Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Electronics Repair (sci.electronics.repair) Discussion of repairing electronic equipment. Topics include requests for assistance, where to obtain servicing information and parts, techniques for diagnosis and repair, and annecdotes about success, failures and problems. |
Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
Here are some interesting questions:
I would like to have an opinion about what someone would think is the best choice of technologies, considering if one was to make the purchase of an HDTV. After this year, CRT technology type TV sets will no longer be made by the main stream of the higher end manufactures. Once these sets run out, they will be offering LCD and Plasma type TV sets. Some will also offer the DLP type TV sets for the consumer market. I am hearing a lot of discussions to what would be the most ideal. Each type of display has its pros and cons. Would your preference be a Plasma TV set? Would your preference be an direct view LCD TV set? Would your preference be a rear screen type LCD TV set? Would your preference be a frontal projection type DLP TV set? Would your preference be a rear screen type DLP TV set? I would like to know a few opinions here, with some comments. I will respond back, as best possible to all comments that I receive. -- Greetings, Jerry Greenberg GLG Technologies GLG ========================================= WebPage http://www.zoom-one.com Electronics http://www.zoom-one.com/electron.htm ========================================= |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
I have a general question. Compared to traditional CRT type Displays, are
not these more delicate / Fragile than the former? So say you have Kids, and they bounce around after School, and break / crack the Screen on a plasma /LCD set. Is it not time to shell out for a brand new set, since a replacement screen meets or exceeds the cost of a NEW? These days, if they break the Outer Shield or the Lenticular Screen on a Projection Set, theres usually a decent chance you can get a shield or a Lense if the sets not too old, and still stay within economics of repair, much less pay a disposal fee if the set is BER. Which also poses another question about disposal of these new types of TV you mention. Are there at least the same disposal problems facing us with these as well? "Jerry G." wrote in message ... | Here are some interesting questions: | | I would like to have an opinion about what someone would think is the best | choice of technologies, considering if one was to make the purchase of an | HDTV. After this year, CRT technology type TV sets will no longer be made | by the main stream of the higher end manufactures. Once these sets run out, | they will be offering LCD and Plasma type TV sets. Some will also offer the | DLP type TV sets for the consumer market. I am hearing a lot of discussions | to what would be the most ideal. Each type of display has its pros and cons. | | | | Would your preference be a Plasma TV set? | | | | Would your preference be an direct view LCD TV set? | | | | Would your preference be a rear screen type LCD TV set? | | | | Would your preference be a frontal projection type DLP TV set? | | | | Would your preference be a rear screen type DLP TV set? | | | | I would like to know a few opinions here, with some comments. I will | respond back, as best possible to all comments that I receive. | | | -- | | Greetings, | | Jerry Greenberg GLG Technologies GLG | ========================================= | WebPage http://www.zoom-one.com | Electronics http://www.zoom-one.com/electron.htm | ========================================= | | | |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
I have a general question. Compared to traditional CRT type Displays, are
not these more delicate / Fragile than the former? So say you have Kids, and they bounce around after School, and break / crack the Screen on a plasma /LCD set. Is it not time to shell out for a brand new set, since a replacement screen meets or exceeds the cost of a NEW? These days, if they break the Outer Shield or the Lenticular Screen on a Projection Set, theres usually a decent chance you can get a shield or a Lense if the sets not too old, and still stay within economics of repair, much less pay a disposal fee if the set is BER. Which also poses another question about disposal of these new types of TV you mention. Are there at least the same disposal problems facing us with these as well? "Jerry G." wrote in message ... | Here are some interesting questions: | | I would like to have an opinion about what someone would think is the best | choice of technologies, considering if one was to make the purchase of an | HDTV. After this year, CRT technology type TV sets will no longer be made | by the main stream of the higher end manufactures. Once these sets run out, | they will be offering LCD and Plasma type TV sets. Some will also offer the | DLP type TV sets for the consumer market. I am hearing a lot of discussions | to what would be the most ideal. Each type of display has its pros and cons. | | | | Would your preference be a Plasma TV set? | | | | Would your preference be an direct view LCD TV set? | | | | Would your preference be a rear screen type LCD TV set? | | | | Would your preference be a frontal projection type DLP TV set? | | | | Would your preference be a rear screen type DLP TV set? | | | | I would like to know a few opinions here, with some comments. I will | respond back, as best possible to all comments that I receive. | | | -- | | Greetings, | | Jerry Greenberg GLG Technologies GLG | ========================================= | WebPage http://www.zoom-one.com | Electronics http://www.zoom-one.com/electron.htm | ========================================= | | | |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
In article , Jerry G. wrote:
Would your preference be a Plasma TV set? Plasma screens look very smart, but they are heavy, expensive and power hungry. Power consumption wouldn't be so much of a problem, for me as for some, because I'm one of these strange people that only switches the thing on when I want to watch something, and then I switch it off again. If you want to leave your TV on all the time, as many do, then several hundred watts burning all day will make a difference. They're also reputed to be "sticky", in that any static picture information (such as corner logos) that is displayed for any length of time can be burned permanently into the display. Would your preference be an direct view LCD TV set? No. Picture quality varies too much with viewing angle. Would your preference be a rear screen type LCD TV set? Not enough space in my living room for rear projection. Not really enough for the large screen CRT I have now, so I wouldn't want anything bigger. Your living room may be different, of course. Would your preference be a frontal projection type DLP TV set? The shape of my living room would suit front projection quite well, so I'm considering this, but as above, yours will probably be different. Also, viewing would require at least subdued lighting, if not complete darkness, and you may not always want to close the curtains. Would your preference be a rear screen type DLP TV set? Same as above for any kind of back projection. In other words, you need something that suits your living room, your viewing habits, your budget, your electricity bill, and your opinions about what aspect of TV watching is most important. Rod. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
In article , Jerry G. wrote:
Would your preference be a Plasma TV set? Plasma screens look very smart, but they are heavy, expensive and power hungry. Power consumption wouldn't be so much of a problem, for me as for some, because I'm one of these strange people that only switches the thing on when I want to watch something, and then I switch it off again. If you want to leave your TV on all the time, as many do, then several hundred watts burning all day will make a difference. They're also reputed to be "sticky", in that any static picture information (such as corner logos) that is displayed for any length of time can be burned permanently into the display. Would your preference be an direct view LCD TV set? No. Picture quality varies too much with viewing angle. Would your preference be a rear screen type LCD TV set? Not enough space in my living room for rear projection. Not really enough for the large screen CRT I have now, so I wouldn't want anything bigger. Your living room may be different, of course. Would your preference be a frontal projection type DLP TV set? The shape of my living room would suit front projection quite well, so I'm considering this, but as above, yours will probably be different. Also, viewing would require at least subdued lighting, if not complete darkness, and you may not always want to close the curtains. Would your preference be a rear screen type DLP TV set? Same as above for any kind of back projection. In other words, you need something that suits your living room, your viewing habits, your budget, your electricity bill, and your opinions about what aspect of TV watching is most important. Rod. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
Roderick Stewart wrote:
Would your preference be a rear screen type LCD TV set? Not enough space in my living room for rear projection. Not really enough for the large screen CRT I have now, so I wouldn't want anything bigger. Your living room may be different, of course. Rear projection LED and DLP sets are smaller and slimmer .... much slimmer ... than any form of CRT set. You imply they are bigger than large screen CRT sets, and this is false. Doug McDonald |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
Roderick Stewart wrote:
Would your preference be a rear screen type LCD TV set? Not enough space in my living room for rear projection. Not really enough for the large screen CRT I have now, so I wouldn't want anything bigger. Your living room may be different, of course. Rear projection LED and DLP sets are smaller and slimmer .... much slimmer ... than any form of CRT set. You imply they are bigger than large screen CRT sets, and this is false. Doug McDonald |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
Hi,
These displays are very fragile, and so are the CRT ones. It is just that the CRT sets are too heavy to move, or be knocked over easily. The flat screens are also very fragile. If your child throws a ball and hits the front screen, or knocks it over, you may be buying a new one the next day! It is true that the cost of a new display panel (when it fails), can easily exceed or be close to the purchase cost of a new set. Normally the Plasma type should last about 30,000 hours, and the LCD type should last over 40,000 hours. Most LCD screens of this type have replaceable lamps inside (not user replaceable, but feasible to replace by a tech). The Plasma displays have no internal lamp. When the display unit goes bad, the unit will usually not be feasible to service. If a still image is left up on a Plasma screen, it can burn in very quickly. An LCD screen will not burn in. With all of these sets, there can be disposal problems, depending on where you live. In some places you have to pay a disposal cost when getting rid of old things such as a TV set. When a display panel is rated at 30,000 hours, this is the time factor where the illumination output will be at 50% of its normal specification. If you use the set for 10 hours a day average (standard household usage with a family), the screen should last about 8 years. At 1/2 output, it will however look a bit dim, but is considered acceptable. Some people say to cut this in 1/2 again, and say it will last about 4 to 5 years maximum. I personally found rear screen sets to look softer, and also they are more critical to the angle of viewing when close up to them. The new ones are improved a bit, but I was not impressed. I also had some feedback about the LCD sets having some black shading problems which annoyed some people. This would be an uneven illumination in the blacks, or dark areas of the screen. The LCD sets also have some viewing angle problems as well. But, overall they are very sharp and perform well. In some cases the prices of the some of the Plasma screen models have dropped to be less than some of the LCD screens in the same size category. This was the opposite just a number of months ago. -- Greetings, Jerry Greenberg GLG Technologies GLG ========================================= WebPage http://www.zoom-one.com Electronics http://www.zoom-one.com/electron.htm ========================================= "techforce" wrote in message ... I have a general question. Compared to traditional CRT type Displays, are not these more delicate / Fragile than the former? So say you have Kids, and they bounce around after School, and break / crack the Screen on a plasma /LCD set. Is it not time to shell out for a brand new set, since a replacement screen meets or exceeds the cost of a NEW? These days, if they break the Outer Shield or the Lenticular Screen on a Projection Set, theres usually a decent chance you can get a shield or a Lense if the sets not too old, and still stay within economics of repair, much less pay a disposal fee if the set is BER. Which also poses another question about disposal of these new types of TV you mention. Are there at least the same disposal problems facing us with these as well? "Jerry G." wrote in message ... | Here are some interesting questions: | | I would like to have an opinion about what someone would think is the best | choice of technologies, considering if one was to make the purchase of an | HDTV. After this year, CRT technology type TV sets will no longer be made | by the main stream of the higher end manufactures. Once these sets run out, | they will be offering LCD and Plasma type TV sets. Some will also offer the | DLP type TV sets for the consumer market. I am hearing a lot of discussions | to what would be the most ideal. Each type of display has its pros and cons. | | | | Would your preference be a Plasma TV set? | | | | Would your preference be an direct view LCD TV set? | | | | Would your preference be a rear screen type LCD TV set? | | | | Would your preference be a frontal projection type DLP TV set? | | | | Would your preference be a rear screen type DLP TV set? | | | | I would like to know a few opinions here, with some comments. I will | respond back, as best possible to all comments that I receive. | | | -- | | Greetings, | | Jerry Greenberg GLG Technologies GLG | ========================================= | WebPage http://www.zoom-one.com | Electronics http://www.zoom-one.com/electron.htm | ========================================= | | | |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
Hi,
These displays are very fragile, and so are the CRT ones. It is just that the CRT sets are too heavy to move, or be knocked over easily. The flat screens are also very fragile. If your child throws a ball and hits the front screen, or knocks it over, you may be buying a new one the next day! It is true that the cost of a new display panel (when it fails), can easily exceed or be close to the purchase cost of a new set. Normally the Plasma type should last about 30,000 hours, and the LCD type should last over 40,000 hours. Most LCD screens of this type have replaceable lamps inside (not user replaceable, but feasible to replace by a tech). The Plasma displays have no internal lamp. When the display unit goes bad, the unit will usually not be feasible to service. If a still image is left up on a Plasma screen, it can burn in very quickly. An LCD screen will not burn in. With all of these sets, there can be disposal problems, depending on where you live. In some places you have to pay a disposal cost when getting rid of old things such as a TV set. When a display panel is rated at 30,000 hours, this is the time factor where the illumination output will be at 50% of its normal specification. If you use the set for 10 hours a day average (standard household usage with a family), the screen should last about 8 years. At 1/2 output, it will however look a bit dim, but is considered acceptable. Some people say to cut this in 1/2 again, and say it will last about 4 to 5 years maximum. I personally found rear screen sets to look softer, and also they are more critical to the angle of viewing when close up to them. The new ones are improved a bit, but I was not impressed. I also had some feedback about the LCD sets having some black shading problems which annoyed some people. This would be an uneven illumination in the blacks, or dark areas of the screen. The LCD sets also have some viewing angle problems as well. But, overall they are very sharp and perform well. In some cases the prices of the some of the Plasma screen models have dropped to be less than some of the LCD screens in the same size category. This was the opposite just a number of months ago. -- Greetings, Jerry Greenberg GLG Technologies GLG ========================================= WebPage http://www.zoom-one.com Electronics http://www.zoom-one.com/electron.htm ========================================= "techforce" wrote in message ... I have a general question. Compared to traditional CRT type Displays, are not these more delicate / Fragile than the former? So say you have Kids, and they bounce around after School, and break / crack the Screen on a plasma /LCD set. Is it not time to shell out for a brand new set, since a replacement screen meets or exceeds the cost of a NEW? These days, if they break the Outer Shield or the Lenticular Screen on a Projection Set, theres usually a decent chance you can get a shield or a Lense if the sets not too old, and still stay within economics of repair, much less pay a disposal fee if the set is BER. Which also poses another question about disposal of these new types of TV you mention. Are there at least the same disposal problems facing us with these as well? "Jerry G." wrote in message ... | Here are some interesting questions: | | I would like to have an opinion about what someone would think is the best | choice of technologies, considering if one was to make the purchase of an | HDTV. After this year, CRT technology type TV sets will no longer be made | by the main stream of the higher end manufactures. Once these sets run out, | they will be offering LCD and Plasma type TV sets. Some will also offer the | DLP type TV sets for the consumer market. I am hearing a lot of discussions | to what would be the most ideal. Each type of display has its pros and cons. | | | | Would your preference be a Plasma TV set? | | | | Would your preference be an direct view LCD TV set? | | | | Would your preference be a rear screen type LCD TV set? | | | | Would your preference be a frontal projection type DLP TV set? | | | | Would your preference be a rear screen type DLP TV set? | | | | I would like to know a few opinions here, with some comments. I will | respond back, as best possible to all comments that I receive. | | | -- | | Greetings, | | Jerry Greenberg GLG Technologies GLG | ========================================= | WebPage http://www.zoom-one.com | Electronics http://www.zoom-one.com/electron.htm | ========================================= | | | |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
Plasma screens do burn more power than the equivalent CRT type screen. But,
the large rear screen CRT type sets are also very power hungry. They are also more sensitive to have picture burn in. Some people I speak to, also have the opinion that nothing beats a conventional CRT type set. But, in about a year or two, these will no longer be available in the major type models. In about 5 years, CRT sets may not be available at all. But, from the consensus that I am seeing, makes it more difficult to choose a descent type of TV set without some compromise. The question now is, to find the best compromise. -- Greetings, Jerry Greenberg GLG Technologies GLG ========================================= WebPage http://www.zoom-one.com Electronics http://www.zoom-one.com/electron.htm ========================================= "Roderick Stewart" wrote in message om... In article , Jerry G. wrote: Would your preference be a Plasma TV set? Plasma screens look very smart, but they are heavy, expensive and power hungry. Power consumption wouldn't be so much of a problem, for me as for some, because I'm one of these strange people that only switches the thing on when I want to watch something, and then I switch it off again. If you want to leave your TV on all the time, as many do, then several hundred watts burning all day will make a difference. They're also reputed to be "sticky", in that any static picture information (such as corner logos) that is displayed for any length of time can be burned permanently into the display. Would your preference be an direct view LCD TV set? No. Picture quality varies too much with viewing angle. Would your preference be a rear screen type LCD TV set? Not enough space in my living room for rear projection. Not really enough for the large screen CRT I have now, so I wouldn't want anything bigger. Your living room may be different, of course. Would your preference be a frontal projection type DLP TV set? The shape of my living room would suit front projection quite well, so I'm considering this, but as above, yours will probably be different. Also, viewing would require at least subdued lighting, if not complete darkness, and you may not always want to close the curtains. Would your preference be a rear screen type DLP TV set? Same as above for any kind of back projection. In other words, you need something that suits your living room, your viewing habits, your budget, your electricity bill, and your opinions about what aspect of TV watching is most important. Rod. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
Plasma screens do burn more power than the equivalent CRT type screen. But,
the large rear screen CRT type sets are also very power hungry. They are also more sensitive to have picture burn in. Some people I speak to, also have the opinion that nothing beats a conventional CRT type set. But, in about a year or two, these will no longer be available in the major type models. In about 5 years, CRT sets may not be available at all. But, from the consensus that I am seeing, makes it more difficult to choose a descent type of TV set without some compromise. The question now is, to find the best compromise. -- Greetings, Jerry Greenberg GLG Technologies GLG ========================================= WebPage http://www.zoom-one.com Electronics http://www.zoom-one.com/electron.htm ========================================= "Roderick Stewart" wrote in message om... In article , Jerry G. wrote: Would your preference be a Plasma TV set? Plasma screens look very smart, but they are heavy, expensive and power hungry. Power consumption wouldn't be so much of a problem, for me as for some, because I'm one of these strange people that only switches the thing on when I want to watch something, and then I switch it off again. If you want to leave your TV on all the time, as many do, then several hundred watts burning all day will make a difference. They're also reputed to be "sticky", in that any static picture information (such as corner logos) that is displayed for any length of time can be burned permanently into the display. Would your preference be an direct view LCD TV set? No. Picture quality varies too much with viewing angle. Would your preference be a rear screen type LCD TV set? Not enough space in my living room for rear projection. Not really enough for the large screen CRT I have now, so I wouldn't want anything bigger. Your living room may be different, of course. Would your preference be a frontal projection type DLP TV set? The shape of my living room would suit front projection quite well, so I'm considering this, but as above, yours will probably be different. Also, viewing would require at least subdued lighting, if not complete darkness, and you may not always want to close the curtains. Would your preference be a rear screen type DLP TV set? Same as above for any kind of back projection. In other words, you need something that suits your living room, your viewing habits, your budget, your electricity bill, and your opinions about what aspect of TV watching is most important. Rod. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
In weight and debt, the CRT sets are larger. The CRT type rear projector
type set, which is going obsolete, is very large compared to the new LCD and DLP types. But, I personally found that these rear screen type sets have softer pictures. They do have their advantages. -- Greetings, Jerry Greenberg GLG Technologies GLG ========================================= WebPage http://www.zoom-one.com Electronics http://www.zoom-one.com/electron.htm ========================================= "Doug McDonald" wrote in message ... Roderick Stewart wrote: Would your preference be a rear screen type LCD TV set? Not enough space in my living room for rear projection. Not really enough for the large screen CRT I have now, so I wouldn't want anything bigger. Your living room may be different, of course. Rear projection LED and DLP sets are smaller and slimmer .... much slimmer ... than any form of CRT set. You imply they are bigger than large screen CRT sets, and this is false. Doug McDonald |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
In weight and debt, the CRT sets are larger. The CRT type rear projector
type set, which is going obsolete, is very large compared to the new LCD and DLP types. But, I personally found that these rear screen type sets have softer pictures. They do have their advantages. -- Greetings, Jerry Greenberg GLG Technologies GLG ========================================= WebPage http://www.zoom-one.com Electronics http://www.zoom-one.com/electron.htm ========================================= "Doug McDonald" wrote in message ... Roderick Stewart wrote: Would your preference be a rear screen type LCD TV set? Not enough space in my living room for rear projection. Not really enough for the large screen CRT I have now, so I wouldn't want anything bigger. Your living room may be different, of course. Rear projection LED and DLP sets are smaller and slimmer .... much slimmer ... than any form of CRT set. You imply they are bigger than large screen CRT sets, and this is false. Doug McDonald |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
"Jerry G." wrote in message ... Some people I speak to, also have the opinion that nothing beats a conventional CRT type set. But, in about a year or two, these will no longer be available in the major type models. In about 5 years, CRT sets may not be available at all. This simply isn't so, unless you're looking SOLELY at the large-screen (over 40" diagonal) HDTV market. For TVs under 40", both HD and SD, CRT technology is expected to remain in the market for the foreseeable future. You did qualify your statement with "major type models," and if by that you mean the Japanese brands we've known over the past 20 years, there's some truth to this. However, CRT sets will still be available, and new makers (Korean, Taiwanese, and more and more from mainland China) will be coming to the U.S. market. In many cases, these are only "new" here. In fact, I just returned from a display industry conference at which the TV market was forecast to still be at least 80% CRT-based by 2008. CRT PROJECTION sets will be declining in favor of other projection types (esp. the various microdisplay technologies), but direct view up to 40" diag. remains very much the domain of the CRT. Bob M. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
"Jerry G." wrote in message ... Some people I speak to, also have the opinion that nothing beats a conventional CRT type set. But, in about a year or two, these will no longer be available in the major type models. In about 5 years, CRT sets may not be available at all. This simply isn't so, unless you're looking SOLELY at the large-screen (over 40" diagonal) HDTV market. For TVs under 40", both HD and SD, CRT technology is expected to remain in the market for the foreseeable future. You did qualify your statement with "major type models," and if by that you mean the Japanese brands we've known over the past 20 years, there's some truth to this. However, CRT sets will still be available, and new makers (Korean, Taiwanese, and more and more from mainland China) will be coming to the U.S. market. In many cases, these are only "new" here. In fact, I just returned from a display industry conference at which the TV market was forecast to still be at least 80% CRT-based by 2008. CRT PROJECTION sets will be declining in favor of other projection types (esp. the various microdisplay technologies), but direct view up to 40" diag. remains very much the domain of the CRT. Bob M. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
In article , Bob Myers wrote:
I just returned from a display industry conference at which the TV market was forecast to still be at least 80% CRT-based by 2008. There are some TV sets still in use that are 20 or more years old, so unless some alternative technology not only offers an overwhelming advantage, but is also cheap enough to justify discarding existing technology that is still in working order, there will be CRTs in use for a very long time indeed. Rod. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
In article , Doug McDonald wrote:
Rear projection LED and DLP sets are smaller and slimmer .... much slimmer ... than any form of CRT set. You imply they are bigger than large screen CRT sets, and this is false. I'm just basing my opinion on what I've seen. Rear-projection displays must either have a large box to the rear, or be a floor-standing device with a 45deg mirror and the projector accommodated in the base. I can't think of any other practical arrangement that would enable the overall assembly to be described as anything other than "large", or "bulky", and I haven't seen any. Rod. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
In article , Bob Myers wrote:
I just returned from a display industry conference at which the TV market was forecast to still be at least 80% CRT-based by 2008. There are some TV sets still in use that are 20 or more years old, so unless some alternative technology not only offers an overwhelming advantage, but is also cheap enough to justify discarding existing technology that is still in working order, there will be CRTs in use for a very long time indeed. Rod. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
In article , Doug McDonald wrote:
Rear projection LED and DLP sets are smaller and slimmer .... much slimmer ... than any form of CRT set. You imply they are bigger than large screen CRT sets, and this is false. I'm just basing my opinion on what I've seen. Rear-projection displays must either have a large box to the rear, or be a floor-standing device with a 45deg mirror and the projector accommodated in the base. I can't think of any other practical arrangement that would enable the overall assembly to be described as anything other than "large", or "bulky", and I haven't seen any. Rod. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
"Roderick Stewart" wrote in message om... I'm just basing my opinion on what I've seen. Rear-projection displays must either have a large box to the rear, or be a floor-standing device with a 45deg mirror and the projector accommodated in the base. I can't think of any other practical arrangement that would enable the overall assembly to be described as anything other than "large", or "bulky", and I haven't seen any. The latest designs for rear-projection displays use much more sophisticated optical paths. InFocus recently introduced their first RPTV product, a 61" (diagonal) unit with a total depth under 7 inches! It's called the "ScreenPlay" - you can see it at the InFocus web site, www.infocus.com Bob M. |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
"Roderick Stewart" wrote in message om... I'm just basing my opinion on what I've seen. Rear-projection displays must either have a large box to the rear, or be a floor-standing device with a 45deg mirror and the projector accommodated in the base. I can't think of any other practical arrangement that would enable the overall assembly to be described as anything other than "large", or "bulky", and I haven't seen any. The latest designs for rear-projection displays use much more sophisticated optical paths. InFocus recently introduced their first RPTV product, a 61" (diagonal) unit with a total depth under 7 inches! It's called the "ScreenPlay" - you can see it at the InFocus web site, www.infocus.com Bob M. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
In article , Bob Myers wrote:
The latest designs for rear-projection displays use much more sophisticated optical paths. InFocus recently introduced their first RPTV product, a 61" (diagonal) unit with a total depth under 7 inches! It's called the "ScreenPlay" - you can see it at the InFocus web site, www.infocus.com Very interesting, but only available in America, apparently, and it still looks like a box that is bigger than the screen. I'm sure it will appeal to many people, but for me, putting a front projector on a little shelf on the wall behind me and painting the opposite wall white looks like a more practical arrangement, and when the time comes it's probably what I will do. rod. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
In article , Bob Myers wrote:
The latest designs for rear-projection displays use much more sophisticated optical paths. InFocus recently introduced their first RPTV product, a 61" (diagonal) unit with a total depth under 7 inches! It's called the "ScreenPlay" - you can see it at the InFocus web site, www.infocus.com Very interesting, but only available in America, apparently, and it still looks like a box that is bigger than the screen. I'm sure it will appeal to many people, but for me, putting a front projector on a little shelf on the wall behind me and painting the opposite wall white looks like a more practical arrangement, and when the time comes it's probably what I will do. rod. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
I would like to have an opinion about what someone would think is the best
choice of technologies, considering if one was to make the purchase of an HDTV. Okay. After this year, CRT technology type TV sets will no longer be made by the main stream of the higher end manufactures. And where did you get this information from? Once these sets run out, they will be offering LCD and Plasma type TV sets. Some will also offer the DLP type TV sets for the consumer market. I am hearing a lot of discussions to what would be the most ideal. Each type of display has its pros and cons. There is also a pending technology in the works which could end up replacing LCD panel displays: LEP. Would your preference be a Plasma TV set? No. While the technology is impressive, it is likened to a hybrid automobile. In the long run, it's just not worth it. With a hybrid cars, the battery cells must be replaced every three years (recommendation from Honda and Toyota for the Civic hybrid, Insight, and Prius). This can cost over $5000 for new cells alone. What money that was saved from using less gas will be eaten up by maintenance costs every three years. Plasma displays, when they require service, can be very expensive to repair. If the repair requires replacement of the display panel itself, you may as well buy a new plasma TV. While there have been improvements, such as a different combination of gasses to help reduce burn-in incidents on Pioneer plasma displays, the technology hasn't matured enough quite yet to be economical in the long run. Would your preference be an direct view LCD TV set? No. A direct view LCD still suffers from refresh lag and contrast problems. Would your preference be a rear screen type LCD TV set? More than likely, yes. Rear projection LCD displays are relatively simple and deliver surprisingly good image quality with a respectable viewing angle. The drawback would be the projection lamp. Eventually, the lamp will require replacement, and replacement lamps could be expensive. Would your preference be a frontal projection type DLP TV set? If money were no object. Would your preference be a rear screen type DLP TV set? If money were no object. Depending on screen size, I would either go with a rear projection LCD display or a direct view CRT display. As for why my preference for a direct-view CRT display. It's a simple, relatively cheap, and a proven technology. It works and works very well. It still has advantages that the other technologies do not offer at this time such as simplicity, overall longevity, and overall image quality. About the only things a CRT display is bad about is getting consistently accurate geometry rendition, shape and size of the TV, and weight. - Reinhart |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
I would like to have an opinion about what someone would think is the best
choice of technologies, considering if one was to make the purchase of an HDTV. Okay. After this year, CRT technology type TV sets will no longer be made by the main stream of the higher end manufactures. And where did you get this information from? Once these sets run out, they will be offering LCD and Plasma type TV sets. Some will also offer the DLP type TV sets for the consumer market. I am hearing a lot of discussions to what would be the most ideal. Each type of display has its pros and cons. There is also a pending technology in the works which could end up replacing LCD panel displays: LEP. Would your preference be a Plasma TV set? No. While the technology is impressive, it is likened to a hybrid automobile. In the long run, it's just not worth it. With a hybrid cars, the battery cells must be replaced every three years (recommendation from Honda and Toyota for the Civic hybrid, Insight, and Prius). This can cost over $5000 for new cells alone. What money that was saved from using less gas will be eaten up by maintenance costs every three years. Plasma displays, when they require service, can be very expensive to repair. If the repair requires replacement of the display panel itself, you may as well buy a new plasma TV. While there have been improvements, such as a different combination of gasses to help reduce burn-in incidents on Pioneer plasma displays, the technology hasn't matured enough quite yet to be economical in the long run. Would your preference be an direct view LCD TV set? No. A direct view LCD still suffers from refresh lag and contrast problems. Would your preference be a rear screen type LCD TV set? More than likely, yes. Rear projection LCD displays are relatively simple and deliver surprisingly good image quality with a respectable viewing angle. The drawback would be the projection lamp. Eventually, the lamp will require replacement, and replacement lamps could be expensive. Would your preference be a frontal projection type DLP TV set? If money were no object. Would your preference be a rear screen type DLP TV set? If money were no object. Depending on screen size, I would either go with a rear projection LCD display or a direct view CRT display. As for why my preference for a direct-view CRT display. It's a simple, relatively cheap, and a proven technology. It works and works very well. It still has advantages that the other technologies do not offer at this time such as simplicity, overall longevity, and overall image quality. About the only things a CRT display is bad about is getting consistently accurate geometry rendition, shape and size of the TV, and weight. - Reinhart |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
The following is what we were told at our meetings with some of the
manufacture reps that we deal with. It is true that there will be a number of low cost models in the market using CRT technology to fill the market place. But, the major manufactures, such as Sony, Panasonic, Toshiba, NEC, and Hitachi, plan to discontinue CRT Monitors and TV sets by this fall coming. Infact, we were told that many of these companies are no longer producing the tubes at this time, and when they run out, there will no longer be any assembly of these CRT sets. This includes all sizes from 3/4 inches (used in small viewfinders) up to the large 36 inch ones. There are many news releases that ALL major CRT production will not exist in about 2 years time. The production runs will be stopping this year. We had notice from three major companies that they will not be doing any CRT manufacturing after this year. For the time being, there will be a few models of very high end broadcast and CAD type CRT monitors being made. These are going to be very expensive models, that will not be on sale at the consumer level. There will be some low end CRT sets coming out of the Orient for a while. This is to fill the market place, and attempt to make some profits until there will no longer be any demand for CRT sets. You will see a number of models priced below $150 US for the 17 to 19 inch range. They will be taking on much of the old manufacturing equipment that the main manufactures will be doing away with. I very strongly suggest you visit the links below. http://quickstart.clari.net/qs_se/we....RkEn_DN8.html http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/biz/.../09/2003075266 http://www.creativepro.com/story/fea...l?origin=story http://www.hardwarecentral.com/hardw...l/news/3651/1/ Jerry G. -- "Bob Myers" wrote in message ... "Jerry G." wrote in message ... Some people I speak to, also have the opinion that nothing beats a conventional CRT type set. But, in about a year or two, these will no longer be available in the major type models. In about 5 years, CRT sets may not be available at all. This simply isn't so, unless you're looking SOLELY at the large-screen (over 40" diagonal) HDTV market. For TVs under 40", both HD and SD, CRT technology is expected to remain in the market for the foreseeable future. You did qualify your statement with "major type models," and if by that you mean the Japanese brands we've known over the past 20 years, there's some truth to this. However, CRT sets will still be available, and new makers (Korean, Taiwanese, and more and more from mainland China) will be coming to the U.S. market. In many cases, these are only "new" here. In fact, I just returned from a display industry conference at which the TV market was forecast to still be at least 80% CRT-based by 2008. CRT PROJECTION sets will be declining in favor of other projection types (esp. the various microdisplay technologies), but direct view up to 40" diag. remains very much the domain of the CRT. Bob M. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
The following is what we were told at our meetings with some of the
manufacture reps that we deal with. It is true that there will be a number of low cost models in the market using CRT technology to fill the market place. But, the major manufactures, such as Sony, Panasonic, Toshiba, NEC, and Hitachi, plan to discontinue CRT Monitors and TV sets by this fall coming. Infact, we were told that many of these companies are no longer producing the tubes at this time, and when they run out, there will no longer be any assembly of these CRT sets. This includes all sizes from 3/4 inches (used in small viewfinders) up to the large 36 inch ones. There are many news releases that ALL major CRT production will not exist in about 2 years time. The production runs will be stopping this year. We had notice from three major companies that they will not be doing any CRT manufacturing after this year. For the time being, there will be a few models of very high end broadcast and CAD type CRT monitors being made. These are going to be very expensive models, that will not be on sale at the consumer level. There will be some low end CRT sets coming out of the Orient for a while. This is to fill the market place, and attempt to make some profits until there will no longer be any demand for CRT sets. You will see a number of models priced below $150 US for the 17 to 19 inch range. They will be taking on much of the old manufacturing equipment that the main manufactures will be doing away with. I very strongly suggest you visit the links below. http://quickstart.clari.net/qs_se/we....RkEn_DN8.html http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/biz/.../09/2003075266 http://www.creativepro.com/story/fea...l?origin=story http://www.hardwarecentral.com/hardw...l/news/3651/1/ Jerry G. -- "Bob Myers" wrote in message ... "Jerry G." wrote in message ... Some people I speak to, also have the opinion that nothing beats a conventional CRT type set. But, in about a year or two, these will no longer be available in the major type models. In about 5 years, CRT sets may not be available at all. This simply isn't so, unless you're looking SOLELY at the large-screen (over 40" diagonal) HDTV market. For TVs under 40", both HD and SD, CRT technology is expected to remain in the market for the foreseeable future. You did qualify your statement with "major type models," and if by that you mean the Japanese brands we've known over the past 20 years, there's some truth to this. However, CRT sets will still be available, and new makers (Korean, Taiwanese, and more and more from mainland China) will be coming to the U.S. market. In many cases, these are only "new" here. In fact, I just returned from a display industry conference at which the TV market was forecast to still be at least 80% CRT-based by 2008. CRT PROJECTION sets will be declining in favor of other projection types (esp. the various microdisplay technologies), but direct view up to 40" diag. remains very much the domain of the CRT. Bob M. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
Roderick Stewart wrote:
I'm just basing my opinion on what I've seen. Rear-projection displays must either have a large box to the rear, or be a floor-standing device with a 45deg mirror and the projector accommodated in the base. I can't think of any other practical arrangement that would enable the overall assembly to be described as anything other than "large", or "bulky", and I haven't seen any. I;m referring to LCD or DLP rear projection. The mirror is nowhere near 45 degrees. A typical 50 inch set is 35 inches high, 55 inches wide, 15 inches deep, and weighs 83 pounds. There are some now that are only 13 inches deep. They are of course "large", as 50 inches simply makes a large screen, and 60 or 65 inches is biggere still. But they are not what you would call "bulky" and most certainly don't sit on the floor. There are now arrangements that get the thickness down to about 8 inches, but they are still very expensive. Doug McDonald |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
Roderick Stewart wrote:
I'm just basing my opinion on what I've seen. Rear-projection displays must either have a large box to the rear, or be a floor-standing device with a 45deg mirror and the projector accommodated in the base. I can't think of any other practical arrangement that would enable the overall assembly to be described as anything other than "large", or "bulky", and I haven't seen any. I;m referring to LCD or DLP rear projection. The mirror is nowhere near 45 degrees. A typical 50 inch set is 35 inches high, 55 inches wide, 15 inches deep, and weighs 83 pounds. There are some now that are only 13 inches deep. They are of course "large", as 50 inches simply makes a large screen, and 60 or 65 inches is biggere still. But they are not what you would call "bulky" and most certainly don't sit on the floor. There are now arrangements that get the thickness down to about 8 inches, but they are still very expensive. Doug McDonald |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
The sets that are even more than about 10 years old will soon wear
out, and also including the wearing out of their CRT's. Replacement tubes for any TV that is more than about 5 years old is hard to find these days. And, if you do find a replacement tube (CRT), it will generaly cost more than the equivelent new set to replace. There are a few sets around that are 20 years and more, but it is impossible to have many of the parts, except for the standard generic type parts. You will not be able to find replacement CRT's, flyback transformers, tuner modules, or especialy any of the dedicated IC's. In a number of years the broadcast system will be changing to digital only. Then it will go on to HDTV type broadcasting. A converter box will be required to see the pictures on the older sets. There will be a point where the older sets will soon die off, and then the users will be forced to replace them with newer sets, if they want to be able to watch TV. (My mother would say... "Read A Book!"). Jerry G. -- Roderick Stewart wrote in message . com... In article , Bob Myers wrote: I just returned from a display industry conference at which the TV market was forecast to still be at least 80% CRT-based by 2008. There are some TV sets still in use that are 20 or more years old, so unless some alternative technology not only offers an overwhelming advantage, but is also cheap enough to justify discarding existing technology that is still in working order, there will be CRTs in use for a very long time indeed. Rod. |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
The sets that are even more than about 10 years old will soon wear
out, and also including the wearing out of their CRT's. Replacement tubes for any TV that is more than about 5 years old is hard to find these days. And, if you do find a replacement tube (CRT), it will generaly cost more than the equivelent new set to replace. There are a few sets around that are 20 years and more, but it is impossible to have many of the parts, except for the standard generic type parts. You will not be able to find replacement CRT's, flyback transformers, tuner modules, or especialy any of the dedicated IC's. In a number of years the broadcast system will be changing to digital only. Then it will go on to HDTV type broadcasting. A converter box will be required to see the pictures on the older sets. There will be a point where the older sets will soon die off, and then the users will be forced to replace them with newer sets, if they want to be able to watch TV. (My mother would say... "Read A Book!"). Jerry G. -- Roderick Stewart wrote in message . com... In article , Bob Myers wrote: I just returned from a display industry conference at which the TV market was forecast to still be at least 80% CRT-based by 2008. There are some TV sets still in use that are 20 or more years old, so unless some alternative technology not only offers an overwhelming advantage, but is also cheap enough to justify discarding existing technology that is still in working order, there will be CRTs in use for a very long time indeed. Rod. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
I just want to correct you on one point. LCD screens WILL have an effect
identical to burn in. I have seen it lots of times on computer lcd screens that are used in business applications and left on the same image for hours on end. It is just much harder to cause this effect than typical phosphor burn in on an RPTV or Plasma screem. In addition, I have seen a very odd failure mode of lcd screens that looks like spider web failure of the lcd panel. This was NOT due to impact on the screen. The cause of the failure was someone touching/cleaning the screen and having a large static discharge into the face of the lcd screen. Thus damaging many of the lcd cells that are right into the screen. David "Jerry G." wrote in message ... Hi, These displays are very fragile, and so are the CRT ones. It is just that the CRT sets are too heavy to move, or be knocked over easily. The flat screens are also very fragile. If your child throws a ball and hits the front screen, or knocks it over, you may be buying a new one the next day! It is true that the cost of a new display panel (when it fails), can easily exceed or be close to the purchase cost of a new set. Normally the Plasma type should last about 30,000 hours, and the LCD type should last over 40,000 hours. Most LCD screens of this type have replaceable lamps inside (not user replaceable, but feasible to replace by a tech). The Plasma displays have no internal lamp. When the display unit goes bad, the unit will usually not be feasible to service. If a still image is left up on a Plasma screen, it can burn in very quickly. An LCD screen will not burn in. With all of these sets, there can be disposal problems, depending on where you live. In some places you have to pay a disposal cost when getting rid of old things such as a TV set. When a display panel is rated at 30,000 hours, this is the time factor where the illumination output will be at 50% of its normal specification. If you use the set for 10 hours a day average (standard household usage with a family), the screen should last about 8 years. At 1/2 output, it will however look a bit dim, but is considered acceptable. Some people say to cut this in 1/2 again, and say it will last about 4 to 5 years maximum. I personally found rear screen sets to look softer, and also they are more critical to the angle of viewing when close up to them. The new ones are improved a bit, but I was not impressed. I also had some feedback about the LCD sets having some black shading problems which annoyed some people. This would be an uneven illumination in the blacks, or dark areas of the screen. The LCD sets also have some viewing angle problems as well. But, overall they are very sharp and perform well. In some cases the prices of the some of the Plasma screen models have dropped to be less than some of the LCD screens in the same size category. This was the opposite just a number of months ago. -- Greetings, Jerry Greenberg GLG Technologies GLG ========================================= WebPage http://www.zoom-one.com Electronics http://www.zoom-one.com/electron.htm ========================================= "techforce" wrote in message ... I have a general question. Compared to traditional CRT type Displays, are not these more delicate / Fragile than the former? So say you have Kids, and they bounce around after School, and break / crack the Screen on a plasma /LCD set. Is it not time to shell out for a brand new set, since a replacement screen meets or exceeds the cost of a NEW? These days, if they break the Outer Shield or the Lenticular Screen on a Projection Set, theres usually a decent chance you can get a shield or a Lense if the sets not too old, and still stay within economics of repair, much less pay a disposal fee if the set is BER. Which also poses another question about disposal of these new types of TV you mention. Are there at least the same disposal problems facing us with these as well? "Jerry G." wrote in message ... | Here are some interesting questions: | | I would like to have an opinion about what someone would think is the best | choice of technologies, considering if one was to make the purchase of an | HDTV. After this year, CRT technology type TV sets will no longer be made | by the main stream of the higher end manufactures. Once these sets run out, | they will be offering LCD and Plasma type TV sets. Some will also offer the | DLP type TV sets for the consumer market. I am hearing a lot of discussions | to what would be the most ideal. Each type of display has its pros and cons. | | | | Would your preference be a Plasma TV set? | | | | Would your preference be an direct view LCD TV set? | | | | Would your preference be a rear screen type LCD TV set? | | | | Would your preference be a frontal projection type DLP TV set? | | | | Would your preference be a rear screen type DLP TV set? | | | | I would like to know a few opinions here, with some comments. I will | respond back, as best possible to all comments that I receive. | | | -- | | Greetings, | | Jerry Greenberg GLG Technologies GLG | ========================================= | WebPage http://www.zoom-one.com | Electronics http://www.zoom-one.com/electron.htm | ========================================= | | | |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
I just want to correct you on one point. LCD screens WILL have an effect
identical to burn in. I have seen it lots of times on computer lcd screens that are used in business applications and left on the same image for hours on end. It is just much harder to cause this effect than typical phosphor burn in on an RPTV or Plasma screem. In addition, I have seen a very odd failure mode of lcd screens that looks like spider web failure of the lcd panel. This was NOT due to impact on the screen. The cause of the failure was someone touching/cleaning the screen and having a large static discharge into the face of the lcd screen. Thus damaging many of the lcd cells that are right into the screen. David "Jerry G." wrote in message ... Hi, These displays are very fragile, and so are the CRT ones. It is just that the CRT sets are too heavy to move, or be knocked over easily. The flat screens are also very fragile. If your child throws a ball and hits the front screen, or knocks it over, you may be buying a new one the next day! It is true that the cost of a new display panel (when it fails), can easily exceed or be close to the purchase cost of a new set. Normally the Plasma type should last about 30,000 hours, and the LCD type should last over 40,000 hours. Most LCD screens of this type have replaceable lamps inside (not user replaceable, but feasible to replace by a tech). The Plasma displays have no internal lamp. When the display unit goes bad, the unit will usually not be feasible to service. If a still image is left up on a Plasma screen, it can burn in very quickly. An LCD screen will not burn in. With all of these sets, there can be disposal problems, depending on where you live. In some places you have to pay a disposal cost when getting rid of old things such as a TV set. When a display panel is rated at 30,000 hours, this is the time factor where the illumination output will be at 50% of its normal specification. If you use the set for 10 hours a day average (standard household usage with a family), the screen should last about 8 years. At 1/2 output, it will however look a bit dim, but is considered acceptable. Some people say to cut this in 1/2 again, and say it will last about 4 to 5 years maximum. I personally found rear screen sets to look softer, and also they are more critical to the angle of viewing when close up to them. The new ones are improved a bit, but I was not impressed. I also had some feedback about the LCD sets having some black shading problems which annoyed some people. This would be an uneven illumination in the blacks, or dark areas of the screen. The LCD sets also have some viewing angle problems as well. But, overall they are very sharp and perform well. In some cases the prices of the some of the Plasma screen models have dropped to be less than some of the LCD screens in the same size category. This was the opposite just a number of months ago. -- Greetings, Jerry Greenberg GLG Technologies GLG ========================================= WebPage http://www.zoom-one.com Electronics http://www.zoom-one.com/electron.htm ========================================= "techforce" wrote in message ... I have a general question. Compared to traditional CRT type Displays, are not these more delicate / Fragile than the former? So say you have Kids, and they bounce around after School, and break / crack the Screen on a plasma /LCD set. Is it not time to shell out for a brand new set, since a replacement screen meets or exceeds the cost of a NEW? These days, if they break the Outer Shield or the Lenticular Screen on a Projection Set, theres usually a decent chance you can get a shield or a Lense if the sets not too old, and still stay within economics of repair, much less pay a disposal fee if the set is BER. Which also poses another question about disposal of these new types of TV you mention. Are there at least the same disposal problems facing us with these as well? "Jerry G." wrote in message ... | Here are some interesting questions: | | I would like to have an opinion about what someone would think is the best | choice of technologies, considering if one was to make the purchase of an | HDTV. After this year, CRT technology type TV sets will no longer be made | by the main stream of the higher end manufactures. Once these sets run out, | they will be offering LCD and Plasma type TV sets. Some will also offer the | DLP type TV sets for the consumer market. I am hearing a lot of discussions | to what would be the most ideal. Each type of display has its pros and cons. | | | | Would your preference be a Plasma TV set? | | | | Would your preference be an direct view LCD TV set? | | | | Would your preference be a rear screen type LCD TV set? | | | | Would your preference be a frontal projection type DLP TV set? | | | | Would your preference be a rear screen type DLP TV set? | | | | I would like to know a few opinions here, with some comments. I will | respond back, as best possible to all comments that I receive. | | | -- | | Greetings, | | Jerry Greenberg GLG Technologies GLG | ========================================= | WebPage http://www.zoom-one.com | Electronics http://www.zoom-one.com/electron.htm | ========================================= | | | |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
In article ,
"Jerry G." wrote: Hi, These displays are very fragile, and so are the CRT ones. It is just that the CRT sets are too heavy to move, or be knocked over easily. The flat screens are also very fragile. If your child throws a ball and hits the front screen, or knocks it over, you may be buying a new one the next day! It is true that the cost of a new display panel (when it fails), can easily exceed or be close to the purchase cost of a new set. Normally the Plasma type should last about 30,000 hours, and the LCD type should last over 40,000 hours. Most LCD screens of this type have replaceable lamps inside (not user replaceable, but feasible to replace by a tech). The Plasma displays have no internal lamp. When the display unit goes bad, the unit will usually not be feasible to service. If a still image is left up on a Plasma screen, it can burn in very quickly. An LCD screen will not burn in. I disagree 100%.. LCD's WILL burn, time tested with now on the 3rd set of Samsung LCD monitors (SyncMaster 400T ) used in our Master Control room. One is fed by a Miranda Kaliedo, the other a Evertz quad split. The Samsungs once burn not only burn but develop very ugly vertical squiggily lines up the LCD display. We still have the Samsungs, they keep replacing them under warranty. I'm not impressed at all with these LCD's.. That's the hype we were fed also, LCD's won't burn. Not true, the Samsungs and a bunch of 17 NEC flatscreen computer monitors that sit on graphics systems ( still stores ) day in and day out 24/7, they DO burn. So in my life, there is no holy grail of "unburnable" monitors.. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
In article ,
"Jerry G." wrote: Hi, These displays are very fragile, and so are the CRT ones. It is just that the CRT sets are too heavy to move, or be knocked over easily. The flat screens are also very fragile. If your child throws a ball and hits the front screen, or knocks it over, you may be buying a new one the next day! It is true that the cost of a new display panel (when it fails), can easily exceed or be close to the purchase cost of a new set. Normally the Plasma type should last about 30,000 hours, and the LCD type should last over 40,000 hours. Most LCD screens of this type have replaceable lamps inside (not user replaceable, but feasible to replace by a tech). The Plasma displays have no internal lamp. When the display unit goes bad, the unit will usually not be feasible to service. If a still image is left up on a Plasma screen, it can burn in very quickly. An LCD screen will not burn in. I disagree 100%.. LCD's WILL burn, time tested with now on the 3rd set of Samsung LCD monitors (SyncMaster 400T ) used in our Master Control room. One is fed by a Miranda Kaliedo, the other a Evertz quad split. The Samsungs once burn not only burn but develop very ugly vertical squiggily lines up the LCD display. We still have the Samsungs, they keep replacing them under warranty. I'm not impressed at all with these LCD's.. That's the hype we were fed also, LCD's won't burn. Not true, the Samsungs and a bunch of 17 NEC flatscreen computer monitors that sit on graphics systems ( still stores ) day in and day out 24/7, they DO burn. So in my life, there is no holy grail of "unburnable" monitors.. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
|
#37
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
|
#38
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
In article , Jerry
Greenberg wrote: The sets that are even more than about 10 years old will soon wear out, and also including the wearing out of their CRT's. Replacement tubes for any TV that is more than about 5 years old is hard to find these days. And, if you do find a replacement tube (CRT), it will generaly cost more than the equivelent new set to replace. Indeed. It's hardly worth repairing anything these days, only the biggest and most expensive items like cars and washing machines. Anything electronic will almost certainly be out of date and superceded by something better many years before it wears out. With nobody getting things repaired, there's no financial incentive for anybody to learn how to repair things, or even take an interest in how they work, so I wonder where we are going to find the next generation of engineers to design new stuff. There will be a point where the older sets will soon die off, and then the users will be forced to replace them with newer sets, if they want to be able to watch TV. (My mother would say... "Read A Book!"). So did mine. :-) Rod. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
In article , Jerry
Greenberg wrote: The sets that are even more than about 10 years old will soon wear out, and also including the wearing out of their CRT's. Replacement tubes for any TV that is more than about 5 years old is hard to find these days. And, if you do find a replacement tube (CRT), it will generaly cost more than the equivelent new set to replace. Indeed. It's hardly worth repairing anything these days, only the biggest and most expensive items like cars and washing machines. Anything electronic will almost certainly be out of date and superceded by something better many years before it wears out. With nobody getting things repaired, there's no financial incentive for anybody to learn how to repair things, or even take an interest in how they work, so I wonder where we are going to find the next generation of engineers to design new stuff. There will be a point where the older sets will soon die off, and then the users will be forced to replace them with newer sets, if they want to be able to watch TV. (My mother would say... "Read A Book!"). So did mine. :-) Rod. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
TV Opinion
"Jerry Greenberg" wrote in message om... It is true that there will be a number of low cost models in the market using CRT technology to fill the market place. But, the major manufactures, such as Sony, Panasonic, Toshiba, NEC, and Hitachi, plan to discontinue CRT Monitors and TV sets by this fall coming. Yes - but as I said, you're just talking about those Japanese brands that most U.S. consumers have come to know over the past couple of decades. Japan isn't the largest producer of CRTs NOW, and has not been for quite some time - the bulk of CRTs are made in Korea, Taiwan, and (small but growing) mainland China, and these countries are also where the CRT monitors and TVs will continue to come from. (Japan hasn't dominated the PC monitor market, except for Sony's dominance of the very high end, for a good number of years, and this is now being repeated in television.) The problem is that, due to the poor economic conditions in Japan through much of the 1990s, these manufacturers could not afford to invest in maintaining and expanding their own in-house production capacity for CRTs (or, for that matter, other display technologies such as LCDs), and so the bulk of the worldwide capacity wound up in these other countries. And it's difficult for these companies to compete with those Korean/Taiwanese/etc.-based firms who either have a local supply of the basic components (or make them in-house) AND have their own domestic labor supply at a much lower cost than the Japanese. (And yes, this HAS happened in non-CRT technologies as well; the biggest TFT-LCD panel makers in the world right now are Samsung (Korea), LG Philips (Korea), AU Optronics (Taiwan), Chungwha (Taiwan), etc.. With the notable exception of Sharp, there has been very little investment by the Japanese in domestic LCD production facilities, at least for the mainstream large-area technologies. They have, instead, been trading technology know-how for a share in the capacity of these other makers.) Infact, we were told that many of these companies are no longer producing the tubes at this time, and when they run out, there will no longer be any assembly of these CRT sets. This includes all sizes from 3/4 inches (used in small viewfinders) up to the large 36 inch ones. Right. But that concerns only these Japanese manufacturers. There are many news releases that ALL major CRT production will not exist in about 2 years time. Please give your sources. I regularly visit these manufacturers, and believe me, there is absolutely no way that CRT production will cease in 2 years, or even 5. Unless, again, you believe that "major CRT production" involves ONLY Japanese sources. What IS happening is that the TV market is fragmenting into two distinct pieces - in North America, Japan, and Europe, the market is essentially saturated; just about everyone HAS a TV, and so new sales come primarily from replacements or upgrades. In those markets, the non-CRT technologies ARE going to start to take significant market share away from the CRT - but that's not the whole picture. Emerging markets, such as China and India, represent HUGE bases of potential customers, but these people can't afford 42" high-definition LCD TVs - those markets will be overwhelmingly CRT-based for a long, long time to come, and that means that the CRT MUST remain available worldwide as the "entry-level" TV technology. I very strongly suggest you visit the links below. Sorry, there's no news there that contradicts anything said above. The Japanese are exiting the CRT market. Old news. The LCD is also displacing the CRT in the desktop monitor market. Also old news. (In fact, the LCD has ALREADY displaced the CRT in monitors - LCDs went over the 50% mark in unit volumes last quarter, and will continue to increase their share to somewhat over 80% by 2008.) I've been following the display industry for about 20 years, and visit about 50-60 display manufacturers each year. I think I'm reasonably qualified to make some statements regarding the near-term forecasts for these markets...:-) Bob M. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
2nd opinion on plumbing into drains | UK diy |