| LCDs have limited viewangle.
| LCD monitors differs in quality in respect of contrast, color
| representation and usable viewangle. Currently, there's an enormous
| difference between the better and the mediocre, so look around.
| LCD monitors don't have quite the valuerange and color accuracy of
| CRTs. They are always sharp and stable though. They also lack the
| flexible resolutions of CRTs. They work best at a single resolution.
|
| LCD monitors also loose about 50% of their maximum brightness in 2
| years. That sounds like a much bigger concern than it actually is,
| though. Don't be alarmed, you'll probably buy a new monitor before you
| start noticing it in ernest, anyway. I haven't noticed anything. The
| lamp is also supposed to be replaceable, though I've never heard of
| anyone that has actually done it.
|
| CRT's are big monsters that take up all of your deskspace. You also
| need hired help to move the monsters around. They're bulky, awkward,
| and very heavy. My best CRT, a big Mazellan, is every bit as sharp as
| my LCDs, but I havent really seen that otherwise. CRTs normally have a
| sort of built in analog AA
. Latest crop of LCDs colors are supposed
| to be improved, but neither of my LCDs are any match at all, when it
| comes to colors, for any of my CRTs.
One more decided minus for LCDs: they're too slow! I can dash the mouse pointer
across my CRT screen and the movement is fairly smooth and defined. Doing the
same thing on an LCD results in very spotty and ill-defined movement, somewhat
like an old silent movie. Rapidly changing text looks funny. The pixels are
noticeably slow to change anytime there is rapid display activity.
I'm convinced that today's LCDs simply aren't the definitive computer monitor.
They are very probably just a stopgap measure before something different and
much better comes along.
In the meantime, I'll just stick with my old ViewSonic 21" CRT monster, thank
you.
Larc
§§§ - Please raise temperature of mail to reply by e-mail - §§§
