

Look especially at the blocky colors on his chest piece, how they blend together instead.

Thanks, interesting!

 

[Voliko]

After getting my first 27" IPS 1440p, I'm glad CRT's are gone.
That geometry stuff had to go, some funny video on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGXNHYFDeyg (finnish language but laughter makes it gold)

This is the worst thing about CRTs by far imo. It will never be 100% right, and it being even slightly off can make 2D games look like wonky shit during motion. Everything else about CRTs is great, I still have a few of them, but I've never been able to get over this flaw.

 

[ForsakenLotus]

They are really expensive to make and, I think, really heavy as well. There may be more to it than that, but I'm not an expert.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

It has something to do with cleartype, doesn't it? When I first installed Vista, I was using it on a PC with an older CRT monitor, and I remember disabling the clear type and it still looked really bad. Almost impossible to use for long periods of time. I thought the monitor was dying, but then I plugged it into a tower with XP and it looked great.

Yeah, I also thought it was cleartype. Huh. There's probably some other work-around, somewhere, although I certainly don't know what is.

 

[Steel]

I still have a 720P 30" CRT laying around.... It looked pretty awesome.

 

[RageWaffles]

They are noisy too. The high frequency noise drives me crazy, I rather have a LCD, even for older systems.

Oh god yes. I don't miss that high-pitched whine from CRTs.

 

[MrCunningham]

Yeah, I also thought it was cleartype. Huh. There's probably some other work-around, somewhere, although I certainly don't know what is.

I was talking about experiences from 9 (almost 10!) years ago, which are pretty much irrelevant to me now. If I want to use a modern operating system on an older CRT, I generally go with Linux, as it still looks great on old CRT's. But there probably is a work around to the cleartype thing. I was never really bothered to look into it.

Compare the jaggy effect from the left image to the right.

Sort of gives the illusion of a denser set of pixels...colors bleed into each other a bit. A natural AA effect.

Look especially at the blocky colors on his chest piece, how they blend together instead.

Back in the day, most game studio pixel artists would have a CRT plugged into their work station so they can see what the pixel art would look like on a CRT TV as they drew it. Artists would try to take advantage of the colour bleeding to try and create more depth or artificially add more colour to an image.

 

[Octavia]

144hz gsync helps negate a lot of that, but color/contrast is always going to be a struggle with flat panels.

I'm glad we have lcds though because I was getting real tired of sssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss coming from every room in the house. God that frequency is maddening and on some models it was really REALLY loud.

 

[Kudo]

This is the worst thing about CRTs by far imo. It will never be 100% right, and it being even slightly off can make 2D games look like wonky shit during motion. Everything else about CRTs is great, I still have a few of them, but I've never been able to get over this flaw.

Agreed, and the default settings are far from being straight too so it's no easy problem to fix. At least on the models I had, been years since I had one.
Just can't imagine how huge 27" CRTs would be, I guess they'd call them TVs instead of monitor at that size. I don't miss them, IPS/LCD definitely saved me, jump from TN to IPS was really great too as I hated TN.

 

[Ziffles]

It's funny regarding the whine from CRTs, which is noise from the vibration of the TV's flyback transformer, or one of the components inside. It's at about 15735hz, so if your hearing is going you will never hear it again. But I still hear it loud and clear at age 35 (depending on the TV), and it's the main reason I had to give up my Toshiba 25" CRT, which would've otherwise been perfect for retro gaming.

After getting my first 27" IPS 1440p, I'm glad CRT's are gone.
That geometry stuff had to go, some funny video on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGXNHYFDeyg (finnish language but laughter makes it gold)

It's like the Finnish Mr. Plinkett

 

[Sectorseven]

They're too impractical to sell for such a small market. The advantages they offer will ultimately be met and surpassed by LCD/oled.

 

[Speedwagon]

I think you want a commercial grade monitor OP

 

[milkham]

my 20' crt monitors weighed north of 70 pounds, my friend had dual monitor setup of the same crt and his desk actually bent from the weight over time.

 

[codswallop]

Mostly for the same reason most people are happy listening to mp3s over FLAC or vinyl, or Netflix over BluRays, or Wi-Fi over physical networks: The convenience and/or form factor outweighs the higher quality of the alternative.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

They're too impractical to sell for such a small market.

And yet, the market is large enough for BenQ? They mostly make gaming monitors, and seem to be doing alright.

The advantages they offer will ultimately be met and surpassed by LCD/oled.

But will they?

Maybe they will eventually be able to lower the input-lag on non-TN panels, I don't know enough to say. It will never be as low as a CRT, but I suppose 2ms is close enough to zero.

However, OLED and LCD screens are always going to have square pixels, which means they're always going to need antialiasing. Which requires a massive amount of processing power.

Correct me if I'm wrong about any of this—the reason I made this thread is because I feel like I must be missing something here.

 

[PreyingShark]

This is the worst thing about CRTs by far imo. It will never be 100% right, and it being even slightly off can make 2D games look like wonky shit during motion. Everything else about CRTs is great, I still have a few of them, but I've never been able to get over this flaw.

I used to play a game that involved clicking lots of circles.

I never could get every circle to look like an actual circle instead of an oval. If I made the center's circles look like circles then the edges were squished, and vice versa.

Yeah fuck that.

 

[TAJ]

You guys need to step up from cheap particle board desks. Doesn't matter that they're lighter because that shit won't survive a move anyway.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

With today's technology we could build much improved CRTs.

We need an Apollo mission for 21st century CRTs now!