Has anybody else noticed this? I'm specing out some new machines for a lab and I was using Dell's configure-o-matic. They've got 20" flat panel displays (1600x1280 resolution) for $1300 over the "computer without display" option. I'm looking at lab machines built around the OptiPlex 260 with all the bells and whistles for a per-seat price of $2600.

$1300 is just amazing, particularly when you consider that CRTs go dim after a few years, while LCD flat panels (allegedly) don't. If you go look at the price of nice Sony Trinitron displays, you see that the flat panels are now in the middle. That is, the cheapest 20" Trinitron is cheaper than a flat panel, but the high-end professional 20" Trinitron still costs more.

Summary: unless you're terminally under-budget, now's a fine time to get rid of the old cathode ray tube.

Although flat panels are very nice, I prefer CRT. Especially for mini presentations, games and dvds. Its a bit sharper I think. Maybe technology is a bit better now, but the 15" Compaq flat panels we have are BAD. Dark and shadowy.

When you can view a flat panel from 50degrees and still see detail, then I'll grab one!

I'm using the same 21" monitor (a Nokia 445X) I've had since about 1992. It's hardly dim.

Maybe you need to be buying better CRTs.

The new UXGA/SXGA+ ASV LCD panels are very high resolution and have a wider viewing angle. I think it's around 60ish degrees now.
And it's much sharper than a CRT. Only problem is if you ever need to run at lower resolutions since it will have to interpolate to fit the native resolution.

- Trevor

A good LCD is sharper, brighter and won't do your eyes in. Unfortunately too many people use them on analogue signals (understandable as DVI video cards can be expensive) and don't see the benefits. Doesn't help if they're the older type that need manual tweaking to adjust to the analogue signal either.

A CRT is certainly much better for games and marginally better for watching movies, although that is improving.

Finding a panel that's cheap enough to buy for myself and does 1600x1200 seems to be impossible. If it's cheap it does 1280x1024 or worse 1024x768...

Pricewatch.com does not seem to support your theory. It looks like CRTs are about 1/2 the price of LCD of the same size.

I also haven't experienced any problems with just a regular 19" Dell Trinitron CRT. It's great and always has been. Every flat panel I've seen in the store has not looked very sharp. Of course, the signal they're getting is pretty bad. Still, anywhere I see flat panels they're always unclear.

Here's what I want

I got a brand new 15" Sceptre touch-screen flat panel off ebay about a year back - it was $425 I think, cheaper than regular LCDs at the time and about 1/3 of the cost new. I used it for a while but preferred my Sony Multiscan E100 so I put it on the "family" computer, not that they use the touch screen bit! It's analogue but *very* clear - a lot of LCDs I see haven't been set up correctly, there are some settings that affect the picture greatly (phase is one of them I think) It's a bit too clear for me, I found my eyes going funny so I went back to the old one. I suspect if I get a 21" LCD I would put up with it

M current Sony was bought second hand, 7 months old from a call centre upgrading to LCDs - I think it was about £75, they were about double that new.

Gareth

You definately should have a look at a UXGA LCD panel on a laptop or on a desktop using DVI. They're all really sharp and high res. It's easier on my eyes as well.

That monitor does look good though. Rather heavy though This is what I want...

- Trevor

I've got a 17" Samsung SyncMaster 171B (1280x1024 analog LCD, pivoting). I had a Iiyama Visionmaster Pro17 (1600x1200 @75 Hz Aperture Grille). I've been very impressed with everything about the Samsung. Great contrast ratio, good brightness & viewing angle. The pivot is handy when working on high resolution photos in portrait mode. It was about $600 a few months back.

The link is attached. (edit: link no worky...go to samsungusa.com and search with 171b under 'Model Code')

-Zeke

Here's what I want (gdmf-fw900)

I've never regretted my purchase of one of these. I've always suspected that (in line with Sony's policy whereby a CD player has a model number like CDPxxx, and so on) the GDMF in that model number stands for G*d-D**n M****rf****r of a monitor...

Peter

I had a play with one of those at a show a few months ago, and they're probably the most impressive LCD I've ever seen. Expensive, but VERY impressive.

pca

You see, we actually have the GDMFW900 Sony monitor here in my office. It's used at our desktop publishing station. I have to walk by it every day, which makes me quite angry. Why? Because it's a widescreen monitor and I believe they have it on 1280x960. I keep telling them that it's the wrong resolution! ARGH! Can't they see how stretched it is??

It's used at our desktop publishing station [...] I keep telling them that it's the wrong resolution! ARGH! Can't they see how stretched it is??

Do all your publications come out looking oddly stretched in the other direction, by any chance? Does your graphic artist always claim that it looked fine in Pagemaker?

Peter

Well, I suspect they don't believe me because everything comes out fine. But that's because everything on the screen will be relative to the paper anyway. I guess they never compare the result to what's on the screen.

But this is all what irritates me the most! With that monitor, you can physically place two 8.5x11 sheets of paper on the screen side-by-side. That's one of the reasons we got it! ARGH! I hate when people don't realize the level of technology they have. They treat this OVER SEVENTEEN HUNDRED DOLLAR monitor like it's just another CRT. Someday I'm gonna swipe it...:)

A couple months ago we got a PowerMac with a 23" Cinema Display to do video editing. The screen is so bright that it rivals my CRT.

When plasma displays first came out, we got one of the first 60" models. It was really cool (being a total of like 2.5-3.0" thick), but the display was dark. I have two flat panel 21" touch screens that I take on the road with me for demos (I think they are NEC, but I'll have to drag them out when I get to work to check). At the last Armor Conference I went to (2001), they seemed to get more attention than my sim did :P

Pricewatch.com does not seem to support your theory. It looks like CRTs are about 1/2 the price of LCD of the same size.

Pricewatch lists:

20" LCDs: $1419 to $1796 (most 1600x1200)
19" LCDs: $781 to $1744 (cheap ones 1280x1024, expensive ones 1600x1200)
21" CRTs: $425 to $1643

It's hard to make an apples-to-apples comparison, but I'll agree with others here that the latest LCD screens, with DVI input and high contrast ratios, look as good as the best CRTs I've ever seen, maybe better since there's never any convergence or moire issues to worry about.

So, indeed, one can purchase a 21" CRT for less, but not a quality CRT. The cheapest price at Pricewatch for the Sony GSM-F520 is $1444. Likewise, Pricewatch lists a 1600x1200 Viewsonic 20" flat panel for $1505 and Dell will sell you their 20" flat panel for $1300 as part of a complete system.

Suffice to say that the huge premium once paid for LCD screens is no longer there. Once you factor in the convenience of avoiding a hernia when lugging around your 21" CRT, the LCDs just look better and better.

But then I have to figure out what to do with all that space left back there! I've got a corner desk, so with a flat panel monitor, I'd have like 5 square feet of empty space back there!

I'll have to question the statement that CRTs go dim after a few years. I have a 8 year old CRT as my second monitor, next to a 2.5 year old unit and the older one is not noticiably dimmer.

I've noticed the price of plasma screens have plumetted in the recent year, from over ten thousand to some plasma 42" screens dipping below $3000.

Calvin

I have to put the good word in on the Cornerstone brand monitors. I purchased their 21" monitor (the p1701) and I have a 5 year on-site replacement warranty with it. It's the clearest, sharpest monitor I've used. It supports extremely high resolutions and extremely high refresh rates. Look into it. http://shop.monitorsdirect.com/product.asp?sku=1088405

You can run 1856x1392 @ 85Hz, 2048x1536 @ 80Hz. It's really quite a sweet monitor. The latest iteration of it is 22". But you can get one of these for $600. That's cheap!

Calvin

From normal usage I've never seen a CRT go significantly dimmer. The only time I've seen a large number of monitors go dim was because they were left on for 24 hours a day and the room was very hot. This took a year or so to happen though.

- Trevor

Hmm... maybe you guys have been lucky with your monitors. I guess it varies from monitor to monitor, but I've seen this plenty of times, where monitors that are 4-5 years old are dimmer than new ones that get bought to replace them.

I'll agree on that one.. one of my users has one of those, so that he can "see two pages at once" I was trying to get the thing setup with XFree 4.2, and looked at the old config, and it was set to 1280x1024, which is _really_ not the correct resolution for the screen. sony reccomends 1920 x 1200 @ 85Hz, but I havn't been able to get the nvidia card in the box to produce that res properly.. oh well.. maybe eventualy i'll get a different card for that box, and get it setup right.