Slightly OT: Old CRT displays vs. new LCD

Chuck Guzis wrote: Personally I find that LCDs give me a headache - I can use the one on this Dell (*spit*!) laptop for a couple of hours, but for every desktop one I've seen so far I can't get more than an hour out of it before I need a good, long break. Maybe I've just never used the LCD equivalent of the high-end Sonys and Iiyamas in the CRT world that I've always been used to? I find the extra sharpness of an LCD to be a drawback except for very specific kinds of work - for a lot of typical applications I just find everything too crisp for comfortable use (which may be related to the headache issue above). A *good* CRT I find to be about spot-on - sharp enough for everyday use but not too sharp as to be annoying. Problem is, a lot of people have poor CRTs to begin with, or don't do any adjustments over the years, all of which gives them a bad name. Oh, I also *like* the bulk of a CRT - for the bigger 19" and 21" screens, there's a useful place on top of the display to park paperwork and things (without blocking the vents, of course!). With an LCD, I'd still need it the same distance from my chair, keyboard etc., but it's not really practical to go stuffing things behind it. Despite the smaller volume, I actually lose functional space. Sadly a CRT won't win out on the power front. As for longevity - remains to be seen. But with routine maintenance CRTs of ten years ago are still fine (and of course we all have much older ones on our vintage gear). Plus I feel better about reusing an existing product and keeping it out of landfill than I do buying a new product (with all the manufacturing 'impact' involved). I certainly like the discussions around modern practices vs. old. (I keep meaning to mention how I actually seem to have *less* useful real-estate in my modern email client than I did in something running on a 80x25 display of 15 years ago :-) 'Progress' is a strange old thing... cheers Jules