CRTs not quite dead yet
by Kevin C. Tofel 
posted Aug 15th 2005 at 9:54AM
Sure,
they've been around for sixty-six years, but Cathode Ray Tube (CRT)
televisions aren't listed in the obituaries just yet. In fact, Samsung
and LG are still spending R&D dollars on the technology, trying
everything from Slim-Fast diets to TVs on treadmills in an effort to
decrease the bulk of a CRT.Samsung now offers a slim, 16-inch deep high-def CRT that is 30-inches wide for roughly a grand. A similar sized LCD from Samsung is only four inches thick but costs you $2,500. LG is also planning to offer a slim CRT in the United States, although we won't see it until 2006. I'm sure most of the HD Beat readers think "thin is in", but the huge savings that slim CRTs offer in terms of space and budgets might help push along our digital TV transition. Thoughts?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
robobone @ Nov 13th 2005 2:10AM
I agree with Kamasutra, If the Samsung CRT looked worse than the LCD, the staff did not adjust it properly. I returned a 42" Samsung LCD for a 30" Samsung CRT. LCD is great for direct view, then only if the source is HD, but the CRT works perfectly with standard and HD. Most programming is in standard def right now. LCD is not only more expensive, displays crap looking standard def up close, but you can not see it very will from the side. Also the CRT does have HDMI imputs and the DVI to HDMI cable makes it work perfectly with the Media Center.
JB @ Aug 16th 2005 10:10AM
Love them or not- CRTs still offer the best HD viewing experience than any other monitor...it is not as sexy as flat screens but I guess thin is in...
why don't those people who have flat screens own up that CRTs show a better picture???
fishpatrol @ Aug 15th 2005 3:48PM
I'd have no complaints with using a CRT on principle, but I wonder if this crowd is pretty heavy into HTPCs and other options that need a DVI/VGA input to fly. I don't expect to find a lot of multisync HD CRTs, but I don't know if the FUD is true concerning monitor ruination. For inputs alone, the LCD route makes a whole lot of sense. Show me some CRT contenders and I'd be glad to take a look. My Mac is waiting...
Bruce M. @ Aug 21st 2005 1:42AM
JB is SOOO wrong about "CRT's being superior" ... I went to Best Buy and checked out Samsung's new superflat CRT-based HDTV ... compared to the 32" LCD TV's on the next shelf, the CRT-based models looked like crap warmed over ... really bad colors, blurry, etc. -- and when I looked at the direct view LCD's the picture was "thrilling" -- i.e. amazing to look at, crisp, clear, and powerful HDTV picture.
SO -- before posting ignorent comments JB, you might actually want to check out the latest HDTV technology to form a real opinion rather than just some outdated hunch.
Kamasutra @ Aug 30th 2005 5:43PM
If you going to compare LCD, Plasma with CRT, last one is a winner.The technology of liquid crystals and gases are not so well developed like CRT production. No doubt about that in the stores staff are not bothering themselves to adjust proper colors, brightness and so on to get perfect image on TVs, especially on CRT ones. The LCD and Plasma TVs have automatic adjustments that apparently make picture looks more clear and better than CRT. Ive Samsung 16:9 30 CRT TV at home, and I always match up to Plasma 40" which we have in the office, and despite Plasma is Panasonic, my Samsung CRT is better.