Monitor wars: CRT vs LCD!

[TheMelodyMaker]

(Bob's dead monitor thread inspired me to make this thread, for those wondering. )

About a month or two ago I had the unfortunateness of experiencing monitor blowout for the first time ever. That is, I was using the computer as normal when suddenly I heard a crackling noise, and then the screen turned itself off as I saw a flashing from inside the monitor casing that lasted for a second or two, following by smelling something burning. Of course, the monitor was about 8 years old and used frequently so I figured it must have been time for it to go sooner or later. -_-

Anyway, I ended up snatching my parents' bigger CRT monitor for myself and buying a new flat-screen LCD monitor for them. The flat screen looked nice when I tried it, but I didn't like the fact that it didn't support the higher refresh rates that my CRT does. (The Traveller's Guide runs at 80 Hz, so I need my high refresh rate! )

Thus, on to the point of this thread: Which do you like better -- CRT or LCD monitors? Let's hear your reasons. ^_^ (And the poll explains the acronyms for those who don't know what they mean. )

[dyzzispell]

Is a CRT a normal tube monitor? If so, then I definitely prefer LCD for the extra space it gives me on my desk, and the clarity and brightness of the screen.
If not, then I don't know what a CRT is anyway.

[Slater]

CRT = Cathode Ray Tube = normal, like you said. LCD is naturally the future over CRT

[Bobtheduck]

CRT = Cathode Ray Tube = normal, like you said. LCD is naturally the future over CRT

Nothing natural about it... Smaller doesn't always mean better... There's no chance that LCD screens look better in their prime to CRTs in their prime, if they're both current. A nice flat tube (but still a tube) tv or monitor looks better than LCD because there aren't problems with blur, and no dead pixels... There's just something incredibly strange about the LCD screens for me... They're good where you can't do CRT (portables, for instance) but I'd take a CRT over an LCD or plasma anyday. If only for reliability... If you get a GOOD CRT and not an emachines, then it'll outlast a plasma (lifespans estimated at 5 years) or LCD (which lose pixels very quickly) easily... What I heard about CRTs, though, is the color will be a little off after about a year or so... Still, I'm much better with off-colors than missing pixels..

[mechana2015]

I use LCD for space sake (I was in a dorm for 3 years before this and barely had space then for the LCD) and for color fidelity. Color shift may not bother some people buuuttt... as I've started to work in printed media, I'm realizing very quicly that color fidelity is one of the most important parts of a monitor as any color error will compound itself when printed.

[Mithrandir]

Bob makes a valid point, but you're glossing over how far LCDs have come in the last 10 years. Can anyone say, "12 inch dual scan!" I knew you could. CRTs, on the other hand, are at the peak of over 50 years worth of progress.

In 10 years, I predict LCDs will be superior.

[Warrior4Christ]

Yeah. Bob said it. Good CRTs are superior to good LCDs.
(But LCDs are typically brighter than CRTs, which is a good thing.)

Having said that, I have an LCD monitor.

[LorentzForce]

Generally...

CRT goods:
- Flexible resolution selection without blurring
- High refresh rate
- Sharp images
- Now very cheap, relative to LCDs

CRT bads:
- Eats whole more power
- Takes more space
- Quite heavy
- Limited to ~21" to 22" screen size

LCD goods:
- Easier on your eyes
- Takes less space
- Not heavy at all

LCD bads:
- Colour issues
- Only at best at native resolution
- Expensive

Please note however that all of above are completely dependent on your needs. One can't say one is clearly better over another when no objectives are given. Are you a casual gamer who has to lug around the monitor to LAN parties? Or are you a professional graphic artist needing highest colour sharpness but cannot afford extreme ends of LCDs? Ordinary read-email/forum/surf-net/chat user? Programmer? Going to order hundreds of them and long term cost is an issue? And even with them answered it's still very vague on exactly which is better.

Heck, even with such generalised terms monitors can differ so much in price ranges. Not really worth discussing which is better.

But personally, I prefer an LCD. Which reminds me to get one one of these days...

[samuraidragon]

i agree with LorentzForce. with a good LCD colour isn't really an issue, though the lower end ones can have problems. i had a very old CRT (very old is 7 years) and it was having issues with randomly turning purple (much to the delight of my little sister). having said that, i really don't know what a good new CRT is like but looking at my LCD and then my CRT is hard on my eyes, the LCD is much sharper. plus now the shelf in my armoire doesn't bow.

[Technomancer]

I'd definately go with LCD. The strobing effect on the old CRTs could really get to me at times, something that doesn't bother me at all with my current LCD screen. I've never had trouble with blur or other artefacts when using an LCD either.

As a side note, LCDs are also more environmentally friendly. They consume less power, and contain fewer toxic materials than do CRTs.

[Valkaiser]

It's all about the CRT's.
The two biggest reasons that I like them:
A. 1600x1200 desktop resolution.
B. I can scrounge them from dumpsters.

My current desktop setup is two 17" and one 21" CRT's (the 17's are dumpster grade)

[Mr. SmartyPants]

Don't forget that CRT monitors use electromagnetic thingies. Thus a magnet will alter the colors on the monitor.

LCD is vastly superior.