Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

Sure, the F5** line had their problems, but the F520 was (and still
is) the best damn monitor out there.

I guess I'm going to have to rethink my dream triple F520 system that
I was going to build someday (I have 1 right now).

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

> Sure, the F5** line had their problems, but the F520 was (and still
> is) the best damn monitor out there.
>
> I guess I'm going to have to rethink my dream triple F520 system that
> I was going to build someday (I have 1 right now).

Welcome in the flat panel era... ;-)

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

"AbbieNormal" <none@none.com> wrote in message
news:1hha905s0frir937apeakt6np2ofcqlsu3@4ax.com...
> Sure, the F5** line had their problems, but the F520 was (and still
> is) the best damn monitor out there.
>
> I guess I'm going to have to rethink my dream triple F520 system that
> I was going to build someday (I have 1 right now).
>
>

Link for this news?

--
Derek

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

On Mon, 3 May 2004 23:09:49 +0100, "Derek Baker"
<me@XYZderekbaker.eclipse.co.uk> wrote:

>> Sure, the F5** line had their problems, but the F520 was (and still
>> is) the best damn monitor out there.
>>
>> I guess I'm going to have to rethink my dream triple F520 system that
>> I was going to build someday (I have 1 right now).
>>
>>
>
>Link for this news?

Nope. I think they did it a few months ago already, but I just noticed
it now.

Go to sony.com and you'll see that the only crt they're still making
is the Artisan. Do a Froogle search for F520 and you'll see that no
one is selling it (out of stock/discontinued)

Eizo's crt line is also dead if you check out their website.

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

Doug Bolton wrote:
> To add to the gripe, I recently compared flat panels to ctrs and the crts still
> offer a considerably better image. Panels may be better for text but certainly
> not for graphics. Because of this I do hope, and believe, that some company
> somewhere will continue to offer superior crts until panels finally catch up.


LCDs (good ones) have caught up in every area, except contrast/colour
fidelity. not too long to go i hope..

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

gimp <gimpboy@smegville.com> wrote:

>Doug Bolton wrote:
>> To add to the gripe, I recently compared flat panels to ctrs and the crts still
>> offer a considerably better image. Panels may be better for text but certainly
>> not for graphics. Because of this I do hope, and believe, that some company
>> somewhere will continue to offer superior crts until panels finally catch up.
>
>LCDs (good ones) have caught up in every area, except contrast/colour
>fidelity. not too long to go i hope..

Wrong.

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

"gimp" <gimpboy@smegville.com> wrote in message
news:c7707c$8pe$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
> Doug Bolton wrote:
> > To add to the gripe, I recently compared flat panels to ctrs and the
crts still
> > offer a considerably better image. Panels may be better for text but
certainly
> > not for graphics. Because of this I do hope, and believe, that some
company
> > somewhere will continue to offer superior crts until panels finally
catch up.
>
>
> LCDs (good ones) have caught up in every area, except contrast/colour
> fidelity. not too long to go i hope..

No. LCDs have actually exceeded CRT performance in contrast,
and, for high-resolution displays, brightness already. Color fidelity
is a very broad subject - LCDs have the edge in some areas, CRTs
in others. LCDs still lag in response time, although they are making
rapid progress here. In many respects, "better" is difficult to judge
between the two, as much of this judgment is subjective and therefore
up to the individual. At some point, we just have to realize that the
"look" of the two technologies will always be different, for some very
basic reasons.

Bob M.

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

"chrisv" <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:u74f90lu44q1gmidla5me2gk86rhm3o27n@4ax.com...

> >I have a "serious" LCD and I don't regret any CRT...
> >
> >Already this year will be commercialized LCD with
> >LED backlights that exceed the Adobe RGB color space.
> >Next will be LCD with true 30bit color and OLEDs
> >with more applications you can dream.
>
> Lots of technology and hype. Too bad they don't work as well, for me.

Chris, have you even SEEN the technology mentioned here?
I seriously doubt it, since the wide-gamut LED backlight design
(from LumiLeds) hasn't yet been exhibited widely. I've seen
this monitor, though, and the gamut and brightness are very,
very impressive, and far exceed what could be achieved in a
CRT of comparable resolution. "30 bit" LCDs are also, in
fact, coming, although I'm not sure that will be perceived as
quite as significant in terms of its impact on the image quality.
OLEDs - well, time will tell, there. We're still quite some time
from commercial OLED monitors in any significant volumes.

Bob M.

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

"Bob Myers" <nospamplease@address.invalid> wrote:

>"chrisv" <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
>news:u74f90lu44q1gmidla5me2gk86rhm3o27n@4ax.com...
>
>> >I have a "serious" LCD and I don't regret any CRT...
>> >
>> >Already this year will be commercialized LCD with
>> >LED backlights that exceed the Adobe RGB color space.
>> >Next will be LCD with true 30bit color and OLEDs
>> >with more applications you can dream.
>>
>> Lots of technology and hype. Too bad they don't work as well, for me.
>
>Chris, have you even SEEN the technology mentioned here?
>I seriously doubt it, since the wide-gamut LED backlight design
>(from LumiLeds) hasn't yet been exhibited widely. I've seen
>this monitor, though, and the gamut and brightness are very,
>very impressive, and far exceed what could be achieved in a
>CRT of comparable resolution.

Will that help with running non-native resolutions?

>"30 bit" LCDs are also, in
>fact, coming, although I'm not sure that will be perceived as
>quite as significant in terms of its impact on the image quality.

"30 bit", huh? Is that rating sorta like the "16ms" response-times
that still smear all over the place? 8)

>OLEDs - well, time will tell, there. We're still quite some time
>from commercial OLED monitors in any significant volumes.

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

"Bob Myers" <nospamplease@address.invalid> wrote:

>"gimp" <gimpboy@smegville.com> wrote:
>>
>> LCDs (good ones) have caught up in every area, except contrast/colour
>> fidelity. not too long to go i hope..
>
>No. LCDs have actually exceeded CRT performance in contrast,
>and, for high-resolution displays, brightness already. Color fidelity
>is a very broad subject - LCDs have the edge in some areas, CRTs
>in others. LCDs still lag in response time, although they are making
>rapid progress here. In many respects, "better" is difficult to judge
>between the two, as much of this judgment is subjective and therefore
>up to the individual. At some point, we just have to realize that the
>"look" of the two technologies will always be different, for some very
>basic reasons.

What bothers me is that those who prefer CRT's are no longer going to
be offered product, with choices decreasing all the time. And why?
Because foolish consumers have bought the "flat is cooler and better"
hype hook, line, and sinker.

Why is flat panel being pushed? Why is it you can look through a Dell
flyer and see dozens of flat-panels, but not see even a hint of the
availability of CRT monitors? Can you say "higher margins for the
seller"?

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

On Tue, 04 May 2004 12:33:32 -0500, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:

>"Bob Myers" <nospamplease@address.invalid> wrote:
>
>>"gimp" <gimpboy@smegville.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> LCDs (good ones) have caught up in every area, except contrast/colour
>>> fidelity. not too long to go i hope..
>>
>>No. LCDs have actually exceeded CRT performance in contrast,
>>and, for high-resolution displays, brightness already. Color fidelity
>>is a very broad subject - LCDs have the edge in some areas, CRTs
>>in others. LCDs still lag in response time, although they are making
>>rapid progress here. In many respects, "better" is difficult to judge
>>between the two, as much of this judgment is subjective and therefore
>>up to the individual. At some point, we just have to realize that the
>>"look" of the two technologies will always be different, for some very
>>basic reasons.
>
>What bothers me is that those who prefer CRT's are no longer going to
>be offered product, with choices decreasing all the time. And why?
>Because foolish consumers have bought the "flat is cooler and better"
>hype hook, line, and sinker.
>
>Why is flat panel being pushed? Why is it you can look through a Dell
>flyer and see dozens of flat-panels, but not see even a hint of the
>availability of CRT monitors? Can you say "higher margins for the
>seller"?

Yikes! I hope this Sony F400 has a few years in it yet. I *really* haven't seen
a panel that's nearly as good. I do hope and expect that they will continue to
improve to the point where they are better. Not yet.

Doug Bolton

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

> Chris, have you even SEEN the technology mentioned here?
> I seriously doubt it, since the wide-gamut LED backlight design
> (from LumiLeds) hasn't yet been exhibited widely. I've seen
> this monitor, though, and the gamut and brightness are very,
> very impressive, and far exceed what could be achieved in a
> CRT of comparable resolution.

Bob have you seen the Nec prototype at CeBit?
EIZO say will have a commercial model before
the end of this year.
http://www.eizo.com/press/releases [...] _drupa.pdf

Informed people say also Philips want to use LumiLeds.
This kind of backlight would have 100.000 hours life. o_O


> "30 bit" LCDs are also, in
> fact, coming, although I'm not sure that will be perceived as
> quite as significant in terms of its impact on the image quality.
> OLEDs - well, time will tell, there. We're still quite some time
> from commercial OLED monitors in any significant volumes.

We will see if Minority Report monitors will come true... :-)

Greetings

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

"chrisv" <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:2dkf90h9as5q9u70gke8i8ms83sgnj4glo@4ax.com...
> >Chris, have you even SEEN the technology mentioned here?
> >I seriously doubt it, since the wide-gamut LED backlight design
> >(from LumiLeds) hasn't yet been exhibited widely. I've seen
> >this monitor, though, and the gamut and brightness are very,
> >very impressive, and far exceed what could be achieved in a
> >CRT of comparable resolution.
>
> Will that help with running non-native resolutions?

Of course not, but that wasn't what was claimed, now was it?


> "30 bit", huh? Is that rating sorta like the "16ms" response-times
> that still smear all over the place? 8)

If you're going to gripe about inflated spec claims made in
marketing literature, that's hardly technology specific. I can
cite a virtually endless list of similar abuses and half-truths
coming from CRT monitor literature, if you'd care to hear it.
Wanna talk contrast specs, for instance? :-)

Bob M.

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

"SR2" <alphasoft_nospam_@libero.it> wrote in message
news:VP8mc.147831$hc5.6404059@news3.tin.it...

> Bob have you seen the Nec prototype at CeBit?

Didn't see it at CeBit, but at a smaller conference a couple of
months back. There will no doubt be commercial models soon. The
main drawbacks at this point are power and cost, and to some
extent overall product thickness, which for now will limit the
use of the technology to some fairly high-end products. But at the
rate LumiLeds is making progress in this area, I have no doubt that
the use LED backlighting will grow. And the color really IS
spectacular...

>
> We will see if Minority Report monitors will come true... :-)
>

Or the Minority Report "printers" - you'd think by the 2050s,
they'd have come up with a better medium than wooden balls...:-)

Bob M.

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

"chrisv" <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:2hkf90d77003e9f2ks32o3tqab6t6609d2@4ax.com...
> What bothers me is that those who prefer CRT's are no longer going to
> be offered product, with choices decreasing all the time. And why?
> Because foolish consumers have bought the "flat is cooler and better"
> hype hook, line, and sinker.

Chris, not everyone who disagrees with your personal preferences is
"foolish," you know. At the risk of sounding immodest, I would like to
think that I have some degree of both experience and expertise in these
technologies - that IS what they've been paying me to do for over 20
years now - and guess what's on my desk? Hint: it's not a CRT...

>
> Why is flat panel being pushed? Why is it you can look through a Dell
> flyer and see dozens of flat-panels, but not see even a hint of the
> availability of CRT monitors? Can you say "higher margins for the
> seller"?
>

You can say that, but if you do, you're grossly oversimplifying the
situation. CRT monitors are still available, and in times of LCD panel
shortages (which in this industry tend to happen like clockwork!)
it would be a wonderful thing if the majority of customers found them
to be an acceptable substitute for the LCD-based product that they
ordered. Unfortunately, most DO NOT. The plain truth is that it was
customer preference, and not some imagined conspiracy to push flat
panels on a "foolish" buying public, that is driving the CRT monitor out
of the PC market.

Have flat-panel monitors provided higher margins for anyone in the
supply chain, vs. CRTs? In some cases, yes - in more and more, no.
LCD monitor prices fell dramatically during the last few years (and are
now having a rebound a bit due to a worldwide shortage of the large
LCD panels themselves), and in most cases I believe that every bit of
"extra" margin was squeezed out. And please keep in mind that pricing
is NOT determined by cost, it is determined by the market (cost simply
determines whether or not you can make a profit at the market price).
The market has shown very clearly that customers are almost without
exception willing to spend a premium for an LCD-based product over
a CRT-based one. You can call that "foolish," if you like, but again that's
really just a matter of your own personal preferences at work.

Now, without question this leaves those who DO prefer CRTs with
fewer choices than in the past, and that trend is clearly going to
continue. I won't ever attempt to try to talk those people out of their
preferences, any more than I would try to tell someone that they can't
like chocolate-covered mints (even though I personally loathe that
combination). But no amount of sympathy for those preferences will
change the basic facts of life here, which is that it costs a certain amount
to continue to build CRT monitors, not to mention the tubes themselves,
in commercially-viable volumes. And since that IS a fact of life, we should
also be expecting just what we're seeing - that more and more
manufacturers will - must, in fact - walk away from CRT production,
at least as a mainstream product. We can reasonably expect CRT
monitors to continue to be AVAILABLE in two opposite and extreme
ends of the worldwide market, though - as the "entry level" product
for those areas which simply cannot afford anything else (emerging
consumer markets such as India and China, for example), and as
very high-end products for certain niche applications to which they are
best suited. You may not be happy with the performance of the former
category; you definitely won't like the price tag that comes with the
latter (and both with eventually shrink away as well, as the LCD and
other technologies become more competitive in those areas). This
situation may indeed bother you, but what do you propose as an
alternative that's commercially feasible?

Bob M.