22 Apr
2005
22 Apr
'05
1:11 p.m.
Subject: Re: tube technology and EMP
From: William Donzelli <aw288 at osfn.org>
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 12:27:36 -0400 (EDT)
To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at
classiccmp.org>
My .02 is sure LCDs are nice, small and expensive but, they even come with a guarentee
that 99.99% of the pixels are good. The rest are well, bad.
A lot of users have noted that getting an LCD with 100% good pixels
is either tough or expensive.
Then again I have Monitors with the still common tube and when they
die it's 15$ here in MA to get rid of one with a bad gun or a
impossible to replace HV transformer. As a result I try to NOT
collect anything with a CRT onless it's fairly unique.
Allison
Do LCD screens still blow pixels after a couple
of years? That'd be my
only reservation compared to a traditional CRT.
I'd rather blow a pixel than a whole gun...
I actually still like a tube in front of me, but damn, these
new(ish) flatscreens are nice.
William Donzelli
aw288 at osfn.org 
22 Apr
22 Apr
1:15 p.m.
Allison wrote:
My .02 is sure LCDs are nice, small and expensive but,
they even come with a guarentee
that 99.99% of the pixels are good. The rest are well, bad.
wipes out handy CRT ^H^H^H LED calculator ... 640x480 * .0001
A lot of users have noted that getting an LCD with 100%
good pixels
is either tough or expensive.
= 30 at least :)
PS. I don't like LCD calculators as they I find hard to read since often
I want to do a quick calc
in a semi-dark room like the calculation above.
2:20 p.m.
New subject: LCD monitors (was Re: tube technology and EMP)
Allison wrote:
My .02 is sure LCDs are nice, small and expensive but,
they even come with
a guarentee that 99.99% of the pixels are good. The rest are well, bad.
The rate is better than that. I'm not sure of the manufacturer's spec,
but Newegg will accept returns if 8 or more pixels are bad. On a 21"
LCD (1600x1200), that is 99.9995% good. In practice, there are not
that many bad. The last several Samsung ones I've inspected had no bad
pixels at all.
A lot of users have noted that getting an LCD with
100% good pixels
is either tough or expensive.
If you buy a name brand LCD, it's likely to cost a bit more and have
fewer (or no) bad pixels.
A monitor (CRT or LCD) is something I expect to use for quite a few years.
I think it's a false economy to try to save money by buying an off brand.
I've had an LCD monitor for eight years now. It is a 14" 1024x768, which
was VERY expensive back then; now the equivalent can be found for under
$250. It had one bad pixel, for which blue was always on. This is *much*
more annoying than bad pixels that are stuck off. Generally the
threshold for acceptable bad pixels that are stuck on is lower than that
for stuck off, or even zero. Anyhow, I've used it a fair bit, and it
has never developed any more bad pixels. I've never even heard of that
happening.
The normal failure mode for an LCD monitor is for one of the fluorescent
tubes of the backlight to fail. These can be very expensive to replace
as they are usually not common tubes.
Eric
2:36 p.m.
New subject: LCD monitors (was Re: tube technology and EMP)
The rate is better than that. I'm not sure of the
manufacturer's spec,
but Newegg will accept returns if 8 or more pixels are bad. On a 21"
LCD (1600x1200), that is 99.9995% good. In practice, there are not
that many bad. The last several Samsung ones I've inspected had no bad
pixels at all.
Come to think of it, it has been a couple of years since I saw a bad pixel
on a flatscreen. The last was my old Stinkpad.
I've had an LCD monitor for eight years now. It
is a 14" 1024x768, which
was VERY expensive back then; now the equivalent can be found for under
$250. It had one bad pixel, for which blue was always on. This is *much*
more annoying than bad pixels that are stuck off
Tiny dab of black paint?
The normal failure mode for an LCD monitor is for one
of the fluorescent
tubes of the backlight to fail. These can be very expensive to replace
as they are usually not common tubes.
Cure the problem with those Woven fibre optic backplanes. OK, so they are
damn expensive as well.
I always thought the company that made them should have tried a shirt.
William Donzelli
aw288 at osfn.org
7184
days inactive
7184
days old
3 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
ajp166＠bellatlantic.net -
aw288＠osfn.org -
bfranchuk＠jetnet.ab.ca -
eric＠brouhaha.com