How come LCD's are still so expensive?

[konakona]

pull the desk forward to what extent? (yes i could have taken the shelf off if i needed to, but i didnt need to!) keep in mind that this was a dorm room and space was slightly limited.

well i have lived in dorms for about 4-5 years so i know where you are coming from. wish i had pics from my last place... the smallest room i EVER seen or heard of in dormitory type of accommodations after i am done with my review session at around 7:00 pm i will try to post another pic to give you an idea if you are interested. i just pull my desk slightly forward to give enough room so the monitor barely touches the wall. not really hard to do, i convinced my once stubborn roomate into it and now he seems to like it a lot more (he upgraded from a 15'' lcd to a 19'' nf diamondtron)

i am quite a bit of a workspace nazi myself : i need to have monitor perfectly in the middle of the environment, i hate any attempts of trying to turn the monitor sideways in an angle :| plus if you have noticed i have speakers at equidistance(sp?) from each other, at ear level and as far apart as possible (even though most of my music listening takes place on headphones). feel free to critique my workplace while at it as anubis has pointed out, i dont use my computer desk to work on math problems or read text...

as a sidenote, i have been able see much more detail in images, viewing on lcd than on a crt.

if thats what you value more, thats something really worthwhile. people see and hear things differently and for you sharpness/crispness happens to take higher priority, richness/lushness of colors in my case

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: Slickone

Originally posted by: Matthias99

..., and...see dullard's post above (resolution : FPS). Response time, color reproduction, cost, and resolution & FPS are more important than ergonomics.

To you. If you're not gaming (or watching a lot of fast-motion video), response time and variable resolution are not a big deal, and if you don't do art, super-accurate color reproduction isn't that important either (I mean, I saw a lot of people in school using dirt-cheap 15" and 17" Gateway monitors that look like ass). And FPS has nothing to do with the monitor you're using. Cost is definitely a factor, but the price differences are not THAT big, especially when you can buy a computer for under $500. An LCD monitor today still costs less than an equivalently-sized CRT did just a few years ago.

Now, personally, I do a lot of gaming, and 25ms LCDs are not acceptable to me, and so I still have a CRT. But I've been eyeing a 2001FP for a while now for a dual-monitor setup -- and for the vast majority of users, the advantages of LCDs far outweigh the disadvantages.

Seems contradicting. You first said if one doesn't play games or watch video, response time and variable resolution aren't important, and if one isn't into art, colors aren't important. If you don't do any of these, what's left? I imagine most people do at least one of these with their PC. Yeah if you only surf the internet, then none of this is important, but an LCD is a lot of money to spend on an internet only PC.

Word processing, email, internet access, instant messaging, listening to music, printing photos from a digital camera, doing scientific or mathematical analysis, programming... just a small sampling of things people commonly do with PCs besides games and digital art. And while current LCDs, for *me*, are inadequate for playing games and watching video, doesn't mean that they're inadequate for everyone.

Also, then you said that response time is important to you because you're a gamer, so you use an LCD.

I said:

Now, personally, I do a lot of gaming, and 25ms LCDs are not acceptable to me, and so I still have a CRT.

IE, I do *not* use an LCD. I strongly suggest reading things before responding to them.

FPS does have to do with your monitor, if you want to run a slightly lower res for faster FPS, but can't without it looking bad because it isn't native.

Yes, I was not fully understanding what the previous poster said (we already discussed this again; see posts above). He listed both "bad scaling from native resolution" and "FPS" as disadvantages of LCDs -- but they're the same problem, which is why I was confused.

 

[removablebench]

Yeah, lcds have definitely dropped in price. I got my Planar PX171M for $300, and that was over 6 months ago.

 

[unclebud]

murphy's law
"LCD's have been around for quite a while now. How come they are still pretty expensive?"
because all the know-it-nothings kept crabbing in hot deals for LCDs to not buy them, the price would drop rock bottom "any day now".
its now three years later, when is the day gonna get here?

 

[Lyfer]

Bottomline LCD's are still expensive until they come down to CRT prices. If they're cheap for you, heck BUY ME ONE. I'm perfectly happy with my $99 KDS 19inch Xtremeflat over a much more expensive LCD.

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: Lyfer
Bottomline LCD's are still expensive until they come down to CRT prices. If they're cheap for you, heck BUY ME ONE. I'm perfectly happy with my $99 KDS 19inch Xtremeflat over a much more expensive LCD.

Part of the reason CRTs cost next to nothing right now is that demand for CRTs is falling like a rock because of the popularity of LCD monitors.

LCDs today cost less than equivalently-sized CRTs did a few years ago. You can get a 20" 2001FP for $800-900 (less with deals); it used to be you couldn't get a 21" CRT for under $1K either.

 

[konakona]

Originally posted by: Matthias99

Originally posted by: Lyfer
Bottomline LCD's are still expensive until they come down to CRT prices. If they're cheap for you, heck BUY ME ONE. I'm perfectly happy with my $99 KDS 19inch Xtremeflat over a much more expensive LCD.

Part of the reason CRTs cost next to nothing right now is that demand for CRTs is falling like a rock because of the popularity of LCD monitors.

LCDs today cost less than equivalently-sized CRTs did a few years ago. You can get a 20" 2001FP for $800-900 (less with deals); it used to be you couldn't get a 21" CRT for under $1K either.

why dwell in the past? not everyone had apple-ii's and amigas back in the days you know... :roll:
i thought we were all about price/performance, most bang for buck and whatnot. somehow it doesnt seem like a good justification to blow money on luxury, who cares how much cars used to cost couple decades ago.

 

[grant2]

Originally posted by: sharkeeper
A 17" TFT has the same viewable area as a 19" CRT.
Cheers!

If you're buying 19" lcds w/ 17" viewable area, you're getting ripped off.

 

[sharkeeper]

If you're buying 19" lcds w/ 17" viewable area, you're getting ripped off.

Haven't bought a CRT (for my use) since 2001...

Anyways, I measure viewable area as the area that is displayable. Measuring with the monitor off does not count. The flat CRT's are even worse - most leave nearly 1/4" gap from the edge of the bezel. If you try to stretch it, your geometry really suffers.

That is what I like most about TFT panels: pixel perfect with perfect geometry. I have yet to see *ANY* CRT do this. Whoever believes a LCD is not as bright as a CRT has it backwards as well. That is one of the advantages of the LCD: superior brightness. Try turning up the brightness on your CRT more than 80% and it will bloom big time. Running a CRT with the brightness wide open will also carbonise the CRT heater filaments 200% faster resulting in a dim display in just a short time. Old displays are already maxed out and are barely viewable in a typical 75 footcandle fluorescent lit office for this reason. The LCD will never flicker due to the high frequency that the backlights are driven at. Backlights DO fail, however. I had a client call me today with one of those Sony Viao computers (think the PC equivalent of iMac!) that is dark but they can see the icons if they shine a flashlight on it!

CRT's also are susceptible to electromagnetic interference, present a security risk when used outside of faraday cages (search for TEMPEST once) and cannot be used in high SPL environments without incurring serious issues with display or just fail.

Power consumption is a big issue for sure especially when you're talking hundreds of monitors. They also put out much less heat than CRT's which means less cooling load for large offices.

Newest model LCD's also have much better optimisation of their non native display.

One of my clients that develops advanced display technology for the military has a patented backlight system based on LED emitters that will cut power consumption and interference down even more. Projected light source lifetime in excess of 100k hours. Furthermore, it allows a display that can be viewed in direct sunlight with better contrast than boosted CCFL TFT panels.

Cheers!

 

[ProviaFan]

Originally posted by: sharkeeper
CRT's also are susceptible to electromagnetic interference, present a security risk when used outside of faraday cages (search for TEMPEST once) and cannot be used in high SPL environments without incurring serious issues with display or just fail.

I'm not nitpicking on purpose, but that TEMPEST thing caught my interest, so I googled it and have been reading about it for the past half hour or so. One quote was in this page:

LCD displays on laptops eliminate the risks of TEMPEST attacks. Maybe, maybe not. The technology behind LCD monitors versus typical CRT monitors may somewhat reduce the risk, but I wouldn't bet my life on it. There have been anecdotal accounts of noisy laptop screens being partially displayed on TVs. If laptops were emanation proof, I seriously doubt there would be TEMPEST standard portables on the market.

 

[sharkeeper]

There's a market for everything!

CRT would be like using an unencrypted password and LCD would be like using 512bit encryption. Anything is possible supposedly however unlike the analogy there is no guarantee the snoop will get anything intelligible from a TFT. The notebook chassis itself is probably more responsible for the leak and this has nothing to do with the original principle. (Which can get beyond the scope of this forum rather quickly!)

Take the wireless keyboard for example! The skill required to build a keystroke recorder using the received RF signal is about as easy as falling off a log backwards.

Cheers!

 

[ROcHE]

Well I'm a student and somewhat cheap. Give me an LCD with the same picture as my 150$ Dell P1110 (Sony G500) and I'll buy it right away. There is no way in hell I'd pay 5x this price just to be "cool" and save space tough.

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Not to divert the LCD vs. CRT debate, but has it occurred to anybody that LCDs are still expensive, relative to CRT, because they are an order of magnitude more difficult to manufacturer?

Combine the high manufacturing costs with the companies reluctance to price themselves into bankruptcy with a price war and you have the current LCD market. You will continue to see high prices for flat panels as long as demand doesn't plummet like it did for CRT. Even with the recent slowing sales, prices haven't lowered that much.