2 Dec
2007
2 Dec
'07
9:46 p.m.
--- "Roy J. Tellason" <rtellason at verizon.net> wrote:
On Sunday 02 December 2007 17:23, Chuck Guzis wrote:
You're not imagining it - I have noticed the same
thing. The picture of a good CRT beats an LCD any day
for me. And, for whatever reason, LCD's seem to give
me headaches. I don't know what it is, but something
about them, I get headaches after a few hours. Mono
terminals never give me problems - LCD's do. Go
figure.
At home I use a pair of old GDM 17E10 (one Sun, one
SGI) monitors on my Mac. I absolutely love them. I
actually just had to swap out one of them, it needs to
be recapped. The linearity is going south, and it's
starting to develop smearing. Not bad though, it was
made in like '93, and I have been using it every day
for the last six years. Fortunately I had a spare.
I'll have to keep my eyes open for more of them.
At work, I use a well worn Dell 17" CRT monitor with
Windows 98 screen burn, connected to a PC running
Linux. It's a bit worse for wear, with the burn-in and
the tube getting dim, but it's still crisp and
readable.
For most purposes, CRT's are much nicer than LCD's
(IMHO). But, then again, that's just how I feel. Most
people these days would disagree with me. Besides, us
in the classic computer community are probably a bit
biased <grin>. Nothing beats the sharpness of a good
monochrome CRT...
-Ian
I was just doing some work on my Beige G3
attached to an HP 98789A
17" monitor sitting next to a PC with a
brand-new
wide-screen LCD and
a NVidia DVI-output AGP card.
What struck me was how smooth the color rendition
was with the CRT (I
think it's a Sony under the HP badge)
compared to
the LCD. Sure, the
LCD has more pixels and is very sharp, but the HP
analog tube seems
to be much more pleasing to the eye.
Am I imagining this or have others noticed the
same thing? Is this
another case of vinyl-vs-CD? I don't own an
LCD
TV and after this
> experience am not tempted to get one.