Cost of LCD tv's

[bogeyman]

What a crap answer. Then everything we discuss in here must somehow define our life. If you don't give a tulipe just avoid replying. You would look less of a miserable grumpy old git than what you appear from your replies.

What Zeit said would have made sense 2-3 years ago. Now there is no point in going for a CRT. And no, my life doesn't depend on that.*

* but I can't wait that the TV bench arrives so I can unwrap the new 42'' inches plasma monster.

What the feck are you on about Franko?

[PerlOfWisdom]

If the quality of your TV picture defines your life, then I really pity you.

Yea but think how good it would be to watch big brother, eastenders and emerdale farm with great quality pictures.

[VectraMan]

I think they are hideous.

I'd rather have a good CRT tv anyday.

I wouldn't totally agree with that, but I've yet to see an LCD or plasma that I thought looked as good as my old Sony 24" WS CRT. Not that I've spent a lot of time looking, but I've been underwhelmed at what I've seen. I do think LCDs are brilliant for computer use, but TV is different.

Let's be honest, LCD/plasmas are just as much if not more about getting the trendy new gadget and something that looks good in your living room, as they are about the picture. And what do you connect it to? My step-father has a 42" plasma screen connected to Sky, and all it does is highlight how awful the picture quality is on Sky.

[DimPrawn]

You haven't experienced porn until you watch HDTV porn on a 100 inch LCD panel.

http://www.engadget.com/media/2006/03/100inchlcd.jpg

[Gonzo]

Let's be honest, LCD/plasmas are just as much if not more about getting the trendy new gadget and something that looks good in your living room, as they are about the picture. And what do you connect it to? My step-father has a 42" plasma screen connected to Sky, and all it does is highlight how awful the picture quality is on Sky.

I totally agree - a few years ago my cousin bought a 42 inch plasma TV, cost him (actually his company ) 6 grand. He was very proud of it.

Unfortunately, his sitting room was not big enough to be able to sit far away enough from it to watch it comfortably

[Francko]

I totally agree - a few years ago my cousin bought a 42 inch plasma TV, cost him (actually his company ) 6 grand. He was very proud of it.

Unfortunately, his sitting room was not big enough to be able to sit far away enough from it to watch it comfortably

Let's get serious for a moment, please. In a few years LCD/Plasma have evolved dramatically and they are now a stable technology. CRT computer monitors have now totally disappeared and so will be for TV. A good CRT TV already costs a lot more than the equivalent good LCD/plasma.

Fact: not all the CRTs have a better picture quality than LCD. Only the good ones (i.e. sony, panasonic) which are very expensive
Fact: the picture quality is not the only parameter in a long-term to judge how enjoyable is your picture (i.e. response time, brilliance, viewing angle, light reflection, etc.)
Fact: HDTV is behind the corner and yes, the quality of HDTV is not even comparable with standard definition TV
Fact: there are only very few CRT models that go over 32''. Already the 32'' alone will fill half of your room destroying the look of your room
Fact: a good 42'' plasma now costs 7-800 pounds (exactly what a good 32'' costed about 2 years ago)
Fact: HDMI allows to receive dolby stereo audio along with your video signal, enhancing the quality of TV shows
Fact: buying a CRT now is a mere act of no-sense
Fact: I don't see great possible improvements in the short term to foresee a possible price crash (the only major thing is the 1080p full-hdtv TVs but again you are able to see it in 1080i and there is still the issue that companies do have to satisfy the majority of TV consumers on the market - which will allow for 1080i only)
Fact: it makes sense now to switch to the technology (imho)

[VectraMan]

Fact: not all the CRTs have a better picture quality than LCD. Only the good ones (i.e. sony, panasonic) which are very expensive

Mine was £400, 8 years ago. But I appreciate it's a subjective thing. I remember buying it: walking into Currys where there were a load of similar spec and similar priced sets and straight off pointing at the Sony as it looked much better.

Fact: there are only very few CRT models that go over 32''. Already the 32'' alone will fill half of your room destroying the look of your room

This is all assuming size is everything. My living room is a reasonable size, and I like having a 24" WS TV in the corner. To a lot of people that's pathetically small, but I think a too large screen or indeed just sitting too close highlights all the deficiencies of the picture. Hopefully HD will be a lot better in that regard, but certainly watching any kind of digital SD picture is awful on a large screen.

But that's probably me, and after years of working on multimedia and video software, I'm all too aware of this sort of thing. Ignorance is bliss.

I agree you'd be foolish to buy a CRT now, but I'm in no hurry to switch. Until Blu-day/HD-DVD settles down; there's enough HD content on TV to make it work it, and as long as my CRT keeps working, there seems little point.

[pisces]

I wouldn't totally agree with that, but I've yet to see an LCD or plasma that I thought looked as good as my old Sony 24" WS CRT. Not that I've spent a lot of time looking, but I've been underwhelmed at what I've seen. I do think LCDs are brilliant for computer use, but TV is different.

Let's be honest, LCD/plasmas are just as much if not more about getting the trendy new gadget and something that looks good in your living room, as they are about the picture. And what do you connect it to? My step-father has a 42" plasma screen connected to Sky, and all it does is highlight how awful the picture quality is on Sky.

Good post. My JVC CRT has a better picture than any LCD I have seen. I won't be upgrading to LCD until HD becomes common place. That's where they come into their own.

[DaveB]

Still on CRT for PC and TV. Picture quality is better on both, no question.

Also, PC LCD screens just can't handle images moving at speed, and you get noticable blurring and smearing of the picture.

[Francko]

Still on CRT for PC and TV. Picture quality is better on both, no question.

Also, PC LCD screens just can't handle images moving at speed, and you get noticable blurring and smearing of the picture.

You are not certainly considering the newest LCDs which have a response time of 8ms and some even less. I can give you that the clarity and scaling of the images is still a tie (but not for other factors as depth/cripsness for example, on which lcd/plasma are actually gaining a clear advantage).

CRT old-fashioned dynosaurs should pop to the shops and check the improvements the technology has made once every 2-3 years.